Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Over the past few decades, many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review attempts to synthesise all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making when dealing with this difficult disease. Objectives: To assess the effect of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both for first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival, while secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, grade 3/4 adverse events, therapy response and quality of life. Search methods: We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL (searched 14 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 14 June 2017), MEDLINE (1946 to 14 June 2017) and CANCERLIT (1999 to 2002) databases. We also handsearched all relevant conference abstracts published up until 14 June 2017. Selection criteria: All randomised studies assessing overall survival outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy, alone or in combination, were the eligible treatments. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently analysed studies, and a third settled any disputes. We extracted data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL), and we assessed risk of bias for each study. Main results: We included 42 studies addressing chemotherapy in 9463 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We did not identify any eligible studies on radiotherapy. We did not find any benefit for chemotherapy over best supportive care. However, two identified studies did not have sufficient data to be included in the analysis, and many of the chemotherapy regimens studied were outdated. Compared to gemcitabine alone, participants receiving 5FU had worse OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.92) and QoL. On the other hand, two studies showed FOLFIRINOX was better than gemcitabine for OS (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.57) and response rates (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.65), but it increased the rate of side effects. The studies evaluating CO-101, ZD9331 and exatecan did not show benefit or harm when compared with gemcitabine alone. Giving gemcitabine at a fixed dose rate improved OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94, high-quality evidence) but increased the rate of side effects when compared with bolus dosing. When comparing gemcitabine combinations to gemcitabine alone, gemcitabine plus platinum improved PFS (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95) and response rates (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98) but not OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08, low-quality evidence). The rate of side effects increased. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improved OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95), PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87) and response rates (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.47, high-quality evidence), but it also increased side effects. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitor did not improve survival outcomes but did increase toxicity. One study demonstrated that gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel improved OS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.84, high-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82) and response rates (RR 3.29, 95% CI 2.24 to 4.84) but increased side effects. Gemcitabine-containing multi-drug combinations (GEMOXEL or cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU/gemcitabine) improved OS (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, low-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) and QOL. We did not find any survival advantages when comparing 5FU combinations to 5FU alone. Authors' conclusions: Combination chemotherapy has recently overtaken the long-standing gemcitabine as the standard of care. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are highly efficacious, but our analysis shows that other combination regimens also offer a benefit. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individual patients still remains difficult, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to help rationalise treatment selection for patients

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer : a systematic review of clinical outcomes

Background. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most deadly cancer worldwide. Unfortunately, a quarter of the patients are diagnosed at late stages, when surgical options are limited. Targeted therapies, particularly immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), are the latest addition and have been studied herein regarding their efficacy outcomes. Methods. Clinical studies were identified through the PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases. Any trial that evaluated ICIs in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) and reported the objective response rate was deemed eligible. Data analysis was performed by employing the random-effects model in STATA v.17. Results. A total of 461 articles were identified; 13 clinical trials were included, encompassing a total cohort of 1209 patients. Our study determined that a single PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade provides durable clinical response in mCRC patients with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). The combinatorial therapy of CTLA-4 + PD-1 inhibitors also showed high response rates in pre-treated MSI-H patients. The single-arm REGONIVO trial reported durable clinical response in patients with microsatellite stable (MSS) status. Conclusions. Our study surmises that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as well as combination therapy with CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibitors show encouraging response rates in mCRC patients, albeit exclusively in patients with cancer that are of MSI-H status. A single study suggests that nivolumab + regorafenib can reach a durable response rate in MSS patients; however, further studies in larger randomized settings are required

Clinical and molecular characterization of HER2 amplified-pancreatic cancer

<p>Background: Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal and molecularly diverse malignancies. Repurposing of therapeutics that target specific molecular mechanisms in different disease types offers potential for rapid improvements in outcome. Although HER2 amplification occurs in pancreatic cancer, it is inadequately characterized to exploit the potential of anti-HER2 therapies.</p> <p>Methods: HER2 amplification was detected and further analyzed using multiple genomic sequencing approaches. Standardized reference laboratory assays defined HER2 amplification in a large cohort of patients (n = 469) with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).</p> <p>Results: An amplified inversion event (1 MB) was identified at the HER2 locus in a patient with PDAC. Using standardized laboratory assays, we established diagnostic criteria for HER2 amplification in PDAC, and observed a prevalence of 2%. Clinically, HER2- amplified PDAC was characterized by a lack of liver metastases, and a preponderance of lung and brain metastases. Excluding breast and gastric cancer, the incidence of HER2-amplified cancers in the USA is >22,000 per annum.</p> <p>Conclusions: HER2 amplification occurs in 2% of PDAC, and has distinct features with implications for clinical practice. The molecular heterogeneity of PDAC implies that even an incidence of 2% represents an attractive target for anti-HER2 therapies, as options for PDAC are limited. Recruiting patients based on HER2 amplification, rather than organ of origin, could make trials of anti-HER2 therapies feasible in less common cancer types.</p&gt

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

An Online Learning Module to Increase Self-Efficacy and Involvement in Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: Research Protocol

BACKGROUND: Improving patient care for individuals with lung cancer is a priority due to the increasing burden of the disease globally. One way this can be done is by improving patient self-management capabilities through increasing their self-efficacy. This can improve positive outcomes for patients with chronic conditions and increase their ability to manage the challenges of such illnesses. Unfortunately, patients with chronic conditions often struggle to travel far from home to engage with patient education events, a common means of improving self-efficacy. The development of more accessible tools for improving patient self-efficacy is required to increase quality of life for patients with chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of delivering symptom identification and management information to patients with advanced lung cancer using an online program. METHODS: This article describes a pre-post test study to evaluate a Qstream online learning platform to improve patient self-efficacy for managing advanced lung cancer symptoms. Undertaking this program should increase participant knowledge about the side-effects they may experience as a result of their treatment and in turn increase help-seeking behavior and self-efficacy for the participant cohort. Quantitative data collected by the Qstream platform on the completion rates of participants will be used as a tool to evaluate the intervention. Additionally, validated scales will be used to collect data on patient self-efficacy. Qualitative data will also be collected via an exit survey and thematic content analysis of semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The research is in the preliminary stages but thus far a protocol has been approved in support of the project. Additionally, advisory committee members have been identified and initial meetings have been undertaken. CONCLUSIONS: Development of new approaches for increasing patient understanding of their care is important to ensure high quality care continues to be delivered in the clinical setting

Retrospective evaluation of the use of pembrolizumab in malignant mesothelioma in a real-world Australian population

Introduction: We investigated the efficacy and toxicity of pembrolizumab in patients with mesothelioma from a real-world Australian population. We aimed to determine clinical factors and predictive biomarkers that could help select patients who are likely to benefit from pembrolizumab. Method: Patients with mesothelioma who were treated with pembrolizumab as part of the Insurance and Care New South Wales compensation scheme were included. Clinical information was collected retrospectively. Tumor biomarkers such as programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), BAP1, and CD3-positive (CD3+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were examined using archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples. Results: A total of 98 patients were included with a median age of 70 years (range, 46–91 y); 92% were men; 76% had epithelioid subtype; 21% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0. Pembrolizumab was used as second-line or subsequent-line treatment in 94 patients and as first-line treatment in four patients. The overall response rate was 18%, and the disease control rate was 56%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.8 months (95% confidence interval: 3.6–6.2), and the median overall survival (OS) was 9.5 months (95% confidence interval: 6.6–13.7). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 27% of patients, of which nine (9%) were of grade 3 or higher. In the multivariable analysis, factors independently associated with longer PFS included baseline ECOG status of 0 (median PFS: 12 mo versus 4 mo, p < 0.01) and PD-L1 tumor proportion score of greater than or equal to 1% (median PFS: 6 mo versus 4 mo, p < 0.01). Baseline platelet count of less than or equal to 400 × 109/liter was independently associated with longer PFS and OS (median PFS: 6 mo versus 2 mo, p = 0.05; median OS: 10 mo versus 4 mo, p = 0.01), whereas lack of pretreatment dexamethasone was independently associated with OS but not PFS (median OS: 10 mo versus 3 mo, p = 0.01). The odds of response were higher for patients with baseline ECOG status of 0 (p = 0.02) and with greater than or equal to 5% CD3+ TILs in the tumor (p < 0.01). PD-L1 expression, BAP1 loss, and CD3+ TILs in the stroma were not significantly associated with the overall response rate. Conclusions: Immunotherapy is a reasonable treatment option for patients with mesothelioma. Our results are comparable to other clinical trials investigating pembrolizumab in mesothelioma in terms of response. Good performance status assessment remains the most robust predictor for patient outcomes. CD3+ TILs in the tumor may help select patients that are likely to respond to pembrolizumab, whereas factors such as PD-L1 expression, baseline platelet count, and lack of pretreatment dexamethasone may help predict survival outcomes from pembrolizumab treatment

Lost in translation: Returning germline genetic results in genome-scale cancer research

Background: The return of research results (RoR) remains a complex and well-debated issue. Despite the debate, actual data related to the experience of giving individual results back, and the impact these results may have on clinical care and health outcomes, is sorely lacking. Through the work of the Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative (APGI) we: (1) delineate the pathway back to the patient where actionable research data were identified; and (2) report the clinical utilisation of individual results returned. Using this experience, we discuss barriers and opportunities associated with a comprehensive process of RoR in large-scale genomic research that may be useful for others developing their own policies. Methods: We performed whole-genome (n = 184) and exome (n = 208) sequencing of matched tumour-normal DNA pairs from 392 patients with sporadic pancreatic cancer (PC) as part of the APGI. We identified pathogenic germline mutations in candidate genes (n = 130) with established predisposition to PC or medium-high penetrance genes with well-defined cancer associated syndromes or phenotypes. Variants from candidate genes were annotated and classified according to international guidelines. Variants were considered actionable if clinical utility was established, with regard to prevention, diagnosis, prognostication and/or therapy. Results: A total of 48,904 germline variants were identified, with 2356 unique variants undergoing annotation and in silico classification. Twenty cases were deemed actionable and were returned via previously described RoR framework, representing an actionable finding rate of 5.1%. Overall, 1.78% of our cohort experienced clinical benefit from RoR. Conclusion: Returning research results within the context of large-scale genomics research is a labour-intensive, highly variable, complex operation. Results that warrant action are not infrequent, but the prevalence of those who experience a clinical difference as a result of returning individual results is currently low

Transient tissue priming via ROCK inhibition uncouples pancreatic cancer progression, sensitivity to chemotherapy, and metastasis.

The emerging standard of care for patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer is a combination of cytotoxic drugs gemcitabine and Abraxane, but patient response remains moderate. Pancreatic cancer development and metastasis occur in complex settings, with reciprocal feedback from microenvironmental cues influencing both disease progression and drug response. Little is known about how sequential dual targeting of tumor tissue tension and vasculature before chemotherapy can affect tumor response. We used intravital imaging to assess how transient manipulation of the tumor tissue, or "priming," using the pharmaceutical Rho kinase inhibitor Fasudil affects response to chemotherapy. Intravital Förster resonance energy transfer imaging of a cyclin-dependent kinase 1 biosensor to monitor the efficacy of cytotoxic drugs revealed that priming improves pancreatic cancer response to gemcitabine/Abraxane at both primary and secondary sites. Transient priming also sensitized cells to shear stress and impaired colonization efficiency and fibrotic niche remodeling within the liver, three important features of cancer spread. Last, we demonstrate a graded response to priming in stratified patient-derived tumors, indicating that fine-tuned tissue manipulation before chemotherapy may offer opportunities in both primary and metastatic targeting of pancreatic cancer

Precision oncology in surgery: patient selection for operable pancreatic cancer

Objective: We aimed to define preoperative clinical and molecular characteristics that would allow better patient selection for operative resection. Background: Although we use molecular selection methods for systemic targeted therapies, these principles are not applied to surgical oncology. Improving patient selection is of vital importance for the operative treatment of pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma). Although surgery is the only chance of long-term survival, 80% still succumb to the disease and approximately 30% die within 1 year, often sooner than those that have unresected local disease. Method: In 3 independent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cohorts (total participants = 1184) the relationship between aberrant expression of prometastatic proteins S100A2 and S100A4 and survival was assessed. A preoperative nomogram based on clinical variables available before surgery and expression of these proteins was constructed and compared to traditional measures, and a postoperative nomogram. Results: High expression of either S100A2 or S100A4 was independent poor prognostic factors in a training cohort of 518 participants. These results were validated in 2 independent patient cohorts (Glasgow, n = 198; Germany, n = 468). Aberrant biomarker expression stratified the cohorts into 3 distinct prognostic groups. A preoperative nomogram incorporating S100A2 and S100A4 expression predicted survival and nomograms derived using postoperative clinicopathological variables. Conclusions: Of those patients with a poor preoperative nomogram score, approximately 50% of patients died within a year of resection. Nomograms have the potential to improve selection for surgery and neoadjuvant therapy, avoiding surgery in aggressive disease, and justifying more extensive resections in biologically favorable disease