Dayyani, Farshid

Abstract Purpose: The addition of MEK inhibition (MEKi) to programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. Although MEK inhibitors may increase tumor cell immunogenicity, they can impair T-cell priming/effector function, limiting combination efficacy. We hypothesized that the addition of a CD27 agonist could restore T-cell function and enhance antitumor immunity in this combination. Patients and Methods: We conducted a randomized, phase II trial evaluating atezolizumab (840 mg, intravenously, days 1 and 15) in combination with the CD27 costimulatory monoclonal antibody [CDX-1127/varlilumab (3 mg/kg, intravenously, days 1 and 15)], with/without the addition of an MEK inhibitor [cobimetinib (60 mg, orally, daily, days 1–21, off days 22–28)] in unresectable biliary tract cancer following at least one metastatic therapy. Overall response rate (ORR) and PFS were coprimary endpoints. Treatment-related changes in CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) were the primary correlative outcomes. Results: The trial was closed early following interim preplanned ORR analysis. At closure, 57 patients had been enrolled [n = 29 in the cobimetinib + atezolizumab + varlilumab (CAV) arm; n = 28 in the atezolizumab + varlilumab (AV) arm]. A majority (67%) had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 32% were immunotherapy experienced. Both regimens were well tolerated without new safety signals. Objective responses were rare [0% (CAV); 3.8% (AV)]. The median PFS (mPFS) was 2.40 (CAV) and 1.84 (AV) months [hazard ratio (HR), 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38–1.18]. Among immunotherapy-experienced patients, the mPFS was 3.62 (CAV) and 1.84 (AV) months (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.18–1.62). Treatment with CAV increased intratumoral CD8+ T-cell density compared with treatment with AV. Conclusions: The combinations of atezolizumab and varlilumab with/without cobimetinib were safe, but neither meaningfully improved outcomes in biliary tract cancer treated in the later lines. Correlative tissue studies validated preclinical work that MEKi increases CD8+ TILs.

Background: Historically, the standard of care for advanced biliary tract cancers (aBTCs) was gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GemCis). Immunotherapy plus GemCis is now recommended as a first-line treatment for aBTCs. Whether patients can tolerate eight cycles of GemCis in clinical practice, as per the Advanced Biliary Cancer (ABC)-02 study, remains to be assessed. We performed a retrospective observational cohort study to assess real-world treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) in patients with de novo or recurrent aBTCs treated with first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in the United States. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study used Optum’s de-identified Market Clarity Data (Market Clarity). Adults diagnosed with de novo or recurrent aBTCs in the United States who began first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy from January 2016–March 2022 were identified and followed from index until death, the end of continuous enrolment, or the end of study period. Treatment patterns and OS were assessed. Results: Overall, 559 patients were included (de novo, n = 462; recurrent, n = 97). GemCis was the most common first-line therapy received (de novo: 73.8%; recurrent: 57.7%). Most patients received approximately five cycles of GemCis; median (95% CI) time to discontinuation was 4.6 (4.3–5.1) months. Most patients died over the follow-up period (de novo: 70.3%; recurrent: 62.9%). Median OS (95% CI) was 14.2 (12.1–16.1) months (de novo) and 18.5 (15.6–26.9) months (recurrent). Conclusions: GemCis was the most common first-line therapy received during the study period; most patients were unable to receive eight cycles of GemCis. Survival was limited over the follow-up period, highlighting the need for new treatments for aBTCs. Future studies are warranted to understand the real-world impact of first-line immunotherapy plus GemCis for patients with aBTCs.

Y-90 Selective Internal Radiotherapy (SIRT) is an ablative therapy used for inoperable liver metastasis. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the impact of local control after SIRT on overall survival (OS) in oligometastatic patients. A retrospective, single-institution study identified oligometastatic patients with ≤5 non-intracranial metastases receiving unilateral or bilateral lobar Y-90 SIRT from 2009 to 2021. The primary endpoint was OS defined from Y-90 SIRT completion to the date of death or last follow-up. Local failure was classified as a progressive disease at the target lesion(s) by RECIST v1.1 criteria starting at 3 months after SIRT. With a median follow-up of 15.7 months, 33 patients were identified who had a total of 79 oligometastatic lesions treated with SIRT, with the majority histology of colorectal adenocarcinoma (n = 22). In total, 94% of patients completed the Y-90 lobectomy. Of the 79 individual lesions treated, 22 (27.8%) failed. Thirteen patients received salvage liver-directed therapy following intrahepatic failure; ten received repeat SIRT. Median OS (mOS) was 20.1 months, and 12-month OS was 68.2%. Intralesional failure was associated with worse 1 y OS (52.3% vs. 86.2%, p = 0.004). These results suggest that intralesional failure following Y-90 may be associated with inferior OS, emphasizing the importance of disease control in low-metastatic-burden patients.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a heterogenous group of malignancies originating in the biliary tree, and associated with poor prognosis. Until recently, treatment options have been limited to surgical resection, liver-directed therapies, and chemotherapy. Identification of actionable genomic alterations with biomarker testing has revolutionized the treatment paradigm for these patients. However, several challenges exist to the seamless adoption of precision medicine in patients with CCA, relating to a lack of awareness of the importance of biomarker testing, hurdles in tissue acquisition, and ineffective collaboration among the multidisciplinary team (MDT). To identify gaps in standard practices and define best practices, multidisciplinary hepatobiliary teams from the University of California (UC) Davis and UC Irvine were convened; discussions of the meeting, including optimal approaches to tissue acquisition for diagnosis and biomarker testing, communication among academic and community healthcare teams, and physician education regarding biomarker testing, are summarized in this review.

AbstractLiposomal irinotecan is a liposomal formulation of irinotecan, which prolongs circulation of irinotecan and its active metabolite SN‐38. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed based on data from seven studies (N = 440). Adequacy of the model was assessed using multiple methods, including visual predictive check. Associations between PK exposure and the incidence of diarrhea (grade ≥3) and neutropenia adverse events (AEs) (grade ≥3) at first event in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) were investigated using logistic regression based on data from two studies (the phase III NAPOLI‐1 [N = 260] and phase I/II NCT02551991 [N = 56] trials). The PKs of total irinotecan was described by a two‐compartment model with first‐order elimination, with SN‐38 formed directly by a first‐order constant from the central compartment of irinotecan or after using a transit compartment. Clearance was 17.9 L/week (0.107 L/h) and 19,800 L/week (118 L/h) for total irinotecan and SN‐38, respectively. The UGT1A1*28 7/7 homozygous genotype had no significant impact on SN‐38 clearance. Model evaluation was satisfactory for both irinotecan and SN‐38. The incidence of diarrhea (grade ≥3) at first event was significantly higher with increasing average concentrations of total irinotecan and SN‐38; there was no significant association between an increased risk of neutropenia AEs (grade ≥3) at first event and average SN‐38 concentrations. In summary, the PKs of total irinotecan and SN‐38 after administration of liposomal irinotecan were well‐described by the model. The UGT1A1*28 status had no significant impact on the PKs of liposomal irinotecan.

Before the introduction of modern imaging techniques and the recent developments in molecular diagnosis, tumor markers (TMs) were among the few available diagnostic tools for the management of cancer patients. Easily obtained from serum or plasma samples, TMs are minimally invasive and convenient, and the associated costs are low. Single TMs were traditionally used but these have come under scrutiny due to their low sensitivity and specificity when used, for example, in a screening setting. However, recent research has shown superior performance using a combination of multiple TMs as a panel for assessment, or as part of validated algorithms that also incorporate other clinical factors. In addition, newer TMs have been discovered that have an increased sensitivity and specificity profile for defined malignancies. The aim of this review is to provide a concise overview of the appropriate uses of both traditional and newer TMs and their roles in diagnosis, prognosis, and the monitoring of patients in current clinical practice. We also look at the future direction of TMs and their integration with other diagnostic modalities and other emerging serum based biomarkers, such as circulating nucleic acids, to ultimately advance diagnostic performance and improve patient management.