Efficacy and Safety of Sunitinib in Patients with Well-Differentiated Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours

BACKGROUND

In a phase III study, sunitinib led to a significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (panNETs). This study was a post-marketing commitment to support the phase III data.

METHODS

In this ongoing, open-label, phase IV trial (NCT01525550), patients with progressive, advanced unresectable/metastatic, well-differentiated panNETs received continuous sunitinib 37.5 mg once daily. Eligibility criteria were similar to those of the phase III study. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.0 (RECIST). Other endpoints included PFS per Choi criteria, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Sixty-one treatment-naive and 45 previously treated patients received sunitinib. By March 19, 2016, 82 (77%) patients had discontinued treatment, mainly due to disease progression. Median treatment duration was 11.7 months. Investigator-assessed median PFS per RECIST (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 13.2 months (10.9-16.7): 13.2 (7.4-16.8) and 13.0 (9.2-20.4) in treatment-naive and previously treated patients, respectively. ORR (95% CI) per RECIST was 24.5% (16.7-33.8) in the total population: 21.3% (11.9-33.7) in treatment-naive and 28.9% (16.4-44.3) in previously treated patients. Median OS, although not yet mature, was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.0-not estimable). The most common treatment-related AEs were neutropenia (53.8%), diarrhoea (46.2%), and leukopenia (43.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

This phase IV trial confirms sunitinib as an efficacious and safe treatment option in patients with advanced/metastatic, well-differentiated, unresectable panNETs, and supports the phase III study outcomes. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of sunitinib.

Epidemiology of pancreatic cancer in France: descriptive study from the French national hospital database

INTRODUCTION

Although indirect evidence suggests that the incidence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma has increased in the last decade, few data are available in European countries. The aim of the present study was to update the epidemiology of pancreatic cancer in France in 2014 from the French national hospital database (Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients hospitalized for pancreatic cancer in France in 2014 in public or private institutions were included. Patient and stays (length, type of support, institutions) characteristics were studied. The results were compared with those observed in 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 13 346 (52% men, median age 71 years) new patients were treated for pancreatic cancer in 2014, accounting for a 12.5% increase compared with 2010. Overall, 22% of patients were operated on. Liver metastases were present in 60% of cases. The disease accounted for 146 680 hospital stays (+24.8% compared with 2010), 76% of which were related to chemotherapy (+32%). The average annual number and length of stay were 7 and 2.6 days, respectively. In 2014, 11 052 deaths were reported (+15.8%).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 13 350 new cases of pancreatic cancer were observed in France in 2014. The increase in incidence was associated with a marked increase in hospital stays for chemotherapy.

Neutrophil count and efficacy of chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic carcinoma: An ancillary study of in the LAP 07 trial

4120

Background: Predictive biomarkers of Overall Survival (OS) and Progression Free Survival (PFS) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) pts are mandatory. Baseline leukocyte, neutrophil and monocyte counts in addition to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) may predict OS in LAPC pts. Efficacy of chemoradiation (CRT) depending on neutrophil count was retrospectively analyzed in the largest Phase III cohort of LAPC. Methods: The international multicenter randomized LAP07 phase III trial (NCT00634725) has recruited 442 LAPC pts. We have studied the predictive and prognostic value of systemic inflammation, as defined: (i) baseline neutrophilia (neutrophil count > 7 G/L at first randomization) or (ii)increased absolute neutrophil count (IANC) after induction chemotherapy vs baseline. Univariate and multivariate Cox analysis evaluated the benefit of CRT for OS, PFS and Local Control (LC) in pts without systemic inflammation. Results: Patients with baseline neutrophilia (11%) had a worse OS (median 8.9 vs 13.3 months, p = 0.01). At 2nd randomization, 9% and 29% pts had baseline neutrophilia or IANC, respectively. Both neutrophilia (median OS 10.6 vs 16.1 months, p = 0.03) and IANC (median OS 14.6 vs 17.4 months, p = 0.02) predicted poor OS. Systemic inflammation predicted local resistance to CRT (p = 0.02, interaction = 0.015). After excluding pts with systemic inflammation, 1-year local control was 80% in CRT vs 54% in chemotherapy arms (p < 0.001). Pts without systemic inflammation in CRT arm had improved PFS vs chemotherapy arm (median 10.3 vs 8.3 months, p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis in this population, CRT increased PFS (HR = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.45 - 0.97, p = 0.03), after adjusting on age, tumor size, pain at enrollment, albumin, and CA 19.9 according to PROLAP nomogram parameters. Conclusions: In LAPC pts with tumor controlled after induction chemotherapy, systemic inflammation may help to better predict those who will benefit from CRT. This result may impact clinical management and the design of future clinical trials for LAPC. An external validation with a cohort from the ARCAD pancreas meta-analysis is under consideration. Clinical trial information: NCT00634725.

A phase IIb of eryaspase in combination with gemcitabine or FOLFOX as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (NCT02195180)

e15718

Background: L-asparaginase (L-ASP) hydrolyses asparagine (ASN) leading to depletion of this amino acid. While normal cells are protected from ASN requirement due to their ability to produce ASN,.leukemic lymphoblasts and most cancer cells have a very low level or even lack of L-asparagine synthetase (ASNS), and thus depend on serum ASN for their proliferation and survival. L-ASP depletes serum ASN, which in turn inhibits the protein synthesis, resulting in cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in susceptible cancer cells, especially pancreatic cancer cells Eryaspase, which is L-ASP encapsulated in red blood cells, recently showed an encouraging activity and improved safety profile compared to L-ASP in patients (pts) with relapsed ALL. Knowing that up to 70% of pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PC) have low or null ASNS expression (Bachet Pancreas 2015), prompted us to evaluate the efficacy and safety of eryaspase in combination with chemo in PC. Methods: This open label, multicenter phase II randomized study (2:1) enrolled pts with second-line metastatic PC. Pts eligible to gemcitabine or FOLFOX regimen (according to first line chemo) were randomized to chemo +/- eryaspase (100 IU/Kg D3 and D17 of 4-wk regimen) until disease progression Primary end point: progression free survival in pts with ASNS negative tumors (0/1+). ASNS expression was measured using immunohistochemistry and optical density. Key secondary endpoints: PFS in ASNS positive pts (2+/3+), overall survival, biomarkers ( KRASmutation, cell free DNA), and safety. Results: 141 pts were enrolled. Treatment was generally well tolerated, with no safety concerns based on IDMC reviews. ASNS expression was negative in 69%, and positive in 31% of the pts At the time of submission, PFS and OS analysis and the correlation of ASNS expression with clinical outcomes were not yet available but will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: This is the largest set of PC pts tested for the expression of ASNS and treated in second line with an asparaginase combined with chemotherapy. The ASNS expression levels may be a potential therapeutic target and therefore predictive of response to eryaspase for the treatment of advanced PC. Clinical trial information: NCT02195180.

Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434.

FINDINGS

Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group.

INTERPRETATION

The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (AFUGEM GERCOR): a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine has become a standard treatment regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, retrospective data suggest that gemcitabine might be inefficient in 50-60% of patients and thus not an optimum regimen in combination with nab-paclitaxel. We did a phase 2 trial to assess the activity and safety of a new regimen of nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil.

METHODS

We did a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial in 15 hospitals and institutions in France. Eligible participants were previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (previous adjuvant chemotherapy after curative intent resection was allowed if the interval between the end of chemotherapy and relapse was more than 12 months). Patients had to have at least one measurable lesion assessed by CT scan or MRI and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less. We randomly assigned participants (1:2) centrally to 28-day cycles of either gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil plus nab-paclitaxel. The randomisation was by minimisation, stratified by centre and ECOG performance status. Drugs were administered in each cycle as follows: nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m²) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m²) as 30-min intravenous infusions on days 1, 8, and 15; leucovorin (400 mg/m²) as a 120-min intravenous infusion on days 1 and 15; and fluorouracil (400 mg/m²) as a 5-min bolus intravenous infusion followed by a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion of 2400 mg/m² on days 1 and 15. Patients continued treatment until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or patient withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months in the first 72 assessable patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with a target of 50% for the regimen to be deemed sufficiently active to warrant further study. We did the primary analysis on the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population, defined as all randomly assigned and assessable patients regardless of their eligibility and received treatments. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01964534. The trial has ended and we report the final analysis here.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 12, 2013, and Oct 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 114 patients to treatment: 75 patients to the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and 39 to the gemcitabine group. One patient in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group did not have a 4-month assessment, and was thus excluded from the modified ITT analysis. Median follow-up was 13·1 months (95% CI 12·5-14·1). At 4 months, 40 (56%, 90% CI 45-66) of 72 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were alive and free from disease progression (21 [54%, 40-68] of 39 patients in the gemcitabine group were also alive and progression-free at 4 months). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 33 (87%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group and in 56 (77%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with different toxicity profiles. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were neutropenia without fever (17 [23%]), fatigue (16 [22%]), paraesthesia (14 [19%]), diarrhoea (nine [12%]), and mucositis (seven [10%]); in the gemcitabine group they were neutropenia without fever (12 [32%]), thrombocytopenia (seven [18%]), fatigue (eight [21%]), anaemia (five [13%]), increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase concentrations (five [13%] for both), and paraesthesia (four [11%]). Two participants died; one in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group from septic shock, and one in the gemcitabine group from diabetes compensation with acidosis; these deaths were deemed to be not related to treatment. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 28 (38%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and in 14 (37%) of 38 in the gemcitabine group.

INTERPRETATION

Nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil fulfilled the primary endpoint in that more than the required 50% of our study population were progression-free at 4 months, with a tolerable toxicity profile. This regimen thus deserves further assessment in a phase 3 trial.

FUNDING

GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) and Celgene through grants to GERCOR.

Interim results of a multicenter phase II trial of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (G) for patients (Pts) with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)

358

Background: Treatment options for pts with LAPC are limited and generally similar to those for metastatic PC (mPC). The phase 3 MPACT trial of pts with mPC demonstrated a > 3-fold shrinkage of primary tumors with nab-P + G vs G, suggesting the potential of nab-P + G for LAPC treatment. Here, we present interim results on disease control rate (DCR), adverse events (AEs), and quality of life (QoL) from the international phase 2 LAPACT trial. Methods: Pts with treatment-naive unresectable LAPC and ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 received 6 cycles (C) of nab-P 125 mg/m2 + G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day C. After the initial nab-P + G treatment phase, pts without PD and unacceptable AEs were eligible for investigator’s choice (IC) of continued treatment with nab-P + G, chemoradiation, or surgery. Surgery could occur prior to completing 6 C in the case of a major response. Pt-reported QoL was assessed via EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26 questionnaires at screening and prior to infusion on day 1 of each C. Results: As of Aug 17, 2016, 47 pts completed (28/47, 60%) or discontinued (19/47, 40%) the initial nab-P + G treatment (median, 5 C). Median age was 66 years (range, 44 - 86). The most frequent reasons for discontinuation were AE (10/47 [21%], with the most common being neutropenia and abnormal liver function [2 pts each]) and PD (3/47, 6%). The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were neutropenia (34%) and anemia (11%). The DCR ≥ 16 weeks was 76% (34/45 efficacy-evaluable pts [defined as having evaluable baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline scan]; PR, n = 13; SD, n = 21). Twenty-two pts (47%) were assigned by the investigators to an IC treatment: 4 (9%) to continue nab-P + G, 8 (17%) to chemoradiation, and 10 (21%) to surgical resection. Mean QoL scores remained stable during the study, with improved symptom scores for appetite and pain. During the initial nab-P + G treatment phase, most patients reported a complete resolution of certain limitations, including depression (≈ 80%), constipation (≈ 62%), and nausea (≈ 93%). Conclusions: These interim results suggest that for pts with LAPC, nab-P + G is tolerable and produces a promising DCR. On average, QoL scores remained stable during nab-P + G treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT02301143.

Genomic profiling of ampullary adenocarcinoma (AA): Insights from a comparative analysis of pancreatic and intestinal adenocarcinoma and opportunities for targeted therapies use

300

Background: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AA) is a rare entity. AA can originate from either intestinal or pancreaticobiliary ductal epithelium, and patients are often managed as those with pancreaticobiliary carcinomas. The study objectives were the genetic profiling of AA and the identification of specific molecular profiles according to these 2 pathological types. Methods: AA patients included in the AGEO retrospective multicenter cohort who underwent surgical resection of their tumor between 1999 and 2010 were selected. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) archival tissue blocks were collected. Next generation sequencing (NGS) using a 50 gene panel (Ion AmpliSeq Cancer panel) on tumor DNA, and immunohistochemistry (IHC) panel including CK7, CK20, MUC1, MUC2 and CDX2, on tumor sections, were performed. Results: NGS was performed on 101 tumors from 6 hospitals, with 1 technical failure. In total, the most frequent gene mutations were: KRAS (45%), TP53 (40%), APC (15%), PIK3CA (12%), SMAD4 (9%), BRAF (8%), CDKN2A (6%). No mutation was found in 21% of tumors. According to IHC, the most common histological type was intestinal (51%), followed by pancreaticobiliary type (42%) and undetermined (7%). BRAF mutation was significantly associated with intestinal type (8 vs 0, p = 0.017). According to Cosmic database, similarities of molecular profiles exist between AA with intestinal type and colorectal adenocarcinoma, and between AA with pancreaticobiliary type and pancreas adenocarcinoma, respectively. Conclusions: This study shows that AA is a heterogeneous entity and that a large proportion of AA presents a molecular profile that is more similar to that of colorectal adenocarcinoma, compared to pancreatic adenocarcinoma. This important information could be interesting to guide treatment decision in patients with this rare disease.

Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine or plus simplified LV5FU2 as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A GERCOR randomized phase II study (AFUGEM)

350

Background: Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine regimen (NABGEM) became a standard in first-line patients (pts) with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPAC). The AFUGEM trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus simplified LV5FU2 (NABFU). Methods: Main eligibility criteria were: untreated mPAC, ECOG PS≤2. Pts received nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2 on d1, 8 and 15) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 on d1, 8 and 15) or plus simplified LV5FU2 (leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5FU bolus 400 mg/m2 followed by 2400 mg/m2 given as a 46-hour continuous infusion on d1 and 15), one cycle every 4 weeks in both arms, ratio 1:2, respectively. The primary end point was observed progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 4 months (m). A Fleming 2-stage design was used with a targeted (H1) 4m-PFS rate of 50% in NABFU arm and an uninteresting 35% rate (H0, unilateral alpha of 5% and power of 80%). Results: 114 pts were included: NABGEM n=39, NABFU n=75. Baseline characteristics were well balanced: median age 66 years (45-86), ≥2 metastatic sites 36.8%, ECOG PS 0-1 84.2% and 2 15.8%, at the exception of pain more frequent in the NABFU arm (38.5% vs 56.0%). In mITT population, the observed 4m-PFS rates were of 55.4% [95% CI, 45-63] in NABFU Vs 53.9% [95% CI, 39.6-67.7] in NABGEM. Disease control rates were 65% (95% CI, 53-76) and 62% (95% CI, 45-77) respectively. After a follow-up of 24.3m, median PFS were 5.9 [95% CI, 3.6-7.4] v 4.9 months [95% CI, 2.1-7.7] [HR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.52-1.20]. Grade 3-4 adverse events were more frequent in NABGEM (77% v 87%). At tumor progression, in the NABFU arm, 50 patients (66%) and then 13 patients (17%) received a second and third line of chemotherapy respectively, versus 22 patients (56%) and 6 patients (15%) in the NABGEM arm. Median OS were 11.4 [95% CI, 8.8-16.5] v 9.2 months [95% CI, 6.0-13.6] [HR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.40-0.95], respectively. The 12 and 18-months OS rates in NABFU vs NABGEM arm were 48% Vs 41% and 34% Vs 13%, respectively. Conclusions: Nab-paclitaxel plus simplified LV5FU2 appears at least as active as gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in mPAC. The toxicity profile is safe and tolerable. This regimen deserves evaluation in a phase III trial. Clinical trial information: NCT01964534.

Gemox versus surveillance following surgery of localized biliary tract cancer: Results of the PRODIGE 12-ACCORD 18 (UNICANCER GI) phase III trial

225

Background: No standard post-surgery adjuvant treatment is currently recommended in localized biliary tract cancer (BTC). Gemcitabine combined with platinum is the standard chemotherapy for advanced BTC. The aim of this phase III randomized trial was to assess whether GEMOX would increase relapse-free survival (RFS) while maintaining health-related quality of life (HrQoL). Methods: We performed a multicenter randomized phase III trial. Patients were randomized, within 3 months of R0 or R1 resection of a localized BTC (intra-hepatic, perihilar, extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma or gallbladder cancer), to receive either GEMOX 85 for 12 cycles (Experimental Arm A) or surveillance (Standard Arm B). Co-primary objectives were RFS and HrQoL. 190 patients and 126 RFS events were required to show an increase of median RFS from 18 to 30 months. Results: Between July 2009 and February 2014, 196 patients were included in 33 French centers. Baseline characteristics were balanced, with similar primary sites, R0 resection rates were 86.2% (Arm A) vs 87.9% (Arm B), lymph node invasion present in 37.2% vs 36.4%. In Arm A, a median of 12 cycles was delivered (mean: 9.3, range: 0-12). Maximal grade of adverse events were grade 3 in 57.5% vs 22.2%, and grade 4 in 17.0% vs 9.1%. During treatment one patient died in each arm. The main grade ≥ 3 adverse events in the year following inclusion were peripheral neuropathy (50.0% vs 1.1%), and neutropenia (22.3% vs 0%). Median follow-up was 44.3 months, with 54 and 64 RFS events in arms A vs B. There was no significant difference in RFS between the arms (log-rank p = 0.31), with a hazard ratio of 0.83 [95% CI: 0.58-1.19], p = 0.31 (futility boundaries were crossed). Median RFS was 30.4 [95% CI: 15.4-45.8] vs 22.0 months [95%CI: 13.6-38.3] in arms A & B respectively, and 4-years RFS was 39.3% [95%CI: 28.4%-50.0%] vs 33.2% [95%CI: 23.1-43.7%]. Global Health HrQoL scores were not different at 12 months (70.8 vs 83.3, p = 0.18) and at 24 months (75.0 vs 83.3, p = 0.50). Conclusions: Adjuvant chemotherapy in BTC with GEMOX was feasible and associated with expected toxicities and no deterioration of HrQoL. There was no significant difference in RFS between GEMOX and surveillance. Clinical trial information: NCT01313377.

Sunitinib in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: updated progression-free survival and final overall survival from a phase III randomized study

BACKGROUND

In a phase III trial in patients with advanced, well-differentiated, progressive pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, sunitinib 37.5 mg/day improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo (11.4 versus 5.5 months; HR, 0.42; P < 0.001). Here, we present PFS using retrospective blinded independent central review (BICR) and final median overall survival (OS), including an assessment highlighting the impact of patient crossover from placebo to sunitinib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, cross-sectional imaging from patients was evaluated retrospectively by blinded third-party radiologists using a two-reader, two-time-point lock, followed by a sequential locked-read, batch-mode paradigm. OS was summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. Crossover-adjusted OS effect was derived using rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) analyses.

RESULTS

Of 171 randomized patients (sunitinib, n = 86; placebo, n = 85), 160 (94%) had complete scan sets/time points. By BICR, median (95% confidence interval [CI]) PFS was 12.6 (11.1-20.6) months for sunitinib and 5.8 (3.8-7.2) months for placebo (HR, 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.55; P = 0.000015). Five years after study closure, median (95% CI) OS was 38.6 (25.6-56.4) months for sunitinib and 29.1 (16.4-36.8) months for placebo (HR, 0.73; 95% CI 0.50-1.06; P = 0.094), with 69% of placebo patients having crossed over to sunitinib. RPSFT analysis confirmed an OS benefit for sunitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

BICR confirmed the doubling of PFS with sunitinib compared with placebo. Although the observed median OS improved by nearly 10 months, the effect estimate did not reach statistical significance, potentially due to crossover from placebo to sunitinib.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00428597.

Care pathway of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer in daily practice in France: Results from the REPERE national survey

Data in the literature regarding the care pathway of pancreatic cancer patients are limited. The objective of the REPERE survey was to identify and describe the initial stages of the care pathway of pancreatic patients in the metastatic phase. From May to October 2015, 62 oncologists (ON) or gastroenterologists specialized in digestive oncology (GESDO) and 300 general practitioners (GP) completed an electronic questionnaire on the pathway of 728 patients recently diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Of these patients, 200 completed a questionnaire given by a specialized physician (ON/GESDO). Weight loss (65%), fatigue (53%) or anorexia (49%) were the main signs/symptoms that motivated the patients to seek medical advice. For 87% of patients, the general practitioner was the first medicine doctor they consulted. According to the respondents (patient, general practitioner or specialist), the median delay between the onset of the first symptoms and the final diagnosis of pancreatic cancer was between 41 and 65 days. This time lapse tended to decrease with associated jaundice (-15 days on average, standard deviation=8, P<0.1 NS) or with patient concerns triggered by the first symptoms (-11 days on average, standard deviation=6, P<0.05). On the contrary, the time lapse was longer (+14 days on average, standard deviation=6, P<0.05) when the general practitioner prescribed symptomatic treatment. In conclusion, diagnostic management of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer should be accelerated with efforts to raise practitioners' awareness.

Digestive System Mixed Neuroendocrine-Non-Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN) are a heterogeneous subgroup of rare neoplasms that represent about a third of all poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (PDNEC). MiNEN combine a neuroendocrine component, usually a PDNEC, and a non-neuroendocrine component, generally an adenocarcinoma, both accounting for at least 30% of the neoplasm. MiNEN are classified as high-, intermediate-, or low-grade malignancies depending on the metastatic potential of the tumour components. High-grade malignant component should be considered even if it represents <30% of the tumour. The prognosis of MiNEN is generally intermediate between those of the two "pure" components composing it. The aim of this comprehensive review of the literature is to suggest a standardized management of MiNEN. An increasing body of evidence suggests that PDNEC components share molecular abnormalities with their adenocarcinoma counterparts, but also display additional alterations. This advocates for a common origin, and that the presence of a PDNEC component in an adenocarcinoma could indicate a turning point in carcinogenesis.

Abstract B57: Effects of MEK inhibition alone or in combination with PI3K-mTOR pathway inhibitors in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in vitro and on an innovative ex vivo fresh tumor tissue culture model

Purpose: Activating KRAS mutations are frequent (&gt;90%) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and drive downstream deregulation of both MAPK and PI3K-mTOR pathways. MEK inhibitors (MEKi) are under clinical evaluation in PDAC, in combination with other agents including PI3K-mTOR inhibitors. While RAS and BRAF mutations, EMT, PI3K-mTOR activation, and pERK inhibition have been suggested as predictive markers for MEKi efficacy, they are not validated in PDAC. We aimed to explore the cellular and molecular effects of MEKi GSK1120212 (GSK212) alone or in combination with PI3K-mTOR inhibitors, in PDAC cell lines and on an innovative ex vivo system.

Methods: GSK212 is an allosteric non-ATP competitive MEKi, everolimus (Ev) a mTORC1 inhibitor, and BKM120 a pan-class PI3K inhibitor. Effects on proliferation were evaluated by MTT assay. Combinations were analyzed by the Chou-Talalay method. Protein expression was assessed by Western blot. Ex vivo drug assays were performed at different drug concentrations on cultures of fresh tumor tissue slices prepared from patient surgical specimens. Apoptosis and proliferation were assessed by cleaved caspase 3 (Cas-3) and MIB-1 (Ki67) immunostainings, respectively; MEKi sensitivity was defined as cleaved Cas-3 expression in 30% or more of cancer cells. Correlations between protein expressions were explored using linear regression and Pearson’s R2 calculation. Samples will be classified into PDAC subtypes according to Collisson’s, Moffit’s and Bailey’s transcriptomic signatures using non-negative matrix factorization and correlation methods.

Results: MIAPaCa-2 and PANC-1 are two mesenchymal KRAS mutated/BRAF wild-type PDAC cell lines with very different response to GSK212, MIAPaCa-2 being sensitive (72h-IC50=0.009µM) and PANC-1 resistant (72h-IC50=33µM). MIAPaCa-2 was more sensitive than PANC-1 to Ev (IC50=23.3µM vs 47.0µM) and BKM120 (IC50=4.19µM vs 31.6µM). Combination of GSK212 and Ev or BKM120 for 72h resulted in synergistic effects (CI&lt;1) in MIAPaCa-2 (MEKi sensitive) but not in PANC-1. GSK212 (0.1µM) treatment resulted in pERK extinction in both cell lines but in decreased pS6 expression only in MIAPaCa-2. Combination therapy led to extinction of pERK and pS6 in both cell lines. Apoptosis induction in MIAPaCa-2 was confirmed by PARP cleavage. Eleven tumor specimens were cultured ex vivo. We observed that: (a) GSK212 (0.1µM) treatment for 48h induced significant (≥30%) apoptosis concomitantly with a decrease in pS6 expression in MEKi sensitive tumors; (b) Ev (1µM) or BKM120 (0.1µM) exerted antiproliferative effects but did not induce apoptosis; (c) combinations resulted in higher apoptosis induction associated with a higher decrease in pS6 expression compared to MEKi alone in MEKi sensitive tumors. In sensitive tumors, cleaved Cas-3 induction was inversely correlated with pS6 expression under treatment by MEKi +/- Ev or BKM120. A R2&gt;0.50 discriminated between sensitive and resistant tumors. There was no correlation with RAS/RAF mutation status. Predictive value of transcriptomic signatures for MEKi response will be presented.

Conclusion: Response to combined MEK/mTOR pathway inhibition was not correlated with known biomarkers of response to MEKi. Besides the therapeutic potential of MEK/mTOR pathway inhibition in PDAC, this work provides the first evidence of feasibility of pharmacodynamic biomarker monitoring on fresh PDAC tissue slices.

Citation Format: Cindy Neuzillet, Annemilaï Tijeras-Raballand, Anguraj Sadanandam, Pierre Bourgoin, Philippe Bourget, Pawan Poudel, Maria Serova, Armand De Gramont, Philippe Ruszniewski, Valérie Paradis, Eric Raymond, Jérôme Cros, Pascal Hammel.{Authors}. Effects of MEK inhibition alone or in combination with PI3K-mTOR pathway inhibitors in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in vitro and on an innovative ex vivo fresh tumor tissue culture model. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer: Advances in Science and Clinical Care; 2016 May 12-15; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(24 Suppl):Abstract nr B57.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in BRCA2 mutation carriers

Germline BRCA2 mutations are the first known cause of inherited (familial) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This tumor is the third most frequent cancer in carriers of germline BRCA2 mutations, as it occurs in around 10% of BRCA2 families. PDAC is known as one of the most highly lethal cancers, mainly because of its chemoresistance and frequently late diagnosis. Based on recent developments in molecular biology, a subgroup of BRCA2-associated PDAC has been created, allowing screening, early surgical treatment and personalized systemic treatment. BRCA2 germline mutation carriers who have ≥1 first-degree relative, or ≥2 blood relatives with PDAC, should undergo screening and regular follow-up based on magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasound. The goal of screening is to detect early invasive PDAC and advanced precancerous lesions suitable for a stepwise surgical complete (R0) resection. Increasing evidence on the molecular role of the BRCA2 protein in the homologous recombination of DNA damages suggest that BRCA2-related PDAC are sensitive to agents causing DNA cross-linking damage, such as platinum salts, and treatments targeting rescue DNA repair pathways, such as poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors that are currently under investigation.

Efficacy of a sequential treatment strategy with GEMOX-based followed by FOLFIRI-based chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancers

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine (GEM)-platinum chemotherapy stands as first-line therapy for patients with recurrent/advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), yielding progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.4-6.4 months. No standard second-line chemotherapy after GEM-platinum failure exists and data on survival benefit remain limited.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with recurrent/advanced BTC who received gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (GEMOX)-based chemotherapy followed by 5-fluorouracil-irinotecan (FOLFIRI)-based chemotherapy to evaluate the efficacy of the sequential treatment strategy. Overall survival (OS) and PFS were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were analyzed, 21 (40%) had intrahepatic, 14 (27%) had hilar/extrahepatic, and 17 (33%) had gallbladder cancer. Median age was 64 years (range 38-79 years). Prior curative intent resection of the primary tumor was performed in 23 (44.2%) patients and GEMOX adjuvant chemotherapy was given in 12 (23.1%) patients. After a median follow-up of 36.3 months, 47 (90.4%) patients completed the treatment strategy. First-sequence GEMOX and second sequence FOLFIRI achieved 4.8 months and 3.2 months median PFS, respectively. The global OS for the sequential chemotherapy was 21.9 months. The sequence of FOLFIRI resulted in a median OS of 8.4 months.

CONCLUSION

The sequence of GEMOX-FOLFIRI is a potential treatment strategy for patients with recurrent/advanced BTC.

MGMT expression predicts response to temozolomide in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Temozolomide (TEM) showed encouraging results in well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (WDPNETs). Low O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) expression and MGMT promoter methylation within tumors correlate with a better outcome under TEM-based chemotherapy in glioblastoma. We aimed to assess whether MGMT expression and MGMT promoter methylation could help predict the efficacy of TEM-based chemotherapy in patients with WDPNET. Consecutive patients with progressive WDPNET and/or liver involvement over 50% who received TEM between 2006 and 2012 were retrospectively studied. Tumor response was assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 guidelines. Nuclear expression of MGMT was assessed by immunochemistry (H-score, 0-300) and MGMT promoter methylation by pyrosequencing. Forty-three patients (21 men, 58years (27-84)) with grade 1 WDPNET (n=6) or 2 (n=36) were analyzed. Objective response, stable disease, and progression rates were seen in 17 patients (39.5%), 18 patients (41.9%), and 8 patients (18.6%), respectively. Low MGMT expression (≤50) was associated with radiological objective response (P=0.04) and better progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.35 (0.15-0.81), P=0.01). Disease control rate at 18months of treatment remained satisfying with an MGMT score up to 100 (74%) but dropped with a higher expression. High MGMT promoter methylation was associated with a low MGMT expression and longer PFS (HR=0.37 (0.29-1.08), P=0.05). Low MGMT score (≤50) appears to predict an objective tumor response, whereas an intermediate MGMT score (50-100) seems to be associated with prolonged stable disease.

ESPAC-4: A multicenter, international, open-label randomized controlled phase III trial of adjuvant combination chemotherapy of gemcitabine (GEM) and capecitabine (CAP) versus monotherapy gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

LBA4006

Background: The ESPAC-3 trial compared adjuvant GEM with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid for resected pancreatic cancer. GEM is the standard of care based on similar survival and less toxicity. ESPAC-4 aimed to determine whether combination chemotherapy with GEM/CAP improved survival compared to GEM monotherapy. Methods: Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were randomized within 12 weeks of surgery (stratified for R0/R1 resection margin status and country) to have either six 4 week cycles of IV GEM alone or GEM with oral CAP. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints were toxicity, relapse free survival, 2 and 5 year survival and quality of life. 722 patients (480 expected events), 361 in each arm, were needed to detect a 10% difference in 2 year survival rates with 90% power (log-rank test with 5% two-sided alpha). Results: Between Nov 10 2008 and Sep 11 2014, 732 patients were randomized with 730 included in the full analysis set (366 GEM, 364 GEM/CAP). Median age was 65 years, 57% were men. WHO performance status was 0, 1 or 2 in 42% 55% and 3% respectively. Postoperative median CA19-9 was 19 kU/L. Median maximum tumor size was 30 mm, 60% were R1 resections, 80% were node positive and 40% were poorly differentiated. On Dec 11 2015 the Independent Trial Steering Committee requested that the trial proceed to full analysis. The data freeze was on March 2 2016. Median survival (months) for patients treated with GEM/CAP was 28.0 (95% CI, 23.5 – 31.5) and 25.5 (22.7 – 27.9) for GEM. Stratified log-rank analysis revealed an HR=0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 – 0.98]; χ2 (1) = 4.61, P=0.032. 196 out of 366 GEM patients in the safety set reported 481 grade 3/4 adverse events, while 226 out of 359 GEM/CAP patients reported 608 grade 3/4 adverse events ( P=0.242). Conclusions: Adjuvant GEM/CAP for pancreatic cancer had a statistically significant improvement in survival compared to GEM monotherapy. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN96397434.