Integrated Capecitabine-Temozolomide with Radioembolization for Liver-Dominant G2 NETs: Long-Term Outcomes of a Single-Institution Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: Capecitabine-Temozolomide (CapTem) is an oral chemotherapy regimen for NETs. Both drugs are radiosensitizers. Integrating CapTem and Y90 transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in patients with grade 2 neuroendocrine tumor (NET) liver metastases achieved an encouraging objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) in a feasibility study. This study expands that report to a larger cohort with longer follow-up. METHODS: Therapy consisted of monthly cycles of capecitabine 600 mg/m2 twice daily for 14 days and temozolomide 150-200 mg/m2 on day 10-14. Simulation angiography was performed during the initial cycle. The dominant lobe was treated with 90Y-resin microspheres using BSA dosimetry on day 7 of the second cycle of CapTem. Patients with bilobar disease had the other lobe treated on day 7 of the third or fourth cycle. CapTem was continued until progression or intolerance. Clinical and laboratory assessment was done monthly and imaging every 3 months. RESULTS: 35/37 patients completed the prescribed regimen. Primary sites of disease were pancreas (16), lung (10), gut (7) and unknown (4). Mean duration of CapTem was 12 months (range, 4-32 months). ORR in the liver was 72% with a disease control rate of 100%. Median PFS was 36 months (95% CI, 25-45 months). Median overall survival was 41 months (95% CI, 24-87 months) from initiation of CapTemY90 therapy and 130 months (95% CI, 56-172 months) from initial diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Chemoradiation with CapTem and TARE provided durable control of G2 NET liver metastases for substantially longer than expectations for embolotherapy or chemotherapy alone.

Multianalyte Prognostic Signature Including Circulating Tumor DNA and Circulating Tumor Cells in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with a poor prognosis. Multianalyte signatures, including liquid biopsy and traditional clinical variables, have shown promise for improving prognostication in other solid tumors but have not yet been rigorously assessed for PDAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) or metastatic PDAC (mPDAC) who were planned to undergo systemic therapy. We collected peripheral blood before systemic therapy and assessed circulating tumor cells (CTCs), cell-free DNA concentration (cfDNA), and circulating tumor KRAS (ctKRAS)-variant allele fraction (VAF). Association of variables with overall survival (OS) was assessed in univariate and multivariate survival analysis, and comparisons were made between models containing liquid biopsy variables combined with traditional clinical prognostic variables versus models containing traditional clinical prognostic variables alone. RESULTS: One hundred four patients, 40 with LAPC and 64 with mPDAC, were enrolled. CTCs, cfDNA concentration, and ctKRAS VAF were all significantly higher in patients with mPDAC than patients with LAPC. ctKRAS VAF (cube root; 0.05 unit increments; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.21; P = .01), and CTCs ≥ 1/mL (hazard ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.69; P = .002) were significantly associated with worse OS in multivariate analysis while cfDNA concentration was not. A model selected by backward selection containing traditional clinical variables plus liquid biopsy variables had better discrimination of OS compared with a model containing traditional clinical variables alone (optimism-corrected Harrell's C-statistic 0.725 v 0.681). CONCLUSION: A multianalyte prognostic signature containing CTCs, ctKRAS, and cfDNA concentration outperformed a model containing traditional clinical variables alone suggesting that CTCs, ctKRAS, and cfDNA provide prognostic information complementary to traditional clinical variables in advanced PDAC.

Implementing Pharmacogenetic Testing in Gastrointestinal Cancers (IMPACT-GI): Study Protocol for a Pragmatic Implementation Trial for Establishing DPYD and UGT1A1 Screening to Guide Chemotherapy Dosing.

Background: Fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil [5-FU], capecitabine) and irinotecan are commonly prescribed chemotherapy agents for gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for germline DPYD and UGT1A1 variants associated with reduced enzyme activity holds the potential to identify patients at high risk for severe chemotherapy-induced toxicity. Slow adoption of PGx testing in routine clinical care is due to implementation barriers, including long test turnaround times, lack of integration in the electronic health record (EHR), and ambiguity in test cost coverage. We sought to establish PGx testing in our health system following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework as a guide. Our implementation study aims to address barriers to PGx testing. Methods: The Implementing Pharmacogenetic Testing in Gastrointestinal Cancers (IMPACT-GI) study is a non-randomized, pragmatic, open-label implementation study at three sites within a major academic health system. Eligible patients with a GI malignancy indicated for treatment with 5-FU, capecitabine, or irinotecan will undergo PGx testing prior to chemotherapy initiation. Specimens will be sent to an academic clinical laboratory followed by return of results in the EHR with appropriate clinical decision support for the care team. We hypothesize that the availability of a rapid turnaround PGx test with specific dosing recommendations will increase PGx test utilization to guide pharmacotherapy decisions and improve patient safety outcomes. Primary implementation endpoints are feasibility, fidelity, and penetrance. Exploratory analyses for clinical effectiveness of genotyping will include assessing grade ≥3 treatment-related toxicity using available clinical data, patient-reported outcomes, and quality of life measures. Conclusion: We describe the formative work conducted to prepare our health system for DPYD and UGT1A1 testing. Our prospective implementation study will evaluate the clinical implementation of this testing program and create the infrastructure necessary to ensure sustainability of PGx testing in our health system. The results of this study may help other institutions interested in implementing PGx testing in oncology care. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04736472, identifier [NCT04736472].

Phase I Trial of Regorafenib, Hydroxychloroquine, and Entinostat in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitor regorafenib provides a survival benefit in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Antiangiogenic therapy causes hypoxic stress within tumor cells, which activates autophagy as a survival mechanism. The histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDAC) entinostat increases dependence on autophagy through epigenetic mechanisms. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) blocks autophagy by blunting lysosomal acidification. We hypothesized that HCQ and entinostat would be tolerable with regorafenib and potentiate the antitumor response. METHODS: This was a 3+3 phase I trial of HCQ and entinostat with regorafenib in patients with metastatic CRC. The primary objective was safety, and the secondary objective was clinical efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty patients received study therapy. Six evaluable patients were enrolled at each of the three planned dose levels, one patient at an intermediate dose level, and one additional patient withdrew consent after 4 days to receive treatment closer to home. One dose-limiting toxicity was noted in the study at dose level 2 (grade 3 fatigue). Seven patients discontinued therapy due to related toxicities; rapid weight loss was near universal, with a median weight loss of 4.4 kg (range 1.5-12.2 kg) in the first 2 weeks of treatment. No objective responses were observed. CONCLUSION: The combination of regorafenib, HCQ, and entinostat was poorly tolerated without evident activity in metastatic CRC. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03215264.

Preemptive pharmacogenetic testing to guide chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: a qualitative study of barriers to implementation.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for germline variants in the DPYD and UGT1A1 genes can be used to guide fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan dosing, respectively. Despite the known association between PGx variants and chemotherapy toxicity, preemptive testing prior to chemotherapy initiation is rarely performed in routine practice. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of oncology clinicians to identify barriers to using preemptive PGx testing to guide chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. Each participant completed a semi-structured interview informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach. RESULTS: Participants included sixteen medical oncologists and nine oncology pharmacists from one academic medical center and two community hospitals in Pennsylvania. Barriers to the use of preemptive PGx testing to guide chemotherapy dosing mapped to four CFIR domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. The most prominent themes included 1) a limited evidence base, 2) a cumbersome and lengthy testing process, and 3) a lack of insurance coverage for preemptive PGx testing. Additional barriers included clinician lack of knowledge, difficulty remembering to order PGx testing for eligible patients, challenges with PGx test interpretation, a questionable impact of preemptive PGx testing on clinical care, and a lack of alternative therapeutic options for some patients found to have actionable PGx variants. CONCLUSIONS: Successful adoption of preemptive PGx-guided chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies will require a multifaceted effort to demonstrate clinical effectiveness while addressing the contextual factors identified in this study.

Quantifying the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gastrointestinal cancer care delivery.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study quantifies how changes in healthcare utilization and delivery during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic have altered the presentation, treatment, and management of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies within an academic health system. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients diagnosed with a GI malignancy (ICD10: C15-C26) who received medical care within the health system during the observation period (first 44 weeks of 2019 and 2020) were identified for a retrospective cohort study. Deidentified patient encounter parameters were collected for this observation period and separated into pre-pandemic (weeks 1-10) and early pandemic (weeks 11-20) study periods. Difference-in-difference analyses adjusted for week-specific and year-specific effects quantified the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care delivery between pre-pandemic and early pandemic study periods in 2020. Across all GI malignancies, the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a significant decline in the number of patients with new patient visits (NPVs) (p = 1.2 × 10-4 ), Radiology encounters (p = 1.9 × 10-7 ), Surgery encounters (p = 1.6 × 10-3 ), Radiation Oncology encounters (p = 4.1 × 10-3 ), and infusion visits (6.1 × 10-5 ). Subgroup analyses revealed cancer-specific variations in changes to delivery. Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) had the most significant decrease in NPVs (p = 7.1 × 10-5 ), which was significantly associated with a concomitant decrease in colonoscopies performed during the early pandemic period (r2  = 0.722, p = 2.1 × 10-10 ). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with significant disruptions to care delivery. While these effects were appreciated broadly across GI malignancies, CRC, diagnosed and managed by periodic screening, has been affected most acutely.

Phase II Trial of Palbociclib in Patients with Advanced Esophageal or Gastric Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Palbociclib monotherapy demonstrated minimal clinical activity in patients with previously treated gastroesophageal cancers. Further clinical evaluation of palbociclib monotherapy is not warranted in gastroesophageal cancers, but improved understanding of resistance mechanisms may permit rational combination approaches. BACKGROUND: Dysregulation of the cell cycle is a hallmark of cancer. Progression through the G1/S transition requires phosphorylation of retinoblastoma (RB) by cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) 4 and 6, which are regulated by cyclins D and E. Amplifications of cyclin D loci and activating mutations in CDKs are frequent molecular aberrations in gastroesophageal malignancies. We conducted a phase II trial of the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib as an initial test of efficacy. METHODS: Patients with previously treated metastatic gastroesophageal cancers with intact RB nuclear expression by immunohistochemistry were treated with 125 mg daily of palbociclib for days 1-21 of 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate. RESULTS: We screened 29 patients and enrolled 21 patients: 5 with gastric adenocarcinoma, 3 with gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 8 with esophageal adenocarcinoma, and 5 with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. All 29 tumors screened had intact nuclear RB expression, and four treated patients tested positive for CCND1 overexpression. No objective responses were seen. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months, and median overall survival was 3.0 months. All recurrent grade 3 or 4 toxicities were hematologic, with neutropenia in eight patients (38%), anemia in four patients (19%), and thrombocytopenia in two patients (10%). CONCLUSION: Palbociclib has limited single-agent activity in gastroesophageal tumors.

Effect of Gemcitabine and nab-Paclitaxel With or Without Hydroxychloroquine on Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Autophagy is a mechanism of treatment resistance to chemotherapy that has a role in the maintenance of pancreatic cancer. Hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQ) is an inhibitor of autophagy that inhibits the fusion of the autophagosome to the lysosome. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether HCQ improves overall survival at 1 year in combination with gemcitabine hydrochloride and nab-paclitaxel (GA) among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted between March 18, 2013, and November 16, 2017, at the University of Pennsylvania, HonorHealth, and The Johns Hopkins University among 112 patients with previously untreated metastatic or advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate marrow and organ function. All efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat population. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive GA with or without HCQ. All patients received standard doses of GA, and those randomized to receive HCQ were treated continuously with 600 mg orally twice daily. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Overall survival at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (45 women and 67 men; median age, 65 years; range, 43-86 years) were enrolled; 55 were randomized to receive GA plus HCQ, and 57 to receive GA. Overall survival at 12 months was 41% (95% CI, 27%-53%) in the HCQ group and 49% (95% CI, 35%-61%) in the non-HCQ group. Median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-9.3 months) in the HCQ group and 6.4 months (95% CI, 4.5-7.6 months) in the non-HCQ group. Median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.2 months) in the HCQ group and 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.3-15.5 months) in the non-HCQ group. Overall response rate was 38.2% (n = 21) in the HCQ group and 21.1% (n = 12) in the non-HCQ group (P = .047). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events that differed between the HCQ and non-HCQ groups were neutropenia (23 of 54 [42.6%] vs 12 of 53 [22.6%]), anemia (2 of 54 [3.7%] vs 9 of 53 [17.0%]), fatigue (4 of 54 [7.4%] vs 0), nausea (5 of 54 [9.3%] vs 0), peripheral neuropathy (7 of 54 [13.0%] vs 3 of 53 [5.7%]), visual changes (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0), and neuropsychiatric symptoms (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The addition of HCQ to block autophagy did not improve the primary end point of overall survival at 12 months. These data do not support the routine use of GA plus HCQ for metastatic pancreatic cancer in the absence of a biomarker. However, improvement seen in the overall response rate with HCQ may indicate a role for HCQ in the locally advanced setting, where tumor response may permit resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01506973.

Safety and Feasibility of Integrating Yttrium-90 Radioembolization With Capecitabine-Temozolomide for Grade 2 Liver-Dominant Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

OBJECTIVES: An integrated protocol combining capecitibine-temozolomide with yttrium-90 radioembolization (CapTemY90) for liver-dominant grade 2 neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) was designed in the hope of achieving synergistic improvement in liver disease control with no more than additive toxicities. This report describes the feasibility and safety of this regimen. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with unresectable grade 2 NET liver-dominant metastases without contraindications to radioembolization or to CapTem initiated therapy with capecitabine 600 mg/m twice daily for 14 days and temozolomide 150 to 200 mg/m in 2 divided doses on days 10 to 14, with 14 days between cycles. During the first cycle, simulation angiography was performed. The dominant lobe was radioembolized on day 7 of the second cycle. In patients with bilobar disease, the other lobe was treated on day 7 of the third or fourth cycle. RESULTS: Nineteen of 21 patients completed the protocol. Adverse events were as expected. Objective response rate was 74% in the liver and 55% for extrahepatic tumor. Median progression-free survival was not reached. Progression-free survival at 3 years was 67%, with 74% progression-free in the liver. CONCLUSIONS: CapTemY90 is feasible and safe for grade 2 NETs. Toxicities were additive. Oncologic outcomes suggest synergy.

Efficacy of Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy in a United States-Based Cohort of Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Patients: Single-Institution Retrospective Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze in a retrospective cohort study the outcomes of a United States-based group of metastatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) patients who underwent peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients from a single US NET Center were treated with PRRT. Toxicities were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03. Progression was determined by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was performed to identify potential predictors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The median age at NET diagnosis was 56 years, 50% of the patients were male, 46% of NET primaries were located in the pancreas, 71% of tumors were nonfunctional, 25% were World Health Organization (WHO) grade III, and 20% had at least a 25% hepatic tumor burden. Anemia (36%) was the most common post-PRRT toxicity, followed by leukopenia (31%), nephrotoxicity (27%), and thrombocytopenia (24%). Median PFS was 18 months, and median OS was 38 months. Having a WHO grade III NET and receiving systemic chemotherapy prior to PRRT were found to be to independent predictors of shorter PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is an effective therapy in a US population. Progression-free survival and OS were better in WHO grade I/II NETs and when PRRT was sequenced prior to systemic chemotherapy.

The efficacy of adjuvant therapy for pancreatic invasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN).

BACKGROUND: The literature investigating pancreatic invasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) has largely come from small institutional studies, preventing adequately powered comparisons of adjuvant therapy versus surgery alone (SA) within specific patient subgroups. METHODS: Patients with resected, stage I through IV, invasive IPMN and conventional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) were identified in the National Cancer Data Base (1998-2010). Cox modeling of patients with invasive IPMN was used to compare overall survival (OS) between patients who received adjuvant therapy and those who underwent SA. A second model was used to compare OS between patients with invasive IPMN and those with PDAC. RESULTS: For the 1220 patients with invasive IPMN, the median OS was 28.9 months; the 1-year and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 76% and 17%, respectively; and 47% received adjuvant therapy. Cox modeling associated SA with worse OS (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.58; P = .00005) as well as American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM stage III/IV disease, positive lymph node status, positive margins, and poor tumor differentiation (all P ≤ .05). In addition, Cox modeling stratified by the following characteristics demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant therapy: AJCC TNM stage II or III/IV, positive lymph node status, positive margins, and poorly differentiated tumors. There was no survival advantage from adjuvant therapy for patients who had AJCC TNM stage I or lymph node-negative disease. Patients who had invasive IPMN had improved risk-adjusted OS compared with those who had PDAC (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.78; P < .00001). CONCLUSIONS: Invasive IPMN appears to be more indolent than conventional PDAC. Adjuvant therapy is associated with improved OS compared with SA in patients with invasive IPMN, especially for those with higher stage disease, positive lymph nodes, positive margins, or poorly differentiated tumors. Conversely, this benefit does not extend to patients with stage I or lymph node-negative disease.

Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy-Induced Hepatotoxicity in Patients With Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is effective in retarding tumor growth. Renal dysfunction, anemia, and thrombocytopenia are well-described treatment-related toxicities. However, hepatotoxicity is not well recognized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with GEP-NETs seen in a tertiary NET clinic from January 2010 to September 2013 (n = 211) with the primary study cohort being patients with metastatic disease to the liver (n = 93). The study exposure was PRRT, and the primary outcome of interest was hepatotoxicity. Hepatotoxicity was defined as a grade 2 or greater injury according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 of the National Cancer Institute. RESULTS: Seventeen (18%) of 93 patients with liver metastases received PRRT after radiographic confirmation of disease progression despite receipt of other traditional therapies. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy patients were similar to the unexposed patient population in terms of sex, age, baseline laboratory values, prior treatment exposure, and duration of disease. In the unexposed group, 23 (30%) of 76 patients had hepatotoxicity related to traditional GEP-NET therapy. In the exposed group, 10 (59%) of 17 patients had an episode of hepatotoxicity. Ascites developed in 59% of the PRRT group versus 6.6% in the unexposed group (P < 0.001). The calculated relative risk of hepatotoxicity related to PRRT exposure in metastatic GEP-NET patients was 1.94 (95% confidence interval, 1.15-3.28). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatotoxicity after PRRT for metastatic GEP-NET is more common than previously reported.

A phase I study of an agonist CD40 monoclonal antibody (CP-870,893) in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: This phase I study investigated the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacodynamics, immunologic correlatives, and antitumor activity of CP-870,893, an agonist CD40 antibody, when administered in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Twenty-two patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced PDA were treated with 1,000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine once weekly for three weeks with infusion of CP-870,893 at 0.1 or 0.2 mg/kg on day three of each 28-day cycle. RESULTS: CP-870,893 was well-tolerated; one dose-limiting toxicity (grade 4, cerebrovascular accident) occurred at the 0.2 mg/kg dose level, which was estimated as the MTD. The most common adverse event was cytokine release syndrome (grade 1 to 2). CP-870,893 infusion triggered immune activation marked by an increase in inflammatory cytokines, an increase in B-cell expression of costimulatory molecules, and a transient depletion of B cells. Four patients achieved a partial response (PR). 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) showed more than 25% decrease in FDG uptake within primary pancreatic lesions in six of eight patients; however, responses observed in metastatic lesions were heterogeneous, with some lesions responding with complete loss of FDG uptake, whereas other lesions in the same patient failed to respond. Improved overall survival correlated with a decrease in FDG uptake in hepatic lesions (R = -0.929; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: CP-870,893 in combination with gemcitabine was well-tolerated and associated with antitumor activity in patients with PDA. Changes in FDG uptake detected on PET/CT imaging provide insight into therapeutic benefit. Phase II studies are warranted.

Toxicity study of gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab, followed by 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab, and radiotherapy, in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum compounds or bevacizumab, in combination with gemcitabine, achieved good response rates in early studies in advanced pancreatic cancer. This prompted an evaluation of an aggressive approach to allow better local control and resectability in locally advanced disease. METHODS: We piloted a combination of gemcitabine/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab Q2w for four cycles, followed by oxaliplatin and bevacizumab added to infusional 5-FU and radiotherapy, in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated, of whom 17 completed the protocol-specified treatment. Median age was 60 years. Fifteen had unresectable, and four had borderline resectable disease. Toxicity of chemotherapy was moderate: grade III neutropenia (5) and grade I/II nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and neuropathy. During chemoradiation, major grade III toxicities were nausea and vomiting (3 each). One patient had intractable pain early on, necessitating treatment cessation. Response rate for 18 evaluable patients was 11 % (by RECIST); five patients (4 inoperable, 1 borderline, 26 %) went on to have surgery. One-year overall survival was 58 % and progression-free survival was 37 %. CONCLUSIONS: This combination, associated with higher response rates in metastatic disease, had a lower than expected response rate in primary tumors. Although tolerable, our approach failed to affect clinical outcomes meaningfully.

CD40 agonists alter tumor stroma and show efficacy against pancreatic carcinoma in mice and humans.

Immunosuppressive tumor microenvironments can restrain antitumor immunity, particularly in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA). Because CD40 activation can reverse immune suppression and drive antitumor T cell responses, we tested the combination of an agonist CD40 antibody with gemcitabine chemotherapy in a small cohort of patients with surgically incurable PDA and observed tumor regressions in some patients. We reproduced this treatment effect in a genetically engineered mouse model of PDA and found unexpectedly that tumor regression required macrophages but not T cells or gemcitabine. CD40-activated macrophages rapidly infiltrated tumors, became tumoricidal, and facilitated the depletion of tumor stroma. Thus, cancer immune surveillance does not necessarily depend on therapy-induced T cells; rather, our findings demonstrate a CD40-dependent mechanism for targeting tumor stroma in the treatment of cancer.

Phase 2 trial of bevacizumab, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin in treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Anti-angiogenesis agents have shown effectiveness in treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It is important to investigate more effective and safe systemic treatment options for patients with advanced HCC. This phase 2 study was designed to determine the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of bevacizumab, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced unresectable and untransplantable HCC. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced unresectable and untransplantable HCC were treated with bevacizumab 5 mg/kg and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 of each cycle, and capecitabine 825 mg/m² orally twice a day from days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled to the study, in which 40% had Child-Pugh B disease. Forty percent had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) of 0, 55% had PS of 1, and 5% had PS of 2. Forty percent of patients had hepatitis B virus infection. The median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 3.4-9.1 months), and the median overall survival was 9.8 months (95% CI, 5.2-12.1 months). Eight patients (20%) achieved partial response; 23 patients had stable disease with overall 77.5% disease control rate. The combination was tolerable with limited grade 3/4 toxicity, mainly peripheral neurotoxicity and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: The combination appeared effective and safe, and the results were encouraging. Further investigation should be considered.

Medical Oncology: Second-line XELOX or FOLFOX-4 for metastatic colorectal cancer.

In the movement towards individualized treatment regimens, Rothenberg et al. validate XELOX as another available systemic therapy for patients being treated with second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. This paper adds to a growing body of data in the first-line and second-line setting that confirms the noninferiority of oral fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens.