EUS-FNA Biopsies to Guide Precision Medicine in Pancreatic Cancer: Results of a Pilot Study to Identify KRAS Wild-Type Tumours for Targeted Therapy

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a leading cause of cancer death and lacks effective treatment options. Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) biopsies represent an appealing source of material for molecular analysis to inform targeted therapy, as they are often the only available tissue for patients presenting with PDAC irrespective of disease stage. However, EUS-FNA biopsies are typically not used to screen for precision medicine studies due to concerns about low tissue yield and quality. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition has shown promise in clinical trials of unselected patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, but has not been prospectively tested in KRAS wild-type patients. Here, we examine the clinical utility of EUS-FNA biopsies for molecular screening of KRAS wild-type PDAC patients for targeted anti-EGFR therapy to assess the feasibility of this approach. Patients and Methods: Fresh frozen EUS-FNA or surgical biopsies from PDAC patient tumours were used to screen for KRAS mutations. Eligible patients with recurrent, locally advanced, or metastatic KRAS wild-type status who had received at least one prior line of chemotherapy were enrolled in a pilot study (ACTRN12617000540314) and treated with panitumumab at 6mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was 4-month progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 275 patient biopsies were screened for KRAS mutations, which were detected in 88.3% of patient samples. 8 eligible KRAS wild-type patients were enrolled onto the interventional study between November 2017 and December 2020 and treated with panitumumab. 4-month PFS was 14.3% with no objective tumour responses observed. The only grade 3/4 treatment related toxicity observed was hypomagnesaemia. Conclusions: This study demonstrates proof-of-principle feasibility to molecularly screen patients with pancreatic cancer for targeted therapies, and confirms diagnostic EUS-FNA biopsies as a reliable source of tumour material for molecular analysis. Single agent panitumumab was safe and tolerable but led to no objective tumour responses in this population

Results of a single-arm pilot study of 32P microparticles in unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is generally managed with chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, but prognosis is poor with a median survival of ∼13 months (or up to 19 months in some studies). We assessed a novel brachytherapy device, using phosphorous-32 (32P) microparticles, combined with standard-of-care chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this international, multicentre, single-arm, open-label pilot study, adult patients with histologically or cytologically proven unresectable LAPC received 32P microparticles, via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle implantation, planned for week 4 of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy, per investigator's choice. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability measured using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The lead efficacy endpoint was local disease control rate at 16 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled and received chemotherapy [intention-to-treat (ITT) population]. Forty-two patients received 32P microparticle implantation [per protocol (PP) population]. A total of 1102 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in the ITT/safety population (956 PP), of which 167 (139 PP) were grade ≥3. In the PP population, 41 TEAEs in 16 (38.1%) patients were possibly or probably related to 32P microparticles or implantation procedure, including 8 grade ≥3 in 3 (7.1%) patients, compared with 609 TEAEs in 42 (100%) patients attributed to chemotherapy, including 67 grade ≥3 in 28 patients (66.7%). The local disease control rate at 16 weeks was 82.0% (95% confidence interval: 68.6% to 90.9%) (ITT) and 90.5% (95% confidence interval: 77.4% to 97.3%) (PP). Tumour volume, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels, and metabolic tumour response at week 12 improved significantly. Ten patients (20.0% ITT; 23.8% PP) had surgical resection and median overall survival was 15.2 and 15.5 months for ITT and PP populations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided 32P microparticle implantation has an acceptable safety profile. This study also suggests clinically relevant benefits of combining 32P microparticles with standard-of-care systemic chemotherapy for patients with unresectable LAPC

Does an extensive diagnostic workup for upfront resectable pancreatic cancer result in a delay which affects survival? Results from an international multicentre study

Backgrounds/Aims: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is recommended in fit patients with a carcinoma (PDAC) of the pancreatic head, and a delayed resection may affect survival. This study aimed to correlate the time from staging to PD with long-term survival, and study the impact of preoperative investigations (if any) on the timing of surgery. // Methods: Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple’s (RAW) study, a multicentre retrospective study of PD outcomes. Only PDAC patients who underwent an upfront resection were included. Patients who received neoadjuvant chemo-/radiotherapy were excluded. Group A (PD within 28 days of most recent preoperative computed tomography [CT]) was compared to group B (> 28 days). // Results: A total of 595 patents were included. Compared to group A (median CT-PD time: 12.5 days, interquartile range: 6–21), group B (49 days, 39–64.5) had similar one-year survival (73% vs. 75%, p = 0.6), five-year survival (23% vs. 21%, p = 0.6) and median time-todeath (17 vs. 18 months, p = 0.8). Staging laparoscopy (43 vs. 29.5 days, p = 0.009) and preoperative biliary stenting (39 vs. 20 days, p 0.99) and endoscopic ultrasonography (28 vs. 32 days, p > 0.99) were not. // Conclusions: Although a treatment delay may give rise to patient anxiety, our findings would suggest this does not correlate with worse survival. A delay may be necessary to obtain further information and minimize the number of PD patients diagnosed with early disease recurrence

Management of Asymptomatic Sporadic Nonfunctioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (ASPEN) ≤2 cm: Study Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study

Introduction: The optimal treatment for small, asymptomatic, nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NF-PanNEN) is still controversial. European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) guidelines recommend a watchful strategy for asymptomatic NF-PanNEN 18 years, the presence of asymptomatic sporadic NF-PanNEN ≤2 cm proven by a positive fine-needle aspiration (FNA) or by the presence of a measurable nodule on high-quality imaging techniques that is positive at 68Gallium DOTATOC-PET scan. Conclusion: The ASPEN study is designed to investigate if an active surveillance of asymptomatic NF-PanNEN ≤2 cm is safe as compared to surgical approach.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Management of Asymptomatic Sporadic Non-Functioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms No Larger Than 2 Cm: Interim Analysis of Prospective ASPEN Trial

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Postoperative complications after pancreatoduodenectomy for malignancy: results from the Recurrence After Whipple’s (RAW) study

Background Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with significant postoperative morbidity. Surgeons should have a sound understanding of the potential complications for consenting and benchmarking purposes. Furthermore, preoperative identification of high-risk patients can guide patient selection and potentially allow for targeted prehabilitation and/or individualized treatment regimens. Using a large multicentre cohort, this study aimed to calculate the incidence of all PD complications and identify risk factors. Method Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple’s (RAW) study, a retrospective cohort study of PD outcomes (29 centres from 8 countries, 2012–2015). The incidence and severity of all complications was recorded and potential risk factors for morbidity, major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo grade > IIIa), postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH) and 90-day mortality were investigated. Results Among the 1348 included patients, overall morbidity, major morbidity, POPF, PPH and perioperative death affected 53 per cent (n = 720), 17 per cent (n = 228), 8 per cent (n = 108), 6 per cent (n = 84) and 4 per cent (n = 53), respectively. Following multivariable tests, a high BMI (P = 0.007), an ASA grade > II (P II patients were at increased risk of major morbidity (P < 0.0001), and a raised BMI correlated with a greater risk of POPF (P = 0.001). Conclusion In this multicentre study of PD outcomes, an ASA grade > II was a risk factor for major morbidity and a high BMI was a risk factor for POPF. Patients who are preoperatively identified to be high risk may benefit from targeted prehabilitation or individualized treatment regimens

Exploring the attitudes of health professionals providing care to patients undergoing treatment for upper gastrointestinal cancers to different models of nutrition care delivery: a qualitative investigation

Background: People with upper gastrointestinal cancer are at high risk for malnutrition without universal access to early nutrition interventions. Very little data exist on the attitudes and views of health professionals on providing nutrition care to this patient cohort delivered by electronic health methods. COVID-19 has fast-tracked the adoption of digital health care provision, so it is more important than ever to understand the needs of health professionals in providing health care via these modes. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of health professionals on providing nutrition care to upper gastrointestinal cancer patients by electronic methods to allow the future scaling-up of acceptable delivery methods. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone and recorded, de-identified and transcribed. Thematic analysis was facilitated by NVivo Pro 12. Results: Interviews were conducted on 13 health professionals from a range of disciplines across several public and private health institutions. Thematic analysis revealed three main themes: (1) the ideal model, (2) barriers to the ideal model and (3) how to implement and translate the ideal model. Health professionals viewed the provision of nutrition interventions as an essential part of an upper gastrointestinal cancer patient&rsquo;s treatment with synchronous, telephone-based internal health service models of nutrition care overwhelmingly seen as the most acceptable model of delivery. Mobile application-based delivery methods were deemed too challenging for the current population serviced by these clinicians. Conclusion: The use of novel technology for delivering nutrition care to people receiving treatment for upper gastrointestinal cancers was not widely accepted as the preferred method of delivery by health professionals. There is an opportunity, given the rapid uptake of digital health care delivery, to ensure that the views and attitudes of health professionals are understood and applied to develop acceptable, efficacious and sustainable technologies in our health care system

Attitudes of Australian Patients Undergoing Treatment for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers to Different Models of Nutrition Care Delivery: Qualitative Investigation

Background Adults diagnosed with cancers of the stomach, esophagus, and pancreas are at high risk of malnutrition. In many hospital-based health care settings, there is a lack of systems in place to provide the early and intensive nutritional support that is required by these high-risk cancer patients. Our research team conducted a 3-arm parallel randomized controlled trial to test the provision of an early and intensive nutrition intervention to patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers using a synchronous telephone-based delivery approach versus an asynchronous mobile app–based approach delivered using an iPad compared with a control group to address this issue. Objective This study aims to explore the overall acceptability of an early and intensive eHealth nutrition intervention delivered either via a synchronous telephone-based approach or an asynchronous mobile app–based approach. Methods Patients who were newly diagnosed with upper gastrointestinal cancer and who consented to participate in a nutrition intervention were recruited. In-depth, semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted by telephone and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using deductive thematic analysis using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability in NVivo Pro 12 Plus. Results A total of 20 participants were interviewed, 10 from each intervention group (synchronous or asynchronous delivery). Four major themes emerged from the qualitative synthesis: participants’ self-efficacy, low levels of burden, and intervention comprehension were required for intervention effectiveness and positive affect; participants sought a sense of support and security through relationship building and rapport with their dietitian; knowledge acquisition and learning-enabled empowerment through self-management; and convenience, flexibility, and bridging the gap to hard-to-reach individuals. Conclusions Features of eHealth models of nutrition care delivered via telephone and mobile app can be acceptable to those undergoing treatment for upper gastrointestinal cancer. Convenience, knowledge acquisition, improved self-management, and support were key benefits for the participants. Future interventions should focus on home-based interventions delivered with simple, easy-to-use technology. Providing participants with a choice of intervention delivery mode (synchronous or asynchronous) and allowing them to make individual choices that align to their individual values and capabilities may support improved outcomes. Trial Registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN) 12617000152325; https://tinyurl.com/p3kxd37b. </jats:sec