Burch, Patrick A.

e14594 Background: PNETs are uncommon malignancies and little is known about risk their factors and association with other cancers. Our aim was to evaluate smoking, alcohol use, personal history of diabetes and a family history of PNET and other cancers as potential risk factors. Methods: PNET cases seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester from 2000 to 2011 were evaluated. Insulinoma and high-grade PNETs were excluded. Primary care patients served as controls and were matched (2:1 ratio) to cases on age, sex and region of residence. Cases and controls completed questionnaires at the time of evaluation. Categorical variables were compared with the chi-square test; continuous variables were compared using a two-sample t test. Results: 355 cases were evaluated, mean age was 56.6 years, 52% were males and 96% were White. Personal smoking history was not associated with PNETs (cases 51%, controls 47%, p=0.24). Ever-alcohol use was less common among cases (54% vs. 67%, p=0.001). 19% of cases reported a history of diabetes compared with 11% of controls (p<0.001). Cases were more likely than controls to report a family member with sarcoma (p=0.02), PNET (p=0.024), gall bladder cancer (p=0.024), ovarian cancer (p=0.04) and stomach cancer (p=0.01). Conclusions: Cases with PNETs were more likely than controls to report a history of diabetes and less likely to report alcohol use. There was no association with smoking. Several types of cancer were more commonly reported in family members of cases than controls.

PURPOSE: We have completed a phase I study, followed by three phase I/II studies, in patients with metastatic melanoma, renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and sarcoma in order to evaluate the safety, toxicity, and antitumor activity of Leuvectin (Vical Inc, San Diego, CA), a gene transfer product containing a plasmid encoding human interleukin (IL)-2 formulated with the cationic lipid 1,2-dimyristyloxypropyl-3-dimethyl-hydroxyethyl ammonium bromide/dioleyl-phosphatidyl-ethanolamine (DMRIE/DOPE) and administered intratumorally. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients were treated in the phase I study. Leuvectin doses were 10 μg, 30 μg, or 300 μg weekly for 6 weeks. In three subsequent phase I/II studies, a total of 52 patients (18 with melanoma, 17 with RCC, and 17 with sarcoma) were treated with further escalating doses of Leuvectin: 300 μg twice a week for 3 weeks, 750 μg weekly for 6 weeks, and 1,500 μg weekly for 6 weeks. RESULTS: There were no drug-related grade 4 toxicities and only one grade 3 toxicity, but the majority ofpatients experienced mild constitutional symptoms after treatment. In the phase I/II studies, 45 patients were assessable for response (14 with RCC, 16 with melanoma, and 15 with sarcoma). Two patients with RCC and one with melanoma have achieved partial responses lasting from 16 to 19 months and continuing. In addition, two RCC, three melanoma, and six sarcoma patients had stable disease lasting from 3 to 18 months and continuing. The plasmid was detected by polymerase chain reaction assay in the posttreatment samples of 29 of 46 evaluated patients. Immunohistochemistry studies on serial biopsy specimens showed increased IL-2 expression and CD8+ infiltration after treatment in the tumor samples of several patients (12 and 16, respectively). CONCLUSION: Direct intratumoral injection of Leuvectin is a safe and possibly effective immunotherapeutic approach in the treatment of certain tumor types.

Purpose The inclusion of metformin in the treatment arms of cancer clinical trials is based on improved survival that has been demonstrated in retrospective epidemiologic studies; however, unintended biases may exist when analysis is performed by using a conventional Cox proportional hazards regression model with dichotomous ever/never categorization. We examined the impact of metformin exposure definitions, analytical methods, and patient selection on the estimated effect size of metformin exposure on survival in a large cohort of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Patients and Methods Of newly diagnosed patients with PDAC with diabetes, 980 were retrospectively included, and exposure to metformin documented. Median survival was assessed by using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were computed to compare time-varying covariate analysis with conventional Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results Median survival of metformin users versus nonusers was 9.9 versus 8.9 months, respectively. By the time-varying covariate analysis, metformin use was not statistically significantly associated with improved survival (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.81 to1.07; P = .28). There was no evidence of benefit in the subset of patients who were naïve to metformin at the time of PDAC diagnosis (most representative of patients enrolled in clinical trials; HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.30; P = .89); however, when the analysis was performed by using the conventional Cox model, an artificial survival benefit of metformin was detected (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.01; P = .08), which suggested biased results from the conventional Cox analysis. Conclusion Our findings did not suggest the benefit of metformin use after patients are diagnosed with PDAC. We highlight the importance of patient selection and appropriate statistical analytical methods when studying medication exposure and cancer survival.

Purpose Palliation of bone pain can be achieved in men with androgen-independent prostate cancer treated with docetaxel and estramustine (DE) or mitoxantrone and prednisone (MP). While Southwest Oncology Group trial 99-16 demonstrated a survival improvement of DE over MP, the study also was designed to compare the palliation of disease-related symptoms. Methods Pain palliation and global quality of life (QOL) were the two primary patient-reported outcomes. Pain was measured with the Present Pain Intensity scale of the McGill Pain Questionnaire-Short Form. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (QLQ-C30) and its Prostate Cancer Module (PR25) measured QOL and symptom status. Pain and analgesic use were measured at random assignment, every cycle for eight cycles, and 1 year from random assignment; the QLQ-C30 and the PR25 were administered at random assignment, before cycle four (week 10) and cycle eight (month 6) and at 1 year. In addition to the primary intent-to-treat, missing at random analysis, sensitivity analyses were performed to assess robustness of global QOL conclusions under alternative informative missing data assumptions. Results Six hundred seventy four eligible patients received DE (n = 338) or MP (n = 336). In an intention-to-treat analysis, median overall survival was 17.5 months for the DE arm and 15.6 months for the MP arm (P = .02). There were no statistically significant differences in pain palliation between the treatment arms. The sensitivity analyses showed a consistent lack of statistically significant global QOL differences for the two arms. Conclusion DE had superior clinical efficacy (overall survival, time-to-progression, and prostate-specific antigen declines) with similar global QOL and pain palliation in the MP arm.