Phase Ib study of talimogene laherparepvec in combination with atezolizumab in patients with triple negative breast cancer and colorectal cancer with liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), a first-in-class oncolytic viral immunotherapy, enhances tumor-specific immune activation. T-VEC combined with atezolizumab, which blocks inhibitor T-cell checkpoints, could provide greater benefit than either agent alone. Safety/efficacy of the combination was explored in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastases.

METHODS

In this phase Ib, multicenter, open-label, parallel cohort study of adults with TNBC or CRC with liver metastases, T-VEC (10⁶ then 10⁸ PFU/ml; ≤4 ml) was administered into hepatic lesions via image-guided injection every 21 (±3) days. Atezolizumab 1200 mg was given on day 1 and every 21 (±3) days thereafter. Treatment continued until patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), had complete response, progressive disease, needed alternative anticancer treatment, or withdrew due to an adverse event (AE). The primary endpoint was DLT incidence, and secondary endpoints included efficacy and AEs.

RESULTS

Between 19 March 2018 and 6 November 2020, 11 patients with TNBC were enrolled (safety analysis set: n = 10); between 19 March 2018 and 16 October 2019, 25 patients with CRC were enrolled (safety analysis set: n = 24). For the 5 patients in the TNBC DLT analysis set, no patient had DLT; for the 18 patients in the CRC DLT analysis set, 3 (17%) had DLT, all serious AEs. AEs were reported by 9 (90%) TNBC and 23 (96%) CRC patients, the majority with grade ≥3 [TNBC, 7 (70%); CRC, 13 (54%)], and 1 was fatal [CRC, 1 (4%)]. Evidence of efficacy was limited. Overall response rate was 10% (95% confidence interval 0.3-44.5) for TNBC; one (10%) patient had a partial response. For CRC, no patients had a response; 14 (58%) were unassessable.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety profile reflected known risks with T-VEC including risks of intrahepatic injection; no unexpected safety findings from addition of atezolizumab to T-VEC were observed. Limited evidence of antitumor activity was observed.

Gallbladder disease and pancreatic cancer risk: a multicentric case-control European study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The overall evidence on the association between gallbladder conditions (GBC: gallstones and cholecystectomy) and pancreatic cancer (PC) is inconsistent. To our knowledge, no previous investigations considered the role of tumour characteristics on this association. Thus, we aimed to assess the association between self-reported GBC and PC risk, by focussing on timing to PC diagnosis and tumour features (stage, location, and resection).

METHODS

Data derived from a European case-control study conducted between 2009 and 2014 including 1431 PC cases and 1090 controls. We used unconditional logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for recognized confounders.

RESULTS

Overall, 298 (20.8%) cases and 127 (11.6%) controls reported to have had GBC, corresponding to an OR of 1.70 (95% CI 1.33-2.16). The ORs were 4.84 (95% CI 2.96-7.89) for GBC diagnosed <3 years before PC and 1.06 (95% CI 0.79-1.41) for ≥3 years. The risk was slightly higher for stage I/II (OR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.15-2.55) vs. stage III/IV tumours (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.87-1.76); for tumours sited in the head of the pancreas (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.13-2.24) vs. tumours located at the body/tail (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.62-1.68); and for tumours surgically resected (OR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.14-2.51) vs. non-resected tumours (OR = 1.25, 95% CI 0.88-1.78). The corresponding ORs for GBC diagnosed ≥3 years prior PC were close to unity.

CONCLUSION

Our study supports the association between GBC and PC. Given the time-risk pattern observed, however, this relationship may be non-causal and, partly or largely, due to diagnostic attention and/or reverse causation.

SEOM clinical guidelines for pancreatic and biliary tract cancer (2020)

Pancreatic cancer (PC) and biliary tract cancer (BTC) are both aggressive and highly fatal malignancies. Nowadays we have a profound knowledge about the molecular landscape of these neoplasms and this has allowed new therapeutic options. Surgery is the only potentially curative therapy in both cancers, but disease recurrence is frequent. In PC, adjuvant treatment with mFOLFIRINOX has improved overall survival (OS) and in BTC adjuvant treatment with capecitabine seems to improve OS and relapse-free survival. Concomitant radio-chemotherapy could also be considered following R1 surgery in both neoplasms. Neoadjuvant treatment represents the best option for achieving an R0 resection in borderline PC. Upfront systemic chemotherapy is the treatment of choice in unresectable locally advanced PC and BTC; then locoregional therapy could be considered after an initial period of at least 3-4 months of systemic chemotherapy. In metastatic PC, FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel have improved OS compared with gemcitabine alone. In metastatic BTC, cisplatin plus gemcitabine constitute the standard treatment. Progress in the knowledge of molecular biology has enabled the identification of new targets for therapy with encouraging results that could in the future improve the survival and quality of life of patients with PC and BTC.

Treatment patterns for metastatic colorectal cancer in Spain

Purpose

The primary aim of this retrospective study was to describe the treatment patterns according to the type of treatment received by patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain.

Methods

This was a retrospective, observational, multicenter study performed by 33 sites throughout Spain that included consecutive patients aged 18 years or older who had received or were receiving treatment for mCRC.

Results

At the time of inclusion, of the 873 evaluable patients, 507 (58%) had received two lines, 235 (27%) had received three lines, 106 (12%) had received four lines, and the remaining patients had received up to ten lines. The most frequent chemotherapy schemes were the FOLFOX or CAPOX regimens (66%) for first-line treatment, FOLFOX, CAPOX or FOLFIRI (70%) for second-line treatment, and FOLFOX, FOLFIRI or other fluoropyrimidine-based regimens for third- and fourth-line (over 60%) treatment. Sixty percent of patients received targeted therapy as part of their first-line treatment, and this proportion increased up to approximately 70% of patients as part of the second-line of treatment. A relevant proportion of patients were treated with unknown KRAS, and especially the BRAF, mutation statuses.

Conclusions

This study reveals inconsistencies regarding adherence to the recommendations of the ESMO guidelines for the management of mCRC in Spain. Improved adherence to the standard practice described in such guidelines for the determination of RAS and BRAF mutation statuses and the use of targeted therapies in first-line treatment should be considered to guarantee that patients can benefit from the best therapeutic approaches available.

First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD)

BACKGROUND

Treatment of frail patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) is controversial. This pilot phase II trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib when administered in first-line to frail patients with advanced CRC.

METHODS

Frail patients without prior advanced colorectal cancer treatment were included in the study. Definition of frailty was defined per protocol based on dependency criteria, presence of chronic comorbid pathologies and/or geriatric features.

MAIN OBJECTIVE

to assess progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of orally administered regorafenib 160 mg/day (3 weeks followed by 1 week rest).

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were included in the study. Median age was 81 years (range 63-89). Frailty criteria: dependency was observed in 26 patients (55%), comorbidities in 27 (57%) and geriatric features in 18 (38%). PFS rate at 6 months was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30-60]. Median PFS was 5.6 months (95%CI 2.7-8.4). Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months (95%CI 7.8-24). Complete response, partial response and stable disease were observed in one, two and 21 patients respectively (objective response rate 6.4%; disease control rate 51%). Thirty-nine patients (83%) experienced grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs). The most common grade 3-4 AEs were hypertension (15 patients; 32%), asthenia (14; 30%), hypophosphatemia (6; 13%); diarrhea (4; 8%), hand-foot-skin reaction (4; 8%). There were two toxic deaths (4.2%) (grade 5 rectal bleeding and death not further specified). Dose reduction was required in 26 patients (55%) and dose-delays in 13 patients (28%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not meet the pre-specified boundary of 55% PFS rate at 6 months. Toxicity observed (83% patients experienced grade 3 and 4 AEs) preclude its current use in clinical practice on this setting. Disease control rate and overall survival results are interesting and might warrant further investigation to identify those who benefit from this approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was prospectively registered at EudraCT ( 2013-000236-94 ). Date of trial registration: April 9th, 2013.

Ultra-selection of metastatic colorectal cancer patients using next-generation sequencing to improve clinical efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy

BACKGROUND

Extended RAS analysis is mandatory in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The optimal threshold of RAS mutated subclones to identify patients most likely to benefit from antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy is controversial. Our aim was to assess the clinical impact of detecting mutations in RAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and EGFRS492R in basal tissue tumour samples by using a highly sensitive next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology in mCRC patients treated with chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Five hundred and eighty-one tumour samples from untreated mCRC patients from 7 clinical studies were collected. Mutational analysis was carried out by standard-of-care (therascreen pyro) with a sensitivity detection of 5% mutant allele fraction (MAF), and compared with NGS technology using 454GS Junior platform (Roche Applied Science, Germany) with a sensitivity of 1%. Molecular results were correlated with clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

After quality assessment, 380 samples were evaluable for molecular analysis. Standard-of-care mutational analysis detected RAS, BRAFV600E or PIK3CA mutations in 56.05% of samples compared with 69.21% by NGS (P = 0.00018). NGS identified coexistence of multiple low-frequency mutant alleles in 96 of the 263 mutated cases (36.5%; range 2-7). Response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were increasingly improved in patients with RAS wild-type, RAS/BRAF wild-type or quadruple (KRAS/NRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA) wild-type tumours treated with anti-EGFR, assessed by standard-of-care. No additional benefit in RR, PFS or OS was observed by increasing the detection threshold to 1% by NGS. An inverse correlation between the MAF of the most prevalent mutation detected by NGS and anti-EGFR response was observed (P = 0.039). EGFRS492Rmutation was not detected in untreated samples.

CONCLUSIONS

No improvement in the selection of patients for anti-EGFR therapy was obtained by adjusting the mutation detection threshold in tissue samples from 5% to 1% MAF. Response to anti-EGFR was significantly better in patients with quadruple wild-type tumours.

Management and supportive treatment of frail patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

Data regarding management of frail patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma practice is currently very scarce. Randomized clinical trials usually exclude these subgroup of patients and the majority of the publications only consider chronological age and ECOG performance status for their classification. Therefore, the current available data do not reflect daily clinical practice. Only data from a phase two study (FRAGANCE study), designed to select a tolerable dose-schedule of nab-placitaxel + gemcitabine (Phase one) and to evaluate the efficacy of the selected regimen (Phase two) in patients with ECOG-2 and previously untreated advanced PDAC, are currently available. Management of these particular patients is exceedingly complex and requires collaboration of multidisciplinary teams and intensive support treatment. This article reviews the literature available regarding the management of the so-called frail patients and provide guidance for chemotherapy as well as supportive care treatments.

Risk of pancreatic cancer associated with family history of cancer and other medical conditions by accounting for smoking among relatives

Background

Family history (FH) of pancreatic cancer (PC) has been associated with an increased risk of PC, but little is known regarding the role of inherited/environmental factors or that of FH of other comorbidities in PC risk. We aimed to address these issues using multiple methodological approaches.

Methods

Case-control study including 1431 PC cases and 1090 controls and a reconstructed-cohort study (N = 16 747) made up of their first-degree relatives (FDR). Logistic regression was used to evaluate PC risk associated with FH of cancer, diabetes, allergies, asthma, cystic fibrosis and chronic pancreatitis by relative type and number of affected relatives, by smoking status and other potential effect modifiers, and by tumour stage and location. Familial aggregation of cancer was assessed within the cohort using Cox proportional hazard regression.

Results

FH of PC was associated with an increased PC risk [odds ratio (OR) = 2.68; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.27-4.06] when compared with cancer-free FH, the risk being greater when ≥ 2 FDRs suffered PC (OR = 3.88; 95% CI: 2.96-9.73) and among current smokers (OR = 3.16; 95% CI: 2.56-5.78, interaction FHPC*smoking P-value = 0.04). PC cumulative risk by age 75 was 2.2% among FDRs of cases and 0.7% in those of controls [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.42; 95% CI: 2.16-2.71]. PC risk was significantly associated with FH of cancer (OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 1.13-1.54) and diabetes (OR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01-1.52), but not with FH of other diseases.

Conclusions

The concordant findings using both approaches strengthen the notion that FH of cancer, PC or diabetes confers a higher PC risk. Smoking notably increases PC risk associated with FH of PC. Further evaluation of these associations should be undertaken to guide PC prevention strategies.