1
|
Sanford NN, Hong TS, Hall WA. Elucidating the Benefit of Radiation Therapy in GI Cancers: Rethinking Trial End Points and Patient Selection. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:868-871. [PMID: 37856733 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.01402] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2023] [Revised: 08/01/2023] [Accepted: 09/05/2023] [Indexed: 10/21/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nina N Sanford
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - William A Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hitchcock KE, Miller ED, Shi Q, Dixon JG, Gholami S, White SB, Wu C, Goulet CC, George M, Jee KW, Wright CL, Yaeger R, Shergill A, Hong TS, George TJ, O'Reilly EM, Meyerhardt JA, Romesser PB. Alliance for clinical trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A022101/NRG-GI009: a pragmatic randomized phase III trial evaluating total ablative therapy for patients with limited metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluating radiation, ablation, and surgery (ERASur). BMC Cancer 2024; 24:201. [PMID: 38350888 PMCID: PMC10863118 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-11899-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 01/19/2024] [Indexed: 02/15/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For patients with liver-confined metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), local therapy of isolated metastases has been associated with long-term progression-free and overall survival (OS). However, for patients with more advanced mCRC, including those with extrahepatic disease, the efficacy of local therapy is less clear although increasingly being used in clinical practice. Prospective studies to clarify the role of metastatic-directed therapies in patients with mCRC are needed. METHODS The Evaluating Radiation, Ablation, and Surgery (ERASur) A022101/NRG-GI009 trial is a randomized, National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase III study evaluating if the addition of metastatic-directed therapy to standard of care systemic therapy improves OS in patients with newly diagnosed limited mCRC. Eligible patients require a pathologic diagnosis of CRC, have BRAF wild-type and microsatellite stable disease, and have 4 or fewer sites of metastatic disease identified on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted. All metastatic lesions must be amenable to total ablative therapy (TAT), which includes surgical resection, microwave ablation, and/or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) with SABR required for at least one lesion. Patients without overt disease progression after 16-26 weeks of first-line systemic therapy will be randomized 1:1 to continuation of systemic therapy with or without TAT. The trial activated through the Cancer Trials Support Unit on January 10, 2023. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, adverse events profile, and time to local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. This study requires a total of 346 evaluable patients to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 0.05 to detect an improvement in OS from a median of 26 months in the control arm to 37 months in the experimental arm with a hazard ratio of 0.7. The trial uses a group sequential design with two interim analyses for futility. DISCUSSION The ERASur trial employs a pragmatic interventional design to test the efficacy and safety of adding multimodality TAT to standard of care systemic therapy in patients with limited mCRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05673148, registered December 21, 2022.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Qian Shi
- Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Jesse G Dixon
- Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Manju George
- COLONTOWN/PALTOWN Development Foundation, Crownsville, MD, USA
| | | | | | - Rona Yaeger
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, 10065, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ardaman Shergill
- Alliance Protocol Operations Office, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | | | - Eileen M O'Reilly
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, 10065, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Paul B Romesser
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, 10065, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wang X, van Rossum PSN, Chu Y, Hobbs BP, Grassberger C, Hong TS, Liao Z, Yang J, Zhang X, Netherton T, Mohan R, Lin SH. Severe Lymphopenia During Chemoradiation Therapy for Esophageal Cancer: Comprehensive Analysis of Randomized Phase 2B Trial of Proton Beam Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:368-377. [PMID: 37652304 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.08.058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Revised: 08/16/2023] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Lymphocytes play an important role in antitumor immunity; however, they are also especially vulnerable to depletion during chemoradiation therapy (CRT). The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of grade 4 lymphopenia (G4L) between proton beam therapy (PBT) and intensity modulated photon radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with esophageal cancer treated with CRT in a completed randomized trial and to ascertain patient heterogeneity to G4L risk based on treatment and established prognostic factors. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between April 2012 and March 2019, a single-institution, open-label, nonblinded, phase 2 randomized trial (NCT01512589) was conducted at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Patients were randomly assigned to IMRT or PBT, either definitively or preoperatively. This secondary analysis of the randomized trial was G4L during concurrent CRT according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. RESULTS Among 105 patients evaluable for analysis, 44 patients (42%) experienced G4L at a median of 28 days after the start date of concurrent CRT. Induction chemotherapy (P = .003), baseline absolute lymphocyte count (P < .001), radiation therapy modality (P = .002), and planning treatment volume (P = .033) were found to be significantly associated with G4L. Multivariate classification analysis partitioned patients into 5 subgroups for whom the incidence of G4L was observed in 0%, 14%, 35%, 70%, and 100% of patients. The benefit of PBT over IMRT was most pronounced in patients with an intermediate baseline absolute lymphocyte count and large planning treatment volume (P = .011). CONCLUSIONS This is the first prospective evidence that limiting dose scatter by PBT significantly reduced the incidence of G4L, especially in the intermediate-risk patients. The implication of this immune-sparing effect of PBT, especially in the context of standard adjuvant immunotherapy, needs further examination in the current phase 3 randomized trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xin Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, China
| | - Peter S N van Rossum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Yan Chu
- UTHealth, University of Texas, Houston, Texas
| | - Brian P Hobbs
- Department of Population Health, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
| | | | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Zhongxing Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jinzhong Yang
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Xiaodong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Tucker Netherton
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Steven H Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Worrell SG, Goodman KA, Altorki NK, Ashman JB, Crabtree TD, Dorth J, Firestone S, Harpole DH, Hofstetter WL, Hong TS, Kissoon K, Ku GY, Molena D, Tepper JE, Watson TJ, Williams T, Willett C. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:28-46. [PMID: 37921736 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/05/2023] [Indexed: 11/04/2023]
Abstract
Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie G Worrell
- Section of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona.
| | - Karyn A Goodman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Nasser K Altorki
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
| | | | - Traves D Crabtree
- Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois
| | - Jennifer Dorth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland, Ohio
| | | | - David H Harpole
- Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Wayne L Hofstetter
- Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Geoffrey Y Ku
- Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daniela Molena
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Joel E Tepper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Thomas J Watson
- Thoracic Surgery Group, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Terence Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Christopher Willett
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Worrell SG, Goodman KA, Altorki NK, Ashman JB, Crabtree TD, Dorth J, Firestone S, Harpole DH, Hofstetter WL, Hong TS, Kissoon K, Ku GY, Molena D, Tepper JE, Watson TJ, Williams T, Willett C. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction. Ann Thorac Surg 2024; 117:15-32. [PMID: 37921794 DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2023.09.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2023] [Revised: 08/23/2023] [Accepted: 09/05/2023] [Indexed: 11/04/2023]
Abstract
Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie G Worrell
- Section of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona.
| | - Karyn A Goodman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Nasser K Altorki
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
| | | | - Traves D Crabtree
- Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois
| | - Jennifer Dorth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland, Ohio
| | | | - David H Harpole
- Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Wayne L Hofstetter
- Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Geoffrey Y Ku
- Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daniela Molena
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Joel E Tepper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Thomas J Watson
- Thoracic Surgery Group, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Terence Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Christopher Willett
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hitchcock KE, Miller ED, Shi Q, Dixon JG, Gholami S, White SB, Wu C, Goulet CC, George M, Jee KW, Wright CL, Yaeger R, Shergill A, Hong TS, George TJ, O'Reilly EM, Meyerhardt JA, Romesser PB. Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A022101/NRG-GI009: A pragmatic randomized phase III trial evaluating total ablative therapy for patients with limited metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluating radiation, ablation, and surgery (ERASur). Res Sq 2023:rs.3.rs-3773522. [PMID: 38196590 PMCID: PMC10775493 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3773522/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2024]
Abstract
Background For patients with liver-confined metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), local therapy of isolated metastases has been associated with long-term progression-free and overall survival (OS). However, for patients with more advanced mCRC, including those with extrahepatic disease, the efficacy of local therapy is less clear although increasingly being used in clinical practice. Prospective studies to clarify the role of metastatic-directed therapies in patients with mCRC are needed. Methods The Evaluating Radiation, Ablation, and Surgery (ERASur) A022101/NRG-GI009 trial is a randomized, National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase III study evaluating if the addition of metastatic-directed therapy to standard of care systemic therapy improves OS in patients with newly diagnosed limited mCRC. Eligible patients require a pathologic diagnosis of CRC, have BRAF wild-type and microsatellite stable disease, and have 4 or fewer sites of metastatic disease identified on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted. All metastatic lesions must be amenable to total ablative therapy (TAT), which includes surgical resection, microwave ablation, and/or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) with SABR required for at least one lesion. Patients without overt disease progression after 16-26 weeks of first-line systemic therapy will be randomized 1:1 to continuation of systemic therapy with or without TAT. The trial activated through the Cancer Trials Support Unit on January 10, 2023. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, adverse events profile, and time to local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. This study requires a total of 346 evaluable patients to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 0.05 to detect an improvement in OS from a median of 26 months in the control arm to 37 months in the experimental arm with a hazard ratio of 0.7. The trial uses a group sequential design with two interim analyses for futility. Discussion The ERASur trial employs a pragmatic interventional design to test the efficacy and safety of adding multimodality TAT to standard of care systemic therapy in patients with limited mCRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Qian Shi
- Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kamran SC, Zhou Y, Otani K, Drumm M, Otani Y, Wu S, Wu CL, Feldman AS, Wszolek M, Lee RJ, Saylor PJ, Lennerz J, Van Allen E, Willers H, Hong TS, Liu Y, Davicioni E, Gibb EA, Shipley WU, Mouw KW, Efstathiou JA, Miyamoto DT. Genomic Tumor Correlates of Clinical Outcomes Following Organ-Sparing Chemoradiation Therapy for Bladder Cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2023; 29:5116-5127. [PMID: 37870965 PMCID: PMC10722135 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-23-0792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2023] [Revised: 05/20/2023] [Accepted: 09/27/2023] [Indexed: 10/25/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE There is an urgent need for biomarkers of radiation response in organ-sparing therapies. Bladder preservation with trimodality therapy (TMT), consisting of transurethral tumor resection followed by chemoradiation, is an alternative to radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), but molecular determinants of response are poorly understood. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN We characterized genomic and transcriptomic features correlated with long-term response in a single institution cohort of patients with MIBC homogeneously treated with TMT. Pretreatment tumors from 76 patients with MIBC underwent whole-exome sequencing; 67 underwent matched transcriptomic profiling. Molecular features were correlated with clinical outcomes including modified bladder-intact event-free survival (mBI-EFS), a composite endpoint that reflects long-term cancer control with bladder preservation. RESULTS With a median follow-up of 74.6 months in alive patients, 37 patients had favorable long-term response to TMT while 39 had unfavorable long-term response. Tumor mutational burden was not associated with outcomes after TMT. DNA damage response gene alterations were associated with improved locoregional control and mBI-EFS. Of these alterations, somatic ERCC2 mutations stood out as significantly associated with favorable long-term outcomes; patients with ERCC2 mutations had significantly improved mBI-EFS [HR, 0.15; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06-0.37; P = 0.030] and improved BI-EFS, an endpoint that includes all-cause mortality (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.68; P = 0.044). ERCC2 mutant bladder cancer cell lines were significantly more sensitive to concurrent cisplatin and radiation treatment in vitro than isogenic ERCC2 wild-type cells. CONCLUSIONS Our data identify ERCC2 mutation as a candidate biomarker associated with sensitivity and long-term response to chemoradiation in MIBC. These findings warrant validation in independent cohorts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia C. Kamran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Yuzhen Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Keisuke Otani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Michael Drumm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Yukako Otani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Shulin Wu
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Chin-Lee Wu
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Adam S. Feldman
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Matthew Wszolek
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Richard J. Lee
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Philip J. Saylor
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jochen Lennerz
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Eliezer Van Allen
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
- Department of Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Henning Willers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Yang Liu
- Veracyte, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | - William U. Shipley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kent W. Mouw
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jason A. Efstathiou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David T. Miyamoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
- Krantz Family Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Khazaei Monfared Y, Heidari P, Klempner SJ, Mahmood U, Parikh AR, Hong TS, Strickland MR, Esfahani SA. DNA Damage by Radiopharmaceuticals and Mechanisms of Cellular Repair. Pharmaceutics 2023; 15:2761. [PMID: 38140100 PMCID: PMC10748326 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15122761] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2023] [Revised: 12/05/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023] Open
Abstract
DNA is an organic molecule that is highly vulnerable to chemical alterations and breaks caused by both internal and external factors. Cells possess complex and advanced mechanisms, including DNA repair, damage tolerance, cell cycle checkpoints, and cell death pathways, which together minimize the potentially harmful effects of DNA damage. However, in cancer cells, the normal DNA damage tolerance and response processes are disrupted or deregulated. This results in increased mutagenesis and genomic instability within the cancer cells, a known driver of cancer progression and therapeutic resistance. On the other hand, the inherent instability of the genome in rapidly dividing cancer cells can be exploited as a tool to kill by imposing DNA damage with radiopharmaceuticals. As the field of targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is rapidly growing in oncology, it is crucial to have a deep understanding of the impact of systemic radiation delivery by radiopharmaceuticals on the DNA of tumors and healthy tissues. The distribution and activation of DNA damage and repair pathways caused by RPT can be different based on the characteristics of the radioisotope and molecular target. Here we provide a comprehensive discussion of the biological effects of RPTs, with the main focus on the role of varying radioisotopes in inducing direct and indirect DNA damage and activating DNA repair pathways.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yousef Khazaei Monfared
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (Y.K.M.); (P.H.); (U.M.)
| | - Pedram Heidari
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (Y.K.M.); (P.H.); (U.M.)
| | - Samuel J. Klempner
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Mass General Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (S.J.K.); (A.R.P.); (M.R.S.)
| | - Umar Mahmood
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (Y.K.M.); (P.H.); (U.M.)
| | - Aparna R. Parikh
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Mass General Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (S.J.K.); (A.R.P.); (M.R.S.)
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA;
| | - Matthew R. Strickland
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Mass General Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (S.J.K.); (A.R.P.); (M.R.S.)
| | - Shadi A. Esfahani
- Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (Y.K.M.); (P.H.); (U.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Narang AK, Hong TS, Ding K, Herman J, Meyer J, Thompson E, Bhutani MS, Krishnan K, Casey B, Shin EJ, Koay EJ. A Multi-Institutional Safety and Feasibility Study Exploring the Use of Hydrogel to Create Spatial Separation between the Pancreas and Duodenum in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer. Pract Radiat Oncol 2023:S1879-8500(23)00340-5. [PMID: 38043645 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.11.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/15/2023] [Indexed: 12/05/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The administration of dose-escalated radiation for pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains challenging due to the proximity of dose-limiting stomach and bowel, particularly the duodenum for pancreatic head tumors. We explore whether endoscopic injection of a temporary, absorbable hydrogel into the pancreatico-duodenal (PD) groove is safe and feasible for the purpose of increasing spatial separation between pancreatic head tumors and the duodenum. METHODS Six patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma underwent endoscopic injection of hydrogel into the PD groove. Safety was assessed based on the incidence of procedure-related adverse events resulting in a delay of radiation therapy initiation. Feasibility was defined as the ability to create spatial separation between the pancreas and duodenum, as assessed on simulation CT. RESULTS All six patients were able to undergo endoscopic injection of hydrogel into the PD groove. No device-related events were experienced at any point in follow-up. Presence of hydrogel in the PD groove was apparent on simulation CT in all six patients. Mean space created by the hydrogel was 7.7 mm +/- 2.4 mm. In three patients who underwent Whipple resection, presence of hydrogel in the PD groove was pathologically confirmed with no evidence of damage to the duodenum. CONCLUSIONS Endoscopic injection of hydrogel into the PD groove is safe and feasible. Characterization of the dosimetric benefit that this technique may offer in the setting of dose-escalated radiation should also be pursued, as should the ability of such dosimetric benefit to translate into clinically improved tumor control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol Kumar Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Kai Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Joseph Herman
- Dept of Radiation Medicine, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, Lake Success, NY
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Elizabeth Thompson
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, 401 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231
| | - Manoop S Bhutani
- Dept of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center,Houston, TX
| | - Kumar Krishnan
- Division of Gastroenterology, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Brenna Casey
- Division of Gastroenterology, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Euin Ji Shin
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Smart AC, Niemierko A, Wo JY, Ferrone CR, Tanabe KK, Lillemoe KD, Clark JW, Blaszkowsky LS, Allen JN, Weekes C, Ryan DP, Warshaw AL, Castillo CFD, Hong TS, Keane FK. Portal Vein or Superior Mesenteric Vein Thrombosis with Dose-Escalated Radiation for Borderline or Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2023; 27:2464-2473. [PMID: 37578568 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-023-05796-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/29/2023] [Indexed: 08/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Portal vein and superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (PVT/SMVT) are potentially morbid complications of radiation dose-escalated local therapy for pancreatic cancer. We retrospectively reviewed records for patients treated with and without intraoperative radiation (IORT) to identify risk factors for PVT/SMVT. METHODS Ninety-six patients with locally advanced or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma received neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical exploration from 2009 to 2014. Patients at risk for close or positive surgical margins received IORT boost to a biologically effective dose (BED10) > 100. Prognostic factors for PVT/SMVT were evaluated using competing risks regression. RESULTS Median follow-up was 79 months for surviving patients. Fifty-six patients (58%) received IORT. Twenty-nine patients (30%) developed PVT/SMVT at a median time of 18 months. On univariate competing risks regression, operative blood loss and venous repair with a vascular interposition graft, but not IORT dose escalation or diabetes history, were significantly associated with PVT/SMVT. The development of thrombosis in the absence of recurrence was significantly associated with a longstanding diabetes history, post-neoadjuvant treatment CA19-9, and operative blood loss. All 4 patients who underwent both IORT and vascular repair with a graft developed PVT/SMVT. PVT/SMVT in the absence of recurrence is not associated with significantly worsened overall survival but led to frequent medical interventions. CONCLUSIONS Approximately 30% of patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation for PDAC developed PVT/SMVT a median of 18 months following surgery. This was significantly associated with venous reconstruction with vascular grafts, but not with escalating radiation dose. PVT/SMVT in the absence of recurrence was associated with significant morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alicia C Smart
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Andrzej Niemierko
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Kenneth K Tanabe
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Keith D Lillemoe
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jeffrey W Clark
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lawrence S Blaszkowsky
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jill N Allen
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Colin Weekes
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - David P Ryan
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Andrew L Warshaw
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Florence K Keane
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Qiao G, Fong ZV, Bolm L, Fernandez Del-Castillo C, Ferrone CR, Servin-Rojas M, Pathak P, Lau-Min K, Allen JN, Blaszkowsky LS, Clark JW, Parikh AR, Ryan DP, Weekes CD, Roberts HM, Wo JY, Hong TS, Lillemoe KD, Qadan M. Feasibility, Safety, and Efficacy of Aggressive Multimodal Management of Elderly Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 2023:00000658-990000000-00669. [PMID: 37830225 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of NAT followed by surgical resection in patients with PDAC aged ≥75 years. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Whether administration of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) followed by surgical resection in elderly patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is safe and effective is unknown. METHODS The present study is a three-part comparison of older (≥ 75 years) versus younger (< 75 years) patients in different settings throughout the continuum of PDAC care. The first analysis was a comparison of older versus younger consecutive patients with non-metastatic PDAC who were initiated on FOLFIRINOX. The second was a comparison of older vs. younger patients who underwent NAT followed by surgical resection, and the third and final analysis was a comparison of older patients who underwent either NAT followed by surgical resection vs. upfront surgical resection. Postoperative complications, overall survival (OS), and time to recurrence (TTR), were compared. Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS In the first analysis, a lower proportion of older patients (n=40) were able to complete the intended neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (8) cycles compared to younger patients (n=214) (65.0% vs. 81.4%, P=0.021). However, older patients were just as likely to undergo surgical exploration as younger patients (77.5% vs 78.5%, P=0.89) as well as surgical resection (57.5% vs 55.6%, P=0.70). In the second analysis, PSM was conducted to compare older (n=54) vs. younger patients (n=54) who underwent NAT followed by surgical resection. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications between the matched groups. While there was a significant difference in overall survival (OS) between older and younger patients (median OS: 16.43 months vs. 30.83 months, P=0.002), importantly, there was no significant difference in time to recurrence (TTR, median: 7.65 months vs. 11.83 months, P=0.215). In the third analysis, older patients who underwent NAT followed by surgical resection (n=48) were compared with similar older patients who underwent upfront surgical resection (n=48). After PSM, there was a significant difference in OS (median OS: 15.78 months vs. 11.51 months, P=0.037) as well as TTR (median TTR: 8.81 months vs. 7.10 months, P=0.046) representing an association with improved outcomes that favored the neoadjuvant approach among older patients alone. CONCLUSIONS This comprehensive three-part study showed that administration of NAT followed by surgical resection appears to be safe and effective among patients ≥ 75 years of age. An aggressive approach should be offered to older adults undergoing multimodal treatment of PDAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guoliang Qiao
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Zhi Ven Fong
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Louisa Bolm
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Lubeck, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Kelsey Lau-Min
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Jill N Allen
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - Jeffrey W Clark
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Aparna R Parikh
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - David P Ryan
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Colin D Weekes
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Hannah M Roberts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Keith D Lillemoe
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Hall WA, Li J, You YN, Gollub MJ, Grajo JR, Rosen M, dePrisco G, Yothers G, Dorth JA, Rahma OE, Russell MM, Gross HM, Jacobs SA, Faller BA, George S, Al baghdadi T, Haddock MG, Valicenti R, Hong TS, George TJ. Prospective Correlation of Magnetic Resonance Tumor Regression Grade With Pathologic Outcomes in Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:4643-4651. [PMID: 37478389 PMCID: PMC10564288 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.02525] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2022] [Revised: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 07/23/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a newly established standard treatment for rectal adenocarcinoma. Current methods to communicate magnitudes of regression during TNT are subjective and imprecise. Magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (MR-TRG) is an existing, but rarely used, regression grading system. Prospective validation of MR-TRG correlation with pathologic response in patients undergoing TNT is lacking. Utility of adding diffusion-weighted imaging to MR-TRG is also unknown. METHODS We conducted a multi-institutional prospective imaging substudy within NRG-GI002 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02921256) examining the ability of MR-based imaging to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) and correlate MR-TRG with the pathologic neoadjuvant response score (NAR). Serial MRIs were needed from 110 patients. Three radiologists independently, then collectively, reviewed each MRI for complete response (mriCR), which was tested for positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, and specificity with pCR. MR-TRG was examined for association with the pathologic NAR score. All team members were blinded to pathologic data. RESULTS A total of 121 patients from 71 institutions met criteria: 28% were female (n = 34), 84% White (n = 101), and median age was 55 (24-78 years). Kappa scores for T- and N-stage after TNT were 0.38 and 0.88, reflecting fair agreement and near-perfect agreement, respectively. Calling an mriCR resulted in a kappa score of 0.82 after chemotherapy and 0.56 after TNT reflected near-perfect agreement and moderate agreement, respectively. MR-TRG scores were associated with pCR (P < .01) and NAR (P < .0001), PPV for pCR was 40% (95% CI, 26 to 53), and NPV was 84% (95% CI, 75 to 94). CONCLUSION MRI alone is a poor tool to distinguish pCR in rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing TNT. However, the MR-TRG score presents a now validated method, correlated with pathologic NAR, which can objectively measure regression magnitude during TNT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William A. Hall
- Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Jiahe Li
- The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Y. Nancy You
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Joseph R. Grajo
- University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
- University of Florida Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, FL
| | - Mark Rosen
- Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) Group, and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Greg dePrisco
- Baylor Scott and White Health Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX
| | | | - Jennifer A. Dorth
- University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
| | | | - Marcia M. Russell
- Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, and VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | | - Bryan A. Faller
- Missouri Baptist Medical Center/Heartland NCORP, St Louis, MO
| | - Sagila George
- Stephenson Cancer Center University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Tareq Al baghdadi
- Trinity Health Ann Arbor Hospital, Michigan Cancer Research Consortium (NCORP), Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | - Richard Valicenti
- University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center/UC Davis School of Med/UC Davis Health, Sacramento, CA
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Thomas J. George
- University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
- University of Florida Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Romesser PB, Miller ED, Shi Q, Dixon JG, Gholami S, White S, Wu C, Goulet CC, Jee KW, Wright CL, Yaeger R, Shergill A, Hong TS, George TJ, O'Reilly E, Meyerhardt J, Hitchcock KE. Alliance A022101: A Pragmatic Randomized Phase III Trial Evaluating Total Ablative Therapy for Patients with Limited Metastatic Colorectal Cancer - Evaluating Radiation, Ablation and Surgery (ERASur). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e335. [PMID: 37785178 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.2391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. MATERIALS/METHODS A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with 4 or fewer sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. RESULTS The trial activated in January 2023. CONCLUSION Recruitment is ongoing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P B Romesser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - E D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Q Shi
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - S Gholami
- University of California, Davis, Davis, CA
| | - S White
- Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - C Wu
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | | | - K W Jee
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - R Yaeger
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - A Shergill
- The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - T S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - T J George
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - E O'Reilly
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | - K E Hitchcock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Tchelebi L, Korah B, Goodman KA, Hoffe S, Stricker C, Pinto DM, Deperalta D, Hong TS, Hacker-Prietz A, Narang A, Aguilera TA, Roberts H, Raldow A, Tempero M, Murphy JD, Malik NK, Herman J. Pancreas Cancer Learning Health Network Established to Share Best Practice Across 14 Centers and Improve Patient Outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e343-e344. [PMID: 37785197 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.2408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Pancreas cancer (PC) survival is among the lowest of all malignancies. Clinical trials have failed to significantly improve outcomes. Individual and institutional biases in care result in significant variation in practice, further hindering progress. Learning health networks (LHNs) prospectively collect real world data across centers and test improvements that can rapidly be expanded across centers if deemed successful. Herein, we report preliminary progress from the Pancreas Cancer Canopy Cancer Collective (PC-CCC), the first oncology LHN, established to improve duration and quality of survival in PC. MATERIALS/METHODS In 2019, we established the PC-CCC with six care centers who engaged in a collaborative design process to create a set of improvement aims, change ideas, and outcome measures. Center team members receive training and coaching in collaborative quality improvement methods, applied to local improvement efforts. Eight more centers joined in 2021, and a shared Canopy outcomes database was built and implemented to inform center-specific and network-wide improvement efforts and allow the LHN to undertake research using real-world data. Current improvement efforts are focused on proactively screening new PC patients for: (1) Clinical trials, (2) pancreas enzymes, (3) palliative care needs, and (4) goals of care conversations. RESULTS Currently, 14 care centers are active participants in the PC-CCC LHN. Data on a total of 2,002 PC patients are available to date. At presentation to the care center, most patients are female (51%) and have biopsy proven PC (83.9%). Average age is 68 years, and presenting disease status is metastatic (14.5%), resectable (11.4%), locally advanced (10.9%), borderline resectable (8.1%), or not yet staged (40%). For those who received radiation, 75.8% received stereotactic body radiation therapy. Among patients whose chemotherapy regimen was documented, most received 5-fluorouracilbased treatment (52%). Descriptive follow up data (including treatment and outcomes) are being actively updated, to be reported at time of presentation. CONCLUSION Creation of a cancer LHN for PC is feasible and has set the stage for improving patient and provider outcomes through iterative community-building, continuous improvement, and sharing of data and multidisciplinary best practices. Additionally, the data obtained from the CCC database can rapidly inform the network how variation in clinical practice across centers can influence outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Tchelebi
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, New Hyde Park, NY
| | - B Korah
- 1440 Foundation Canopy Cancer Collective, Scotts Valley, CA
| | - K A Goodman
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY
| | - S Hoffe
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Tampa, FL
| | - C Stricker
- 1440 Foundation Canopy Cancer Collective, Scotts Valley, CA
| | | | | | - T S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - A Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - A Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - T A Aguilera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - H Roberts
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | - A Raldow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - M Tempero
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - J D Murphy
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, UC San Diego, La Jolla, CA
| | - N K Malik
- Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | - J Herman
- Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Shiau C, Cao J, Gregory M, Kim Y, He S, Reeves J, Wang S, Lester NA, Su J, Wang PL, Beechem J, Hong TS, Wo JY, Ting D, Hemberg M, Hwang WL. Intercellular Mechanisms of Therapeutic Resistance at the Tumor-Stromal Interface Using Ultra High-Plex Single-Cell Spatial Transcriptomics and Genetically-Engineered Tumoroids. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:S101-S102. [PMID: 37784270 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.056] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) There is a major gap in knowledge regarding how intercellular interactions in the tumor microenvironment (TME) mediate therapeutic resistance. Achievement of this goal has been limited by a lack of (1) spatial context in dissociated single-cell methods; (2) single-cell resolution in spatial profiling approaches; (3) high quality data and yield with FFPE patient specimens; and (4) computational methods for ligand-receptor analyses that consider both gene expression and spatial coordinates. MATERIALS/METHODS We developed an innovative spatial biology paradigm that combines cutting-edge experimental and computational methods to enable high-resolution, spatially-guided discovery of critical mediators of therapeutic resistance. We applied this approach to dissect the single-cell spatial transcriptomic landscape of untreated vs. chemoradiotherapy-treated primary human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC; n = 21) using ultra-high plex spatial molecular imaging (SMI) optimized for high-sensitivity, subcellular detection of up to 6000 gene transcripts in FFPE sections-an order of magnitude greater than contemporary methods. RESULTS We recovered over 1,000,000 high-quality single cells in situ representing more than 20 distinct cell types, including epithelial, immune, endothelial, endocrine, and diverse stromal cells. We developed an optimal transport-based computational method to infer cell-cell communication at the cancer-stromal interface. Treatment with chemoradiotherapy was associated with the largest increase in fibroblast-malignant interactions. Comparing the SMI data with orthogonal single-nucleus RNA-sequencing and digital spatial profiling data, we identified CLCF1-CNTFR as the fibroblast-malignant interaction most associated with resistance to chemoradiotherapy in PDAC. CLCF1 is a gp130-family cytokine that activates Jak-STAT signaling and acts as a potent neurotrophic factor. Notably, the CLCF1-CNTRF (fibroblast-malignant) interaction has prominent pro-oncogenic effects in lung adenocarcinoma and an engineered CNTFR decoy receptor with therapeutic potential has been developed. To functionally validate the role of the CLCF1-CNTFR (fibroblast-malignant) interaction in mediating resistance to cytotoxic therapy, we created CRISPR-engineered cancer-fibroblast tumoroids and modulated expression of this ligand-receptor pair. Pancreatic cancer cell viability in the presence of 5-fluorouracil was better maintained with increased CLCF1-CNTFR signaling. CONCLUSION In this study, we integrated ultra high-plex single-cell spatial transcriptomics, optimal transport ligand-receptor predictions, and genetically-engineered stromal tumoroids to identify and validate CLCF1-CNTFR as an important intercellular mechanism of resistance to chemoradiotherapy in PDAC-pioneering a paradigm for translating single-cell spatial biology to clinical oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Shiau
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - J Cao
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - M Gregory
- Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA
| | - Y Kim
- Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA
| | - S He
- Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA
| | - J Reeves
- Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA
| | - S Wang
- Columbia University, New York, NY
| | - N A Lester
- Massaschusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - J Su
- Massachusetts General Hospital, BOSTON, MA
| | - P L Wang
- Massaschusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - J Beechem
- Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA
| | - T S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - J Y Wo
- Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Newton, MA
| | - D Ting
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - M Hemberg
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - W L Hwang
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Koenig JL, Pappas L, Yeap BY, Clark JW, Allen JN, Wo JY, Ryan DP, Blaszkowsky LS, Giantonio B, Weekes C, Klempner S, Roberts HJ, Drapek LC, Ly L, Meurer J, Corcoran R, Mehta A, Ting D, Hong TS, Parikh AR. Association between Liver Metastases and Treatment Response in Patients with Metastatic, Microsatellite Stable Colorectal Cancer Treated with Radiation Therapy and Dual Immune Checkpoint Blockade. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e308-e309. [PMID: 37785117 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.2333] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Most patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have microsatellite stable (MSS) disease with a limited response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In our phase 2 trial (NCT03104439), 27 patients with metastatic MSS CRC received ipilimumab, nivolumab, and RT (24 Gy/3 fractions) on C2D1 with a disease control rate (DCR) of 37% (10/27) and overall response rate (ORR) of 15% (4/27). Our follow up phase 2 study with ipilimumab, nivolumab, and RT moved to C1D1 (NCT04361162) showed a DCR of 33% (10/30) and an ORR of 13% (4/30). Clinical and preclinical data suggest liver metastases are less responsive to systemic ICIs and complementary liver-directed RT can potentially overcome this effect. To address this, we investigated the association between liver metastases and response rates among patients treated with and without liver-directed RT in a pooled analysis of our phase 2 studies of nivolumab and ipilimumab with RT. MATERIALS/METHODS In this pooled secondary analysis of two open-label, single-arm, phase 2 studies, eligible patients had metastatic MSS CRC, ECOG PS 0-1, and progressed on at least one line of chemotherapy. Treatment consisted of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg q6weeks for 4 cycles, nivolumab 240 mg q2weeks on a 6-week cycle, and RT (24 Gy/3 fractions) on C1D1 or C2D1 to one site. Responses were defined outside of the RT field by RECIST 1.1 with centrally reviewed imaging q3months. ORR/DCR and PFS/OS were compared between patients with and without liver metastases with the Fisher's exact and log-rank tests, respectively. P-values are two-sided. RESULTS We treated 57 patients (median age 57 years [range, 26-85], 61% male, 88% white, 65% with liver metastases) from 07/2017 to 05/2022. Patients received a median of 3 (range, 1-10) prior lines of systemic therapy. The combined ORR was 14% (8/57; 95% CI, 6-26%) and DCR was 35% (20/57; 95% CI, 23-49%). The ORR was 30% (6/20; 95% CI, 12-54%) in patients without liver metastases and 5% (2/37; 95% CI, 1-18%) in patients with liver metastases (p = 0.017). The DCR was 55% (11/20; 95% CI, 32-77%) in patients without liver metastases and 24% (9/37; 94% CI, 12-41%) in patients with liver metastases (p = 0.040). 76% (28/37) of patients with liver metastases received liver-directed RT including 2/2 (100%) patients with a PR. The ORR was 0% in patients with liver metastases without liver-directed RT. The median PFS was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.2-2.4 months) and OS was 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.8-12.8). OS was longer in patients without liver metastases (median 13.6 v 6.8 months, p = 0.010) and in patients treated with liver-directed RT among those with liver metastases (median 7.5 months v 4.5 months, p = 0.025). CONCLUSION Among patients with metastatic MSS CRC treated with ICIs and RT in two phase 2 studies, ORR, DCR, and OS are significantly higher in patients without liver metastases. Liver-directed RT may improve ICI efficacy and OS in patients with liver metastases. Further analysis of PFS and prospective study of ICIs with comprehensive liver-directed RT are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J L Koenig
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Boston, MA
| | - L Pappas
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - B Y Yeap
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - J W Clark
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - J N Allen
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - J Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - D P Ryan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - L S Blaszkowsky
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - B Giantonio
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - C Weekes
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - S Klempner
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - H J Roberts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - L C Drapek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - L Ly
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - J Meurer
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - R Corcoran
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - A Mehta
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; The Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA
| | - D Ting
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - T S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - A R Parikh
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Hwang WL, Su J, Shiau C, Wang PL, Guo JA, Lester NA, Barth JL, Hoffman HI, Aguirre A, Hong TS, Wo JY, Ting D, Zheng L, Mino-Kenudson M, Jacks T. Molecular Mechanisms of Intratumoral Nerve Recruitment and Perineural Invasion Elucidated with Spatial Transcriptomics and CRISPR Activation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:S21. [PMID: 37784453 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Perineural invasion (PNI) is an aggressive manifestation of tumor-nerve interactions associated with postoperative recurrence, metastasis, pain, and decreased survival. Hence, PNI is included in the staging criteria of several malignancies and often an indication for treatment intensification using adjuvant radiotherapy. However, the diverse molecular mechanisms underlying tumor-nerve crosstalk remain largely unknown-hindering the development of new therapies targeting this key pathological process. Moreover, prior studies were limited by a lack of cell-type information, spatial context, and/or a fragmented focus on a small number of pathways. MATERIALS/METHODS Using pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as an exemplar given the exceptionally high frequency of PNI in this malignancy, we performed the first comprehensive, cell-type specific, and spatially resolved whole-transcriptome analysis of human PDAC to identify molecular mediators of tumor-nerve crosstalk and PNI. We constructed 12 custom tissue microarrays (TMAs) derived from matched malignant regions with and without tumor-nerve proximity (n = 288 cores). We performed whole-transcriptome digital spatial profiling (DSP) to independently determine mRNA abundance from the malignant, fibroblast, and nerve compartments through optical sectioning. RESULTS We mapped malignant subtypes we previously identified onto the spatial data and found strong (p<0.0001) positive nerve associations with the mesenchymal, basaloid, and neural-like progenitor subtypes and a negative nerve association with the classical subtype. Numerous genes expressed by malignant cells were enriched (e.g., MMP2, PLXND1, NRP1) or depleted (e.g., SEMA3B) in association with radial distance from nerves, including recapitulation of prior literature. To functionally explore these candidate mediators of tumor-nerve crosstalk, we derived genetically-engineered murine organoids (KrasLSL-G12D/+; Trp53FL/FL; Rosa26-dCas9-VPR) and transduced them with guide RNAs to overexpress subtype-specific transcription factors or candidate genes from the spatial analysis. We quantified (1) cancer cell invasion through extracellular matrix using cultured dorsal root ganglia (DRG) sensory neurons as the chemoattractant, and (2) the role of cancer-intrinsic signaling on nerve recruitment/outgrowth by applying conditioned media or exogenous proteins to cultured DRG sensory neurons and tracking their growth with live imaging. CONCLUSION Our results suggest that the mechanisms enabling cancer cells to recruit nerves into the tumor microenvironment are distinct from those facilitating perineural invasion. This study has transformed our understanding of how cancer cells and the peripheral nervous system collaborate to promote tumor growth, survival, and dissemination, and is now guiding prioritization of therapeutic strategies that synergize with adjuvant radiotherapy in the burgeoning field of cancer neuroscience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W L Hwang
- Harvard Medical School / Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA
| | - J Su
- Massachusetts General Hospital, BOSTON, MA
| | - C Shiau
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - P L Wang
- Massaschusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - J A Guo
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA
| | - N A Lester
- Massaschusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - J L Barth
- Massaschusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - A Aguirre
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | - T S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - J Y Wo
- Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Newton, MA
| | - D Ting
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - L Zheng
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | | | - T Jacks
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
De B, Upadhyay R, Liao K, Kumala T, Shi C, Dodoo G, Abi Jaoude J, Corrigan KL, Manzar GS, Marqueen KE, Bernard V, Lee SS, Raghav KPS, Vauthey JN, Tzeng CWD, Tran Cao HS, Lee G, Wo JY, Hong TS, Crane CH, Minsky BD, Smith GL, Holliday EB, Taniguchi CM, Koong AC, Das P, Javle M, Ludmir EB, Koay EJ. Definitive Liver Radiotherapy for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma with Extrahepatic Metastases. Liver Cancer 2023; 12:198-208. [PMID: 37593365 PMCID: PMC10427952 DOI: 10.1159/000530134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2022] [Accepted: 03/06/2023] [Indexed: 08/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Tumor-related liver failure (TRLF) is the most common cause of death in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Though we previously showed that liver radiotherapy (L-RT) for locally advanced ICC is associated with less frequent TRLF and longer overall survival (OS), the role of L-RT for patients with extrahepatic metastatic disease (M1) remains undefined. We sought to compare outcomes for M1 ICC patients treated with and without L-RT. Methods We reviewed ICC patients that found to have M1 disease at initial diagnosis at a single institution between 2010 and 2021 who received L-RT, matching them with an institutional cohort by propensity score and a National Cancer Database (NCDB) cohort by frequency technique. The median biologically effective dose was 97.5 Gy (interquartile range 80.5-97.9 Gy) for L-RT. Patients treated with other local therapies or supportive care alone were excluded. We analyzed survival with Cox proportional hazard modeling. Results We identified 61 patients who received L-RT and 220 who received chemotherapy alone. At median follow-up of 11 months after diagnosis, median OS was 9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 8-11) and 21 months (CI: 17-26) for patients receiving chemotherapy alone and L-RT, respectively. TRLF was the cause of death more often in the patients who received chemotherapy alone compared to those who received L-RT (82% vs. 47%; p = 0.001). On multivariable propensity score-matched analysis, associations with lower risk of death included duration of upfront chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82; p = 0.005) and receipt of L-RT (HR: 0.40; p = 0.002). The median OS from diagnosis for NCDB chemotherapy alone cohort was shorter than that of the institutional L-RT cohort (9 vs. 22 months; p < 0.001). Conclusion For M1 ICC, L-RT associated with a lower rate of death due to TRLF and longer OS versus those treated with chemotherapy alone. Prospective studies of L-RT in this setting are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian De
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rituraj Upadhyay
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kaiping Liao
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tiffany Kumala
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Christopher Shi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Grace Dodoo
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Joseph Abi Jaoude
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kelsey L Corrigan
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gohar S Manzar
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kathryn E Marqueen
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Vincent Bernard
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sunyoung S Lee
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kanwal P S Raghav
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jean-Nicolas Vauthey
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ching-Wei D Tzeng
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Hop S Tran Cao
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Grace Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Christopher H Crane
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bruce D Minsky
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Grace L Smith
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Emma B Holliday
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Cullen M Taniguchi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Albert C Koong
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Prajnan Das
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Milind Javle
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ethan B Ludmir
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Shiau C, Cao J, Gregory MT, Gong D, Yin X, Cho JW, Wang PL, Su J, Wang S, Reeves JW, Kim TK, Kim Y, Guo JA, Lester NA, Schurman N, Barth JL, Weissleder R, Jacks T, Qadan M, Hong TS, Wo JY, Roberts H, Beechem JM, Castillo CFD, Mino-Kenudson M, Ting DT, Hemberg M, Hwang WL. Therapy-associated remodeling of pancreatic cancer revealed by single-cell spatial transcriptomics and optimal transport analysis. bioRxiv 2023:2023.06.28.546848. [PMID: 37425692 PMCID: PMC10327107 DOI: 10.1101/2023.06.28.546848] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/11/2023]
Abstract
In combination with cell intrinsic properties, interactions in the tumor microenvironment modulate therapeutic response. We leveraged high-plex single-cell spatial transcriptomics to dissect the remodeling of multicellular neighborhoods and cell-cell interactions in human pancreatic cancer associated with specific malignant subtypes and neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy. We developed Spatially Constrained Optimal Transport Interaction Analysis (SCOTIA), an optimal transport model with a cost function that includes both spatial distance and ligand-receptor gene expression. Our results uncovered a marked change in ligand-receptor interactions between cancer-associated fibroblasts and malignant cells in response to treatment, which was supported by orthogonal datasets, including an ex vivo tumoroid co-culture system. Overall, this study demonstrates that characterization of the tumor microenvironment using high-plex single-cell spatial transcriptomics allows for identification of molecular interactions that may play a role in the emergence of chemoresistance and establishes a translational spatial biology paradigm that can be broadly applied to other malignancies, diseases, and treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carina Shiau
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Jingyi Cao
- Evergrande Center for Immunologic Diseases, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Dennis Gong
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Harvard-MIT Health Sciences and Technology Program, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Xunqin Yin
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Jae-Won Cho
- Evergrande Center for Immunologic Diseases, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Peter L Wang
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Su
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Steven Wang
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Jimmy A Guo
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Biological and Biomedical Sciences Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Nicole A Lester
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | - Jamie L Barth
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ralph Weissleder
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Tyler Jacks
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hannah Roberts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | - Mari Mino-Kenudson
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - David T Ting
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Martin Hemberg
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Evergrande Center for Immunologic Diseases, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - William L Hwang
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Fong ZV, Verdugo FL, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Ferrone CR, Allen JN, Blaszkowsky LS, Clark JW, Parikh AR, Ryan DP, Weekes CD, Hong TS, Wo JY, Lillemoe KD, Qadan M. Tolerability, Attrition Rates, and Survival Outcomes of Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Intent-to-Treat Analysis. J Am Coll Surg 2023; 236:1126-1136. [PMID: 36729817 DOI: 10.1097/xcs.0000000000000499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND FOLFIRINOX is increasingly used in the management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, neoadjuvant therapy is associated with toxicity, possible disease progression, and biopsy-related and biliary complications that may preclude operative exploration. Data on the true attrition rate outside of clinical trials or resected surgical series are lacking. STUDY DESIGN Patients with nonmetastatic PDAC who initiated FOLFIRINOX from 2015 to 2020 were identified from our institution's pharmacy records. Multivariable regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used for adjusted analyses of categorical and survival outcomes, respectively. RESULTS Of 254 patients who initiated first-line neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, 199 (78.3%) underwent exploration, and 54 (21.3%) did not complete their chemotherapy cycles due to poor tolerability (46.3%), poor response (31.5%), or disease progression (14.8%), among other causes (7.4%). A total of 109 (42.9%) patients experienced grade 3/4 FOLFIRINOX-related toxicity, of whom 73 (28.7%) and 100 (39.4%) required an emergency department visit or inpatient admission, respectively. Finally, not undergoing surgical exploration was associated with impaired overall survival (hazard ratio 7.0; 95% CI 3.8 to 12.8; p < 0.001). Independent predictors of not undergoing exploration were remote history of chemotherapy receipt (odds ratio [OR] 0.06; p = 0.02), inability to complete FOLFIRINOX cycles (OR 0.2, p = 0.003), increase in ECOG score (OR 0.2, p < 0.001), and being single or divorced (OR 0.3, p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS Among 254 patients with nonmetastatic PDAC initiated on FOLFIRINOX, of whom 52% were locally advanced, a total of 199 (78.3%) were explored, 142 (71.4%) underwent successful resection, and 129 (90.8%) were resected with negative margins. Despite 109 (42.9)% of patients experiencing significant toxicity, most patients could be managed through treatment-related complications to complete planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy and undergo planned surgical exploration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhi Ven Fong
- From the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Fong, Verdugo, Fernandez-del Castillo, Ferrone, Qadan)
| | - Fidel Lopez Verdugo
- From the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Fong, Verdugo, Fernandez-del Castillo, Ferrone, Qadan)
| | - Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo
- From the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Fong, Verdugo, Fernandez-del Castillo, Ferrone, Qadan)
| | - Cristina R Ferrone
- From the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Fong, Verdugo, Fernandez-del Castillo, Ferrone, Qadan)
| | - Jill N Allen
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
| | - Lawrence S Blaszkowsky
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
| | - Jeffrey W Clark
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
| | - Aparna R Parikh
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
| | - David P Ryan
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
| | - Colin D Weekes
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
| | - Theodore S Hong
- the Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Hong, Wo)
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- the Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Hong, Wo)
| | - Keith D Lillemoe
- From the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Fong, Verdugo, Fernandez-del Castillo, Ferrone, Qadan)
- the Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Allen, Blaszkowsky, Clark, Parikh, Ryan, Weekes)
- the Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Hong, Wo)
| | - Motaz Qadan
- From the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (Fong, Verdugo, Fernandez-del Castillo, Ferrone, Qadan)
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lopez-Verdugo F, Fong ZV, Lillemoe KD, Blaszkowsky LS, Parikh AR, Wo JY, Hong TS, Ferrone CR, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Qadan M. Underlying Bias in the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: Minorities Treated at the Same Facilities are Less Likely to Receive Neoadjuvant Therapy. Ann Surg 2023; 277:829-834. [PMID: 34954756 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005354] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify disparities in access to NAT for PDAC at the prehospital and intrahospital phases of care. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Delivery of NAT in PDAC is susceptible to disparities in access. There are limited data that accurately locate the etiology of disparities at the prehospital and intrahospital phases of care. METHODS Retrospective cohort of patients ≥18 years old with clinical stage I-II PDAC from the 2010-2016 National Cancer Database. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess 2 sequential outcomes: (1) access to an NAT facility (prehospital phase) and (2) receipt of NAT at an NAT facility (intrahospital phase). RESULTS A total of 36,208 patients were included for analysis in the prehospital phase of care. Higher education, longer travel distances, being treated at academic/research or integrated network cancer programs, and more recent year of diagnosis were independently associated with receipt of treatment at an NAT facility. All patients treated at NAT facilities (31,099) were included for the second analysis. Higher education level and receiving care at an academic/research facility were independently associated with increased receipt of NAT. NonBlack racial minorities (including American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islanders), being Hispanic, being uninsured, and having Medicaid insurance were associated with decreased receipt of NAT at NAT facilities. CONCLUSIONS Non-Black racial minorities and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive NAT at NAT facilities compared to White and non-Hispanic patients, respectively. Discrepancies in administration of NAT while being treated at NAT facilities exist and warrant urgent further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Zhi Ven Fong
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Keith D Lillemoe
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - Aparna R Parikh
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; and
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | | | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Anderson MA, Knipp DE, Noda Y, Kamran SC, Baliyan V, Kordbacheh H, Hong TS, Kambadakone A. MRI-Based Tumor Necrosis Depiction in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Can It Predict Tumor Aggressiveness? Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15082313. [PMID: 37190241 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15082313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2023] [Revised: 04/13/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether tumor necrosis depicted on contrast-enhanced abdominal MRI can predict tumor aggressiveness in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this retrospective analysis, we included 71 patients with pathology-proven PDAC who underwent contrast-enhanced MRI from 2006 to 2020. Assessment for the presence/absence of imaging detected necrosis was performed on T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted images. Primary tumor characteristics, regional lymphadenopathy, metastases, stage, and overall survival were analyzed. Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis. Of the 72 primary tumors, necrosis was identified on MRI in 58.3% (42/72). Necrotic PDACs were larger (44.6 vs. 34.5 mm, p = 0.0016), had higher rates of regional lymphadenopathy (69.0% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.0007), and more frequent metastases (78.6% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.0010) than those without MRI-evident necrosis. A non-statistically significant reduction in median overall survival was observed in patients with versus without MRI-evident necrosis (15.8 vs. 38.0 months, p = 0.23). PDAC tumor necrosis depicted on MRI was associated with larger tumors and higher frequency of regional lymphadenopathy and metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark A Anderson
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - David E Knipp
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Yoshifumi Noda
- Department of Radiology, Gifu University, 1-1-1 Yanagido Street, Gifu City 501-1194, Japan
| | - Sophia C Kamran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Vinit Baliyan
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Hamed Kordbacheh
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Avinash Kambadakone
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Boucher Y, Posada JM, Subudhi S, Kumar AS, Rosario SR, Gu L, Kumra H, Mino-Kenudson M, Talele NP, Duda DG, Fukumura D, Wo JY, Clark JW, Ryan DP, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Hong TS, Pittet MJ, Jain RK. Addition of Losartan to FOLFIRINOX and Chemoradiation Reduces Immunosuppression-Associated Genes, Tregs, and FOXP3+ Cancer Cells in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2023; 29:1605-1619. [PMID: 36749873 PMCID: PMC10106451 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-22-1630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2022] [Revised: 12/31/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2023] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Adding losartan (LOS) to FOLFIRINOX (FFX) chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (CRT) resulted in 61% R0 surgical resection in our phase II trial in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Here we identify potential mechanisms of benefit by assessing the effects of neoadjuvant LOS on the tumor microenvironment. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN We performed a gene expression and immunofluorescence (IF) analysis using archived surgical samples from patients treated with LOS+FFX+CRT (NCT01821729), FFX+CRT (NCT01591733), or surgery upfront, without any neoadjuvant therapy. We also conducted a longitudinal analysis of multiple biomarkers in the plasma of treated patients. RESULTS In comparison with FFX+CRT, LOS+FFX+CRT downregulated immunosuppression and pro-invasion genes. Overall survival (OS) was associated with dendritic cell (DC) and antigen presentation genes for patients treated with FFX+CRT, and with immunosuppression and invasion genes or DC- and blood vessel-related genes for those treated with LOS+FFX+CRT. Furthermore, LOS induced specific changes in circulating levels of IL-8, sTie2, and TGF-β. IF revealed significantly less residual disease in lesions treated with LOS+FFX+CRT. Finally, patients with a complete/near complete pathologic response in the LOS+FFX+CRT-treated group had reduced CD4+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs), fewer immunosuppressive FOXP3+ cancer cells (C-FOXP3), and increased CD8+ T cells in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma lesions. CONCLUSIONS Adding LOS to FFX+CRT reduced pro-invasion and immunosuppression-related genes, which were associated with improved OS in patients with LAPC. Lesions from responders in the LOS+FFX+CRT-treated group had reduced Tregs, decreased C-FOXP3 and increased CD8+ T cells. These findings suggest that LOS may potentiate the benefit of FFX+CRT by reducing immunosuppression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yves Boucher
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Jessica M. Posada
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Sonu Subudhi
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Ashwin S. Kumar
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
- Harvard–MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Cambridge, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Spencer R. Rosario
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Liqun Gu
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Heena Kumra
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Mari Mino-Kenudson
- Department of Pathology, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Nilesh P. Talele
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Dan G. Duda
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Dai Fukumura
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Jennifer Y. Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Jeffrey W. Clark
- Department of Medicine, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - David P. Ryan
- Department of Medicine, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | - Theodore S. Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Mikael J. Pittet
- Department of Pathology and Immunology, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland
- Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, 1005 Lausanne, Switzerland
- Agora Cancer Research Center, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Rakesh K. Jain
- Steele Laboratories of Tumor Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Anteby R, Blaszkowsky LS, Hong TS, Qadan M. ASO Visual Abstract: Disparities in Receipt of Adjuvant Therapy after Upfront Surgical Resection for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:2484-2485. [PMID: 36681738 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-13069-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Roi Anteby
- School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lawrence S Blaszkowsky
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Anteby R, Blaszkowsky LS, Hong TS, Qadan M. Disparities in Receipt of Adjuvant Therapy After Upfront Surgical Resection for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:2473-2481. [PMID: 36585536 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12976-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A multimodal approach of surgery and chemotherapy, with or without radiation, is the mainstay of therapy with curative-intent for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study compared utilization trends and outcomes of upfront surgery with and without adjuvant therapy. METHODS The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with a diagnosis of stage 1 or 2 PDAC who underwent upfront resection. Multivariable regression was applied to identify factors associated with initiation of adjuvant therapy. RESULTS Of the 39,128 patients in the study, 67% initiated adjuvant therapy after resection, whereas 33% received upfront surgery alone. Receipt of adjuvant multimodal therapy increased from 59% in 2006 to 69% in 2017 (P < 0.0001). Non-white race was associated with lower odds of receiving adjuvant therapy after adjustment for income status, education attainment, and other variables (Hispanic/Spanish [odds ratio {OR}, 0.77; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.69-0.86] and non-Hispanic black [OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.91 vs non-Hispanic white; P < 0.001). The variables that contributed to receipt of adjuvant therapy were place of residence in high versus low education attainment area (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.18-1.44; P < 0.0001) and lower odds for initiation of adjuvant therapy with increasing distance from the treating facility (> 50 miles [OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.47-0.54] vs <12.5 miles; P < 0.0001). The median unadjusted overall survival (OS) time was 18.2 months (95% CI 17.7-18.8 months) for upfront surgery alone and 25.3 months (95% CI 24.9-25.8 months) for surgery with adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS The patients who underwent upfront surgical resection for PDAC showed wide socioeconomic disparities in the use of adjuvant therapy independent of insurance status, facility type, or travel distance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roi Anteby
- School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lawrence S Blaszkowsky
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Newton-Wellesley Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Furtado FS, Wu MZ, Esfahani SA, Ferrone CR, Blaszkowsky LS, Clark JW, Ryan DP, Goyal L, Franses JW, Wo JY, Hong TS, Qadan M, Tanabe KK, Weekes CD, Cusack JC, Crafa F, Mahmood U, Anderson MA, Mojtahed A, Hahn PF, Caravan P, Kilcoyne A, Vangel M, Striar RM, Rosen BR, Catalano OA. Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging (PET/MRI) Versus the Standard of Care Imaging in the Diagnosis of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis. Ann Surg 2023; 277:e893-e899. [PMID: 35185121 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to the standard of care imaging (SCI) for the diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in primary abdominopelvic malignancies. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Identifying PC impacts prognosis and management of multiple cancer types. METHODS Adult subjects were prospectively and consecutively enrolled from April 2019 to January 2021. Inclusion criteria were: 1) acquisition of whole-body contrast-enhanced (CE) 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MRI, 2) pathologically confirmed primary abdominopelvic malignancies. Exclusion criteria were: 1) greater than 4 weeks interval between SCI and PET/MRI, 2) unavailable follow-up. SCI consisted of whole-body CE PET/computed tomography (CT) with diagnostic quality CT, and/or CE-CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and/or CE-MRI of the abdomen±pelvis. If available, pathology or surgical findings served as the reference standard, otherwise, imaging followup was used. When SCI and PET/MRI results disagreed, medical records were checked for management changes. Follow-up data were collected until August 2021. RESULTS One hundred sixty-four subjects were included, 85 (52%) were female, and the median age was 60 years (interquartile range 50-69). At a subject level, PET/MRI had higher sensitivity (0.97, 95% CI 0.86-1.00) than SCI (0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.71), P < 0.001, without a difference in specificity, of 0.95 (95% CI 0.90-0.98) for PET/MRI and 0.98 (95% CI 0.93-1.00) for SCI, P ¼ 0.250. PET/MRI and SCI results disagreed in 19 cases. In 5/19 (26%) of the discordant cases, PET/MRI findings consistent with PC missed on SCI led to management changes. CONCLUSION PET/MRI improves detection of PC compared with SCI which frequently changes management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felipe S Furtado
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| | - Mark Z Wu
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Shadi A Esfahani
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| | - Cristina R Ferrone
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Lawrence S Blaszkowsky
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jeffrey W Clark
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - David P Ryan
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Lipika Goyal
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Joseph W Franses
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Kenneth K Tanabe
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Colin D Weekes
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - James C Cusack
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | - Umar Mahmood
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| | - Mark A Anderson
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Amirkasra Mojtahed
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Peter F Hahn
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Peter Caravan
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| | - Aoife Kilcoyne
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Mark Vangel
- Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Robin M Striar
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| | - Bruce R Rosen
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| | - Onofrio A Catalano
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Springfeld C, Ferrone CR, Katz MHG, Philip PA, Hong TS, Hackert T, Büchler MW, Neoptolemos J. Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2023; 20:318-337. [PMID: 36932224 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-023-00746-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 03/19/2023]
Abstract
Patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are best treated with surgical resection of the primary tumour and systemic chemotherapy, which provides considerably longer overall survival (OS) durations than either modality alone. Regardless, most patients will have disease relapse owing to micrometastatic disease. Although currently a matter of some debate, considerable research interest has been focused on the role of neoadjuvant therapy for all forms of resectable PDAC. Whilst adjuvant combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for patients with resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy seems to improve OS without necessarily increasing the resection rate in those with borderline-resectable disease. Furthermore, around 20% of patients with unresectable non-metastatic PDAC might undergo resection following 4-6 months of induction combination chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy, even in the absence of a clear radiological response, leading to improved OS outcomes in this group. Distinct molecular and biological responses to different types of therapies need to be better understood in order to enable the optimal sequencing of specific treatment modalities to further improve OS. In this Review, we describe current treatment strategies for the various clinical stages of PDAC and discuss developments that are likely to determine the optimal sequence of multimodality therapies by integrating the fundamental clinical and molecular features of the cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Springfeld
- Department of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumour Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Matthew H G Katz
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Philip A Philip
- Wayne State University School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Henry Ford Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Research and Scientific Affairs, Gastrointestinal Service Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Markus W Büchler
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - John Neoptolemos
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Chamseddine I, Kim Y, De B, Naqa IE, Duda DG, Wolfgang JA, Pursley J, Wo JY, Hong TS, Paganetti H, Koay EJ, Grassberger C. Predictive Model of Liver Toxicity to Aid the Personalized Selection of Proton Versus Photon Therapy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023:S0360-3016(23)00104-9. [PMID: 36739920 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.01.055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 01/27/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our objective was to develop an externally validated model for predicting liver toxicity after radiation therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that can integrate both photon and proton dose distributions with patient-specific characteristics. METHODS AND MATERIALS Training data consisted of all patients with HCC treated between 2008 and 2019 at our institution (n = 117, 60%/40% photon/proton). We developed a shallow convolutional neural network (CNN) to predict posttreatment liver dysfunction from the differential dose-volume histogram (DVH) and baseline liver metrics. To reduce bias and improve robustness, we used ensemble learning (CNNE). After a preregistered study analysis plan, we evaluated stability using internal bootstrap resampling and generalizability using a data set from a different institution (n = 88). Finally, we implemented a class activation map method to characterize the critical DVH subregions and benchmarked the model against logistic regression and XGBoost. The models were evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the precision-recall curve. RESULTS The CNNE model showed similar internal performance and robustness compared with the benchmarks. CNNE exceeded the benchmark models in external validation, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.78 versus 0.55 to 0.70, and an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.6 versus 0.43 to 0.52. The model showed improved predictive power in the photon group, excellent specificity in both modalities, and high sensitivity in the photon high-risk group. Models built solely on DVHs confirm outperformance of the CNNE and indicate that the proposed structure efficiently abstracts features from both proton and photon dose distributions. The activation map method demonstrates the importance of the low-dose bath and its interaction with low liver function at baseline. CONCLUSIONS We developed and externally validated a patient-specific prediction model for hepatic toxicity based on the entire DVH and clinical factors that can integrate both photon and proton therapy cohorts. This model complements the new American Society for Radiation Oncology clinical practice guidelines and could support value-driven integration of proton therapy into the management of HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ibrahim Chamseddine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Yejin Kim
- Korean Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, South Korea
| | - Brian De
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Issam El Naqa
- Department of Machine Learning, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida
| | - Dan G Duda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - John A Wolfgang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jennifer Pursley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Clemens Grassberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Overman MJ, Yothers G, Jacobs SA, Sanoff HK, Cohen DJ, Guthrie KA, Henry NL, Ganz PA, Kopetz S, Lucas PC, Blanke CD, Hong TS, Wolmark N, Hochster HS, George TJ, Rocha Lima CMSP. NRG-GI004/SWOG-S1610: Colorectal Cancer Metastatic dMMR Immuno-Therapy (COMMIT) study—A randomized phase III study of atezolizumab (atezo) monotherapy versus mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab/atezo in the first-line treatment of patients (pts) with deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) or microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.tps258] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
TPS258 Background: Despite the superiority in progression-free survival (PFS) of inhibition of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway in dMMR/MSI-H as compared to chemotherapy with either anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFr) or anti-epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFr) antibodies in mCRC, more pts had progressive disease as the best response in the anti-PD1 monotherapy arm (29.4% v 12.3%) with mean PFS of 13.7 mos, with ~45% of pts in the immunotherapy arm progressed at 12 mos (KEYNOTE 177). We hypothesize that dMMR/MSI-H mCRC pts may be more effectively treated with the combination of PD-1 pathway blockade and mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab (bev) rather than with anti-PD-1 therapy (atezo) alone. Preclinical work demonstrated synergistic effects between anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF and between oxaliplatin/anti-PD-1 in murine CRC models and phase II data, which showed activity of anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF in chemotherapy refractory colon cancer. A recent randomized trial subgroup analysis of 8 pts with dMMR metastatic colon cancer treated with FOLFOXIRI+bev+atezo, with the first patient having progression ~16 mos (AtezoTRIBE). Additionally, in other solid tumor malignancies, anti-PD1 plus anti-VEGFr (i.e., HCC and RCC) as well as anti-PD1 plus chemotherapy (i.e., gastric and esophageal cancers) combinations are standard first-line treatments. Methods: The redesigned COMMIT study was reactivated on 1/29/2021 as a two-arm prospective phase III open-label trial randomizing (1:1) mCRC dMMR/MSI-H to atezo monotherapy v mFOLFOX6/bev+atezo combination. Assuming our control arm, atezo monotherapy (48% PFS at 24 mos as assessed by site investigator), we have 80% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.6 (equivalent to 64.4% PFS at 24 mos) with alpha 0.025 one-sided. Stratification factors include BRAFV600E status, metastatic site, and prior adjuvant CRC therapy. Secondary endpoints include OS, objective response rate, safety profile, disease control rate, and duration of response. Health-related quality of life is an exploratory objective. Archived tumor tissue and blood samples will be collected for correlative studies. Key inclusion criteria are: mCRC without prior chemotherapy for advanced disease; dMMR tumor determined by local CLIA-certified IHC assay (MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2) or MSI-H by local CLIA-certified PCR or NGS panel; and measurable disease per RECIST. Enrollment actively continues to the target accrual of 211 patients randomized between the two immunotherapy arms. Clinical trial: NCT02997228. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, -180888, UG1CA189867, U24CA196067; Genentech, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT05080673 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J. Overman
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and SWOG, Houston, TX
| | - Greg Yothers
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The University of Pittsburgh Department of Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Samuel A. Jacobs
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Hanna Kelly Sanoff
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Alliance, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Deirdre Jill Cohen
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and ECOG-ACRIN, New York, NY
| | - Katherine A Guthrie
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Norah Lynn Henry
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School and SWOG, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Patricia A. Ganz
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at UCLA, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Scott Kopetz
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Peter C. Lucas
- NRG Oncology, and Department of Pathology; UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Charles David Blanke
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and OHSU School of Medicine Knight Cancer Institute, and SWOG chair, Portland, OR
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center Department of Radiation/Oncology, Boston, MA
| | - Norman Wolmark
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Howard S. Hochster
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Thomas J. George
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The University of Florida Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, FL
| | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Morris VK, Yothers G, Kopetz S, Jacobs SA, Lucas PC, Iqbal A, Boland PM, Deming DA, Scott AJ, Lim HJ, Hong TS, Wolmark N, George TJ. Phase II/III study of circulating tumor DNA as a predictive biomarker in adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage II colon cancer: NRG-GI005 (COBRA). J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.tps259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
TPS259 Background: Detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) shed into the bloodstream represents a highly specific and sensitive approach for identifying microscopic or residual tumor cells after surgical resection. For patients (pts) with colon cancer (CC), the detection of ctDNA is associated with persistent disease after resection and outperforms traditional clinical and pathological features in prognosticating risk for recurrence. However, for pts with stage II CC, there are currently no validated biomarkers predicting benefit in identifying pts whose residual disease cancer be cleared by adjuvant chemotherapy. We hypothesize that for pts whose stage II colon cancer has been resected and who have no traditional high-risk features, a positive ctDNA status may identify those who will benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: In this prospective phase II/III clinical trial, pts (N=1,408) with resected stage II CC without traditional high-risk features and whom the evaluating oncologist deems suitable for active surveillance (i.e., not needing adjuvant chemotherapy) will be randomized 1:1 into 2 arms: standard-of-care/observation (Arm A), or prospective testing for ctDNA (Arm B). Postoperative blood will be analyzed for ctDNA with the Guardant Reveal assay, covering CC-relevant mutations and CC-specific methylation profiling. Pts in Arm B with ctDNA detected will be treated with 6 months of adjuvant (FOLFOX) chemotherapy. For all pts in Arm A, ctDNA status will be analyzed retrospectively at the time of endpoint analysis. The primary endpoints are clearance of ctDNA with adjuvant chemotherapy (phase II) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for “ctDNA-detected” pts treated with or without adjuvant chemotherapy (phase III). Secondary endpoints will include time-to-event outcomes (OS, RFS, TTR) by ctDNA marker status and treatment, prevalence of detectable ctDNA in stage II CC, and rates of compliance with assigned intervention. Archived normal and matched tumor and blood samples will be collected for exploratory correlative research. Enrollment continues across North America to the 540-patient phase II endpoint. Support: U10CA180868, -180822; UG1CA189867; GuardantHealth. Clinical trial information: NCT04068103 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Van K. Morris
- NRG Oncology, and University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Greg Yothers
- NRG Oncology, and The University of Pittsburgh Department of Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Scott Kopetz
- NRG Oncology, and University of Texax MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Peter C. Lucas
- NRG Oncology, and Department of Pathology; UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Atif Iqbal
- NRG Oncology, and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
| | - Patrick M Boland
- NRG Oncology, and Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, and Alliance, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Dustin A. Deming
- NRG Oncology, and University of Wisconsin, and ECOG-ACRIN, Madison, WI
| | - Aaron James Scott
- NRG Oncology, and University of Arizona Cancer Center, and SWOG, Tucson, AZ
| | - Howard John Lim
- BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- NRG Oncology, and Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Norman Wolmark
- NRG Oncology, and The UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Thomas J. George
- NRG Oncology and The University of Florida Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Dawson LA, Winter KA, Knox JJ, Zhu AX, Krishnan S, Guha C, Kachnic LA, Gillin M, Hong TS, Craig T, Hosni A, Chen EX, Noonan AM, Koay EJ, Sinha R, Lock M, Ohri N, Dorth JA, Moughan J, Crane CH. NRG/RTOG 1112: Randomized phase III study of sorafenib vs. stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) followed by sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
489 Background: To determine if SBRT followed by sorafenib (SBRT/S) improves overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and quality of life (QOL) vs. sorafenib alone (S), in patients (pts) with HCC. Methods: Eligible pts had new or recurrent HCC, unsuitable for surgery, ablation or TACE, with Zubrod performance status (PS) 0-2, Child-Pugh (CP) A, BCLC stage B or C, ≤ 5 HCCs, sum of hepatic HCCs ≤ 20 cm, and distant metastases ≤ 3 cm. Pts were randomized 1:1 to S 400 mg BID vs. SBRT (27.5-50 Gy in 5 fractions) followed by S 200 mg BID, increased to 400 mg BID after 28 days. Primary endpoint was OS; reported secondary endpoints - PFS, adverse events (AEs - CTCAEv4), and QOL (improvement in FACT-Hep score by ≥ 5 points from baseline to 6 months). Planned sample size was 292 pts (238 OS events, HR=0.72, 80% power, 1-sided α=0.05). Accrual closed early, due to a change in HCC standard of care. Statistics were amended to report as of 7/1/2022, projecting 155 OS events, with 65% power and the same α. OS and PFS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and arms compared using log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze treatment effect. Secondary endpoints were tested with 2-sided α=0.05. Results: Of 193 pts accrued from April 2013 to March 2021 from 23 sites, 177 eligible pts were randomized to S (n=92) vs. SBRT/S (n=85). Median age was 66 yrs (27-84); 41% had Hep. C; 19% had Hep. B or B/C. 82% were BCLC stage C. 74% had macrovascular invasion (MVI), 63% with VP3 or VP4 MVI. 4% had metastases. Median sum of max diameter of HCCs was 8.2 cm for S and 6.7 cm for SBRT/S; 40% had a single HCC. Median follow-up for all and alive pts was 13.2 and 33.7 mo. 22% of S pts received SBRT after discontinuing S. With 153 OS events, median OS was improved from 12.3 mo. (90% CI 10.6, 14.3) with S to 15.8 mo. (90% CI 11.4-19.2) with SBRT/S (HR=0.77, 1-sided p=0.0554). After adjusting for PS, M stage, CP A5 vs. 6, and degree of MVI, OS was statistically significantly improved for SBRT/S (HR=0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.99, 2-sided Cox p=0.042). Median PFS was improved from 5.5 mo. (95% CI 3.4-6.3) with S to 9.2 months (95% CI 7.5-11.9) with SBRT/S (HR=0.55, 95% CI 0.40-0.75, 2-sided p=0.0001). 8 grade (G) 3+ bleeds were seen: 5 in S arm (1 G3 variceal, 2 G3 upper GI, 1 G3 hepatic, and 1 G4 abdominal) and 3 post SBRT/S (2 G3 upper GI, 1 G3 lower GI). Treatment-related G3+ AEs were not significantly different (S - 42%; SBRT/S - 47%; p=0.52), with 3 G5 AEs (S - 1 hepatic failure, 1 death NOS; SBRT/S - 1 lung infection). 83 (47%) pts consented to QoL. Of 20 S and 17 SBRT/S pts with QoL assessments at baseline and 6 months, 10% on S improved in FACT-Hep score vs 35% on SBRT/S. Conclusions: Compared to S alone, SBRT improved OS & PFS in patients with HCC, with no observed increase in AEs, and a strong suggestion for QOL benefit at 6 months. Supported by U10CA180868 (NRG Onc. Op., U10CA180822 (NRG Onc. SDMC), UG1CA189867 (NCORP), and U24CA180803 (IROC) from the NCI. Clinical trial information: NCT01730937 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jennifer J. Knox
- Princess Margaret - University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Chandan Guha
- Montefiore Einstein Center for Cancer Care, Bronx, NY
| | | | - Michael Gillin
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Timothy Craig
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ali Hosni
- Princess Margaret - University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Anne M. Noonan
- James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH
| | - Eugene Jon Koay
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Rishi Sinha
- Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Michael Lock
- London Regional Cancer Centre, London, ON, Canada
| | - Nitin Ohri
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY
| | - Jennifer Anne Dorth
- University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, and Case Western Reserve University Comprehensive Cancer Center LAPS, Cleveland, OH
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Hong TS, Yeap BY, Horick NK, Wo JYL, Weekes CD, Allen JN, Qadan M, Oberstein PE, Jain RK, Blaszkowsky LS, Wolpin BM, Laheru DA, Messersmith WA, Ly L, Drapek LC, Ting DT, Burkhart RA, Fernandez-del Castillo C, Kimmelman A, Ryan DP. A multicenter, randomized phase II study of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) with FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and SBRT, with or without losartan (L) and nivolumab (N) in borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.719] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
719 Background: Outcomes in BR and LA PDAC remain historically poor, in part due to low rates of R0 resection. A prior phase II study demonstrated that losartan (L) as a TGF-beta inhibitor combined with FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and radiation in LA PDAC led to a 61% R0 resection rate. Additionally, prior phase II studies suggest potential synergy with SBRT and nivolumab (N) in PDAC. We conducted a multi-center, randomized phase II trial to evaluate the effect of L and L+N in combination with TNT using FFX and SBRT. Methods: Patients with BR or LA PDAC by NCCN criteria, pathologically confirmed, ACE/ARB naïve, were randomized to TNT with FFX and SBRT (Arm 1), TNT + L (Arm 2), and TNT+L+N (Arm 3), stratified by BR/LA. Patients already on an ACE or ARB were enrolled on an exploratory arm of TNT+N (Arm 4) and will be reported separately. TNT consisted of FFX x 8 followed by SBRT (6.6 Gy x 5). L was given at 50 mg qd throughout TNT and for 6 mo after surgery. N was given at 240 mg flat dosing q2 wks concurrent with SBRT and for 12 doses postoperatively. All patients were recommended for surgical exploration after TNT. The study was designed to compare the R0 resection rate on each of Arms 2 and 3 independently versus Arm 1 at a one-sided 0.10 level. Secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, and pCR rates and analyzed using two-sided tests with Arm 1 as the control arm. Intent-to-treat analysis was based on eligible patients who started therapy on protocol. Results: Patients with BR or LA PDAC by NCCN criteria, pathologically confirmed, ACE/ARB naïve, were randomized to TNT with FFX and SBRT (Arm 1), TNT + L (Arm 2), and TNT+L+N (Arm 3), stratified by BR/LA. Patients already on an ACE or ARB were enrolled on an exploratory arm of TNT+N (Arm 4) and will be reported separately. TNT consisted of FFX x 8 followed by SBRT (6.6 Gy x 5). L was given at 50 mg qd throughout TNT and for 6 mo after surgery. N was given at 240 mg flat dosing q2 wks concurrent with SBRT and for 12 doses postoperatively. All patients were recommended for surgical exploration after TNT. The study was designed to compare the R0 resection rate on each of Arms 2 and 3 independently versus Arm 1 at a one-sided 0.10 level. Secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, and pCR rates and analyzed using two-sided tests with Arm 1 as the control arm. Intent-to-treat analysis was based on eligible patients who started therapy on protocol. Conclusions: We did not observe effects of L and L+N on the R0 resection rate, PFS, OS, and pCR rate when added to TNT with FFX and SBRT for BR or LA PDAC. The lack of differences may reflect heterogeneity in surgical opinion as the decision for proceeding to surgery following TNT tends to be highly variable in a population with historically low resection rates. Clinical trial information: NCT03563248 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodore S. Hong
- NRG Oncology and Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Brian M. Wolpin
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Boston, MA
| | - Daniel A. Laheru
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center and Bloomberg-Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD
| | | | - Leilana Ly
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | | | - Richard A. Burkhart
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
George TJ, Yothers G, Rahma OE, Hong TS, Russell MM, You YN, Parker W, Jacobs SA, Lucas PC, Colangelo LH, Gollub MJ, Hall WA, Kachnic LA, Bajaj M, Gross HM, Peterson RA, Dorth JA, Vijayvergia N, Wolmark N. Long-term results from NRG-GI002: A phase II clinical trial platform using total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
7 Background: This NCTN multi-arm randomized phase II modular clinical trial platform utilizes TNT with parallel experimental arms (EAs) in LARC. EAs are not intended for direct comparison, but rather to concurrently randomized control arm (CA) patients. Primary endpoint (EP) and available secondary EPs (from EA1 using veliparib [V], PARPi; and EA2 using pembrolizumab [P], anti-PD-1) have been previously reported. We present long-term outcomes of all pts enrolled (NCT02921256). Methods: Stage II/III pts with MSS LARC (with any ONE of the following: distal location [cT3-4 ≤5cm from anal verge, any N]; bulky [any cT4 or tumor within 3mm of mesorectal fascia]; high risk for metastatic disease [cN2]; or not a sphincter-sparing surgery [SSS] candidate) were randomized to CA (neoadjuvant FOLFOX [x 4mo] → chemoRT [capecitabine with 50.4Gy] → surgery 8-12 wks later). EA1 added V (400mg PO BID) and EA2 added P (200mg IV Q3 wks x 6 doses) each concurrent with chemoRT. Primary EP: 4-point reduction in Neoadjuvant Rectal Cancer (NAR) score with a one-sided α=0.10, 80% power. NAR compared by linear model controlling for clinical T4 at entry (Y/N). Secondary EPs: OS, DFS. p-values are two-sided. Results: From 10/2016-2/2018, 178 pts were randomized (88 CA, 90 EA1). From 8/2018-5/2019, 185 pts were randomized (95 CA, 90 EA2). Baseline characteristics were previously reported. Median follow-up is 3.50 yrs for the 1st comparison. Median follow-up is 3.15 yrs for the 2nd comparison. Updated primary and long-term secondary outcomes are in the table. Conclusions: With longer follow-up, addition of V to TNT provided no significant differences in the NAR score or 3yr outcomes. The addition of P to TNT was associated with a statistically significant improvement in 3yr OS, but not DFS. Correlative molecular analyses are ongoing. Support: U10CA180868, -180822; UG1-189867; U24-196067; AbbVie; Merck. Clinical trial information: NCT02921256 . [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Greg Yothers
- University of Pittsburgh Department of Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | - Theodore S. Hong
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Marcia McGory Russell
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA; VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Y. Nancy You
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - William Parker
- McGill University Health Centre, Medical Physics Unit, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | - Peter C. Lucas
- UMPC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | - Marc J Gollub
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | | | - Madhuri Bajaj
- Illinois CancerCare, P.C. / Hartland NCORP, Peoria, IL
| | - Howard M. Gross
- Dayon NCI Community Oncology Research Program, Englewood, OH
| | | | - Jennifer Anne Dorth
- University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, and Case Western Reserve University Comprehensive Cancer Center LAPS, Cleveland, OH
| | | | - Norman Wolmark
- UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Lieu CH, Lin Y, Kopetz S, Jacobs SA, Lucas PC, Sahin IH, Deming DA, Philip PA, Hong TS, Rojas-Khalil Y, Loree JM, Wolmark N, Yothers G, George TJ, Dasari A. NRG GI008: Colon adjuvant chemotherapy based on evaluation of residual disease (CIRCULATE-US). J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.tps260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
TPS260 Background: Currently, there are no biomarkers validated prospectively in randomized studies for resected colon cancer (CC) to determine need for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC). However, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represents a highly specific and sensitive approach (especially with serial monitoring) for identifying minimal/molecular residual disease (MRD) post-surgery in CC patients (pts), and may outperform traditional clinical and pathological features in prognosticating risk for recurrence. CC pts who do not have detectable ctDNA (ctDNA-) are at a much lower risk of recurrence and may be spared the toxicities associated with AC. Furthermore, for CC pts with detectable ctDNA (ctDNA+) who are at a very high risk of recurrence, the optimal AC regimen has not been established. We hypothesize that for pts whose CC has been resected, ctDNA status may be used to risk-stratify for making decisions about AC. Methods: In this prospective phase II/III trial, up to 1,912 pts with resected stage III A, B (all pts) and stage II, IIIC (ctDNA+ only) CC will be enrolled. Based on the post-operative ctDNA status using personalized and tumor-informed assay (Signatera™, bespoke assay), those who are ctDNA- (Cohort A) will be randomized to immediate AC with fluoropyrimidine (FP) + oxaliplatin (Ox) for 3-6 mos per established guidelines vs . serial ctDNA monitoring. Patients who are ctDNA+ post-operatively or with serial monitoring (Cohort B) will be randomized to FP+Ox vs . more intensive AC with addition of irinotecan (I) for 6 mos. The primary endpoints for Cohort A are time to ctDNA+ status (phase II) and disease-free survival (DFS) (phase III) in the immediate vs . delayed AC arms. The primary endpoint for Cohort B is DFS in the FP+Ox vs FP+Ox+I arms for both phase II and phase III portions of the trial. Secondary endpoints include prevalence of detectable ctDNA post-operatively, time-to-event outcomes (overall survival and time to recurrence) by ctDNA status, and the assessment of compliance to adjuvant therapy. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, as well as post-operative plus serial matched/normal blood samples, will be collected for exploratory correlative research. Active enrollment across the NCTN started in June, 2022. Support: U10-CA-180868, -180822; UG1CA-189867; Natera, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT05174169 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Yan Lin
- NRG Oncology SDMC, and The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Scott Kopetz
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Peter C. Lucas
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Dept of Pathology, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Ibrahim Halil Sahin
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and University of Pittsburgh Medical Center-Hillman Cancer Center University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | - Philip Agop Philip
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and Wayne State University School of Medicine, Henry Ford Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center Department of Radiation/Oncology, Boston, MA
| | | | - Jonathan M. Loree
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and BCCA-Vancouver Cancer Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Norman Wolmark
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Greg Yothers
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The University of Pittsburgh Department of Biostatistics, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Thomas J. George
- NRG Oncology and The University of Florida Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, FL
| | - Arvind Dasari
- NSABP/NRG Oncology and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Morris VK, Kennedy EB, Baxter NN, Benson AB, Cercek A, Cho M, Ciombor KK, Cremolini C, Davis A, Deming DA, Fakih MG, Gholami S, Hong TS, Jaiyesimi I, Klute K, Lieu C, Sanoff H, Strickler JH, White S, Willis JA, Eng C. Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:678-700. [PMID: 36252154 PMCID: PMC10506310 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.01690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 99] [Impact Index Per Article: 99.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/10/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS Five systematic reviews and 10 randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS Doublet chemotherapy should be offered, or triplet therapy may be offered to patients with previously untreated, initially unresectable mCRC, on the basis of included studies of chemotherapy in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. In the first-line setting, pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mCRC and microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair tumors; chemotherapy and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair left-sided treatment-naive RAS wild-type mCRC; chemotherapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair RAS wild-type right-sided mCRC. Encorafenib plus cetuximab is recommended for patients with previously treated BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC that has progressed after at least one previous line of therapy. Cytoreductive surgery plus systemic chemotherapy may be recommended for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases; however, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not recommended. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may be recommended following systemic therapy for patients with oligometastases of the liver who are not considered candidates for resection. Selective internal radiation therapy is not routinely recommended for patients with unilobar or bilobar metastases of the liver. Perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone should be offered to patients with mCRC who are candidates for potentially curative resection of liver metastases. Multidisciplinary team management and shared decision making are recommended. Qualifying statements with further details related to implementation of guideline recommendations are also included.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Van K Morris
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Nancy N Baxter
- Melbourne School of Population and Public Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Al B Benson
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
| | - Andrea Cercek
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Marwan G Fakih
- City of Hope Helford Clinical Research Hospital, Duarte, CA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Jason A Willis
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Cathy Eng
- Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Roberts HJ, Hong TS. Proton versus photon radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current data and technical considerations. J Radiosurg SBRT 2023; 9:9-16. [PMID: 38029005 PMCID: PMC10681146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2023] [Accepted: 07/15/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023]
Abstract
Radiation is an accepted standard of care for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and while photon radiation is the current standard, the use of proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) is an active area of investigation given its ability to better spare uninvolved liver. Patients with HCC typically have background liver disease and many patients die of their underlying liver function in the absence of tumor progression. Early photon-based series showed promising rates of local control however the risk of non-classic radiation induced liver disease (RILD) remains relatively high and may be associated with poorer outcomes. There is a theoretical advantage to PBT in its ability to spare uninvolved liver parenchyma and potentially allow for further dose escalation. There are technical considerations for image guidance, respiratory motion management, and conformality to both PBT and photon radiotherapy that are critical to optimizing each modality. Whether the use of PBT affects clinical outcomes is the subject of the ongoing NRG Oncology GI003 trial, that randomizes patients with HCC to protons or photons. This article reviews the technical differences and literature on individual outcomes for PBT and photon radiation as well as the available comparative data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah J Roberts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St., Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St., Boston, MA 02114, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Boucher Y, Posada JM, Subudhi S, Rosario SR, Gu L, Kumar AS, Kumra H, Mino-Kenudson M, Talele NP, Duda DG, Fukumura D, Wo JY, Clark JW, Ryan DP, Castillo CFD, Hong TS, Pittet MJ, Jain RK. Abstract C043: Addition of losartan to FOLFORINOX and chemoradiation downregulates pro-invasion and immunosuppression-associated genes in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res 2022. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.panca22-c043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose: Adding losartan to FOLFIRINOX (FFX) chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (CRT) resulted in 61% R0 surgical resection in our phase II trial in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Here we identify potential mechanisms of benefit by assessing the effects of neoadjuvant losartan+FFX+CRT versus FFX+CRT on the stromal tumor microenvironment. Experimental Design: We performed a gene expression analysis of RNA extracted from pancreatic cancer tissue sections and immunofluorescence for cancer cells and immune cells using archived surgical samples from patients treated with losartan+FFX+CRT (NCT01591733), FFX+CRT (NCT01591733) or surgery upfront, without any neoadjuvant therapy. We then assessed whether certain gene sets could stratify the overall survival of patients. Results: Neoadjuvant losartan+FFX+CRT and FFX+CRT increased the expression of genes linked to vascular normalization, transendothelial migration of leukocytes, T cell activation and cytolytic activity, and dendritic cell related genes versus no neoadjuvant treatment. In comparison to FFX+CRT, losartan+FFX+CRT downregulated pro-invasion, immunosuppression, and M2 macrophages related genes, and upregulated genes associated with tumor suppression, including the p53 pathway. Furthermore, immunostaining revealed significantly less residual disease in lesions treated with losartan+FFX+CRT versus FFX+CRT. Losartan+FFX+CRT also reduced CD4+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in pancreatic cancer lesions with a complete/near complete response. Overall survival was associated with dendritic cell and antigen presentation genes for patients treated with FFX+CRT, and with immunosuppression and invasion genes or dendritic cell- and blood vessel-related genes for those treated with losartan+FFX+CRT. Conclusions: Adding losartan to FFX+CRT reduced pro-invasion and immunosuppression related genes, which were associated with improved treatment outcomes in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer.
Citation Format: Yves Boucher, Jessica M. Posada, Sonu Subudhi, Spencer R. Rosario, Liqun Gu, Ashwin S. Kumar, Heena Kumra, Mari Mino-Kenudson, Nilesh P. Talele, Dan G. Duda, Dai Fukumura, Jennifer Y. Wo, Jeffrey W. Clark, David P. Ryan, Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo, Theodore S. Hong, Mikael J. Pittet, Rakesh K. Jain. Addition of losartan to FOLFORINOX and chemoradiation downregulates pro-invasion and immunosuppression-associated genes in locally advanced pancreatic cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer; 2022 Sep 13-16; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(22 Suppl):Abstract nr C043.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Liqun Gu
- 1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA,
| | | | - Heena Kumra
- 1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA,
| | | | | | - Dan G. Duda
- 1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Pankaj A, Raabe MJ, Patel B, Lang ER, Kocher J, Xu KH, Nieman LT, Kimmelman AC, Ryan DP, Hong TS, Hwang WL, Aryee M, Ting DT. Abstract PR004: Characterizing the effects of neoadjuvant therapy in PDAC. Cancer Res 2022. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.panca22-pr004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma lethality can be attributed to a combination of rapid metastatic dissemination and intrinsic resistance to conventional therapies. Our prior studies using single cell RNA-seq in pancreatic circulating tumor cells (CTCs) revealed that these “seeds of metastasis” had a biphenotypic state of both epithelial and mesenchymal features. This suggested that CTCs are highly plastic cells that exist in an intermediate state along epithelial (E) to mesenchymal (M) transition (EMT). Analysis of CTC markers in primary PDAC tumors revealed that this subpopulation of cancer cells was concentrated at the interface of tumor cells and stromal cancer associated fibroblasts (CAFs). To evaluate the contribution of CAFs in PDAC EMT plasticity, we utilized patient derived PDAC-CAF co-culture preclinical models demonstrating that PDAC EMT heterogeneity was modulated by the density of CAFs and partially driven by TGF-b secretion. Moreover, analysis of patient derived PDAC tumor spheres treated with FOLFIRINOX (FFX) demonstrated selection or induction of EMT changes that were also found in patient tumors that were resected after neoadjuvant FFX. Altogether, our collective work along with others demonstrates the importance of EMT plasticity in PDAC cell metastatic propensity and the ability to resist cytotoxic chemotherapy. A multi-institutional randomized Phase II trial supported by SU2C-Lustgarten Foundation evaluating the role of the TGF-b modulating activities of losartan on locally advanced PDAC response to chemotherapy and suppression of metastatic dissemination has neared completion. This 3 arm (n=40 per arm) trial of neoadjuvant FFX, FFX + losartan, or FFX+ losartan + nivolumab (anti-PD1). Here, we have performed EMT RNA in situ hybridization in all post-treatment resection specimens to determine if there is a difference in EMT proportions between the different arms of the study. As an orthogonal unbiased approach, we have utilized the NanoString GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiler whole transcriptome assay (18,000+ protein coding genes) on each of the resection specimens with analysis of the tumor cells, CAFs, and immune cell separately for multiple regions of interest in these specimens. This provides deeper molecular insight of the PDAC tumor cells that resisted neoadjuvant therapy, the changes in the surrounding CAFs, and the modulation of immune infiltrates that might differ between each arm of the study. We anticipate the results of the trial will be completed before the conference and initial correlative analysis of spatial transcriptomics and RNA-ISH will be presented.
Citation Format: Amaya Pankaj, Michael J. Raabe, Bidish Patel, Evan R. Lang, Joshua Kocher, Katherine H. Xu, Linda T. Nieman, Alec C. Kimmelman, David P. Ryan, Theodore S. Hong, William L. Hwang, Martin Aryee, David T. Ting. Characterizing the effects of neoadjuvant therapy in PDAC [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer; 2022 Sep 13-16; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(22 Suppl):Abstract nr PR004.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amaya Pankaj
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Michael J. Raabe
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Bidish Patel
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Evan R. Lang
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Joshua Kocher
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Katherine H. Xu
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Linda T. Nieman
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Alec C. Kimmelman
- 2Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY,
| | - David P. Ryan
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - William L. Hwang
- 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| | - Martin Aryee
- 4Department of Data Sciences, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | - David T. Ting
- 1Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Hwang WL, Su J, Guo JA, Shiau C, Barth JL, Hoffman HI, Divakar P, Reeves JW, Miller E, Cervantes-Jaramillo G, Freed-Pastor W, Funes V, Wo JY, Hong TS, Castillo CFD, Zheng L, Aguirre AJ, Ting DT, Mino-Kenudson M, Jacks T. Abstract C052: Identifying mediators of perineural invasion in pancreatic cancer using spatial transcriptomics. Cancer Res 2022. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.panca22-c052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Intratumoral nerves play important and versatile roles in cancer initiation, progression, recurrence, treatment-resistance, metastasis, morbidity, and mortality for many malignancies but the diverse molecular mechanisms underlying tumor-nerve crosstalk remain largely unknown. One of the differentiating hallmarks of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an exceptionally high frequency of perineural invasion (PNI), a histopathologic manifestation of tumor-nerve crosstalk whereby cancer cells recruit, migrate towards, and envelop or invade peripheral nerves. Evidence for some neurochemicals/neurotrophins involved in PNI have been uncovered, but most of the underlying work was limited by a lack of cell-type specificity, spatial context, and fragmented focus on individual pathways. To address these shortcomings, we set out to comprehensively identify cell-type specific genes spatially linked to PNI in patient tumors and then dissect the functional roles of these genes through live imaging of dorsal root ganglia (DRG) sensory neurons incubated in conditioned media from cancer cell organoids overexpressing candidate genes via CRISPR activation (CRISPRa). First, we performed whole transcriptome digital spatial profiling (NanoString GeoMx) on twelve custom tissue microarrays (n=288 cores) derived from intratumorally-matched malignant regions with and without PNI in primary resected PDAC specimens (n=31 patients). Differential gene expression (DE) analysis (FDR < 0.001) for PNI demonstrated that for malignant cells there were 271 enriched and 65 depleted genes, and for fibroblasts there were 16 enriched and 27 depleted genes. We further evaluated associations between PNI and expression of malignant subtypes previously identified from single-nucleus RNA-seq applied to 43 primary resected PDAC specimens. We found that malignant cells engaged in PNI were enriched in the mesenchymal, basaloid and neural-like progenitor (NRP) subtypes and depleted in the classical subtype. To test these associations functionally, we generated isogenic murine organoid lines (KrasG12D/+;Trp53FL/FL;R26-dCas9-VPR) overexpressing subtype-driving transcription factors and collected conditioned media. DRG sensory neurons demonstrate enhanced and suppressed growth kinetics when grown in NRP and classical conditioned media, respectively; mesenchymal and basal-like conditioned media do not appear to influence growth kinetics. These results suggest that while mesenchymal, basaloid, and NRP cells likely all play a role in cancer cell invasion of nerves, NRP cells may have an additional role in tumor-nerve tropism. Additional experiments exploring the functional effects of the top enriched and depleted genes from the DE analysis are ongoing. We anticipate that this study will provide a high-resolution understanding of critical intercellular interactions in the PDAC tumor microenvironment that facilitate PNI and tumor-nerve crosstalk more broadly to guide novel therapeutic strategies.
Citation Format: William L. Hwang, Jennifer Su, Jimmy A. Guo, Carina Shiau, Jaimie L. Barth, Hannah I. Hoffman, Prajan Divakar, Jason W. Reeves, Eric Miller, Grissel Cervantes-Jaramillo, William Freed-Pastor, Vanessa Funes, Jennifer Y. Wo, Theodore S. Hong, Carlos Fernandez-del Castillo, Lei Zheng, Andrew J. Aguirre, David T. Ting, Mari Mino-Kenudson, Tyler Jacks. Identifying mediators of perineural invasion in pancreatic cancer using spatial transcriptomics [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer; 2022 Sep 13-16; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(22 Suppl):Abstract nr C052.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jennifer Su
- 2Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Lei Zheng
- 6Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD,
| | | | | | | | - Tyler Jacks
- 2Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Chawla A, Qadan M, Castillo CFD, Wo JY, Allen JN, Clark JW, Murphy JE, Catalano OA, Ryan DP, Ting DT, Deshpande V, Weekes CD, Parikh A, Lillemoe KD, Hong TS, Ferrone CR. Prospective Phase II Trials Validate the Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Pattern of Recurrence in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 2022; 276:e502-e509. [PMID: 33086310 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004585] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to characterize the patterns of first recurrence after curative-intent resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA We evaluated the first site of recurrence after neoadjuvant treatment as locoregional (LR) or distant metastasis (DM). To validate our findings, we evaluated the pattern from 2 phase II clinical trials evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in PDAC. METHODS We identified site of first recurrence from a retrospective cohort of patients from 2011 to 2017 treated with NAC followed by chemoradiation and then an operation or an operation first followed by adjuvant therapy, and 2 separate prospective cohorts of patients derived from 2 phase II clinical trials evaluating patients treated with NAC in borderline-resectable and locally advanced PDAC. RESULTS In the retrospective cohorts, 160 out of 285 patients (56.1%) recurred after a median disease-free survival (mDFS) of 17.2 months. The pattern of recurrence was DM in 81.9% of patients, versus LR in 11.1%. This pattern was consistent in patients treated with upfront resection and adjuvant chemotherapy (DM 83.0%, LR 16.9%) regardless of margin-involvement (DM 80.1%, LR 19.4%). The use of NAC did not alter pattern of recurrence; 81.7% had DM and 18.3% had LR. This pattern also remained consistent regardless of margin-involvement (DM 94.1%, LR 5.9%). In the Phase II borderline-resectable trial (NCI# 01591733) cohort of 32 patients, the mDFS was 34.2 months. Pattern of recurrence remained predominantly DM (88.9%) versus LR (11.1%). In the Phase II locally-advanced trial (NCI# 01821729) cohort of 34 patients, the mDFS was 30.7 months. Although there was a higher rate of local recurrence in this cohort, pattern of first recurrence remained predominantly DM (66.6%) versus LR (33.3%) and remained consistent independent of margin-status. CONCLUSIONS The pattern of recurrence in PDAC is predominantly DM rather than LR, and is consistent regardless of the use of NAC and margin involvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akhil Chawla
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Northwestern Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jill N Allen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jeffrey W Clark
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Janet E Murphy
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Onofrio A Catalano
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David P Ryan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David T Ting
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Vikram Deshpande
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Colin D Weekes
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Aparna Parikh
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Keith D Lillemoe
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Cristina R Ferrone
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Nipp RD, Gaufberg E, Vyas C, Azoba C, Qian CL, Jaggers J, Weekes CD, Allen JN, Roeland EJ, Parikh AR, Miller L, Wo JY, Smith MH, Brown PMC, Shulman E, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Kimmelman AC, Ting D, Hong TS, Greer JA, Ryan DP, Temel JS, El-Jawahri A. Supportive Oncology Care at Home Intervention for Patients With Pancreatic Cancer. JCO Oncol Pract 2022; 18:e1587-e1593. [PMID: 35830625 DOI: 10.1200/op.22.00088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Revised: 03/22/2022] [Accepted: 06/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to determine the feasibility of delivering a Supportive Oncology Care at Home intervention among patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS We prospectively enrolled patients with pancreatic cancer from a parent trial of neoadjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRINOX). The intervention entailed (1) remote monitoring of patient-reported symptoms, vital signs, and body weight; (2) a hospital-at-home care model; and (3) structured communication with the oncology team. We defined the intervention as feasible if ≥ 60% of patients enrolled in the study and ≥ 60% completed the daily assessments within the first 2-weeks of enrollment. We determined rates of treatment delays, urgent clinic visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations among those who did (n = 20) and did not (n = 24) receive Supportive Oncology Care at Home from the parent trial. RESULTS From January 2019 to September 2020, we enrolled 80.8% (21/26) of potentially eligible patients. One patient became ineligible following consent because of moving out of state, resulting in 20 participants (median age = 67 years). In the first 2 weeks of enrollment, 65.0% of participants completed all daily assessments. Overall, patients reported 96.1% of daily symptoms, 96.1% of daily vital signs, and 92.5% of weekly body weights. Patients receiving the intervention had lower rates of treatment delays (55.0% v 75.0%), urgent clinic visits (10.0% v 25.0%), and emergency department visits/hospitalizations (45.0% v 62.5%) compared with those not receiving the intervention from the same parent trial. CONCLUSION Findings demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of a Supportive Oncology Care at Home intervention. Future work will investigate the efficacy of this intervention for decreasing health care use and improving patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan D Nipp
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Eva Gaufberg
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Charu Vyas
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Chinenye Azoba
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Carolyn L Qian
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jordon Jaggers
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Colin D Weekes
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jill N Allen
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Eric J Roeland
- Division of Hematology/Medical Oncology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR
| | - Aparna R Parikh
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Laurie Miller
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | | | - Alec C Kimmelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - David Ting
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Joseph A Greer
- Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - David P Ryan
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jennifer S Temel
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Areej El-Jawahri
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Herman JM, Stricker CT, Myers S, Korah B, Narang A, Hacker-Prietz A, Deperalta D, Hong TS, Dullard A, Lowy A, Ejaz A, Tempero MA, Fisher GA, Coveler AL, King D, Pinto D, Meguid C, Aguilera TA, Hoos WA, Margolis P. Building a learning network to accelerate improvement in pancreas cancer care and outcomes: Canopy Cancer Collective. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.28_suppl.368] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
368 Background: Pancreas cancer (PC) survival is among the lowest of all malignancies. While limited advances in treatment are a major driver of this reality, ample opportunity exists to improve outcomes by reducing care variation, providingcoordinated, comprehensive care, and accelerating research. Learning health networks (LHNs) improve outcomes in pediatric diseases through such mechanisms, yet are not widely implemented in adult care. We aimed to develop, implement, and collect initial outcomes of the first oncology LHN, the Canopy Cancer Collective (CCC). Methods: In 2019, we established CCC to apply to PC the LHN model, including core tenets of continuous quality improvement (QI), data-sharing, empowered interdisciplinary teams and a stakeholder community including individuals with PC, and focus on community-defined improvable “outcomes that matter”. Six care centers were selected to join the LHN, and engaged in a collaborative design process to co-create a set of improvement aims and change ideas. Center team members received training in basic QI methods/tools guided by the IHI Model for Improvement and were coached to apply these to local improvement efforts. LHN infrastructure and technology enabled sharing of new ideas, best practices, and results amongst centers. Eight more centers joined in 2021, and an outcomes database built and implemented. Results generated by this database will inform center-specific and Network-wide improvement efforts and allow the LHN to undertake research. Results: Currently, 14 care centers are active participants in the CCC LHN. Five key outcomes have been defined as key targets, and centers have co-created and tested change ideas organized around key drivers of excellent PC care including proactive, timely care, aligned/prepared multidisciplinary teams, informed, activated patients, and accurate diagnosis and disease classification. 100% of care centers are trained in QI methods and actively testing change ideas. For example, in May 2022, 11 centers reporting on monthly QI activities met on average 4 times to advance QI projects, deploying a mean of 2.9 plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles (range, 0-5) focused on key drivers and outcomes, including reduced time to treatment, increased trial enrollment, assessment of patient experience, and improved data capture. Conclusions: Building a sustainable LHN for PC centers is feasible and has set the stage for improving patient and provider outcomes through iterative community-building, continuous improvement, and sharing of data and multidisciplinary best practices. Results lay the foundation for expansion not only in PC, but translation to other complex malignancies that will benefit from transformative, system-based approaches to outcome improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY
| | | | - Sarah Myers
- Sarah K Myers Consulting LLC, Oconomowoc, WI
| | | | - Amol Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | | | | | | | - Andrew Lowy
- University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | - Aslam Ejaz
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | - George A. Fisher
- Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
| | | | | | - Danielle Pinto
- Division of Surgery, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, New Hyde Park, NY
| | | | | | | | - Peter Margolis
- Cincinnati Children’s Research Foundation, Cincinnati, OH
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Shiau C, Su J, Guo JA, Hong TS, Wo JY, Jagadeesh KA, Hwang WL. Treatment-associated remodeling of the pancreatic cancer endothelium at single-cell resolution. Front Oncol 2022; 12:929950. [PMID: 36185212 PMCID: PMC9524152 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.929950] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Accepted: 08/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most treatment refractory and lethal malignancies. The diversity of endothelial cell (EC) lineages in the tumor microenvironment (TME) impacts the efficacy of antineoplastic therapies, which in turn remodel EC states and distributions. Here, we present a single-cell resolution framework of diverse EC lineages in the PDAC TME in the context of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and losartan. We analyzed a custom single-nucleus RNA-seq dataset derived from 37 primary PDAC specimens (18 untreated, 14 neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX + chemoradiotherapy, 5 neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX + chemoradiotherapy + losartan). A single-nucleus transcriptome analysis of 15,185 EC profiles revealed two state programs (ribosomal, cycling), four lineage programs (capillary, arterial, venous, lymphatic), and one program that did not overlap significantly with prior signatures but was enriched in pathways involved in vasculogenesis, stem-like state, response to wounding and hypoxia, and endothelial-to-mesenchymal transition (reactive EndMT). A bulk transcriptome analysis of two independent cohorts (n = 269 patients) revealed that the lymphatic and reactive EndMT lineage programs were significantly associated with poor clinical outcomes. While losartan and proton therapy were associated with reduced lymphatic ECs, these therapies also correlated with an increase in reactive EndMT. Thus, the development and inclusion of EndMT-inhibiting drugs (e.g., nintedanib) to a neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimen featuring losartan and/or proton therapy may be most effective in depleting both lymphatic and reactive EndMT populations and potentially improving patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carina Shiau
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Jennifer Su
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Jimmy A. Guo
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
- Biological and Biomedical Sciences Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jennifer Y. Wo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Karthik A. Jagadeesh
- Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
- *Correspondence: William L. Hwang, ; Karthik A. Jagadeesh,
| | - William L. Hwang
- Center for Systems Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, United States
- *Correspondence: William L. Hwang, ; Karthik A. Jagadeesh,
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Seppälä TT, Zimmerman JW, Suri R, Zlomke H, Ivey GD, Szabolcs A, Shubert CR, Cameron JL, Burns WR, Lafaro KJ, He J, Wolfgang CL, Zou YS, Zheng L, Tuveson DA, Eshleman JR, Ryan DP, Kimmelman AC, Hong TS, Ting DT, Jaffee EM, Burkhart RA. Precision Medicine in Pancreatic Cancer: Patient-Derived Organoid Pharmacotyping Is a Predictive Biomarker of Clinical Treatment Response. Clin Cancer Res 2022; 28:3296-3307. [PMID: 35363262 PMCID: PMC9357072 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-21-4165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2021] [Revised: 01/24/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Patient-derived organoids (PDO) are a promising technology to support precision medicine initiatives for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PDOs may improve clinical next-generation sequencing (NGS) and enable rapid ex vivo chemotherapeutic screening (pharmacotyping). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN PDOs were derived from tissues obtained during surgical resection and endoscopic biopsies and studied with NGS and pharmacotyping. PDO-specific pharmacotype is assessed prospectively as a predictive biomarker of clinical therapeutic response by leveraging data from a randomized controlled clinical trial. RESULTS Clinical sequencing pipelines often fail to detect PDAC-associated somatic mutations in surgical specimens that demonstrate a good pathologic response to previously administered chemotherapy. Sequencing the PDOs derived from these surgical specimens, after biomass expansion, improves the detection of somatic mutations and enables quantification of copy number variants. The detection of clinically relevant mutations and structural variants is improved following PDO biomass expansion. On clinical trial, PDOs were derived from biopsies of treatment-naïve patients prior to treatment with FOLFIRINOX (FFX). Ex vivo PDO pharmacotyping with FFX components predicted clinical therapeutic response in these patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced PDAC treated in a neoadjuvant or induction paradigm. PDO pharmacotypes suggesting sensitivity to FFX components were associated with longitudinal declines of tumor marker, carbohydrate-antigen 19-9 (CA-19-9), and favorable RECIST imaging response. CONCLUSIONS PDOs established from tissues obtained from patients previously receiving cytotoxic chemotherapies can be accomplished in a clinically certified laboratory. Sequencing PDOs following biomass expansion improves clinical sequencing quality. High in vitro sensitivity to standard-of-care chemotherapeutics predicts good clinical response to systemic chemotherapy in PDAC. See related commentary by Zhang et al., p. 3176.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Toni T. Seppälä
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
- Applied Tumor Genomics Research Program, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Jacquelyn W. Zimmerman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Reecha Suri
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Haley Zlomke
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Gabriel D. Ivey
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Annamaria Szabolcs
- The Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Christopher R Shubert
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - John L. Cameron
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - William R. Burns
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Kelly J Lafaro
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Ying S. Zou
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Pathology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - David A. Tuveson
- Lustgarten Foundation Pancreatic Cancer Research Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA
| | - James R. Eshleman
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Pathology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - David P. Ryan
- The Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alec C. Kimmelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology at New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- The Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - David T. Ting
- The Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Elizabeth M. Jaffee
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Richard A. Burkhart
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Cancer Convergence Institute, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Lustgarten Foundation Pancreatic Cancer Research Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Hwang WL, Jagadeesh KA, Guo JA, Hoffman HI, Yadollahpour P, Reeves JW, Mohan R, Drokhlyansky E, Van Wittenberghe N, Ashenberg O, Farhi SL, Schapiro D, Divakar P, Miller E, Zollinger DR, Eng G, Schenkel JM, Su J, Shiau C, Yu P, Freed-Pastor WA, Abbondanza D, Mehta A, Gould J, Lambden C, Porter CBM, Tsankov A, Dionne D, Waldman J, Cuoco MS, Nguyen L, Delorey T, Phillips D, Barth JL, Kem M, Rodrigues C, Ciprani D, Roldan J, Zelga P, Jorgji V, Chen JH, Ely Z, Zhao D, Fuhrman K, Fropf R, Beechem JM, Loeffler JS, Ryan DP, Weekes CD, Ferrone CR, Qadan M, Aryee MJ, Jain RK, Neuberg DS, Wo JY, Hong TS, Xavier R, Aguirre AJ, Rozenblatt-Rosen O, Mino-Kenudson M, Castillo CFD, Liss AS, Ting DT, Jacks T, Regev A. Single-nucleus and spatial transcriptome profiling of pancreatic cancer identifies multicellular dynamics associated with neoadjuvant treatment. Nat Genet 2022; 54:1178-1191. [PMID: 35902743 DOI: 10.1038/s41588-022-01134-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 42.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2021] [Accepted: 06/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal and treatment-refractory cancer. Molecular stratification in pancreatic cancer remains rudimentary and does not yet inform clinical management or therapeutic development. Here, we construct a high-resolution molecular landscape of the cellular subtypes and spatial communities that compose PDAC using single-nucleus RNA sequencing and whole-transcriptome digital spatial profiling (DSP) of 43 primary PDAC tumor specimens that either received neoadjuvant therapy or were treatment naive. We uncovered recurrent expression programs across malignant cells and fibroblasts, including a newly identified neural-like progenitor malignant cell program that was enriched after chemotherapy and radiotherapy and associated with poor prognosis in independent cohorts. Integrating spatial and cellular profiles revealed three multicellular communities with distinct contributions from malignant, fibroblast and immune subtypes: classical, squamoid-basaloid and treatment enriched. Our refined molecular and cellular taxonomy can provide a framework for stratification in clinical trials and serve as a roadmap for therapeutic targeting of specific cellular phenotypes and multicellular interactions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William L Hwang
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Karthik A Jagadeesh
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Jimmy A Guo
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.,Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Biological and Biomedical Sciences Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hannah I Hoffman
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Harvard-MIT MD/PhD and Health Sciences and Technology Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Payman Yadollahpour
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | - Rahul Mohan
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | | | - Orr Ashenberg
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | - Denis Schapiro
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Laboratory of Systems Pharmacology, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Institute for Computational Biomedicine and Institute of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Heidelberg University and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | | | | | - George Eng
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jason M Schenkel
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Su
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Carina Shiau
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Patrick Yu
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - William A Freed-Pastor
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Arnav Mehta
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Joshua Gould
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Julia Waldman
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | - Lan Nguyen
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Toni Delorey
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Devan Phillips
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Jaimie L Barth
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Marina Kem
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Clifton Rodrigues
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Debora Ciprani
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jorge Roldan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Piotr Zelga
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Vjola Jorgji
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jonathan H Chen
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Zackery Ely
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Jay S Loeffler
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - David P Ryan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Colin D Weekes
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Cristina R Ferrone
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Motaz Qadan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Martin J Aryee
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Rakesh K Jain
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Edwin L. Steele Laboratory for Tumor Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Donna S Neuberg
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Y Wo
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Center for Systems Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ramnik Xavier
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Andrew J Aguirre
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Orit Rozenblatt-Rosen
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Mari Mino-Kenudson
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Andrew S Liss
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - David T Ting
- Department of Medical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Tyler Jacks
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
| | - Aviv Regev
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA. .,Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Hwang WL, Jagadeesh KA, Guo JA, Hoffman HI, Shiau C, Su J, Yadollahpour P, Reeves JW, Kim Y, Kim S, Gregory M, Divakar P, Miller E, Rhodes M, Warren S, Rueckert E, Fuhrman K, Zollinger DR, Fropf R, Beechem JM, Mehta A, Delorey T, McCabe C, Barth JL, Zelga P, Ferrone CR, Qadan M, Lillemoe KD, Jain RK, Wo JY, Hong TS, Xavier R, Rozenblatt-Rosen O, Aguirre AJ, Castillo CFD, Liss AS, Mino-Kenudson M, Ting DT, Jacks T, Regev A. Abstract SY12-04: Multicellular spatial community featuring a novel neuronal-like malignant phenotype is enriched in pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Cancer Res 2022. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.am2022-sy12-04] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is projected to be the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States by 2030. Given that resistance to cytotoxic therapy is pervasive, there is a critical need to elucidate salient gene expression programs and spatial relationships among malignant and stromal cells in the tumor microenvironment (TME), particularly in residual disease. We developed and applied a single-nucleus RNA-seq (snRNA-seq) technique to 43 banked frozen primary PDAC specimens that either received neoadjuvant therapy (n=25) or were treatment-naïve (n=18). We discovered expression programs across malignant cell and fibroblast profiles that formed the basis for a refined molecular taxonomy, including a novel neural-like progenitor (NRP) malignant program enriched with neoadjuvant treatment in tumors and organoids, and associated with the worst prognosis in bulk profiles from independent cohorts.
To elucidate how neoadjuvant treatment and cancer cell- and fibroblast-intrinsic programs modulate the composition of multicellular neighborhoods, we performed spatial profiling with the GeoMx[1] platform (NanoString) on 21 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections using the human whole transcriptome atlas (WTA). Each tumor showed intra-tumoral heterogeneity in tissue architecture and regions of interest (ROIs) with diverse patterns of neoplastic cells, cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), and immune cells were selected for profiling. We deconvolved the WTA data with our snRNA-seq cell type signatures and mapped expression programs onto the tumor architecture to reveal three distinct multicellular neighborhoods, which we annotated as classical, squamoid-basaloid, and treatment-enriched. The observed enrichment in post-treatment residual disease of multiple spatially-defined receptor-ligand interactions and a neighborhood featuring the NRP program, neurotropic CAF program, and CD8+ T cells may open new therapeutic opportunities.
Next, we mapped malignant/CAF programs and immune cell subsets at single-cell spatial resolution by performing spatial molecular imaging (SMI[2]; NanoString CosMx) using a panel of 960 RNA targets on a subset of seven tumors (2 untreated, 5 treated) and captured over 200,000 cells with an average of more than 450 transcripts detected per cell. Correlating ROIs from whole-transcriptome DSP to matched fields of view in kiloplex SMI enabled further dissection of PDAC architecture and treatment-associated remodeling of cell type distributions and receptor-ligand interactions.
Ongoing functional studies have begun to elucidate the key regulatory elements underlying the distinct treatment-associated NRP malignant program and its interactions with the TME. Overall, the complementary combination of snRNA-seq, whole-transcriptome DSP, and kiloplex SMI provides a high-resolution molecular framework that can be harnessed to augment precision oncology efforts in pancreatic cancer.
[1] GeoMx DSP is for Research Use Only and not for use in diagnostic procedures. [2] CosMx SMI is for Research Use Only and not for use in diagnostic procedures.
Citation Format: William L. Hwang, Karthik A. Jagadeesh, Jimmy A. Guo, Hannah I. Hoffman, Carina Shiau, Jennifer Su, Payman Yadollahpour, Jason W. Reeves, Youngmi Kim, Sean Kim, Mark Gregory, Prajan Divakar, Eric Miller, Michael Rhodes, Sarah Warren, Erroll Rueckert, Kit Fuhrman, Daniel R. Zollinger, Robin Fropf, Joseph M. Beechem, Arnav Mehta, Toni Delorey, Cristin McCabe, Jaimie L. Barth, Piotr Zelga, Cristina R. Ferrone, Motaz Qadan, Keith D. Lillemoe, Rakesh K. Jain, Jennifer Y. Wo, Theodore S. Hong, Ramnik Xavier, Orit Rozenblatt-Rosen, Andrew J. Aguirre, Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo, Andrew S. Liss, Mari Mino-Kenudson, David T. Ting, Tyler Jacks, Aviv Regev. Multicellular spatial community featuring a novel neuronal-like malignant phenotype is enriched in pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr SY12-04.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Jennifer Su
- 4Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
| | | | | | | | - Sean Kim
- 5NanoString Technologies, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Tyler Jacks
- 4Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
| | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Rajurkar M, Parikh AR, Solovyov A, You E, Kulkarni AS, Chu C, Xu KH, Jaicks C, Taylor MS, Wu C, Alexander KA, Good CR, Szabolcs A, Gerstberger S, Tran AV, Xu N, Ebright RY, Van Seventer EE, Vo KD, Tai EC, Lu C, Joseph-Chazan J, Raabe MJ, Nieman LT, Desai N, Arora KS, Ligorio M, Thapar V, Cohen L, Garden PM, Senussi Y, Zheng H, Allen JN, Blaszkowsky LS, Clark JW, Goyal L, Wo JY, Ryan DP, Corcoran RB, Deshpande V, Rivera MN, Aryee MJ, Hong TS, Berger SL, Walt DR, Burns KH, Park PJ, Greenbaum BD, Ting DT. Reverse Transcriptase Inhibition Disrupts Repeat Element Life Cycle in Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Discov 2022; 12:1462-1481. [PMID: 35320348 PMCID: PMC9167735 DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.cd-21-1117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2021] [Revised: 01/27/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Altered RNA expression of repetitive sequences and retrotransposition are frequently seen in colorectal cancer, implicating a functional importance of repeat activity in cancer progression. We show the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor 3TC targets activities of these repeat elements in colorectal cancer preclinical models with a preferential effect in p53-mutant cell lines linked with direct binding of p53 to repeat elements. We translate these findings to a human phase II trial of single-agent 3TC treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer with demonstration of clinical benefit in 9 of 32 patients. Analysis of 3TC effects on colorectal cancer tumorspheres demonstrates accumulation of immunogenic RNA:DNA hybrids linked with induction of interferon response genes and DNA damage response. Epigenetic and DNA-damaging agents induce repeat RNAs and have enhanced cytotoxicity with 3TC. These findings identify a vulnerability in colorectal cancer by targeting the viral mimicry of repeat elements. SIGNIFICANCE Colorectal cancers express abundant repeat elements that have a viral-like life cycle that can be therapeutically targeted with nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) commonly used for viral diseases. NRTIs induce DNA damage and interferon response that provide a new anticancer therapeutic strategy. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1397.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mihir Rajurkar
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Aparna R. Parikh
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alexander Solovyov
- Computational Oncology, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eunae You
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | | | - Chong Chu
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Katherine H. Xu
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Christopher Jaicks
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Martin S. Taylor
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Connie Wu
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
- Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Katherine A. Alexander
- Epigenetics Institute, Departments of Cell and Developmental Biology, Genetics, and Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Charly R. Good
- Epigenetics Institute, Departments of Cell and Developmental Biology, Genetics, and Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Annamaria Szabolcs
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Stefanie Gerstberger
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Antuan V. Tran
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Nova Xu
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Richard Y. Ebright
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | | | - Kevin D. Vo
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Eric C. Tai
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Chenyue Lu
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | | | - Michael J. Raabe
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Linda T. Nieman
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Niyati Desai
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Kshitij S. Arora
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Matteo Ligorio
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Vishal Thapar
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
| | - Limor Cohen
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
- Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Padric M. Garden
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
- Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Yasmeen Senussi
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
- Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hui Zheng
- Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jill N. Allen
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jeffrey W. Clark
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lipika Goyal
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer Y. Wo
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - David P. Ryan
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ryan B. Corcoran
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Vikram Deshpande
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Miguel N. Rivera
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Martin J. Aryee
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Theodore S. Hong
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Shelley L. Berger
- Epigenetics Institute, Departments of Cell and Developmental Biology, Genetics, and Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - David R. Walt
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
- Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Kathleen H. Burns
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Oncologic Pathology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Peter J. Park
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| | - Benjamin D. Greenbaum
- Computational Oncology, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Physiology, Biophysics & Systems Biology, Weill Cornell Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - David T. Ting
- Mass General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School; Charlestown, MA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Kaslow-Zieve E, Ly L, Parikh AR, Klempner SJ, Wo JYL, Drapek LC, Weekes CD, Franses JW, Hong TS, Nipp RD, Perni S. Clinical trial perceptions among patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer in an academic cancer center. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.e18579] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
e18579 Background: Clinical trials (CTs) are essential for advancing care for individuals with cancer, yet a minority of patients participate in CTs. We conducted an exploratory analysis of CT perceptions (knowledge, attitudes, and barriers) among patients with GI cancer. Methods: We prospectively surveyed a convenience sample of patients treated for GI cancer at Massachusetts General Hospital from 11/2020–12/2021. We obtained sociodemographic/clinical characteristics via patient report and chart review. We assessed CT perceptions, communication confidence (Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions Questionnaire, PEPPI, range 0-50; higher score indicates higher confidence), and illness perceptions (Brief Illness Perceptions Questionnaire, BIPQ, range 0-80; higher score indicates more negative perceptions). Using descriptive statistics, we examined associations of CT perceptions with patient characteristics, communication confidence, and illness perceptions. Results: We enrolled 80 patients (median age = 66 years [range 24-85], 54% men, 93% white, 48% had metastatic disease, 69% had college/postgraduate degrees, 15% had participated in CTs [25% phase I, 75% phase II-III]). Cancer types were pancreatic (38%), colorectal/bowel (23%), hepatobiliary (18%), gastroesophageal (16%), and other (6%). Median PEPPI was 43 (range 16-50). Median BIPQ was 44 (range 1-66); 63% reported negative illness perceptions (BIPQ≥40). Most (89%) agreed CTs are essential to improving standard treatment, yet only 42% had discussed CTs during care. Overall, 38% reported a clear idea of what a CT means, and 8% thought most people are cured on CTs. Unmarried patients were more likely to think most people are cured on CTs (21% vs 4%, p = .017). Most (76%) saw CTs as opportunities to obtain new treatment; only 15% believed enrolling would mean missing out on standard care. Only 16% thought most patients like them enroll in CTs. Younger patients (≤65 years) were more likely to think most patients like them enroll (25% vs 8%, p = .046). Most (61%) felt confident differentiating a CT from other treatments. Older patients (> 65 years) were more likely than younger patients to agree/strongly agree that they feel confident differentiating a CT from other treatments (74% vs 49%, p = .025), as were men versus women (76% vs 43%, p = .003). Those with higher communication confidence (Medians [M]: 44 vs 40, p = .04) or more positive illness perceptions (M: 41 vs 50, p = .003) were also more likely to be confident differentiating a CT. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis of CT perceptions among patients with GI cancer, we found high levels of CT knowledge and positive CT perceptions. We demonstrated hypothesis-generating associations among patient factors and CT perceptions, underscoring the need for future research to confirm our findings and to develop interventions to enhance CT decision-making and participation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Leilana Ly
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | - Lorraine C. Drapek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Colin D. Weekes
- University of Colorado Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aurora, CO
| | | | | | | | - Subha Perni
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Dasari A, Lin Y, Kopetz S, Jacobs SA, Lucas PC, Sahin IH, Deming DA, Philip PA, Hong TS, Rojas-Khalil Y, Wolmark N, Yothers G, George TJ, Lieu CH. Colon adjuvant chemotherapy based on evaluation of residual disease (CIRCULATE-US): NRG-GI008. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps3643] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS3643 Background: Currently, there are no biomarkers validated prospectively in randomized studies for resected colon cancer (CC) to determine need for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC). However, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represents a highly specific and sensitive approach (especially with serial monitoring) for identifying minimal/molecular residual disease (MRD) post-surgery in CC patients (pts), and may outperform traditional clinical and pathological features in prognosticating risk for recurrence. CC pts who do not have detectable ctDNA (ctDNA-) are at a much lower risk of recurrence and may be spared the toxicities associated with AC. Furthermore, for CC pts with detectable ctDNA (ctDNA+) who are at a very high risk of recurrence, the optimal AC regimen has not been established. We hypothesize that for pts whose CC has been resected, ctDNA status may be used to risk stratify for making decisions about AC. Methods: In this prospective phase II/III trial, up to 1,912 pts with resected stage III A, B (all pts) and stage II, IIIC (ctDNA+ only) CC will be enrolled. Based on the post-operative ctDNA status using personalized and tumor informed assay (SignateraTM, bespoke assay), those who are ctDNA- (Cohort A) will be randomized to immediate AC with fluoropyrimidine (FP) + oxaliplatin (Ox) for 3-6 mos per established guidelines vs . serial ctDNA monitoring. Patients who are ctDNA+ post-operatively or with serial monitoring (Cohort B) will be randomized to FP+Ox vs . more intensive AC with addition of irinotecan (I) for 6 mos. The primary endpoints for Cohort A are time to ctDNA+ status (phase II) and disease-free survival (DFS) in phase III in the immediate vs . delayed AC arms. The primary endpoint for Cohort B is DFS in the FP+Ox vs FP+Ox+I arms for both phase II and phase III portions of the trial. Secondary endpoints include prevalence of detectable ctDNA post-operatively, time-to-event outcomes (overall survival and time to recurrence) by ctDNA status, and the assessment of compliance to adjuvant therapy. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, post-operative and serial matched/normal blood samples will be collected for exploratory correlative research. Active enrollment across the NCTN started in early 2022. Support: U10-CA-180868, -180822; UG1CA-189867; Clinical trial information: NCT05174169.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arvind Dasari
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Yan Lin
- The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Scott Kopetz
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Peter C. Lucas
- NSABP Foundation, Inc., Department of Pathology, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | - Dustin A. Deming
- University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, and ECOG-ACRIN, Madison, WI
| | - Philip Agop Philip
- Karmanos Cancer Center, Wayne State University, and SWOG, Farmington Hills, MI
| | | | | | - Norman Wolmark
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Greg Yothers
- NRG Oncology/ University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Rocha Lima CMSP, Yothers G, Jacobs SA, Sanoff HK, Cohen DJ, Guthrie KA, Henry NL, Ganz PA, Kopetz S, Lucas PC, Blanke CD, Hong TS, Wolmark N, Hochster HS, George TJ, Overman MJ. Colorectal cancer metastatic dMMR immuno-therapy (COMMIT) study: A randomized phase III study of atezolizumab (atezo) monotherapy versus mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab/atezo in the first-line treatment of patients (pts) with deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) or microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)—NRG-GI004/SWOG-S1610. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps3647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS3647 Background: Despite the superiority in progression-free survival (PFS) of inhibition of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway in dMMR/MSI-H as compared to chemotherapy with either anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFr) or anti-epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFr) antibodies in mCRC, more pts had progressive disease as the best response in the anti-PD1 monotherapy arm (29.4% v 12.3%) with mean PFS of 13.7 mos, with ̃45% of pts in the IO arm progressed at 12 mos ( N Engl J Med 2020; 383:2207). We hypothesize that the dMMR/MSI-H mCRC pts may be more effectively treated with the combination of PD-1 pathway blockade and mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab (bev) rather than with anti-PD-1 therapy (atezo) alone. Preclinical work demonstrated synergistic effects between anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF and between oxaliplatin/anti-PD-1 in murine CRC models and phase II data, which showed activity of anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF in chemotherapy refractory colon cancer. A recent randomized trial subgroup analyses of 8 pts with dMMR metastatic colon cancer treated with FOLFOXIRI+bev+atezo, with the first patient having progression ̃16 mos ( ESMO 2021, Abstt LBA20). Additionally, in other solid tumor malignancies, anti-PD1 plus anti-VEGFr (i.e., HCC and RCC) as well as anti-PD1 plus chemotherapy (i.e., gastric and esophageal cancers) combinations are standard first-line treatments. Methods: The redesigned COMMIT study was reactivated on 1/29/2021 as a two-arm prospective phase III open-label trial randomizing (1:1) mCRC dMMR/MSI-H to atezo monotherapy v mFOLFOX6/bev+atezo combination. Assuming our control arm, atezo monotherapy (48% PFS at 24 mos as assessed by site investigator), we have 80% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.6 (equivalent to 64.4% PFS at 24 mos) with alpha 0.025 one-sided. Stratification factors include BRAFV600E status, metastatic site, and prior adjuvant CRC therapy. Secondary endpoints include OS, objective response rate, safety profile, disease control rate, and duration of response. Health-related quality of life is an exploratory objective. Archived tumor tissue and blood samples will be collected for correlative studies. Key inclusion criteria are: mCRC without prior chemotherapy for advanced disease; dMMR tumor determined by local CLIA-certified IHC assay (MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2) or MSI-H by local CLIA-certified PCR or NGS panel; and measurable disease per RECIST. Enrollment actively continues to the target accrual of 211 patients randomized between the two immunotherapy arms. Support: U10CA180868, -180822, -180888, UG1CA189867, U24CA196067. Clinical trial information: NCT02997228.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Greg Yothers
- The Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | - Hanna Kelly Sanoff
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Alliance, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Deirdre Jill Cohen
- The Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and ECOG-ACRIN, New York, NY
| | - Katherine A Guthrie
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | - Scott Kopetz
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Peter C. Lucas
- NSABP, The University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, and UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Charles David Blanke
- Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Oregon Health and Science University, andSWOG Group Chair’s Office, Portland, OR
| | | | - Norman Wolmark
- NSABP/NRG Oncology, and The UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|