ALLIANCE A022104/NRG-GI010: The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial: a randomized phase II/III trial testing the efficacy of triplet versus doublet chemotherapy regarding clinical complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated cCR as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and patient groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation, improve quality of life for patients and improve survival outcomes. Methods: In this NCI-sponsored multi-group randomized, seamless phase II/III trial (1:1), up to 760 patients with LARC, T4N0, any T with node positive disease (any T, N+) or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Patients will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course chemoradiation (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 3-4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Patients will undergo assessment 8-12 (+/- 4) weeks post-TNT completion. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion will compare cCR between treatment arms. A total number of 296 evaluable patients (148 per arm) will provide statistical power of 90.5% to detect an 17% increase in cCR rate, at a one-sided alpha=0.048. The primary endpoint for the phase III portion will compare disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms. A total of 285 DFS events will provide 85% power to detect an effect size of hazard ratio 0.70 at a one-sided alpha of 0.025, requiring enrollment of 760 patients (380 per arm). Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, plasma and buffy coat in EDTA tubes, and serial rectal MRIs will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and has a current accrual of 312. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Discussion: Building off of data from modern day rectal cancer trials and patient input from national advocacy groups, we have designed the current trial studying chemotherapy intensification via a consolidation chemotherapy approach with the intent to enhance cCR and DFS rates, increase organ preservation rates, and improve quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 ; Support includes U10CA180868 (NRG) and U10CA180888 (SWOG).

Pancreatic cancer: ESMO clinical practice guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

The opportunity to detect pancreatic cancer (PC) when potentially curable depends on early diagnosis and an ability to identify and screen high-risk populations before symptoms arise. Identification of a high-risk population is challenging and optimal screening tools remain unclear.1 Older age is the strongest risk factor; incidence peaks at 65-69 years in males and 75-79 years in females.2 A pooled analysis of 117 meta-analyses assigned a relative risk to a number of common risk factors (Supplementary Table S1, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2023.08.009).3 The vast majority (>80%) of PCs arise due to sporadically occurring somatic mutations. Only a small proportion are due to inherited deleterious germline mutations.1 Familial PC, defined as at least two first-degree relatives with PC, accounts for only 4%-10% of all cases. Variants in BRCA2 are the most common genetic abnormalities seen in familial PC. Other familial syndromes linked to PC are listed in Supplementary Table S2, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2023.08.009. Individuals from families at risk should receive genetic counselling and be considered for enrolment in investigational screening registries. Currently, in high-risk individuals, annual endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and/or pancreatic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the procedures of choice for surveillance.4 Surveillance programmes usually begin at age 50 years (or 10 years earlier than the age of the youngest affected relative). Prospective surveillance data in high-risk individuals demonstrated high rates of resectability and encouraging observations of long-term survival.5, 6, 7, 8, 9 In sporadic PC, the major risk factors are tobacco, Helicobacter pylori infection and factors related to dietary habits (high red meat, high alcohol intake, low fruit and vegetable intake, overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus).2,3,10 Chronic pancreatitis, irrespective of the cause (alcohol abuse, smoking, genetic mutations), is a risk factor for PC. A proportion of the risk factors associated with PC are potentially modifiable, affording a unique opportunity for primary prevention that is yet to be realised.

The management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Current expert opinion and recommendations derived from the 24th ESMO/World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2022.

This article summarises expert discussion on the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which took place during the 24th World Gastrointestinal Cancer Congress (WGICC) in Barcelona, July 2022. A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory to ensure an optimal diagnosis and staging of HCC, planning of curative and therapeutic options, including surgical, embolisation, ablative strategies, or systemic therapy. Furthermore, in many patients with HCC, underlying liver cirrhosis represents a challenge and influences the therapeutic options.

Combining tumor deposits with the number of lymph node metastases to improve the prognostic accuracy in stage III colon cancer: a post hoc analysis of the CALGB/SWOG 80702 phase III study (Alliance)☆.

BACKGROUND: In colon cancer, tumor deposits (TD) are considered in assigning prognosis and staging only in the absence of lymph node metastasis (i.e. stage III pN1c tumors). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of the presence and the number of TD in patients with stage III, node-positive colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All participants from the CALGB/SWOG 80702 phase III trial were included in this post hoc analysis. Pathology reports were reviewed for the presence and the number of TD, lymphovascular and perineural invasion. Associations with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by multivariable Cox models adjusting for sex, treatment arm, T-stage, N-stage, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion and lymph node ratio. RESULTS: Overall, 2028 patients were included with 524 (26%) TD-positive and 1504 (74%) TD-negative tumors. Of the TD-positive patients, 80 (15.4%) were node negative (i.e. pN1c), 239 (46.1%) were pN1a/b (<4 positive lymph nodes) and 200 (38.5%) were pN2 (≥4 positive lymph nodes). The presence of TD was associated with poorer DFS [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.63, 95% CI 1.33-1.98] and OS (aHR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.24-2.04). The negative effect of TD was observed for both pN1a/b and pN2 groups. Among TD-positive patients, the number of TD had a linear negative effect on DFS and OS. Combining TD and the number of lymph node metastases, 104 of 1470 (7.1%) pN1 patients were re-staged as pN2, with worse outcomes than patients confirmed as pN1 (3-year DFS rate: 65.4% versus 80.5%, P = 0.0003; 5-year OS rate: 87.9% versus 69.1%, P = <0.0001). DFS was not different between patients re-staged as pN2 and those initially staged as pN2 (3-year DFS rate: 65.4% versus 62.3%, P = 0.4895). CONCLUSION: Combining the number of TD and the number of lymph node metastases improved the prognostication accuracy of tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging.

Incidence of Asymptomatic Chiari Malformation

Aim The aim of this study is to define the incidence of asymptomatic Chiari malformation in an Irish population. Methods MRIs performed over 24 months were analysed. Exclusion criteria include: space occupying lesion, hydrocephalus, Chiari symptoms and inadequate views. Data were analysed to give incidence of asymptomatic Chiari and to analyze the relationship between symptom and position of the cerebellar tonsils (Chi square and Fishers exact test). Results Sample Characteristics: 147 patients (Male = 65: Female = 82), age range 15 to 93 years (M age = 53.35, SD= 16.67). 2%had a Chiari malformation (n=2). There was no significant association between symptom and tonsil position (Fishers exact test, ² (8) = 9.98, p = .23.) Conclusion This study shows an asymptomatic Chiari Malformation rate of 2%. This study supports the idea that in asymptomatic patients, a tonsil herniation of up to 5 millimeters may be an incidental and inconsequent finding.

Tumour response to TRK inhibition in a patient with pancreatic adenocarcinoma harbouring an NTRK gene fusion.

BACKGROUND: Although rare, NTRK gene fusions are known to be oncogenic drivers in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We report the response of a metastatic CTRC-NTRK1 gene fusion-positive PDAC to targeted treatment with the oral tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor larotrectinib and the eventual development of resistance to treatment. PATIENT, METHODS AND RESULTS: A 61-year-old woman presented with a 2.5-cm mass in the body of the pancreas and a 1.2-cm liver lesion on routine follow-up for endometrial cancer that was in complete remission. Liver biopsy confirmed a primary PDAC unrelated to the endometrial cancer. The patient was treated with gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel and ADI-PEG 20 for 12 months until disease progression and toxicity emerged [best overall response (BOR): partial response (PR)]. The patient switched to a modified regimen of folinic acid, fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin for 4 months until neuropathy occurred. Oxaliplatin was withheld until disease progression 6 months later (BOR: stable disease). Despite recommencing oxaliplatin, the disease continued to progress. At this time, somatic profiling of the liver lesion revealed a CTRC-NTRK1 gene fusion. Treatment with larotrectinib 100 mg twice daily was commenced with BOR of PR at 2 months. The patient progressed after 6 months and was re-biopsied. Treatment was switched to the investigational next-generation TRK inhibitor selitrectinib (BAY 2731954, LOXO-195) 100 mg twice daily. After 2 months, the disease progressed and dabrafenibtrametinib combination therapy was initiated due to existence of a BRAF-V600E mutation. However, the cancer continued to progress and the patient died 2 months later. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted TRK inhibition with larotrectinib in PDAC harbouring a CTRC-NTRK1 gene fusion is well tolerated and can improve quality of life for the patient. However, acquired resistance to therapy can emerge in some patients. Next-generation TRK inhibitors such as selitrectinib are currently in development to overcome this resistance (NCT02576431; NCT03215511).

Health-related quality of life in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving maintenance olaparib.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer often have a detriment in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In the randomized, double-blind, phase III POLO trial progression-free survival was significantly longer with maintenance olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, than placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm) and metastatic pancreatic cancer whose disease had not progressed during first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The prespecified HRQoL evaluation is reported here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive maintenance olaparib (300 mg b.i.d.; tablets) or placebo. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item module at baseline, every 4 weeks until disease progression, at discontinuation, and 30 days after last dose. Scores ranged from 0 to 100; a ≥10-point change or difference between arms was considered clinically meaningful. Adjusted mean change from baseline was analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures. Time to sustained clinically meaningful deterioration (TSCMD) was analysed using a log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 154 randomized patients, 89 of 92 olaparib-arm and 58 of 62 placebo-arm patients were included in HRQoL analyses. The adjusted mean change in Global Health Status (GHS) score from baseline was <10 points in both arms and there was no significant between-group difference [-2.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.27, 2.33; P = 0.31]. Analysis of physical functioning scores showed a significant between-group difference (-4.45 points; 95% CI -8.75, -0.16; P = 0.04). There was no difference in TSCMD for olaparib versus placebo for GHS [P = 0.25; hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; 95% CI 0.41, 1.27] or physical functioning (P = 0.32; HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.73, 2.63). CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL was preserved with maintenance olaparib treatment with no clinically meaningful difference compared with placebo. These results support the observed efficacy benefit of maintenance olaparib in patients with a gBRCAm and metastatic pancreatic cancer. CLINCALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT02184195.

Immunotherapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an emerging entity?

The genomic-plasticity of the immune system creates a broad immune repertoire engaged to tackle cancer cells. Promising clinical activity has been observed with several immune therapy strategies in solid tumors including melanoma, lung, kidney, and bladder cancers, albeit as yet immunotherapy-based treatment approaches in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remain to have proven value. While translational and early clinical studies have demonstrated activation of antitumor immunity, most recent late-phase clinical trials have not confirmed the early promise in PDAC except in MSI-High PDAC patients. These results may in part be explained by multiple factors, including the poorly immunogenic nature of PDAC along with immune privilege, the complex tumor microenvironment, and the genetic plasticity of PDAC cells. These challenges have led to disappointments in the field, nonetheless they have also advanced our understanding that may tailor the future steps for immunotherapy for PDAC. Therefore, there is significant hope that progress is on the horizon.

'We have to discuss it': cancer patients' advance care planning impressions following educational information about cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

OBJECTIVE: Most cancer patients desire information about care options at the end of life, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Communicating such care options can be challenging and is part of advance care planning (ACP). Our prior studies with video educational media produced data on patients' categoric preferences (yes/no/unsure) for CPR; however, the thematic underpinnings of these educated preferences in patients treated for advanced cancer aren't well known. METHODS: Qualitative thematic content analysis of participants' responses in a randomized trial of an educational video (V) or narrative (N) about CPR in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers. Responses were independently coded and categorized for thematic content by two reviewers. RESULTS: Of 54 study participants, 26 total (41% of V arm, 56% of N arm) articulated questions, comments, or both. Reviewer analyses demonstrated thematic consensus and resulted in seven distinct themes listed in decreasing order of prevalence: (a) ACP should be started early; (b) educational information about CPR affirmed participants' existing beliefs/knowledge/values about advanced illness; (c) participants were apprehensive about ACP but wanted to discuss it; (d) gaps in knowledge about ACP emerged; (e) CPR information was helpful/acceptable; (f) physicians should be involved in ACP; and (g) medical questions about critical illness arose. CONCLUSIONS: Findings identified that while sometimes difficult to discuss, advance care planning is desired, deemed helpful, and ideally begun early by clinicians, and that video education is an appropriate and affirming initiator of discussions. These themes are incorporated into our ongoing research on cancer patient-specific values and education about care options.

Phase I study of olaparib plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumours and comparison with gemcitabine alone in patients with locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib (Lynparza) is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that induces synthetic lethality in cancers with homologous recombination defects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I, dose-escalation trial, patients with advanced solid tumours received olaparib (50-200 mg capsules b.i.d.) continuously or intermittently (days 1-14, per 28-day cycle) plus gemcitabine [i.v. 600-800 mg/m(2); days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (cycle 1), days 1, 8, and 15 (subsequent cycles)] to establish the maximum tolerated dose. A separate dose-escalation phase evaluated olaparib in tablet formulation (100 mg o.d./b.i.d.; days 1-14) plus gemcitabine (600 mg/m(2)). In an expansion phase, patients with genetically unselected locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomised 2 : 1 to the tolerated olaparib capsule combination dose or gemcitabine alone (1000 mg/m(2)). RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were treated [dose-escalation phase, n = 44 (tablet cohort, n = 12); dose-expansion phase, n = 22 (olaparib plus gemcitabine, n = 15; gemcitabine alone, n = 7)]. In the dose-escalation phase, four patients (6%) experienced dose-limiting toxicities (raised alanine aminotransferase, n = 2; neutropenia, n = 1; febrile neutropenia, n = 1). Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 38/47 patients (81%) treated with olaparib capsules plus gemcitabine; most common were haematological toxicities (55%). Tolerated combinations were olaparib 100 mg b.i.d. capsule (intermittently, days 1-14) plus gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2) and olaparib 100 mg o.d. tablet (intermittently, days 1-14) plus gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2). There were no differences in efficacy observed during the dose-expansion phase. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib 100 mg b.i.d. (intermittent dosing; capsules) plus gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2) is tolerated in advanced solid tumour patients, with no unmanageable/unexpected toxicities. Continuous dosing of olaparib or combination with gemcitabine at doses >600 mg/m(2) was not considered to have an acceptable tolerability profile for further study. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00515866.

A phase II, open-label, multicenter study to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of CO-1.01 as second-line therapy for gemcitabine-refractory patients with stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma and negative tumor hENT1 expression.

BACKGROUND: Nucleotide transporters such as human equilibrative nucleoside transporter-1 (hENT1) play a major role in transporting gemcitabine into cells. CO-1.01 (gemcitabine-5'-elaidate) is a novel cytotoxic agent consisting of a fatty acid derivative of gemcitabine, which is transported intracellularly independent of hENT1. CO-1.01 was postulated to have efficacy as a second-line treatment in gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic adenocarcinoma in patients with negative tumor hENT1 expression. METHODS: Eligibility criteria included patients with either a newly procured or archival biopsy tumor confirming the absence of hENT1 and either gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreas adenocarcinoma or with progression of disease following resection during or within 3 months of adjuvant gemcitabine therapy. Patients were treated with intravenous infusion of CO-1.01 dosed at 1250 mg/m(2) on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 4-week cycle. The primary end point was disease control rate (DCR). RESULTS: Nineteen patients were enrolled of which 18 patients were evaluable for efficacy assessment. Thirteen patients (68%) had liver metastases, 6 (32%) had lymph node metastases, and 10 (53%) had lung metastases. Two of 18 patients (11%) achieved disease control. The median survival time was 4.3 (95% CI 2.1-8.1) months. All patients experienced at least one treatment-related adverse event with the majority of events being mild or moderate. CONCLUSION: This study did not meet its primary endpoint and no efficacy signal was identified for CO-1.01 in treating progressive metastatic pancreas adenocarcinoma.

A phase II study of gemcitabine and cisplatin plus sorafenib in patients with advanced biliary adenocarcinomas.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the addition of sorafenib to gemcitabine and cisplatin in biliary adenocarcinoma first-line therapy. METHODS: Patients with advanced biliary adenocarcinomas received gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) and cisplatin 25 mg m(-2) on a 2 weeks on/1 week off cycle and sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. After the initial 16 patients were enrolled, the chemotherapy doses were amended in view of grade 3 and 4 hand-foot skin reaction and haematologic toxicity. Subsequently, 21 patients received gemcitabine 800 mg m(-2), cisplatin 20 mg m(-2) and sorafenib 400 mg. The primary end point was an improvement in 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6) from historical 57-77% (90% power, type I error of 10%). Pretreatment pERK, evaluated by immunostaining, was correlated with clinical outcome. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients were accrued. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities noted in >10% of patients were fatigue, elevated liver function tests and haematologic toxicities including thromboemboli, hyponatraemia and hypophosphataemia. Six-month progression-free survival was 51% (95% confidence interval (CI) 34-66%). Median PFS and overall survival were 6.5 (95% CI: 3.5-8.3) and 14.4 months (95% CI: 11.6-19.2 months), respectively. No correlation was observed between pERK and outcomes. CONCLUSION: The addition of sorafenib to gemcitabine and cisplatin in biliary adenocarcinomas did not improve efficacy over historical data, and toxicity was increased.

Global, multicenter, randomized, phase II trial of gemcitabine and gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 in patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated AGS-1C4D4, a fully human monoclonal antibody to prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA), with gemcitabine in a randomized, phase II study of metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0/1 and previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned 1:2 to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly seven times, 1 week rest, weekly three times q4weeks) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (48 mg/kg loading dose, then 24 mg/kg q3weeks IV). The primary end point was 6-month survival rate (SR). Archived tumor samples were collected for pre-planned analyses by PSCA expression. RESULTS: Between April 2009 and May 2010, 196 patients were randomly assigned to gemcitabine (n = 63) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (n = 133). The 6-month SR was 44.4% (95% CI, 31.9-57.5) in the gemcitabine arm and 60.9% (95% CI, 52.1-69.2) in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm (P = 0.03), while the median survival was 5.5 versus 7.6 months and the response rate was 13.1% versus 21.6% in the two arms, respectively. The 6-month SR was 57.1% in the gemcitabine arm versus 79.5% in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm among the PSCA-positive subgroup and 31.6% versus 46.2% among the PSCA-negative subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized, phase II study achieved its primary end point, demonstrating an improved 6-month SR with addition of AGS-1C4D4 to gemcitabine among patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00902291.

Genomics and pharmacogenomics of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The last decade has brought significant advances in the development of molecularly targeted therapies for treatment of a variety of human malignancies. In contrast to other solid tumors, however, the impact of novel therapeutic strategies on clinical outcomes in patients with pancreas adenocarcinoma (PAC) has been limited to date. Gemcitabine was established as a standard of care for treatment of advanced PAC in 1997 based on an observed improvement in clinical benefit as adjudicated principally by pain scores and analgesic consumption, and demonstration of an overall survival (OS) benefit in a randomized comparison with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Since then, multiple agents targeting oncogenic signaling pathways and mediators of angiogenesis have failed to improve outcomes in phase III clinical trials when compared with gemcitabine monotherapy. An exception to this is the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy erlotinib, which yielded a survival benefit in patients with advanced disease in combination with gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone, although this was a marginal incremental improvement for which the clinical significant has been heavily debated. More recently, the most significant therapeutic advance in PAC has come from the combination of several cytotoxic agents; infusional 5-FU, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. This combination chemotherapy regimen, known as FOLFIRINOX, improved survival in patients with an excellent functional status and stage IV disease by 4.3 months compared with gemcitabine alone. This improvement in survival did come at the cost expectedly of a significant increase in toxicities, including gastrointestinal and hematologic particularly. Other gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy regimens including gemcitabine and platinum analogs and gemcitabine and capecitabine have consistently shown an increased response rate but no OS benefit in individual trials; albeit pooled and meta-analyses have indicated a survival benefit in good performance status patient for both these cytotoxic combinations. Accordingly, the 5-year survival for patients with PAC remains <5%, with an annual disease-specific mortality which approaches the incidence. The challenge remains therefore, to develop more effective systemic therapies against this challenging malignancy. Recent progress toward understanding the genetic events in the development of PAC, in combination with advances in the field of pharmacogenomics offer hope that we may build on achievements to-date to develop more effective therapeutic strategies for PAC in years to come.

Multicenter phase II trial of adjuvant therapy for resected pancreatic cancer using cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and interferon-alfa-2b-based chemoradiation: ACOSOG Trial Z05031.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group sought to confirm the efficacy of a novel interferon-based chemoradiation regimen in a multicenter phase II trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected (R0/R1) adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head were treated with adjuvant interferon-alfa-2b (3 million units s.c. on days 1, 3, and 5 of each week for 5.5 weeks), cisplatin (30 mg/m(2) i.v. weekly for 6 weeks), and continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU; 175 mg·m(2)/day for 38 days) concurrently with external-beam radiation (50.4 Gy). Chemoradiation was followed by two 6-week courses of continuous infusion 5-FU (200 mg·m(2)/day). The primary study end point was 18-month overall survival from protocol enrollment (OS18); an OS18 ≥65% was considered a positive study outcome. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were enrolled. Eighty-four patients were assessable for toxicity. The all-cause grade ≥3 toxicity rate was 95% (80 patients) during therapy. No long-term toxicity or toxicity-related deaths were noted. At 36-month median follow-up, the OS18 was 69% [95% confidence interval (CI) 60% to 80%]; the median disease-free survival and overall survival were 14.1 months (95% CI 11.0-20.1 months) and 25.4 months (95% CI 23.4-34.1 months), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding promising multi-institutional efficacy results, further development of this regimen will require additional modifications to mitigate toxic effects.

Targeted therapies for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The majority of patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the pancreas have advanced disease at presentation, with only 20% surviving beyond one year. Even among the 10% to 15% of patients who present with localized disease, only 20% will be alive 5 years post surgical resection. Systemic therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma to date has failed to provide more than a very modest survival benefit for patients with advanced disease. However, the past decade has seen significant advances in the understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer, culminating in the sequencing of the pancreatic cancer genome. New generations of therapeutic agents targeting key oncogenic cellular signaling pathways are currently under evaluation in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Although thus far only erlotinib has been shown to improve survival when compared to gemcitabine monotherapy, the authors anticipate that further developments in biomarker analysis and pharmacogenomics, along with the identification of new drugs will help maximize the benefit of novel therapeutics by directing effective use in the future. Herein the authors review the evidence to date for the use of novel cytotoxic and molecularly targeted agents in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and discuss key areas for future therapeutic development.

Combination of human tumor necrosis factor-alpha (hTNF-alpha) gene delivery with gemcitabine is effective in models of pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive and highly lethal malignancy. Currently, gemcitabine is commonly used in patients with pancreatic cancer. However, the life expectancy of pancreatic cancer patients remains poor. We explored the possibility of increased anti-tumor activity by combining human tumor necrosis factor-alpha (hTNF-alpha) with current front-line therapy. Human TNF-alpha displays potent anti-tumor activity, but its use is limited by the toxicity of systemic administration. We developed a gene delivery approach using intratumoral injections of an adenoviral vector expressing hTNF-alpha, AdEgr.TNF.11D (TNFerade), to increase local concentrations of hTNF-alpha within the tumor, thereby maximizing local anti-tumor activity and yet minimizing the systemic toxicities. An ongoing phase III clinical trial is testing the efficacy of AdEgr.TNF.11D-injected intratumorally and combining with chemotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In this study, we show that treatment with AdEgr.TNF.11D and gemcitabine results in a high level of hTNF-alpha expression in human pancreatic cancer cell lines. The combined treatment was well tolerated, highly active and produced marked delays in the growth of human pancreatic xenograft tumors relative to either agent alone. Our results strongly suggest that combination of AdEgr.TNF.11D and gemcitabine may be a potentially useful therapeutic approach for the improved treatment of pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma in a young patient population--12-year experience at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of data in a younger population of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PAC) regarding epidemiology, genetics, prognosis, and outcome. This report examines a large cohort of patients with PAC