26
|
Van Blarigan EL, Ou FS, Bainter TM, Fuchs CS, Niedzwiecki D, Zhang S, Saltz LB, Mayer RJ, Hantel A, Benson AB, Atienza D, Messino M, Kindler HL, Venook AP, Ogino S, Sanoff HK, Giovannucci EL, Ng K, Meyerhardt JA. Associations Between Unprocessed Red Meat and Processed Meat With Risk of Recurrence and Mortality in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e220145. [PMID: 35191970 PMCID: PMC8864503 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.0145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Importance The American Cancer Society and American Institute for Cancer Research recommend that cancer survivors limit intake of red and processed meats. This recommendation is based on consistent associations between red and processed meat intake and cancer risk, particularly risk of colorectal cancer, but fewer data are available on red and processed meat intake after cancer diagnosis. Objectives To examine whether intake of unprocessed red meat or processed meat is associated with risk of cancer recurrence or mortality in patients with colon cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study used data from participants with stage III colon cancer enrolled in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB 89803/Alliance) trial between 1999 and 2001. The clinical database for this analysis was frozen on November 9, 2009; the current data analyses were finalized in December 2021. Exposures Quartiles of unprocessed red meat and processed meat intake assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire during and 6 months after chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for risk of cancer recurrence or death and all-cause mortality. Results This study was conducted among 1011 patients with stage III colon cancer. The median (IQR) age at enrollment was 60 (51-69) years, 442 patients (44%) were women, and 899 patients (89%) were White. Over a median (IQR) follow-up period of 6.6 (1.9-7.5) years, we observed 305 deaths and 81 recurrences without death during follow-up (386 events combined). Intake of unprocessed red meat or processed meat after colon cancer diagnosis was not associated with risk of recurrence or mortality. The multivariable HRs comparing the highest vs lowest quartiles for cancer recurrence or death were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.58-1.23) for unprocessed red meat and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.75-1.47) for processed meat. For all-cause mortality, the corresponding HRs were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.47-1.07) for unprocessed red meat and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.72-1.51) for processed meat. Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study, postdiagnosis intake of unprocessed red meat or processed meat was not associated with risk of recurrence or death among patients with stage III colon cancer.
Collapse
|
27
|
Kircher S, Braccio N, Gallagher K, Carlos R, Wagner L, Smith ML, Balch A, Benson AB. Meeting Patients Where They Are: Policy Platform for Telehealth and Cancer Care Delivery. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:1470-1474. [PMID: 34902826 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.7111] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
|
28
|
Brajcich BC, Benson AB, Gantt G, Eng OS, Marsh RW, Mulcahy MF, Polite BN, Shogan BD, Yang AD, Merkow RP. Management of colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations from a statewide multidisciplinary cancer collaborative. J Surg Oncol 2021; 125:560-563. [PMID: 34820843 PMCID: PMC9015333 DOI: 10.1002/jso.26758] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2021] [Accepted: 11/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
COVID‐19 has resulted in significant disruptions in cancer care. The Illinois Cancer Collaborative (ILCC), a statewide multidisciplinary cancer collaborative, has developed expert recommendations for triage and management of colorectal cancer when disruptions occur in usual care. Such recommendations would be applicable to future outbreaks of COVID‐19 or other large‐scale disruptions in cancer care.
Collapse
|
29
|
Kelley RK, Joseph NM, Nimeiri HS, Hwang J, Kulik LM, Ngo Z, Behr SC, Onodera C, Zhang K, Bocobo AG, Benson AB, Venook AP, Gordan JD. Phase II Trial of the Combination of Temsirolimus and Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Tumor Mutation Profiling. Liver Cancer 2021; 10:561-571. [PMID: 34950179 PMCID: PMC8647100 DOI: 10.1159/000518297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Accepted: 07/01/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway is upregulated in nearly half of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tumors and is associated with poor prognosis. In preclinical models of HCC, the combination of mTOR pathway inhibition with the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib improves treatment efficacy. A prior phase I study of the allosteric mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus combined with sorafenib demonstrated acceptable safety at the recommended phase II dose. METHODS We conducted a single-arm, multicenter phase II trial of the combination of temsirolimus 10 mg intravenously weekly plus sorafenib 200 mg b.i.d. The primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP) with efficacy target of median TTP of at least 6 months; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, safety, and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) tumor marker response. Next-generation tumor sequencing was performed as an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS Twenty-nine patients were enrolled, including 48% with hepatitis C virus infection and 28% with hepatitis B virus; 86% had Barcelona clinic liver cancer stage C disease. Among 28 patients evaluable for efficacy, the median TTP was 3.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2, 5.3) months, with 14% of patients achieving TTP of at least 6 months. The median OS was 8.8 (95% CI: 6.8, 14.8) months. There were no complete or partial responses; 75% of patients had stable disease as best response. AFP decline by at least 50% was associated with prolonged TTP and OS. Serious adverse events occurred in 21%; the most common treatment-related adverse events of CTCAE grade 3 or higher were hypophosphatemia (36%), thrombocytopenia (14%), and rash (11%). There were no grade 5 events attributed to sorafenib or temsirolimus. Tumor next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed in a subgroup of 24 patients with adequate tumor samples. Tumor mTOR pathway mutations were identified in 42%. There was no association between tumor mutation profile and OS or TTP. CONCLUSIONS The combination of temsirolimus and sorafenib demonstrated acceptable safety but did not achieve the target threshold for efficacy in this phase II study. Tumor NGS including the presence of mTOR pathway mutations was not associated with treatment response in an exploratory subgroup analysis.
Collapse
|
30
|
Benson AB, Carlos RC. Clinical trials as a path toward equity. Cancer 2021; 127:3717-3719. [PMID: 34374076 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33648] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
31
|
Loaiza‐Bonilla A, Benson AB, Grothey A, Karimi M, Klempner SJ, Lin D, Mahtani R, Soares HP. Use of Molecular Assays and Circulating Tumor DNA in Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer: A Roundtable Discussion of the Gastrointestinal Cancer Therapy Expert Group. Oncologist 2021; 26:651-659. [PMID: 33650740 PMCID: PMC8342566 DOI: 10.1002/onco.13738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
The use of genomic testing is rapidly emerging as an important clinical tool both for cancer diagnosis and for guiding treatment decisions in a wide range of malignancies, including gastrointestinal (GI) cancers such as colorectal cancer (CRC). Advances in technologies such as polymerase chain reaction and next-generation sequencing methods have made it possible to noninvasively screen for CRC through, for example, the use of blood- or stool-based testing, with high specificity. Tests are also available that can provide prognostic information beyond traditional clinicopathologic factors such as tumor size, grade, and nodal status, which can enable clinicians to more accurately risk stratify patients for recurrence. Lastly, in the setting of resected CRC, tests are now available that can detect circulating tumor DNA as a means for noninvasive minimal/molecular residual disease monitoring, thereby potentially guiding the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and/or escalating or de-escalating therapy. The Gastrointestinal Cancer Therapy Expert Group (GICTEG) recently convened a virtual meeting to discuss current issues related to genomic testing in GI cancer, with the goal of providing guidance on the use of these tests for the practicing community oncologist, for whom GI cancer may be only one of many tumor types encountered. This article provides a summary of the discussion and highlights the key opinions of the GICTEG on this topic. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The Gastrointestinal Cancer Therapy Expert Group seeks to provide practical guidance and opinion on the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies, including colorectal cancer (CRC), for the practicing community oncologist in situations for which guidelines from established bodies, such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, may be less clear. In the present report, clinical guidance on the use of molecular assays for a range of clinical indications in CRC is presented, including the use of circulating tumor DNA to detect minimal/molecular residual disease in patients with successfully resected early-stage CRC.
Collapse
|
32
|
Trosman JR, Weldon CB, Rapkin BD, Benson AB, Makower DF, Liang SY, Kulkarni SA, Perez CB, Lo SS, Krueger EA, Throckmorton AD, Gallagher C, Hoskins K, Schaeffer CM, Van Horn J, Schapira L, Ravelo A, Yu E, Gradishar WJ. Evaluation of the Novel 4R Oncology Care Planning Model in Breast Cancer: Impact on Patient Self-Management and Care Delivery in Safety-Net and Non-Safety-Net Centers. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17:e1202-e1214. [PMID: 34375560 DOI: 10.1200/op.21.00161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Optimal cancer care requires patient self-management and coordinated timing and sequence of interdependent care. These are challenging, especially in safety-net settings treating underserved populations. We evaluated the 4R Oncology model (4R) of patient-facing care planning for impact on self-management and delivery of interdependent care at safety-net and non-safety-net institutions. METHODS Ten institutions (five safety-net and five non-safety-net) evaluated the 4R intervention from 2017 to 2020 with patients with stage 0-III breast cancer. Data on self-management and care delivery were collected via surveys and compared between the intervention cohort and the historical cohort (diagnosed before 4R launch). 4R usefulness was assessed within the intervention cohort. RESULTS Survey response rate was 63% (422/670) in intervention and 47% (466/992) in historical cohort. 4R usefulness was reported by 79.9% of patients receiving 4R and was higher for patients in safety-net than in non-safety-net centers (87.6%, 74.2%, P = .001). The intervention cohort measured significantly higher than historical cohort in five of seven self-management metrics, including clarity of care timing and sequence (71.3%, 55%, P < .001) and ability to manage care (78.9%, 72.1%, P = .02). Referrals to interdependent care were significantly higher in the intervention than in the historical cohort along all six metrics, including primary care consult (33.9%, 27.7%, P = .045) and flu vaccination (38.6%, 27.9%, P = .001). Referral completions were significantly higher in four of six metrics. For safety-net patients, improvements in most self-management and care delivery metrics were similar or higher than for non-safety-net patients, even after controlling for all other variables. CONCLUSION 4R Oncology was useful to patients and significantly improved self-management and delivery of interdependent care, but gaps remain. Model enhancements and further evaluations are needed for broad adoption. Patients in safety-net settings benefited from 4R at similar or higher rates than non-safety-net patients, indicating that 4R may reduce care disparities.
Collapse
|
33
|
Shah MH, Goldner WS, Benson AB, Bergsland E, Blaszkowsky LS, Brock P, Chan J, Das S, Dickson PV, Fanta P, Giordano T, Halfdanarson TR, Halperin D, He J, Heaney A, Heslin MJ, Kandeel F, Kardan A, Khan SA, Kuvshinoff BW, Lieu C, Miller K, Pillarisetty VG, Reidy D, Salgado SA, Shaheen S, Soares HP, Soulen MC, Strosberg JR, Sussman CR, Trikalinos NA, Uboha NA, Vijayvergia N, Wong T, Lynn B, Hochstetler C. Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Tumors, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:839-868. [PMID: 34340212 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 232] [Impact Index Per Article: 77.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Gland Tumors focus on the diagnosis, treatment, and management of patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), adrenal tumors, pheochromocytomas, paragangliomas, and multiple endocrine neoplasia. NETs are generally subclassified by site of origin, stage, and histologic characteristics. Appropriate diagnosis and treatment of NETs often involves collaboration between specialists in multiple disciplines, using specific biochemical, radiologic, and surgical methods. Specialists include pathologists, endocrinologists, radiologists (including nuclear medicine specialists), and medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists. These guidelines discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary neuroendocrine and adrenal tumors and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. This article is focused on the 2021 NCCN Guidelines principles of genetic risk assessment and counseling and recommendations for well-differentiated grade 3 NETs, poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, adrenal tumors, pheochromocytomas, and paragangliomas.
Collapse
|
34
|
D'Amico TA, Bandini LAM, Balch A, Benson AB, Edge SB, Fitzgerald CL, Green RJ, Koh WJ, Kolodziej M, Kumar S, Meropol NJ, Mohler JL, Pfister D, Walters RS, Carlson RW. Quality Measurement in Cancer Care: A Review and Endorsement of High-Impact Measures and Concepts. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 18:250-259. [PMID: 32135508 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7536] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2019] [Accepted: 01/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Although oncology care has evolved, outcome assessment remains a key challenge. Outcome measurement requires identification and adoption of a succinct list of metrics indicative of high-quality cancer care for use within and across healthcare systems. NCCN established an advisory committee, the NCCN Quality and Outcomes Committee, consisting of provider experts from NCCN Member Institutions and other stakeholders, including payers and patient advocacy, community oncology, and health information technology representatives, to review the existing quality landscape and identify contemporary, relevant cancer quality and outcomes measures by reevaluating validated measures for endorsement and proposing new measure concepts to fill crucial gaps. This manuscript reports on 22 measures and concepts; 15 that align with existing measures and 7 that are new.
Collapse
|
35
|
Overman M, Javle M, Davis RE, Vats P, Kumar-Sinha C, Xiao L, Mettu NB, Parra ER, Benson AB, Lopez CD, Munugalavadla V, Patel P, Tao L, Neelapu S, Maitra A. Randomized phase II study of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib, alone or with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. J Immunother Cancer 2021; 8:jitc-2020-000587. [PMID: 32114502 PMCID: PMC7057435 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2020-000587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The immunosuppressive desmoplastic stroma of pancreatic cancer represents a major hurdle to developing an effective immune response. Preclinical studies in pancreatic cancer have demonstrated promising anti-tumor activity with Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibition combined with programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) blockade. Methods This was a phase II, multicenter, open-label, randomized (1:1) clinical trial evaluating the BTK inhibitor acalabrutinib, alone (monotherapy) or in combination with the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab (combination therapy). Eligible patients were adults with histologically confirmed metastatic or locally advanced unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) ≤1 who had received at least one prior systemic therapy. Oral acalabrutinib 100 mg twice daily was administered with or without intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg on day 1 of each 3-week cycle. Peripheral blood was analyzed for changes in immune markers, and tumors from exceptional responders were molecularly analyzed. Results A total of 77 patients were enrolled (37 monotherapy; 40 combination therapy) with a median age of 64 years; 77% had an ECOG PS of 1. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 1–6). Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were seen in 14.3% of patients in the monotherapy arm and 15.8% of those in the combination therapy arm. The overall response rate and disease control rate were 0% and 14.3% with monotherapy and 7.9% and 21.1% with combination therapy, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 1.4 months in both arms. Peripheral blood flow analysis demonstrated consistent reductions in granulocytic (CD15+) myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) over time. Two exceptional responders were found to be microsatellite stable with low tumor mutation burden, low neoantigen load and no defects in the homologous DNA repair pathway. Conclusions The combination of acalabrutinib and pembrolizumab was well tolerated, but limited clinical activity was seen with either acalabrutinib monotherapy or combination therapy. Peripheral reductions in MDSCs were seen. Efforts to understand and target the pancreatic tumor microenvironment should continue. Trial registration number NCT02362048.
Collapse
|
36
|
Benson AB, D'Angelica MI, Abbott DE, Anaya DA, Anders R, Are C, Bachini M, Borad M, Brown D, Burgoyne A, Chahal P, Chang DT, Cloyd J, Covey AM, Glazer ES, Goyal L, Hawkins WG, Iyer R, Jacob R, Kelley RK, Kim R, Levine M, Palta M, Park JO, Raman S, Reddy S, Sahai V, Schefter T, Singh G, Stein S, Vauthey JN, Venook AP, Yopp A, McMillian NR, Hochstetler C, Darlow SD. Hepatobiliary Cancers, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:541-565. [PMID: 34030131 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 418] [Impact Index Per Article: 139.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), gallbladder cancer, and cancer of the bile ducts (intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma). Due to the multiple modalities that can be used to treat the disease and the complications that can arise from comorbid liver dysfunction, a multidisciplinary evaluation is essential for determining an optimal treatment strategy. A multidisciplinary team should include hepatologists, diagnostic radiologists, interventional radiologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, and pathologists with hepatobiliary cancer expertise. In addition to surgery, transplant, and intra-arterial therapies, there have been great advances in the systemic treatment of HCC. Until recently, sorafenib was the only systemic therapy option for patients with advanced HCC. In 2020, the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab became the first regimen to show superior survival to sorafenib, gaining it FDA approval as a new frontline standard regimen for unresectable or metastatic HCC. This article discusses the NCCN Guidelines recommendations for HCC.
Collapse
|
37
|
Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Al-Hawary M, Behrman SW, Benson AB, Cardin DB, Chiorean EG, Chung V, Czito B, Del Chiaro M, Dillhoff M, Donahue TR, Dotan E, Ferrone CR, Fountzilas C, Hardacre J, Hawkins WG, Klute K, Ko AH, Kunstman JW, LoConte N, Lowy AM, Moravek C, Nakakura EK, Narang AK, Obando J, Polanco PM, Reddy S, Reyngold M, Scaife C, Shen J, Vollmer C, Wolff RA, Wolpin BM, Lynn B, George GV. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:439-457. [PMID: 33845462 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 464] [Impact Index Per Article: 154.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the United States. A major challenge in treatment remains patients' advanced disease at diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma provides recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pancreatic cancer. Although survival rates remain relatively unchanged, newer modalities of treatment, including targeted therapies, provide hope for improving patient outcomes. Sections of the manuscript have been updated to be concordant with the most recent update to the guidelines. This manuscript focuses on the available systemic therapy approaches, specifically the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic disease.
Collapse
|
38
|
Chan H, Zhang L, Choti MA, Kulke M, Yao JC, Nakakura EK, Bloomston M, Benson AB, Shah MH, Strosberg JR, Bergsland EK, Van Loon K. Recurrence Patterns After Surgical Resection of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Analysis From the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Oncology Outcomes Database. Pancreas 2021; 50:506-512. [PMID: 33939661 PMCID: PMC8097723 DOI: 10.1097/mpa.0000000000001791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEPNETs) recommend complete (R0) surgical resection of the primary tumor and metastases, if feasible. However, large multicenter studies of recurrence patterns of GEPNETs after resection have not been performed. METHODS Patients 18 years or older who presented to 7 participating National Comprehensive Cancer Network institutions between 2004 and 2008 with a new diagnosis of a small bowel, pancreas, or colon/rectum neuroendocrine tumor (NET) and underwent R0 resection of the primary tumor, and synchronous metastases, if present, were included in this analysis. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to calculate recurrence rates and time-associated end points, respectively. RESULTS Of 294 patients with GEPNETs, 50% were male, 88% were White, and 99% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1. The median age was 55 years (range, 20-90). The median follow-up time from R0 resection was 62.1 months. Recurrence rates were 18% in small bowel NETs (n = 110), 26% in pancreatic NETs (n = 141), and 10% in colon/rectum NETs (n = 50). The frequency of surveillance imaging was highly variable. CONCLUSIONS R0 resection was associated with variable risk of recurrence across subtypes. Further research to inform refinement of guidelines for the appropriate duration of surveillance after R0 resection is needed.
Collapse
|
39
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Arain MA, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen S, Cooper HS, Deming D, Farkas L, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Gunn A, Hecht JR, Hoffe S, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Johung KL, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stoffel EM, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Willett CG, Gregory KM, Gurski LA. Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:329-359. [PMID: 33724754 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 679] [Impact Index Per Article: 226.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation-positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.
Collapse
|
40
|
Sangaré L, Delli-Zotti K, Florea A, Rehn M, Benson AB, Lowe KA. An evaluation of RAS testing among metastatic colorectal cancer patients in the USA. Future Oncol 2021; 17:1653-1663. [PMID: 33629919 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2020-1075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Data on RAS testing practices prior to metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment initiation are lacking in the USA. Materials & methods: Flatiron data were utilized for patients diagnosed with mCRC between 2011 and 2017. Flatiron is a longitudinal, demographically and geographically diverse database representing data from over 1.5 million active US patients treated at 255 community and hospital-affiliated oncology clinics. Results: Among 17,387 mCRC patients 69% were RAS tested and 31% were never tested. Timing of RAS testing was as follows: 23% were tested at the time of their initial CRC diagnosis, 60% following mCRC diagnosis but prior to first line of treatment, 3% prior to third line, the remaining 14% were tested following third line. Conclusion: A third (31%) of patients failed to receive RAS testing, therefore all treatment options were unavailable to them. These data highlight how universal testing has not been achieved.
Collapse
|
41
|
Shaunfield S, Webster KA, Kaiser K, Greene GJ, Yount SE, Lacson L, Benson AB, Halperin DM, Yao JC, Singh S, Feuilly M, Marteau F, Cella D. Development of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Carcinoid Syndrome Symptom Index. Neuroendocrinology 2021; 111:850-862. [PMID: 32911478 DOI: 10.1159/000511482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2020] [Accepted: 09/08/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To develop a symptom-focused index to evaluate representative symptoms, treatment side effects, and emotional and functional well-being of patients with carcinoid syndrome (CS). METHODS The development of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Carcinoid Syndrome Symptom Index (FACT-CSI) followed US Food and Drug Administration guidelines for the development of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and involved the following: (a) literature review; (b) interviews with 14 CS patients; (c) interviews with 9 clinicians; and (d) instrument development involving input from a range of PRO measure development and CS experts. The resulting draft instrument underwent cognitive interviews with 7 CS patients. RESULTS Forty-six CS sources were reviewed. Analysis of patient interviews produced 23 patient-reported symptoms. The most frequently endorsed physical symptoms were flushing, diarrhea, abdominal pain, fatigue, and food sensitivity/triggers. Seven priority CS emotional and functional themes were also identified by patients. Expert interviews revealed 12 unique priority symptoms - the most common being diarrhea, flushing, wheezing, edema, abdominal pain/cramping, fatigue, and 8 emotional and functional concerns. Through an iterative process of team and clinical collaborator meetings, data review, item reduction and measure revision, 24 items were selected for the draft symptom index representing symptoms, emotional concerns, global assessment of treatment side effects, and functional well-being. Cognitive interview results demonstrated strong content validity, including positive endorsement of item clarity (>86% across items), symptom relevance (>70% for most items), and overall measure content (86%). CONCLUSIONS The FACT-CSI is a content-relevant, symptom-focused index reflecting the highest priority and clinically relevant symptoms and concerns of people with CS.
Collapse
|
42
|
Van Cutsem E, Amonkar M, Fuchs CS, Alsina M, Özgüroğlu M, Bang YJ, Chung HC, Muro K, Goekkurt E, Benson AB, Sun W, Wainberg ZA, Norquist JM, Chen X, Shih CS, Shitara K. Correction to: Health-related quality of life in advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer with second-line pembrolizumab in KEYNOTE-061. Gastric Cancer 2021; 24:1341. [PMID: 34536168 PMCID: PMC9172792 DOI: 10.1007/s10120-021-01248-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
43
|
Dasari A, Morris VK, Allegra CJ, Atreya C, Benson AB, Boland P, Chung K, Copur MS, Corcoran RB, Deming DA, Dwyer A, Diehn M, Eng C, George TJ, Gollub MJ, Goodwin RA, Hamilton SR, Hechtman JF, Hochster H, Hong TS, Innocenti F, Iqbal A, Jacobs SA, Kennecke HF, Lee JJ, Lieu CH, Lenz HJ, Lindwasser OW, Montagut C, Odisio B, Ou FS, Porter L, Raghav K, Schrag D, Scott AJ, Shi Q, Strickler JH, Venook A, Yaeger R, Yothers G, You YN, Zell JA, Kopetz S. ctDNA applications and integration in colorectal cancer: an NCI Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces whitepaper. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2020; 17:757-770. [PMID: 32632268 PMCID: PMC7790747 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-020-0392-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 191] [Impact Index Per Article: 47.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/12/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
An increasing number of studies are describing potential uses of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in the care of patients with colorectal cancer. Owing to this rapidly developing area of research, the Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces of the United States National Cancer Institute convened a panel of multidisciplinary experts to summarize current data on the utility of ctDNA in the management of colorectal cancer and to provide guidance in promoting the efficient development and integration of this technology into clinical care. The panel focused on four key areas in which ctDNA has the potential to change clinical practice, including the detection of minimal residual disease, the management of patients with rectal cancer, monitoring responses to therapy, and tracking clonal dynamics in response to targeted therapies and other systemic treatments. The panel also provides general guidelines with relevance for ctDNA-related research efforts, irrespective of indication.
Collapse
|
44
|
Kircher SM, Mulcahy M, Kalyan A, Weldon CB, Trosman JR, Benson AB. Telemedicine in Oncology and Reimbursement Policy During COVID-19 and Beyond. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 19:1-7. [PMID: 32998106 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7639] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2020] [Accepted: 08/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
The first confirmed case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States was reported on January 20, 2020. As of September 17, 2020, there were more than 6.6 million confirmed cases and 196,277 deaths. Limited data are available on outcomes of immunocompromised patients, but early published reports from China indicate that those with cancer have a 3.5 times higher risk of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or death than those without cancer. Because of the uncertain behavior of COVID-19, it has become imperative for practices to limit exposure to vulnerable patients. Telemedicine has been one of the cornerstones of caring for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review provides an overview of reimbursement policy by public and private payers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, describes implications in cancer care, and offers considerations for future reimbursement policy.
Collapse
|
45
|
Bitterman DS, Winter KA, Hong TS, Fuchs CS, Regine WF, Abrams RA, Safran H, Hoffman JP, Benson AB, Kasunic T, Mulcahy M, Strauss JF, DiPetrillo T, Stella PJ, Chen Y, Plastaras JP, Crane CH. Impact of Diabetes and Insulin Use on Prognosis in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer: An Ancillary Analysis of NRG Oncology RTOG 9704. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 109:201-211. [PMID: 32858111 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.08.042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2020] [Revised: 07/31/2020] [Accepted: 08/14/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Diabetes mellitus (DM) has been proposed to be tumorigenic; however, prior studies of the association between DM and survival are conflicting. The goal of this ancillary analysis of RTOG 9704, a randomized controlled trial of adjuvant chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer, was to determine the prognostic effects of DM and insulin use on survival. METHODS AND MATERIALS Eligible patients from RTOG 9704 with available data on DM and insulin use were included. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and variable levels were compared using log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were created to assess the associations among DM, insulin use, and body mass index phenotypes on outcomes. RESULTS Of 538 patients enrolled from 1998 to 2002, 238 patients were eligible with analyzable DM and insulin use data. Overall 34% of patients had DM and 66% did not. Of patients with DM, 64% had insulin-dependent DM, and 36% had non-insulin-dependent DM. On univariable analysis, neither DM nor insulin dependence were associated with OS or DFS (P > .05 for all). On multivariable analysis, neither DM, insulin use, nor body mass index were independently associated with OS or DFS. Nonwhite race (hazard ratio [HR], 2.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-3.50; P = .0014), nodal involvement (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.24-2.45; P = .0015), and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) ≥90 U/mL (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 2.32-5.63; P < .001) were associated with decreased OS. Nonwhite race (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.05-2.63; P = .029) and CA19-9 ≥90 U/mL (HR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.85-4.40; P < .001) were associated with decreased DFS. CONCLUSIONS DM and insulin use were not associated with OS or DFS in patients with pancreatic cancer in this study. Race, nodal involvement, and increased CA19-9 were significant predictors of outcomes. These data might apply to the more modern use of neoadjuvant therapies for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
|
46
|
Kamath SD, Kircher SM, Benson AB. Comparison of Cancer Burden and Nonprofit Organization Funding Reveals Disparities in Funding Across Cancer Types. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:849-854. [PMID: 31319386 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2018.7280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2018] [Accepted: 02/04/2019] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) in oncology are vital for patient advocacy and funding research for rare cancers, young investigators, and innovative projects. However, some cancers may be underfunded relative to their burden. This study examined the alignment of cancer burden by histology with NPO funding for each histology. PATIENTS AND METHODS This nationwide, cross-sectional study conducted from October 2017 through February 2018 included all oncology NPOs with >$5 million in annual revenue. Total revenue from NPOs supporting individual cancer types with the incidence, mortality, and person-years of life lost (PYLL) for each cancer type was compared using scatter plots and Pearson correlation coefficients. Correlation of expenditure types (eg, fundraising, patient education) with revenue was assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients. Effect of disease association with a stigmatized behavior (eg, lung cancer and smoking) was evaluated using descriptive statistics. RESULTS A total of 119 cancer-related NPOs were included, generating approximately $6 billion in annual revenue in 2015. Cancers with the largest revenue were breast cancer ($460 million; 33.2%), leukemia ($201 million; 14.5%), pediatric cancers ($177 million; 12.8%), and lymphoma ($145 million; 10.5%). Breast cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, and pediatric cancers were all well funded compared with their incidence, mortality, and PYLL. Gastrointestinal (colorectal, pancreas, and hepatobiliary), gynecologic (ovarian, cervical, and endometrial), brain, and lung cancers were poorly funded in all 3 metrics. All cancers associated with a stigmatized behavior were poorly funded in at least 2 metrics. Increased spending on fundraising, administrative costs, patient education, and treatment was highly correlated with increased revenue (Pearson correlation coefficients all >0.92). CONCLUSIONS NPO funding by cancer type is not proportionate with individual cancer burden on society. Disease stigma negatively impacts funding. A significant need exists to increase awareness and funding for many undersupported but common and highly lethal cancers.
Collapse
|
47
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Arain MA, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen SA, Cooper HS, Deming DA, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Hoffe SE, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Kamel A, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen KS, Saltz LB, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stoffel EM, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Willett CG, Johnson-Chilla A, Gregory KM, Gurski LA. Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:1109-1133. [PMID: 31487687 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 75] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract that has increased in incidence across recent years. Often diagnosed at an advanced stage, outcomes for SBA are worse on average than for other related malignancies, including colorectal cancer. Due to the rarity of this disease, few studies have been done to direct optimal treatment, although recent data have shown that SBA responds to treatment differently than colorectal cancer, necessitating a separate approach to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma were created to establish an evidence-based standard of care for patients with SBA. These guidelines provide recommendations on the workup of suspected SBA, primary treatment options, adjuvant treatment, surveillance, and systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Additionally, principles of imaging and endoscopy, pathologic review, surgery, radiation therapy, and survivorship are described.
Collapse
|
48
|
Li Y, Eresen A, Shangguan J, Yang J, Benson AB, Yaghmai V, Zhang Z. Preoperative prediction of perineural invasion and KRAS mutation in colon cancer using machine learning. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2020; 146:3165-3174. [PMID: 32779023 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-020-03354-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2020] [Accepted: 08/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Preoperative prediction of perineural invasion (PNI) and Kirsten RAS (KRAS) mutation in colon cancer is critical for treatment planning and patient management. We developed machine learning models for diagnosis of PNI and KRAS mutation in colon cancer patients by interpreting preoperative CT. METHODS This retrospective study included 207 patients who received surgical resection in our institution. The underlying tumor characteristics were described by analyzing CT image texture quantitatively. The key radiomics features were determined with similarity analysis followed by RELIEFF method among 306 CT imaging features. Eight kernel-based support vector machines classifiers were constructed using individual (II, III, or IV) or multi-stage (II + III + IV) patient cohorts for predicting PNI and KRAS mutation. The model performances were evaluated using accuracy, receiver operating curve, and decision curve analyses. RESULTS Multi-stage classifiers obtained AUC of 0.793 and 0.862 for detecting PNI and KRAS mutation for test cohort. Moreover, individual-stage classifiers demonstrated significantly improved diagnostic performance at all stages (IIAUC: [0.86; 0.99], IIIAUC: [0.99; 0.99], and IVAUC: [1.00; 1.00], respectively, for PNI and KRAS mutation in test cohort). Besides, stage II tumor is better described with coarse texture features while more detailed features are required for better characterization of advanced-stage tumors (III and IV) for diagnoses of PNI or KRAS mutation. CONCLUSION Machine learning models developed using preoperative CT data can predict PNI and KRAS mutation in colon cancer patients with satisfactory performance. Individual-stage models better-characterized the relationship between CT features and PNI or KRAS mutation than multi-stage models and demonstrated good prediction scores.
Collapse
|
49
|
Benson AB, D'Angelica MI, Abbott DE, Abrams TA, Alberts SR, Anaya DA, Anders R, Are C, Brown D, Chang DT, Cloyd J, Covey AM, Hawkins W, Iyer R, Jacob R, Karachristos A, Kelley RK, Kim R, Palta M, Park JO, Sahai V, Schefter T, Sicklick JK, Singh G, Sohal D, Stein S, Tian GG, Vauthey JN, Venook AP, Hammond LJ, Darlow SD. Guidelines Insights: Hepatobiliary Cancers, Version 2.2019. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:302-310. [PMID: 30959462 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 184] [Impact Index Per Article: 46.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers provide treatment recommendations for cancers of the liver, gallbladder, and bile ducts. The NCCN Hepatobiliary Cancers Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussion and updated recommendations regarding systemic therapy for first-line and subsequent-line treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
Collapse
|
50
|
Lanzi A, Sinicrope FA, Benson AB, Galon J. The consensus Immunoscore in phase 3 clinical trial (N0147) and impact on patient management decisions. Oncoimmunology 2020; 9:1796003. [PMID: 32934890 PMCID: PMC7466859 DOI: 10.1080/2162402x.2020.1796003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
The consensus Immunoscore is a routine assay quantifying the adaptive immune response within the tumor microenvironment. It has a prognostic value that has been confirmed in a phase 3 clinical trial (NCCTG N0147) in stage III colon cancers. Moreover, results from another phase 3 randomized trial revealed the predictive value of Immunoscore for response to adjuvant chemotherapy duration. These results highlight the clinical utility of Immunoscore. In its latest edition, the World Health Organization classification of Digestive System Tumors introduced for the first time the immune response as an essential and desirable diagnostic criterion for colorectal cancer. Within the tumor microenvironment, the immune response provides an important estimate of the risk of recurrence and death in colon cancer. The international validation of the prognostic value of the consensus Immunoscore together with its prognostic value in the N0147 trial and its predictive utility for response to chemotherapy in stage III patients provide valuable information for patient management.
Collapse
|