Jatoi, Aminah

Purpose This brief report describes a planned, interim, 6-patient toxicity analysis that confirms the safety of pemetrexed, carboplatin, radiation with subsequent surgery, as prescribed in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group trial N044E, in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Methods Six patients with locally advanced, potentially resectable esophageal cancer received pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 and carboplatin AUC = 6 on days 1 and 22 with 5040 centigray of concomitant radiation in 28 fractions over 5.5 weeks followed by esophagectomy as a prelude to a phase II multi-institutional trial. Results Only 1 of the 6 patients experienced a grade 4 adverse event (neutropenia). This patient also experienced a grade 3 depression. Of the remaining 5 patients, three experienced at least one grade 3 adverse event (neutropenia, nausea/vomiting, and esophagitis). There were no deaths. Incidentally, one patient manifested a complete pathologic response, three a partial pathologic response, and one stable disease. Conclusion These preliminary observations on safety suggest that this regimen can be further studied in this clinical setting.

Background Few studies have described the demographics and outcomes in patients with multiple cancers. Methods We reviewed the health records of patients with at least 3 invasive solid-tumor malignancies (lung, colorectal, pancreatic, prostate, breast, or ovarian) diagnosed between 1995 and 2014 at our institution. Results A total of 163 patients were identified. The median age at first cancer diagnosis was 61 years. Sixteen (10%) had a family history of cancer, and 7 (4%) had a cancer-predisposing syndrome. Most had early-stage malignancies and underwent a series of surgical resections. The median survival from the first cancer diagnosis was 14 years (95% confidence interval: 12–16). Forty-three percent developed 4 or more cancers. In univariate analyses, older age, male sex, smoking history, concurrent cancer, and stage IV disease were associated with worse survival; by contrast, breast cancer as the first cancer diagnosis yielded better survival. In multivariate analyses, older age, smoking history, and stage IV disease were associated with worse survival. Conclusions A small group of patients with no ostensible risk factors develop multiple early-stage cancers, receive curative therapy (often surgery), and live for years. These patients merit further study to ascertain the broader prevalence rates of individuals with multiple invasive cancers and to better understand factors that contribute to cancer risk.

BACKGROUND A nocebo is an inert substance associated with adverse events. Although previous studies have examined the positive (placebo) effects of such inert substances, few have examined negative (nocebo) adverse event profiles, particularly in older patients who have higher morbidity and can experience frequent and severe adverse events from cancer therapy. METHODS This study focused on placebo/nocebo‐exposed patients who participated in 2 double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, cancer therapeutic studies, namely, North Central Cancer Therapy Group trial NCCTG 97‐24‐51 and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z9001, with the goal of reporting the comparative, age‐based adverse event rates, as reported during the conduct of these trials. RESULTS Among the 446 patients who received only placebo/nocebo and who were the focus of the current report, 161 were aged ≥65 years at the time of respective trial entry, and 5234 adverse events occurred. Unadjusted adverse event rates did not differ significantly between patients aged ≥65 years and younger patients (rate ratio, 1.01; 99% confidence interval, 0.47‐2.02), and the findings were similar findings for grade 2 or worse adverse events and for all symptom‐driven adverse events (for example, pain, loss of appetite, anxiety). Adjustment for sex, ethnicity, baseline performance score, and individual trial resulted in no significant age‐based differences in adverse event rates. Similar findings were observed with an age threshold of 70 years. CONCLUSIONS Adverse events are equally common in older and younger cancer patients who are exposed to nocebo and thus require the same degree of clinical consideration regardless of age. Cancer 2017;123:4193–4198. © 2017 American Cancer Society .

BACKGROUNDOxaliplatin in combination with either 5‐fluorouracil or capecitabine is commonly used as first‐line therapy for patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma. The addition of irinotecan improves survival in other gastrointestinal tumors but at the cost of hematologic toxicity. The authors performed a phase 2 cooperative group study (North Central Cancer Treatment Group N0543, Alliance) using genotype‐dosed capecitabine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (gCAPIRINOX), with dosing assigned based on UDP glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 (UGT1A1) genotype to test: 1) whether the addition of irinotecan would improve outcomes; and 2) whether UGT1A1 genotype‐based dosing could optimize tolerability.METHODSPreviously untreated patients with advanced small bowel adenocarcinoma received irinotecan (day 1), oxaliplatin (day 1), and capecitabine (days 2‐15) in a 21‐day cycle and were dosed with gCAPIRINOX according to UGT1A1*28 genotypes (6/6, 6/7, and 7/7).RESULTSA total of 33 patients (17 with the 6/6 genotype, 10 with the 6/7 genotype, and 6 with the 7/7 genotype) were enrolled from October 2007 to November 2013; 73% were male, with a mean age of 64 years (range, 41‐77 years). Location of the primary tumor included the duodenum (58%), jejunum (30%), and ileum (9%). The regimen yielded a confirmed response rate of 37.5% (95% confidence interval, 21%‐56%), with a median progression‐free survival of 8.9 months and a median overall survival of 13.4 months. Neither hematologic toxicity (grade ≥3 in 52.9%, 30.0%, and 33.3%, respectively, of the 6/6, 6/7, and 7/7 genotype groups) nor tumor response rate (41.2%, 33%, and 33%, respectively) were found to differ significantly by UGT1A1 genotype.CONCLUSIONSUGT1A1 genotype‐directed dosing (gCAPIRINOX) appears to be feasible with favorable rates of hematologic toxicity compared with prior 3‐drug studies in unselected patients. Larger studies would be needed to determine the regimen's comparability to oxaliplatin and capecitabine (CapeOx) alone or if response/toxicity differs among patients with different UGT1A1 genotypes. Cancer 2017;123:3494‐501. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Abstract Background: Epidemiologic associations of leukocyte telomere length (LTL) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have been inconsistent owing, in part, to variation in telomere length (TL) assessment across studies. To overcome this limitation and address concerns of potential reverse causation, we used carriage of telomere-related alleles to genetically predict TL and examined its association with PDAC. Methods: A case–control study of 1,500 PDAC cases and 1,500 controls, frequency-matched on age and sex was performed. Eight of nine polymorphisms previously associated with variation in LTL were analyzed. Genetic risk scores (GRS) consisting of the TL-related polymorphisms were computed as the number of long TL alleles carried by an individual scaled to published kilobase pairs of TL associated with each allele. Participants were further categorized on the basis of the number of short TL alleles they carry across all eight SNPs. Associations were examined in additive and dominant models using logistic regression to calculate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: In age- and sex-adjusted models, one short TL allele (rs10936599, T) was associated with reduced risk, whereas another short TL allele (rs2736100, A) was associated with increased risk, with per-allele ORs of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79–0.99) and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.01–1.24), respectively. No association was observed with GRS or short TL allele counts, and no associations were observed in the dominant models. Conclusions: Findings suggest that genetically predicted short TL is not associated with PDAC risk. Impact: Common genetic determinants of short TL do not appear to influence PDAC risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(6); 971–4. ©2017 AACR.