Molecular profile and its clinical impact of IDH1 mutated versus IDH1 wild type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

IDH1-mutated cholangiocarcinomas (CCAs) are an interesting group of neoplasia with particular behavior and therapeutic implications. The aim of the present work is to highlight the differences characterizing IDH1m and IDH1wt CCAs in terms of genomic landscape. 284 patients with iCCA treated for resectable, locally advanced or metastatic disease were selected and studied with the FOUNDATION Cdx technology. A comparative genomic analysis and survival analyses for the most relevant altered genes were performed between IDH1m and IDH1wt patients. Overall, 125 patients were IDH1m and 122 IDH1wt. IDH1m patients showed higher mutation rates compared to IDH1wt in CDKN2B and lower mutation rates in several genes including TP53, FGFR2, BRCA2, ATM, MAP3K1, NOTCH2, ZNF703, CCND1, NBN, NF1, MAP3KI3, and RAD21. At the survival analysis, IDH1m and IDH1wt patients showed no statistically differences in terms of survival outcomes, but a trend in favor of IDH1wt patients was observed. Differences in prognostic values of the most common altered genes were reported. In surgical setting, in IDH1m group the presence of CDKN2A and CDKN2B mutations negatively impact DFS, whereas the presence of CDKN2A, CDKN2B, and PBRM1 mutations negatively impact OS. In advanced setting, in the IDH1m group, the presence of KRAS/NRAS and TP53 mutations negatively impact PFS, whereas the presence of TP53 and PIK3CA mutations negatively impact OS; in the IDH1wt group, only the presence of MTAP mutation negatively impact PFS, whereas the presence of TP53 mutation negatively impact OS. We highlighted several molecular differences with distinct prognostic implications between IDH1m and IDH1wt patients

Comprehensive transcriptomic analysis to identify biological and clinical differences in cholangiocarcinoma

Abstract Background Cholangiocarcinoma (CC) is a rare and aggressive disease with limited therapeutic options and a poor prognosis. All available public records of cohorts reporting transcriptomic data on intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) were collected with the aim to provide a comprehensive gene expression‐based classification with clinical relevance. Methods A total of 543 patients with primary tumor tissues profiled by RNAseq and microarray platforms from seven public datasets were used as a discovery set to identify distinct biological subgroups. Group predictors developed on the discovery sets were applied to a single cohort of 131 patients profiled with RNAseq for validation and assessment of clinical relevance leveraging machine learning techniques. Results By unsupervised clustering analysis of gene expression data we identified both in the ICC and ECC discovery datasets four subgroups characterized by a distinct type of immune infiltrate and signaling pathways. We next developed class predictors using short gene list signatures and identified in an independent dataset subgroups of ICC tumors at different prognosis. Conclusions The developed class‐predictor allows identification of CC subgroups with specific biological features and clinical behavior at single‐sample level. Such results represent the starting point for a complete molecular characterization of CC, including integration of genomics data to develop in clinical practice

Comparative Effectiveness of Gemcitabine plus Nab-Paclitaxel and FOLFIRINOX in the First-Line Setting of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NAB) and the combination of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRINOX) are valid first-line options for advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, no randomized trials comparing the two schemes have been performed. This meta-analysis aims to compare GEM-NAB and FOLFIRINOX in terms of safety and effectiveness, taking into account data from real-life studies on mPC. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library up to November 2018 to identify retrospective or cohort studies on mPC comparing GEM-NAB and FOLFIRINOX. We included 16 retrospective studies, including 3813 patients (2123 treated with GEM-NAB and 1690 treated with FOLFIRINOX). Despite a median weighted overall survival (OS) difference in favor of FOLFIRINOX (mean difference: 1.15, 95% confidence interval CI 0.08–2.22, p = 0.03), in whole population OS was similar (hazard ratio (HR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.84–1.16; p = 0.9). PFS was also not different between the two arms (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.71–1.1; p = 0.26). The overall response rate was similar (25 vs. 24% with GEM-NAB and FOLFIRINOX). Among grade 3–4 toxicities, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and nausea were lower with GEM-NAB, while neurotoxicity and anemia were lower with FOLFIRINOX. In conclusion, despite a numerically longer median OS with FOLFIRINOX as compared to GEM-NAB, the overall risk of death and progression were similar. Their toxicity was different with less nausea, neutropenia, and febrile neutropenia with GEM-NAB, as compared to less neurotoxicity and anemia with FOLFIRINOX. Therefore, analysis of non-randomized “real world” studies to date has not provided evidence of a major benefit of one regimen over the other

Is a pharmacogenomic panel useful to estimate the risk of oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity in colorectal cancer patients?

Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OXPN) is a dose-limiting toxicity in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in drug transport may lead to higher intracellular oxaliplatin accumulation in the dorsal root ganglia and thus increased risk of OXPN. In this study, a panel of 5 SNPs, namely ABCC2 (-24C > T/rs717620 and c.4544 G > A/rs8187710), ABCG2 (c.421 C > A/rs2231142), ABCB1 (c.3435 C > T/rs1045642) and SLC31A1 (c.-36 + 2451 T > G/rs10981694), was evaluated to assess their association with grade 2-3 OXPN in metastatic CRC patients. SNPs were considered according to a dominant model (heterozygous + homozygous). Germline DNA was available from 120 patients who received oxaliplatin between 2010 and 2016. An external cohort of 80 patients was used to validate our results. At the univariable logistic analyses, there were no significant associations between SNPs and incidence of OXPN. Taking into account the strength of observed association between OXPN and the SNPs, a clinical risk score was developed as linear predictor from a multivariable logistic model including all the SNPs together. This score was significantly associated with grade 2-3 OXPN (p = 0.036), but the external calibration was not satisfactory due to relevant discrepancies between the two series. Our data suggest that the concomitant evaluation of multiple SNPs in oxaliplatin transporters is an exploratory strategy that may deserve further investigation for treatment customization in CRC patients

Is There an Interplay between Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors, Thromboprophylactic Treatments and Thromboembolic Events? Mechanisms and Impact in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients

PD-1 pathway blockade has been shown to promote proatherogenic T-cell responses and destabilization of atherosclerotic plaques. Moreover, preclinical evidence suggests a potential synergy of antiplatelet drugs with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We conducted an analysis within a prospective observational protocol (APOLLO study) to investigate the rates, predictors, and prognostic significance of thromboembolic events (TE) and thromboprophylaxis in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with ICIs. Among 217 patients treated between April 2014 and September 2018, 13.8% developed TE events. Current smoking status (HR 3.61 (95% CI 1.52–8.60), p = 0.004) and high (>50%) PD-L1 (HR 2.55 (95% CI 1.05–6.19), p = 0.038) resulted in being independent TE predictors. An increased risk of death following a diagnosis of TE (HR 2.93; 95% CI 1.59–5.42; p = 0.0006) was observed. Patients receiving antiplatelet treatment experienced longer progression-free survival (PFS) (6.4 vs. 3.4 months, HR 0.67 (95% CI 0.48–0.92), p = 0.015) and a trend toward better OS (11.2 vs. 9.6 months, HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.55–1.09), p = 0.14), which were not confirmed in a multivariate model. No impact of anticoagulant treatment on patients’ outcomes was observed. NSCLC patients treated with ICIs bear a consistent risk for thrombotic complications, with a detrimental effect on survival. The impact of antiplatelet drugs on ICIs efficacy deserves further investigation in prospective trials

Lack of Benefit From Anti-EGFR Treatment in RAS and BRAF Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer With Mucinous Histology or Mucinous Component

Background: Adenocarcinoma with mucinous histology or mucinous component are histologic subtypes of metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) with limited benefit from cytotoxic agents. Their sensitivity to anti-epithelial growth factor receptors (EGFRs) is not clear. Patients and Methods: The activity and efficacy of anti-EGFRs was retrospectively evaluated among patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC with or without mucinous histology or mucinous component. Subgroup analyses according to primary tumor location were conducted. Results: Overall, the study population included 22 mucinous or with mucinous component tumors (11 right- and 11 left-sided tumors) and 83 not mucinous tumors. One patient experienced partial response among mucinous tumors, whereas in the not mucinous group, 42 patients experienced partial response, with an overall response rate of 4% and 51%, respectively (P =.003). The median progression-free survival was 2.8 versus 6.7 months (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.59; P <.001), and the median overall survival was 6.5 and 16.7 months (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-1.00; P =.022), for the mucinous and not mucinous groups, respectively. Similar results were observed in subgroup analysis according to primary tumor location. Conclusion: Anti-EGFRs may not provide clinically meaningful benefit in mCRCs with mucinous histology or mucinous component compared with those without mucinous component, irrespective of sidedness. Adenocarcinoma with mucinous histology or mucinous component are histologic subtypes of metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) with limited benefit from cytotoxic agents. Their sensitivity to anti-epithelial growth factor receptors (EGFRs) is not clear. We retrospectively identified patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with anti-EGFRs. Our findings suggest no benefit from anti-EGFRs in mCRC with mucinous histology or mucinous component, irrespective of sidedness