An open-label study of pemigatinib in cholangiocarcinoma: final results from FIGHT-202.

BACKGROUND: Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusions and rearrangements are clinically actionable genomic alterations in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Pemigatinib is a selective, potent, oral inhibitor of FGFR1-3 and demonstrated efficacy in patients with previously treated, advanced/metastatic CCA with FGFR2 alterations in FIGHT-202 (NCT02924376). We report final outcomes from the extended follow-up period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase II FIGHT-202 study enrolled patients ≥18 years old with previously treated advanced/metastatic CCA with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements (cohort A), other FGF/FGFR alterations (cohort B), or no FGF/FGFR alterations (cohort C). Patients received once-daily oral pemigatinib 13.5 mg in 21-day cycles (2 weeks on, 1 week off) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) in cohort A assessed as per RECIST v1.1 by an independent review committee; secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: FIGHT-202 enrolled 147 patients (cohort A, 108; cohort B, 20; cohort C, 17; unconfirmed FGF/FGFR alterations, 2). By final analysis, 145 (98.6%) had discontinued treatment due to progressive disease (71.4%), withdrawal by patient (8.2%), or adverse events (AEs; 6.8%). Median follow-up was 45.4 months. The ORR in cohort A was 37.0% (95% confidence interval 27.9% to 46.9%); complete and partial responses were observed in 3 and 37 patients, respectively. Median DOR was 9.1 (6.0-14.5) months; median PFS and OS were 7.0 (6.1-10.5) months and 17.5 (14.4-22.9) months, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were hyperphosphatemia (58.5%), alopecia (49.7%), and diarrhea (47.6%). Overall, 15 (10.2%) patients experienced TEAEs leading to pemigatinib discontinuation; intestinal obstruction and acute kidney injury (n = 2 each) occurred most frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Pemigatinib demonstrated durable response and prolonged OS with manageable AEs in patients with previously treated, advanced/metastatic CCA with FGFR2 alterations in the extended follow-up period of FIGHT-202.

Does neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer improve overall survival? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may improve overall survival (OS) in 'borderline' resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC). Whether the results are the same in upfront RPC is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To evaluate the association of neoadjuvant treatment and survival outcomes in RPC, a systematic literature review was carried out including prospective randomized trials of neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery. Articles indexed in PubMed, Embase and Scopus were evaluated. Data regarding systemic treatment regimens, R0 resection rates, disease-free survival (DFS) and OS were extracted. The outcomes were compared using a random-effects model. The index I2 and the graphs of funnel plot were used for the interpretation of the data. RESULTS: Of 3229 abstracts, 6 randomized controlled trials were considered eligible with a combined sample size of 805 RPC patients. Among the trials, PACT-15, PREP-02/JSAP-05 and updated long-term results from PREOPANC and NEONAX trials were included. Combining the studies with meta-analysis, we could see that neoadjuvant treatment in RPC does not improve DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 (0.46-1.09)] or OS [HR 0.76 (0.52-1.11)], without significant heterogeneity. Interestingly, R0 rates improved ∼20% with the neoadjuvant approach [HR 1.2 (1.04-1.37)]. It is important to note that most studies evaluated gemcitabine-based regimens in the neoadjuvant setting. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation does not improve DFS or OS in RPC compared to upfront surgery followed by adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant treatment improves R0 rates by ∼20%. Randomized ongoing trials are eagerly awaited with more active combined regimens including modified FOLFIRINOX.

Germline Cancer Testing in Unselected Patients with Gastric and Esophageal Cancers: A Multi-center Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To determine prevalence and clinical utility of pathogenic germline variants (PGV) in gastric and esophageal cancer patients using universal genetic testing approach. METHODS: We undertook a prospective study of germline sequencing using an > 80 gene next-generation sequencing platform among patients with gastric and esophageal cancers receiving care at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2020. Patients were not selected based on cancer stage, family history of cancer, ethnicity, or age. Family cascade testing was offered at no cost. RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were evaluated. Median age was 66 years, 80.2% were male, 89.6% were white. Nearly 39% of the cohort had esophageal cancer, 35.4% gastric cancer and 26% gastroesophageal junction cancers. Approximately half (52%) of the patients had metastatic disease. Pathogenic germline variants (PGV) were detected in 15.6% (n = 15) patients. The prevalence of PGV was 10.8% in esophageal cancer, 17.6% in gastric cancer and 20% in gastroesophageal cancer. Eighty percent of patients with a positive result would not have been detected by screening with standard guidelines for genetic testing. Most PGV detected included genes with high and moderate penetrance related to DNA damage response including BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2 and ATM. CONCLUSIONS: Universal multi-gene panel testing in gastric and esophageal cancers was associated with detection of heritable mutations in 15% of patients. The majority of PGV would not be detected with current screening guidelines and are related to DNA damage response.

SARS-CoV-2 and Plasmodium falciparum common immunodominant regions may explain low COVID-19 incidence in the malaria-endemic belt.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused significant morbidity and mortality and new cases are on the rise globally, yet malaria-endemic areas report statistically significant lower incidences. We identified potential shared targets for an immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by immune determinants' shared identities with P. falciparum using the Immune Epitope Database and Analysis Resource Immune 9.0 browser tool. Probable cross-reactivity is suggested through HLA-A∗02:01 and subsequent CD8+ T-cell activation. The apparent immunodominant epitope conservation between SARS-CoV-2 (N and open reading frame (ORF) 1ab) and P. falciparum thrombospondin-related anonymous protein (TRAP) may underlie the low COVID-19 incidence in the malaria-endemic zone by providing immunity against virus infection to those previously infected with Plasmodium. Additionally, we hypothesize that the shared epitopes which lie within antigens that aid in the establishment of the P. falciparum erythrocyte invasion may be an alternative route for SARS-CoV-2 via the erythrocyte CD147 receptor, although this remains to be proven.