Pitot, Henry C.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), constituting the predominant manifestation of liver cancer, stands as a formidable medical challenge. The prognosis subsequent to surgical intervention, particularly for individuals presenting with a solitary tumor, relies heavily on the degree of invasiveness. The decision-making process surrounding therapeutic modalities in such cases assumes paramount importance. This case report illuminates a rather unusual clinical scenario. Here, we encounter a patient who, following a disease-free interval, manifested an atypical presentation of HCC, specifically, a solitary cardiac metastasis. The temporal interval of remission adds an additional layer of complexity to the case. Through a multidisciplinary planning process, the decision was made for surgical removal of the metastatic tumor.

Abstract RTOG 9402 demonstrated procarbazine (P), lomustine (CCNU/C), and vincristine (V), collectively PCV, added to radiation therapy significantly improved survival for patients with newly diagnosed anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors. The improvement was most pronounced in 1p19q codeleted cases, and to a lesser extent, IDH-mutant cases, with no survival benefit in cases with neither biomarker. Analogous results were observed in other phase III trials. However, vincristine (V) can cause substantial toxicity and requires intravenous administration, both negatively affecting quality of life, with debatable contribution to PCV efficacy. As a randomized trial comparing PCV to PC is unlikely to be conducted, we explored correlations between survival and V-dosing in patients randomized to PCV in RTOG 9402. We performed post-hoc analyses of all evaluable participants (n = 143) randomized to PCV on RTOG 9402, supplemented by restricting the analyses to the chemosensitive molecular subsets (IDH-mutant and/or 1p/19q codeleted, n = 118). Total V dose by quartile (Q) was calculated. Survival from six months post-randomization was compared among V dose groups, adjusting for age, extent of resection (EOR), and Karnofsky Performances Status (KPS) in a Cox proportional hazards model. Higher V dose received correlated with longer survival in multivariate analyses (n = 134, median-Q3 vs. < Q1, HR 0.40 (0.22, 0.73), p = 0.003; ≥Q3 vs. < Q1, HR 0.39 (0.22, 0.72), p = 0.002). Excluding chemoresistant cases (IDH wild-type/not codeleted), survival was also significantly longer in evaluable participants receiving the highest doses of vincristine (≥Q3 vs. < Q1 HR 0.42 (0.21,0.81), p = 0.01). In this post-hoc analysis, higher overall V-dose received correlated with longer survival in evaluable patients with anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors receiving PCV chemotherapy in RTOG 9402. Of note, as vincristine dosing was not assigned by randomization, confounding due to differences in patient characteristics among V dose groups cannot be ruled out. Caution should be exercised when considering discarding V from the PCV regimen.

PURPOSE Three agents with differing mechanisms of action are available for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin. In this study, we compared the activity and toxicity of three different two-drug combinations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had not been treated previously for advanced disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were concurrently randomly assigned to receive irinotecan and bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (IFL, control combination), oxaliplatin and infused fluorouracil plus leucovorin (FOLFOX), or irinotecan and oxaliplatin (IROX). The primary end point was time to progression, with secondary end points of response rate, survival time, and toxicity. RESULTS A total of 795 patients were randomly assigned between May 1999 and April 2001. A median time to progression of 8.7 months, response rate of 45%, and median survival time of 19.5 months were observed for FOLFOX. These results were significantly superior to those observed for IFL for all end points (6.9 months, 31%, and 15.0 months, respectively) or for IROX (6.5 months, 35%, and 17.4 months, respectively) for time to progression and response. The FOLFOX regimen had significantly lower rates of severe nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, and dehydration. Sensory neuropathy and neutropenia were more common with the regimens containing oxaliplatin. CONCLUSION The FOLFOX regimen of oxaliplatin and infused fluorouracil plus leucovorin was active and comparatively safe. It should be considered as a standard therapy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Abstract Background We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil in combination with irinotecan in a phase II trial setting for refractory, advanced unresectable biliary tract carcinoma (BTC). Methods A total of 28 patients (27 were evaluable) with advanced BTCs who progressed on at least one prior systemic therapy were enrolled and were treated with trifluridine/tipiracil 25 mg/m2 (days 1-5 of 14-day cycle) and irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (day 1 of the 14-day cycle). The primary endpoint for the study was 16-week progression-free survival (PFS16) rate. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety were pre-specified secondary endpoints. Results Of 27 patients, PFS16 rate was 37% (10/27; 95% CI: 19%-58%), thereby meeting the criteria for success for the primary endpoint. The median PFS and OS of the entire cohort were 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.5-7.4) and 9.1 months (95% CI: 8.0-14.3), respectively. In the patients evaluable for tumor response (n = 20), the ORR and DCR were 10% and 50%, respectively. Twenty patients (74.1%) had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event (AE), and 4 patients (14.8%) had grade 4 AEs. A total of 37% (n = 10/27) and 51.9% (n = 14/27) experienced dose reductions in trifluridine/tipiracil and irinotecan, respectively. Delay in therapy was noted in 56% of the patients while 1 patient discontinued the therapy, primarily due to hematologic AEs. Conclusion The combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus irinotecan is a potential treatment option for patients with advanced, refractory BTCs with good functional status and no targetable mutations. A larger randomized trial is needed to confirm these results. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04072445)

Abstract Purpose: This phase Ib/2 trial investigated pembrolizumab-containing trimodality therapy in patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods: Patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma (cT1–3NanyM0) received neoadjuvant pembrolizumab-containing chemoradiation (CROSS regimen) followed by surgical resection and adjuvant pembrolizumab. The primary endpoints were tolerability in the first 16 patients and pathologic complete response [pCR (ypT0N0)]. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An independent propensity-score-matched cohort (treated with CROSS without immunotherapy) was used for comparison. Exploratory analyses included immune biomarkers in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and plasma. Results: We enrolled 31 eligible patients, of whom 29 received all expected doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and 28 underwent R0 resection. Safety endpoints were met. The primary efficacy endpoint was not met [7/31 (22.6%) achieved pCR]. Patients with high [i.e., combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10] baseline expression of programmed death (PD)-L1 in the TME had a significantly higher pCR rate than those with low expression [50.0% (4/8) vs. 13.6% (3/22); P = 0.046]. Patients with high PD-L1 expression also experienced longer PFS and OS than propensity-score-matched patients. Among trial patients with PD-L1 CPS < 10, unprespecified analysis explored whether extracellular vesicles (EV) could identify further responders: an elevated plasma level of PD-L1–expressing EVs was significantly associated with higher pCR. Conclusions: Adding pembrolizumab to trimodality therapy showed acceptable tolerability but did not meet the pre-specified pCR endpoint. Exploratory analyses suggested that high PD-L1 expression in the TME and/or on EVs may identify patients most likely to achieve tumor response.

Abstract Background We evaluated the time to progression (TTP) and survival outcomes of second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer among adults aged 70 years and older compared with younger adults following progression on first-line clinical trials. Methods Associations between clinical and disease characteristics, time to initial progression, and rate of receipt of second-line therapy were evaluated. TTP and overall survival (OS) were compared between older and younger adults in first- and second-line trials by Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, number of metastatic sites and presence of metastasis in the lung, liver, or peritoneum. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Older adults comprised 16.4% of patients on first-line trials (870 total older adults aged >70 years; 4419 total younger adults aged ≤70 years, on first-line trials). Older adults and those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status >0 were less likely to receive second-line therapy than younger adults. Odds of receiving second-line therapy decreased by 11% for each additional decade of life in multivariable analysis (odds ratio = 1.11, 95% confidence interval = 1.02 to 1.21, P = .01). Older and younger adults enrolled in second-line trials experienced similar median TTP and median OS (median TTP = 5.1 vs 5.2 months, respectively; median OS = 11.6 vs 12.4 months, respectively). Conclusions Older adults were less likely to receive second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, though we did not observe a statistical difference in survival outcomes vs younger adults following second-line therapy. Further study should examine factors affecting decisions to treat older adults with second-line therapy. Inclusion of geriatric assessment may provide better criteria regarding the risks and benefits of second-line therapy.

AbstractThrough our involvement in KEYNOTE‐059, we unexpectedly observed durable responses in two patients with metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA) who received ramucirumab (anti‐VEGFR‐2)/paclitaxel after immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI). To assess the reproducibility of this observation, we piloted an approach to administer ramucirumab/paclitaxel after ICI in more patients, and explored changes in the immune microenvironment. Nineteen consecutive patients with mGEA received ICI followed by ramucirumab/paclitaxel. Most (95%) did not respond to ICI, yet after irRECIST‐defined progression on ICI, all patients experienced tumor size reduction on ramucirumab/paclitaxel. The objective response rate (ORR) and progression‐free survival (PFS) on ramucirumab/paclitaxel after ICI were higher than on the last chemotherapy before ICI in the same group of patients (ORR, 58.8% vs 11.8%; PFS 12.2 vs 3.0 months; respectively). Paired tumor biopsies examined by imaging mass cytometry showed a median 5.5‐fold (range 4‐121) lower frequency of immunosuppressive forkhead box P3+ regulatory T cells with relatively preserved CD8+ T cells, post‐treatment versus pre‐treatment (n = 5 pairs). We then compared the outcomes of these 19 patients with a separate group who received ramucirumab/paclitaxel without preceding ICI (n = 68). Median overall survival on ramucirumab/paclitaxel was longer with (vs without) immediately preceding ICI (14.8 vs 7.4 months) including after multivariate analysis, as was PFS. In our small clinical series, outcomes appeared improved on anti‐VEGFR‐2/paclitaxel treatment when preceded by ICI, in association with alterations in the immune microenvironment. However, further investigation is needed to determine the generalizability of these data. Prospective clinical trials to evaluate sequential treatment with ICI followed by anti‐VEGF(R)/taxane are underway.

402 Background: Pancreas cancer is an aggressive malignancy with limited therapeutic options. Nanoliposomal irinotecan (Nal-IRI) is a preferred second-line treatment, and current guidelines recommend its use in the absence of prior irinotecan. This study aimed to assess whether patients who had received regular irinotecan derive benefit from Nal-IRI. Methods: Medical records of metastatic pancreas cancer patients who had received regular irinotecan and then Nal-IRI were reviewed. The following information was extracted from each medical record: patient demographics, confirmation of a diagnosis of exocrine pancreas cancer, initial cancer stage, dates of administration of the drugs of interest, adverse events that occurred with Nal-IRI treatment, reasons for stopping regular irinotecan, and reasons for starting and stopping Nal-IRI. The primary endpoint was overall survival after the initiation of Nal-IRI (an a priori threshold of > 4 months defined success). Survival data were censored based on date of last follow up. Direct quotes from the medical record were documented to provide insight on prescribing Nal-IRI when guidelines advised the contrary. Results: Sixty four patients met eligibility criteria with a median age of 65 years (range: 36, 80 years). Prior to Nal-IRI, 61 patients had received FOLFIRINOX, and 3 FOLFIRI. Of these, 32 patients manifested progressive disease on regular irinotecan-based therapy. Nal-IRI was prescribed with a fluoropyrimidine; only one patient received monotherapy. At time of analysis, 54 patients had died. Median overall survival from initiation of Nal-IRI was 5.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 5.6, 4.3, months). An exploratory comparison, based on no cancer progression with regular irinotecan versus progression, showed improved survival with Nal-IRI in the former group: 6.1 months (95% CI: 9.3, 5.1 months) versus 4.3 months (95% CI: 4.8, 2.3 months); p=0.0006. Nal-IRI adverse events occurred as expected. Qualitative data illustrated several themes, including “limited treatment options,” which appeared to drive the decision to prescribe Nal-IRI. Conclusions: Nal-IRI might be considered in pancreas cancer patients who had received regular irinotecan, particularly in the absence of disease progression with the latter.

239 Background: After trastuzumab (T) approval for advanced HER2-positive E/GEJ-AC, HER2 testing has increased in patients (pts) with resectable disease. Neoadjuvant carboplatin/paclitaxel chemoradiation (nCP-CRT) is a common therapy approach. We performed the largest evaluation, to our knowledge, of the prognostic impact of HER2 in E/GEJ-AC pts treated with nCP-CRT. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of all trimodality-eligible (T2+ or N+) pts with E/GEJ-AC who started nCP-CRT (usually 50.4 Gy) with planned surgery at Mayo Clinic (2014-2019). HER2 was tested using standard criteria for HER2 positivity (ie, immunohistochemistry 3+ or amplification by in situ hybridization). Clinicopathologic data and time to recurrence (TTR), disease free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), survival after recurrence (SAR), and pathologic complete response (pCR – ie, no residual tumor in primary or nodes) were collected. Kaplan Meier and multivariate Cox analysis were used. Results: Of 161 consecutive eligible pts, HER2 status was available in 107 pts (HER2-positive n=26, HER2-negative n=81) of whom n=82 had surgery and n=19 had pCR. Most tumors were clinical T3 (80%) or N+ (81%), histologic grade 3 of 3 (62%). HER2 positivity was significantly associated with lower grade, but not with age, clinical T or N, or ECOG performance status (PS). A similar proportion of HER2-positive ( vs negative) pts had surgery. Among pts who had surgery, pCR rates were lower in HER2-positive ( vs negative) pts (11% [2/19] vs 27% [17/63]). After a median follow up of 23 mo, DFS and TTR were significantly shorter in HER2 positive ( vs negative) pts, independent of other pretreatment covariables (Table). Yet OS was comparable. Lung recurrence was enriched in HER2 positive ( vs negative) pts. Among pts with recurrence, SAR was longer in HER2-positive vs -negative pts. A total of 53% (10/19) of previously HER2-positive pts received T-based therapy after recurrence, and these pts were the drivers of favorable SAR (median 22 mo in n=10 HER2-positive pts who received T vs 11 mo in n=9 HER2-positive pts who did not receive T vs 11 mo in n=40 HER2-negative pts; P log-rank=.01). Conclusions: HER2 positivity ( vs negativity) is independently associated with shorter TTR and DFS, but more comparable OS. The adverse association of HER2 on tumor response and TTR may have been largely overcome through enhanced survival after recurrence, although OS data are maturing. These data may have implications for the design of endpoints in future curative-intent anti-HER2 trials. [Table: see text]