ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE To develop a clinical practice guideline and recommendations for symptom management of patients with well-differentiated grade 1 to grade 3 metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel to develop a clinical practice guideline by reviewing the literature for relevant guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and observational studies to develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS The literature review identified eight guidelines, 19 systematic reviews, and three RCTs that informed the development of guideline recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations are included for carcinoid syndrome, carcinoid heart disease and carcinoid crisis, and functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor syndromes. Recommendations are provided for surgical management, liver-directed therapy, and systemic therapy options, as well as palliative care. Limited guidance is provided for sequencing of interventions. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines .
Influence of insurance status on the postoperative outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC
AbstractBackgroundCytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is increasingly performed for peritoneal surface malignancies but remains associated with significant morbidity. Scant research is available regarding the impact of insurance status on postoperative outcomes.MethodsPatients undergoing CRS/HIPEC between 2000 and 2017 at 12 participating sites in the US HIPEC Collaborative were identified. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the baseline characteristics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes of patients with government, private, or no insurance.ResultsAmong 2268 patients, 699 (30.8%) had government insurance, 1453 (64.0%) had private, and 116 (5.1%) were uninsured. Patients with government insurance were older, more likely to be non‐white, and comorbid (p < 0.05). Patients with government (OR: 2.25, CI: 1.50−3.36, p < 0.001) and private (OR: 1.69, CI: 1.15−2.49, p = 0.008) insurance had an increased risk of complications on univariate analysis. There was no independent relationship on multivariate analysis. An American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or 4, peritoneal carcinomatosis index score >15, completeness of cytoreduction score >1, and nonhome discharge were factors independently associated with a postoperative complication.ConclusionWhile there were differences in postoperative outcomes between the three insurance groups on univariate analysis, there was no independent association between insurance status and postoperative complications after CRS/HIPEC.
Development and Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Major Complications After Cytoreductive Surgery
596 Background: Genomic alterations (GA) that drive cancer development and predict therapeutic response remain elusive in patients (pts) with KRAS WT PDAC. We interrogated our institutional database to identify actionable GAs in pts with metastatic, KRAS WT PDAC and analyzed the therapeutic impact of matched TT. Methods: We reviewed electronic medical records of KRAS WT PDAC pts (n=24) who underwent comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) utilizing Foundation One CDx (25.0%) or Tempus (75.0%) between 2015-2021. Duration of response (DOR) was calculated from date of treatment (Tx) initiation to Tx discontinuation. Overall survival (OS) was measured from the date of the diagnosis (Dx) of advanced disease (AD) to death or last follow-up. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with at-risk periods left-truncated at the time of CGP. The effect of covariates on survival was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Of the 24 KRAS WT pts, 14 (58%) had AD: 8 (57%) pts had metastatic disease at or shortly after Dx, 6 (43%) pts developed metachronous recurrence. Median age at Dx for pts with AD was 65, and 57% were female. Seven of 14 pts with AD (50%) had highly actionable GA (HAGA), (Table). Pts with HAGA demonstrated durable responses to TT (Table) with manageable toxicities. Pts with HAGA had a median OS of 28 mo compared to 5.9 mo for those without (Hazard Ratio = 0.47, p = 0.33). Conclusions: The sustained therapeutic benefit noted with TT matched to HAGA in pts with KRAS WT PDAC underscores the need for systematic interrogation of the somatic genome in PDAC pts. Optimal sequencing of cytotoxic therapy with TT and its impact on modulating clonal selection pressure in pts with KRAS WT PDAC merits prospective evaluation.[Table: see text]
Impact of KRAS alterations in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).
4136 Background: The genomic alterations which characterize PDAC holds great promise for novel therapeutic interventions. Constitutive signaling via mutated KRAS is considered the signature pathognomonic alteration in PDAC, less than 10% of patients (pts) have tumors which are KRAS wild type (WT). We retrospectively reviewed our institutional genomic database to characterize PDAC pts with KRAS WT tumors. Methods: We reviewed electronic medical records of PDAC pts who underwent comprehensive genomic profiling (CPG) utilizing Foundation One CDx (50.6%) or TEMPUS (49.4%) between 2015-2020. Demographic and disease characteristics were compared between cohorts using Wilcoxon rank-sum test or chi-square tests. Left truncation at the time of CGP was used to account for the time of entry into the study cohort. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival curve estimation, and log-rank test was used for between-group comparison. Cox regression was used to adjust for confounders. Results: We identified 235 patients: median age at diagnosis was 65 years and 52% were male. Clinical stages at diagnosis were localized (resectable/borderline resectable), locally advanced, or metastatic in 105 (44.7%), 61 (26.0%), and 69 (29.4%) patients, respectively. KRAS status was mutated in 212 (90%) patients: the most common alterations being G12D (48%), G12V (28%) and G12R (14%). KRAS WT status was noted in 23 (9.8%) pts, actionable genomic alterations in this subgroup are summarized in the table. Baseline demographic and treatment characteristics were similar between patients with KRAS mutated and WT tumors. Of the 23 patients with KRAS WT tumors, 16 (69.6%) completed all planned curative intent therapy compared to 121 (57.3%) of the 212 KRAS mutated pts (p=0.26). Median Overall Survival of patients with KRAS mutated tumors was 18.6 months compared to 44.1 months for WT pts (p=0.03). Adjusting for stage, WT vs. mutated status was associated with a 62% decreased hazard of death (HR 0.38 [0.18-0.83]; p=0.016). Conclusions: Patients with KRAS WT PDAC appear to have a distinct biology compared to those with KRAS mutations, meriting exploration in larger data sets. Further, comprehensive whole genome or transcriptomic characterization of KRAS WT tumors is necessary to identify putative driver alterations as well as actionable therapeutic targets.[Table: see text]
Xanthomatous Dermal Changes in a Patient With Locally Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma Treated Using Vismodegib
Abstract: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most commonly diagnosed cutaneous cancer in the United States with more than 2.5 million treated annually. Genetic studies have revealed that approximately 90% of BCCs have a mutation in the hedgehog-signaling pathway. Patients with BCC usually have an excellent prognosis with surgical modalities, however, patients with locally advanced BCC may potentially experience significant cosmetic or functional impairment, with only surgical intervention. Vismodegib is a hedgehog pathway inhibitor that has been successful in treating patients with locally advanced BCC. We report a patient with BCC with a good response to vismodegib and a novel xanthomatous change in the excision specimen.
Impact of KRAS alterations in localized pancreatic cancer (PC).
431 Background: Patients (pts) with localized PC do not routinely undergo comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) unless they develop recurrent or metastatic disease. KRAS is the most frequently mutated gene in PC, however, the impact of different KRAS mutations in localized PC has not been well characterized. We interrogated our genomic database to analyze the KRAS status in PC pts who presented with localized disease at diagnosis (Dx). Methods: We identified PC pts at our institution who underwent CGP utilizing the Foundation One CDx assay and had localized disease at initial Dx; these pts were categorized into resectable/borderline resectable PC (LPC) and locally advanced PC (LAPC). All pts with LPC and LAPC underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation prior to possible surgery (all intended therapy - AIT). Tissue from metastatic sites was used for CGP in pts who developed recurrent/metastatic disease before or after completion of AIT. The primary tumor was used for CGP in pts who completed AIT without subsequent relapse or in the absence of adequate metastatic tissue. Effect of each gene on response and survival outcomes was estimated using proportional odds and Cox regression analysis, respectively, adjusting for stage. Results: 75 pts were identified, median age at Dx was 65 years, 59% were male, 65% had a primary tumor in the pancreatic head. 38 (86%) pts with LPC completed AIT compared to 21 (68%) pts with LAPC (p<0.001). KRAS mutation was detected in 95% (71/75) of pts– 94% (67/71) in codon 12 and 6% (4/71) in codon 61. The various KRAS mutations and their association with completion of AIT is summarized in the table. The likelihood of completing AIT did not differ based on KRAS wildtype (WT) vs mutated status (p =1.00), the mutated codon (codon 12 vs. codon 61; p =1.00) or the individual KRAS point mutations (p = 0.7); however, all patients with G12A (N= 1), G12C (N=1), G12L (N=1) and G12R (N=11) mutations completed AIT. KRAS status (mutated vs. WT) and the individual KRAS mutations were not associated with overall survival (OS) after adjusting for stage (p= 0.13 and p = 0.26 respectively). Median OS for patients with LPC and LAPC, was 39 months (mos) and 29 mos respectively. Conclusions: KRAS status and individual KRAS mutations did not have an impact on completing AIT or mOS; however, these findings need to be interpreted with caution due to the inherent biases involved in such analyses. The clinical significance and functional relevance of KRAS G12A, G12C, G12L and G12R mutations, though relatively rare, needs further characterization as well as mechanistic elucidation. [Table: see text]
The impact of HIPEC vs. EPIC for the treatment of mucinous appendiceal carcinoma: a study from the US HIPEC collaborative
AbstractBackgroundWhile parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), liver resection (LR) is increasingly performed with CRS/HIPEC.MethodsPatients from the US HIPEC Collaborative (2000–2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0‐1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 658 patients were included. About 83 (15%) underwent LR of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. LR patients had more complications (81% vs. 60%; p = .001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs. 1.5; p < .001) per patient and required more reoperations (22% vs. 11%; p = .007) and readmissions (39% vs. 25%; p = .014) than non‐LR patients. LR patients had decreased OS (2‐year OS 62% vs. 79%, p < .001), even when accounting for peritoneal carcinomatosis index and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in LR patients included age < 60 years (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.10–11.81), colorectal histology (HR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.69–12.65), and multiple liver tumors (HR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.21–9.85) (all p < .05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2‐year survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%).ConclusionsAs CRS/HIPEC + LR has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC + LR. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in OS.
Institutional variation in recovery after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: An opportunity for enhanced recovery pathways
AbstractBackgroundVariations in care have been demonstrated both within and among institutions in many clinical settings. By standardizing perioperative practices, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways reduce variation in perioperative care. We sought to characterize the variation in cytoreductive surgery (CRS)/heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) perioperative practices among experienced US medical centers.MethodsData from the US HIPEC Collaborative represents a retrospective multi‐institutional cohort study of CRS and CRS/HIPEC procedures performed from 12 major academic institutions. Patient characteristics and perioperative practices were reported and compared. Institutional variation was analyzed using hierarchical mixed‐effects linear (continuous outcomes) or logistic (binary outcomes) regression models.ResultsA total of 2372 operations were included. CRS/HIPEC was performed most commonly for appendiceal histologies (64.2%). The rate of complications (overall 56.3%, range: 31.8‐70.9) and readmissions (overall 20.6%, range: 8.9‐33.3) varied by institution (P < .001). Institution‐level variation in perioperative practice patterns existed among measured ERAS pathway process/outcomes (P < .001). The percentages of variation with each process/outcome measure attributable solely to institutional practices ranged from 0.6% to 66.6%.ConclusionsSignificant variation exists in the perioperative care of patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC at major US academic institutions. These findings provide a strong rationale for the investigation of best practices in CRS/HIPEC patients.