Bekaii‐Saab, Tanios

Abstract Molecular profiling reveals that up to 40% of advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs) harbor actionable genomic alterations amenable to matched targeted therapies. However, conventional trial designs typically evaluate these agents in pretreated populations, resulting in approvals for later-line use. Notably, 25–44% of patients with advanced BTC may become ineligible for treatment after first-line therapy due to disease progression or functional decline, thus the real-world survival outcomes with matched therapies remains poorly characterized. This international collaborative study includes data from Mayo Clinic, Duke Cancer Institute, and National Cancer Center East (Japan), as well as a combined dataset from the SCRUM-Japan GOZILA, MONSTAR-SCREEN-1, and MONSTAR-SCREEN-2 projects. We assessed overall survival (OS) of patients based on the presence of actionable alterations and the receipt of matched therapy. To adjust for confounding, we applied propensity score weighting with inverse probability of treatment and multivariate Cox regression modeling, controlling for age, sex, tumor location, prior resection, and mutational subgroup. Among 1,049 patients that were analyzed, 358 (34.1%) harbored actionable alterations, with 160 (44.7%) receiving matched targeted therapy. The matched group (patients with actionable tumors who received a matched therapy) were significantly associated with longer median OS (23.3 months; 95% CI: 19.5–30.4) compared to the unmatched group (14.7 months; 95% CI: 12.8–17.9) and those with non-actionable tumors (17.1 months; 95% CI: 15.5–18.7; HR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.46–0.71; p < 0.0001). The unmatched group also was associated with the lowest three-year OS rate (13% vs. 35% in matched and 19% in actionable groups, respectively; p<0.0001). On multivariable analysis with patients who received ≥2 lines of therapy, receipt of matched therapy remained an independent predictor of improved OS (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.43–0.90). These findings support the early integration of targeted therapies in BTC management and underscore the need to overcome systemic barriers to treatment access.

Abstract Background Unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) is a leading cause of cancer death. FDA-approved first-line systemic therapies include atezolizumab/bevacizumab (atezo/bev) and durvalumab/tremelimumab (durva/treme); however, there is a lack of comparative data. Methods We reviewed outcomes of patients with uHCC who initiated atezo/bev or durva/treme between 2017 and 2024, across six institutions. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier and Cox models, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Results Four hundred fifty-two uHCC pts were included. Median age: 68 years; 77% male; 81% white. Most common etiologies were viral hepatitis (38.9%) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (19.5%). Disease progression was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation, atezo/bev (56%) and durva/treme (42%). Outcomes were not statistically significant (median OS [month, m]: 14.0 vs 14.6 [P = .66]; median TTD [m]: 4.9 vs 3.9 [P = .42] for atezo/bev vs durva/treme). Outcomes were significantly different between Child-Pugh classes (CP: A, B7, B8/9, C) respectively, median OS(m): 19.0, 6.1, 5.1, 2.0 (P &lt; .001); median TTD(m): 6.1, 2.3, 3.0, 1.3 (P &lt; .001). Conclusions In this real-world study of uHCC, no significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between atezo/bev and durva/treme in the first-line setting. CP scores were a key prognostic variable with both regimens.

Abstract Background Surgical resection without visible or residual microscopic disease (R0 resection) is known as the optimal path to cure localized pancreatic cancer (PDAC). Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is used to improve R0 resection rates; however, the optimal regimen is unclear. We assessed the safety and efficacy of peri-operative gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GEM/NAB) and pre-operative stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with resectable (R-PDAC) and borderline resectable PDAC (BR-PDAC). Patients and Methods This was a prospective, multicenter single arm phase 2 study in patients with R-PDAC and BR-PDAC. Patients received three cycles of GEM/NAB prior to SBRT followed by surgery and three cycles of adjuvant GEM/NAB. Primary endpoint was R0 surgical resection rate in each cohort. Secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival (OS). Results Eighty-six patients consented and following radiologic screening, 49 were enrolled into two cohorts: R-PDAC (n = 20) and BR-PDAC (n = 29) between June 2016 and April 2021. Seventy percent of R-PDAC (14/20) and 55.2% of BR-PDAC patients (16/29) completed all NAT. Eleven R-PDAC (55.0%) and 11 BR-PDAC patients (37.9%) underwent surgical resection. Nine R-PDAC (45.0%) and 9 BR-PDAC patients (31.0%) had R0 resections. The median OS for R-PDAC and BR-PDAC patients with R0 resections was 22 months (95% CI: 17.7 months-NA) and 39 months (95%CI: 13.21 months-NA), respectively. Conclusion While the trial failed to meet one of its primary objectives as only 45% of R-PDAC patients had an R0 resection, the objective of 30% R0 resection for the BR-PDAC group was met. NAT should be part of current therapeutic strategies for BR-PDAC; however, our trial does not answer what is the best NAT for BR-PDAC. Trial Registration NCT02723331

Importance The prognosis of advanced pancreaticobiliary tumors is poor. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of tissue samples is utilized to identify actionable alterations, but there are occasional limitations due to inadequate tissue acquisition. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an alternative method, but its correlation with tissue-based NGS remains unexplored. Objectives To assess the mutation concordance (mCR) rates between ctDNA and tissue testing for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and to evaluate how ctDNA performs as a treatment response biomarker. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients with PDAC and CC treated at academic institutions from January 2014 to January 2025. Patients underwent ctDNA testing using 1 platform and tissue NGS testing using 2 platforms. Main Outcomes and Measures mCR, which measures the shared gene alterations observed by both ctDNA and tissue-based NGS testing, was calculated using the Spearman correlation for PDAC and CC. The performance of ctDNA as a treatment response biomarker was assessed by comparing serial ctDNA data with restaging scans and cancer antigen 19-9 levels in patients with PDAC. Results Our cohort included 790 patients: 570 with advanced PDAC (265 [46.5%] female; median [IQR] age, 64 [33-84] years) and 220 with advanced CC (95 [43.2%] female; median [IQR] age, 66 [42-88] years). Overall, 461 patients with PDAC (80.9%) and 192 patients with CC (87.2%) underwent ctDNA testing, while 239 patients with PDAC (41.9%) and 70 patients with CC (31.8%) had tissue NGS testing. Among patients with PDAC, 85 of 130 patients (65.4%) showed shared specific gene alterations between ctDNA and tissue testing; there was a significant mCR, with a Spearman correlation of 0.47 (95% CI, 0.28-0.62; P &amp;lt; .001). For patients with CC, 32 of 48 (66.7%) had shared alterations between ctDNA and tissue testing; there was a significant mCR, with a Spearman correlation of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.35-0.70; P &amp;lt; .001). A subgroup analysis of patients with PDAC who underwent serial ctDNA testing suggested that new TP53 subclones and increased ctDNA variant allele frequency levels of TP53 and KRAS were associated with higher odds of progressive disease (eg, increased TP53 frequency: odds ratio, 7.28; 95% CI, 2.15-24.66; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study of patients with pancreaticobiliary tumors, there was a significant mCR between ctDNA and tissue NGS testing. Additionally, results suggest that ctDNA might detect resistant clones and enable assessment of treatment response.

Importance Pathologic complete response (pCR) is increasingly used as a surrogate end point for survival in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the field of gastrointestinal oncology. Although this approach has been endorsed by the US Food and Drug Administration, it is still novel and incompletely verified. Objective To evaluate the trial-level association between pCR and survival in rectal cancer RCTs examining the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy. Data Sources A meta-analysis was conducted to identify eligible RCTs in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases published between database inception to January 3, 2024. Study Selection RCTs evaluating neoadjuvant therapies in patients with rectal cancer who underwent subsequent surgical resection and reported pCR, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis Two investigators extracted the data, which were verified by a third author. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, version 2, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool, respectively. Adjusted odds and hazard ratios with their 95% CIs were extracted. Weighted linear regression was used to assess the correlation between pCR and both OS and DFS. Main Outcomes and Measures Trial-level correlation between pCR and both OS and DFS. Results Twenty-five RCTs, including 11 882 patients, met the inclusion criteria. On meta-regression analysis, pCR was not correlated with OS (β = 0.37; 95% CI, −0.98 to 1.71; P = .57). Similarly, pCR was not correlated with DFS (β = −0.84; 95% CI, −2.55 to 0.87; P = .32). Two studies (8%) used in the meta-analysis had high risk of bias. On sensitivity analysis excluding these studies, pCR was still not associated with OS or DFS. Subgroup analysis of RCTs using total neoadjuvant therapies was not possible due to limited sample size. Conclusions and Relevance In this systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing neoadjuvant therapies in rectal cancer, there was no trial-level association between pCR and survival. These results suggest that the use of pCR as a surrogate end point for survival should be reexamined and used more cautiously.

Abstract In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the possible prognostic impact of concomitant medications in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy combinations. This real‐world analysis aims to evaluate the impact of concomitant medications on survival outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTCs) treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine and durvalumab (CGD) therapy. The study cohort included patients with a diagnosis of advanced BTCs who were taking concomitant medications for their comorbidities before the start of CGD. The primary objectives were overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS). The initial population consisted of 666 patients, who were retrospectively collected from 41 sites in 12 countries. Data on concomitant medications were available for 493 patients. After a median follow‐up of 8.8 months (95% CI: 7.8–9.8), patients who did not take steroids (prednisone >10 mg/day or equivalent) or nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids, before the start of CGD, had longer OS and PFS in univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis confirmed longer OS for patients who did not take steroids. Patients who did not take steroids had an OS of 14.8 months (95% CI: 13.1–29.1) versus 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.14–11.32) of patients who took prednisone >10 mg/day or equivalent. No differences were reported in terms of overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) ( p = 1.0 and p = .16, respectively), and safety profile between the two groups. Our analysis suggests that patients who did not receive steroids before the start of GCD had longer survival and highlighted the relevance of balancing concomitant medications and chemoimmunotherapy.

Abstract Background Cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab combination is a standard first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer. This study aimed to assess the impact of genetic alterations on outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab in real-world clinical practice. Methods Patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer treated with cisplatin and gemcitabine plus durvalumab across 39 centers in 11 countries in Europe, the United States, and Asia were included in this analysis. Results The cohort included 513 patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. The 5 most frequently altered genes were TP53 (22.1%), KRAS (13.7%), CDKN2A/B (13.6%), ARID1A (12.2%), and IDH1 (9.2%). In multivariate analysis, SMAD4 mutations were associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.49, P = .018) and overall survival (HR = 0.11, P = .023), while TP53 mutations were linked to worse PFS (HR = 1.62, P = .0047) and TERT mutations to worse overall survival (HR = 8.92, P = .0012). No other genomic alterations were statistically associated with outcomes. Subgroup analysis showed that TP53 mutations negatively affected PFS and overall survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, while KRAS mutations were associated with poorer PFS in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. No gene alterations were linked to outcomes in gallbladder cancer. Conclusions This large-scale analysis, with comprehensive molecular profiling, supports the positive prognostic impact of SMAD4 mutations for PFS and overall survival and highlights the negative prognostic roles of TP53 (PFS) and TERT (overall survival) mutations, providing valuable insights for personalized treatment strategies in biliary tract cancer.

PURPOSE Despite international medical graduates (IMGs) accounting for up to one third of all practicing oncologists in the United States, and nearly half of fellowship trainees, little is known about their contributions to presentations at international oncology meetings. Therefore, we investigated the representation of IMGs in invited faculty roles at the ASCO Annual Meeting as a representative example. METHODS Presentation data from ASCO 2022 and 2023 Annual Meetings were obtained from program guides. We collected presentation-level and speaker-level variables of invited faculty roles and original research. Speakers were categorized as American medical graduate (AMG), IMG, non–US-based, or non-MD (Doctor of Medicine). Univariable and multivariable analyses assessed factors influencing selection for invited faculty roles. RESULTS A total of 2,590 presentations by 2,109 unique speakers were reviewed, including primary research presenters and invited faculty. Among the 1,352 presentations by AMGs, 30% were primary research and 70% were invited faculty roles. For the 374 presentations by IMGs, 41% were primary research and 59% were invited faculty roles. Notably, first-author IMGs were significantly less likely to receive invited faculty roles relative to their primary research output compared with first-author AMGs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.90]; P = .006), even when accounting for academic rank, presumed sex, and year. CONCLUSION Relative to IMGs' original research output, IMGs appear to receive fewer invitations for ASCO Annual Meeting invited faculty roles compared with AMGs. Our findings suggest potential underrepresentation and under-recognition of IMGs in these roles, despite their contributions to the oncology workforce in the United States.