Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Immunotherapy in Resectable NSCLC

Non-small cell lung cancer, even when diagnosed in early stages, has been linked with poor survival rates and distant recurrence patterns. Novel therapeutic approaches harnessing the immune system have been implemented in early stages, following the designated steps of advanced NSCLC treatment strategies. Immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) regimens as monotherapy, combinational, or alongside chemotherapy have been intensely investigated as adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and, more recently, perioperative therapeutic strategies, representing pivotal milestones in the evolution of early lung cancer management while holding great potential for the future. The subject of current ongoing research is optimizing treatment outcomes for patient subsets with different needs and identifying biomarkers that could be predictive of response while translating the trials' endpoints to survival rates. The aim of this review is to discuss all current treatment options with the pros and cons of each, persistent challenges, and future perspectives on immunotherapy as illuminating the path to a new era for resectable NSCLC.

A review of perioperative treatment strategies with immunotherapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitors in resectable and stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer

Stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous group with different potential therapeutic approaches. Treatment is typically multimodal with either surgical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation or concurrent chemotherapy and radiation if unresectable. Despite the multimodal treatment and early stage, cure rates have traditionally been low. The introduction of immunotherapy changed the treatment landscape for NSCLC in all stages, and the introduction of immunotherapy in early-stage lung cancer has improved event free survival and overall survival. Tyrosine Kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have also improved outcomes in early-stage mutation-driven NSCLC. Optimal treatment choice and sequence is increasingly becoming based upon personalized factors including clinical characteristics, comorbidities, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) score, and the presence of targetable mutations. Despite encouraging data from multiple trials, the optimal multimodal sequence of stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC treatment remains unresolved and warrants further investigation. This review article summarizes recent major clinical trials of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment including stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC with a focus on immunotherapy and TKIs.

An Updated Review of Management of Resectable Stage III NSCLC in the Era of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have an established role in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). ICIs have now entered the paradigm of early-stage NSCLC. The recent evidence shows that the addition of ICI to neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and survival rate in early-stage resectable NSCLC and is now a standard of care option in this setting. In this regard, stage III NSCLC merits special consideration, as it is heterogenous and requires a multidisciplinary approach to management. As the neoadjuvant approach is being adopted widely, new challenges have emerged and the boundaries for resectability are being re-examined. Consequently, it is ever more important to carefully individualize the treatment strategy for each patient with resectable stage III NSCLC. In this review, we discuss the recent literature in this field with particular focus on evolving definitions of resectability, T4 disease, N2 disease (single and multi-station), and nodal downstaging. We also highlight the controversy around adjuvant treatment in this setting and discuss the selection of patients for adjuvant treatment, options of salvage, and next line treatment in cases of progression on/after neoadjuvant treatment or after R2 resection. We will conclude with a brief discussion of predictive biomarkers, predictive models, ongoing studies, and directions for future research in this space.

Surgical-decision making in the setting of unsuspected N2 disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

Identification of unsuspected nodal metastasis may occur at the time of operation for a stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Guidelines for this scenario are unclear. Our goal was to assess the cost-effectiveness of aborting the operation in an attempt to first provide neoadjuvant systemic therapy compared with upfront resection.

Methods

A computer simulation Markov model with a lifetime horizon was constructed to compare the costs and clinical outcomes, as measured by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), of upfront resection at the time of identification of unsuspected N2 mediastinal disease vs. aborting initial resection and continuing with neoadjuvant therapy prior to resection. Input parameters for the model were derived from published literature with costs measured from the healthcare perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was evaluated with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY. Both deterministic (one-, two-, and three-way) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the impact of variation in input parameter values on model results.

Results

Aborting initial resection in favor of neoadjuvant therapy resulted in both higher costs ($40,415 vs. $29,873) and more QALYs (3.95 vs. 2.84) relative to upfront resection, yielding an ICER of $9,526/QALY. While variation in overall survival had a significant impact on the ICER, perioperative variables did not. As the annual mortality of best-case therapy in the abort group increased from a base-case estimate of 11% to 15%, the ICER exceeded the WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY. Subsequent one- and two-way sensitivity analyses did not find substantially alter the overall results. PSA resulted in aborting resection to be cost-effective in 99.7% of samples, with 13% of samples dominating upfront resection.

Conclusions

Treatment of stage IIIa lung cancer requires the input of a multidisciplinary team who must consider cost, quality of life, and overall survival. As new treatments are developed, further analyses should be performed to determine optimal therapy.

Neoadjuvant Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy has demonstrated beneficial outcomes in various cancer types; however, standardized protocols for neoadjuvant immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are currently lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the reliability of neoadjuvant immunotherapy's efficacy and safety in the context of HCC.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted across PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings to identify clinical trials involving resectable HCC and neoadjuvant immunotherapy. Single-arm meta-analyses were employed to compute odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity analysis, data quality assessment, and subgroup analyses based on the type of immunotherapy drugs and combination therapies were performed. This meta-analysis is registered in PROSPERO (identifier CRD42023474276).

Results

This meta-analysis included 255 patients from 11 studies. Among resectable HCC patients, neoadjuvant immunotherapy exhibited an overall major pathological response (MPR) rate of 0.47 (95% CI 0.31-0.70) and a pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 0.22 (95% CI 0.14-0.36). The overall objective response rate (ORR) was 0.37 (95% CI 0.20-0.69), with a grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) incidence rate of 0.35 (95% CI 0.24-0.51). Furthermore, the combined surgical resection rate was 3.08 (95% CI 1.66-5.72). Subgroup analysis shows no significant differences in the efficacy and safety of different single-agent immunotherapies; the efficacy of dual ICIs (Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors) combination therapy is superior to targeted combined immunotherapy and monotherapy, while the reverse is observed in terms of safety.

Discussion

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy presents beneficial outcomes in the treatment of resectable HCC. However, large-scale, high-quality experiments are warranted in the future to provide robust data support.

A new, potential and safe neoadjuvant therapy strategy in epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive resectable non-small-cell lung cancer-targeted therapy: a retrospective study

Background

Studies of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been conducted. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the benefits of osimertinib as neoadjuvant therapy for resectable EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

Method

This retrospective study evaluated patients with EGFR mutations in exon 19 or 21 who received targeted therapy with osimertinib (80 mg per day) before surgery between January 2019 and October 2023 in Henan Cancer Hospital.

Results

Twenty patients were evaluated, all of whom underwent surgery. The rate of R0 resection was 100% (20/20). The objective response rate was 80% (16/20), and the disease control rate was 95% (19/20). Postoperative pathological analysis showed a 25% (5/20) major pathological response rate and 15% (3/20) pathological complete response rate. In total, 25% (5/20) developed adverse events (AEs), and the rate of grades 3-4 AEs was 10% (2/20). One patient experienced a grade 3 skin rash, and 1 patient experienced grade 3 diarrhea.

Conclusion

Osimertinib as neoadjuvant therapy for resectable EGFR-mutated NSCLC is safe and well tolerated. Osimertinib has the potential to improve the radical resection rate and prognosis.

The Evolving Landscape of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Gastroesophageal Cancer

Despite advances in treatment strategies and surgical approaches in recent years, improving survival outcomes in esophagogastric cancer (EGC) patients treated with curative intent remains a significant area of unmet need. The recent emergence of adjuvant immunotherapy as the standard of care for resected EGC demonstrates the impact of immunotherapy in improving recurrence-free survival. Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapies represent another promising approach with potential advantages over adjuvant therapy. Despite the promising results of early neoadjuvant immunotherapy studies, there are several challenges and future research needs. The optimal timing, duration and number of doses in relation to surgery and the optimal combination of immunotherapies are still unclear. In addition, rigorous correlative studies need to be performed to identify biomarkers for patient selection and treatment response prediction to maximize the benefits of neoadjuvant immunotherapy. In this review, we provide a concise summary of the current standard of care for resectable EGC and discuss the rationale for the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in this setting and the pre-clinical and early clinical data of these novel therapies. Finally, we will examine the potential role and future direction of immunotherapy in the treatment paradigm and the perceived challenges and opportunities that lay ahead.

Efficacy of staging laparoscopy for resectable pancreatic cancer on imaging and the therapeutic effect of systemic chemotherapy for positive peritoneal cytology

BACKGROUND

The frequency and prognosis of positive peritoneal washing cytology (CY1) in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (R-PDAC) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to identify the clinical implications of CY1 in R-PDAC and staging laparoscopy (SL).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 115 consecutive patients with R-PDAC who underwent SL between 2018 and 2022. Patients with negative cytology (CY0) received radical surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, while CY1 patients received systemic chemotherapy and were continuously evaluated for cytology.

RESULTS

Of the 115 patients, 84 had no distant metastatic factors, 22 had only CY1, and nine had distant metastasis. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that larger tumor size was an independent predictor of the presence of any distant metastatic factor (OR: 6.30, p = .002). Patients with CY1 showed a significantly better prognosis than patients with distant metastasis (MST: 24.6 vs. 18.9 months, p = .040). A total of 11 CY1 patients were successfully converted to CY-negative, and seven underwent conversion surgery. There was no significant difference in overall survival between patients with CY0 and those converted to CY-negative.

CONCLUSION

SL is effective even for R-PDAC. The prognosis of CY1 patients converted to CY-negative is expected to be similar to that of CY0 patients.

Current clinical practice in the management of Brazilian patients with potentially resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to describe the routine clinical practice of physicians involved in the treatment of patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in Brazil.

METHODS

Physicians were invited through email and text messages to participate in an electronic survey sponsored by the Brazilian Gastrointestinal Tumor Group (GTG) and the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO). We evaluated the relationship between variable categories numerically with false discovery rate-adjusted Fisher's exact test p values and graphically with Multiple Correspondence Analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 255 physicians answered the survey. Most (52.5%) were medical oncologists, treated patients predominantly in the private setting (71.0%), and had access to multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTDTB; 76.1%). Medical oncologists were more likely to describe neoadjuvant therapy as beneficial in the resectable setting and surgeons in the borderline resectable setting. Most physicians would use information on risk factors for early recurrence, frailty, and type of surgery to decide treatment strategy. Doctors working predominantly in public institutions were less likely to have access to MTDTB and to consider FOLFIRINOX the most adequate regimen in the neoadjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences exist in the management of localized PDAC, some of them possibly explained by the medical specialty, but also by the funding source of health care.

A phase II study of neoadjuvant liposomal irinotecan with 5-FU and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma

For patients with localized pancreatic cancer with minimal vascular involvement, optimal survivability requires a multidisciplinary approach of surgical resection and systemic chemotherapy. FOLFIRINOX is a combination chemotherapy regimen that offers promising results in the perioperative and metastatic settings; however, it can cause significant adverse effects. Such toxicity can negatively impact some patients, resulting in chemotherapy discontinuation or surgical unsuitability. In an effort to reduce toxicities and optimize outcomes, this investigation explores the safety and feasibility of substituting liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) for nonliposomal irinotecan to improve tumor drug delivery and potentially reduce toxicity. This regimen, NALIRIFOX, has the potential to be both safer and more effective when administered in the preoperative setting.

How A Patient with Resectable or Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer should Be Treated-A Comprehensive Review

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive disease with high morbidity and mortality in which long-term survival rates remain disastrous. Surgical resection is the only potentially curable treatment for early pancreatic cancer; however, the right patient qualification is crucial for optimizing treatment outcomes. With the rapid development of radiographic and surgical techniques, resectability decisions are made by a multidisciplinary team. Upfront surgery (Up-S) can improve the survival of patients with potentially resectable disease with the support of adjuvant therapy (AT). However, early recurrences are quite common due to the often-undetectable micrometastases occurring before surgery. Adopted by international consensus in 2017, the standardization of the definitions of resectable PDAC (R-PDAC) and borderline resectable PDAC (BR-PDAC) disease was necessary to enable accurate interpretation of study results and define which patients could benefit from neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). NAT is expected to improve the resection rate with a negative margin to provide significant local control and eliminate micrometastases to prolong survival. Providing information about optimal sequential multimodal NAT seems to be key for future studies. This article presents a multidisciplinary concept for the therapeutic management of patients with R-PDAC and BR-PDAC based on current knowledge and our own experience.

A novel PIBF1-RET gene fusion identified from a stage IA lung adenocarcinoma: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Rearranged during transfection (RET) gene fusions occur in 0.7% to 2% in lung cancer and 1% to 2% in non-small cell lung cancer. Systemic therapies for RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer consist mostly of targeted therapy with RET inhibitors such as selpercatinib and pralsetinib. To date, approximately 40 fusion partners have been reported. Herein, we report a novel progesterone immunomodulatory binding factor 1 (PIBF1)-RET gene fusion identified from a stage IA lung adenocarcinoma and was further validated by RNA sequencing analysis.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 55-year-old male smoker was found by chest computed tomography to have a solid nodule in the right lower lobe of the lung and enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes.

DIAGNOSES

The patient was then diagnosed with stage IA lung adenocarcinoma (T1N0M0).

INTERVENTION

The patient then underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy of the right lower lobe and mediastinal lymph node dissection. Molecular testing with a targeted panel of 8 lung cancer-associated driver genes detected a novel PIBF1-RET (P16:R12) fusion, which putatively encodes a gene in which the first 16 exons of PIBF1 was concatenated to RET exon 13 and its downstream sequence, retaining the RET kinase domain. The genomic translocation was further validated by RNA sequencing with a panel of 115 cancer-associated genes, which found no other aberrations.

OUTCOMES

The patient was discharged 3 days after surgery.

CONCLUSION

We report a novel PIBF1-RET fusion in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma. This finding expands the spectrum of RET fusion partners and warrants further studies in characterizing the oncogenic role of this genomic aberration and response to RET-targeted therapies.

Incidence and Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND/AIM

Pancreatic cancer has the highest risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Additionally, chemotherapy for cancer patients increases the risk of developing VTE. Due to recent advances in neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens, more patients with resectable pancreatic cancer will receive NAC. However, the incidence, risk, and predictors of developing VTE in these patients have not been fully evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the incidence, risk, and predictors of VTE among 67 consecutive patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant combination therapy with gemcitabine+S-1 (NAC-GS) followed by surgery and 45 patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who underwent upfront surgery (Up-S).

RESULTS

The incidence of VTE in the NAC-GS and Up-S groups was 10.4% and 6.6%, respectively. Preoperative D-dimer levels were significantly higher in the NAC-GS group, and D-dimer levels were significantly increased during NAC-GS. Preoperative D-dimer level was the only predictor for VTE in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who received NAC-GS.

CONCLUSION

There is an increased risk of developing VTE during NAC. Screening with D-dimer and taking appropriate measures to suppress critical VTE is essential to provide NAC to patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

Impact of margin accentuation with intraoperative irreversible electroporation on local recurrence in resected pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rates of local recurrence and margin positivity in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer after pancreatectomy with or without irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation.

METHODS

Prospective data for preoperative stages IIB (borderline resectable) and III were evaluated, with 75 patients undergoing pancreatectomy with irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation compared to 71 patients who underwent pancreatectomy alone from March 2010 to November 2020.

RESULTS

Both irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation and pancreatectomy-alone groups were similar for body mass index, Charleston comorbidity index, and sex. The irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation group had significantly greater preoperative stage III (irreversible electroporation 83% vs pancreatectomy alone 51%; P = .0001), with similar tumor location (head 64% vs 72%) and tumor size (median 2.9 vs 2.8). Neoadjuvant/induction chemotherapy and prior radiation therapy was similar in both groups (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 89% vs 72%). Surgical therapy included a greater percentage of pancreaticoduodenectomy in the pancreatectomy-alone group. Despite greater stage and greater percentage of margin positivity (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 27% vs 20%; P = not significant), rates of local recurrence were similar. The mean disease-free interval for local recurrence from time of diagnosis was similar (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 15.8 vs 16.5 pancreatectomy alone; P = not significant) and time of treatment (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 9.4 vs 10.5 months; P = not significant). Overall survival was improved with the irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation group, with a mean of 34.2 months versus 27.9 months in the pancreatectomy-alone group.

CONCLUSION

Irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation is safe and effective in stages IIB and III pancreatic adenocarcinomas that are technically resectable. Despite higher margin positivity rates, the time to local recurrence and the effects of recurrence were the same in the pancreatectomy-alone group.

Clinical Prediction Models for Recurrence in Patients with Resectable Grade 1 and 2 Sporadic Non-Functional Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Systematic Review

Recurrence after resection in patients with non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-pNET) has a considerable impact on overall survival. Accurate risk stratification will tailor optimal follow-up strategies. This systematic review assessed available prediction models, including their quality. This systematic review followed PRISMA and CHARMS guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to December 2022 for studies that developed, updated, or validated prediction models for recurrence in resectable grade 1 or 2 NF-pNET. Studies were critically appraised. After screening 1883 studies, 14 studies with 3583 patients were included: 13 original prediction models and 1 prediction model validation. Four models were developed for preoperative and nine for postoperative use. Six models were presented as scoring systems, five as nomograms, and two as staging systems. The c statistic ranged from 0.67 to 0.94. The most frequently included predictors were tumor grade, tumor size, and lymph node positivity. Critical appraisal deemed all development studies as having a high risk of bias and the validation study as having a low risk of bias. This systematic review identified 13 prediction models for recurrence in resectable NF-pNET with external validations for 3 of them. External validation of prediction models improves their reliability and stimulates use in daily practice.

Mutational and Transcriptional Characterization Establishes Prognostic Models for Resectable Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Background

The prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients has been comprehensively studied. However, the prognosis of resectable (stage I-IIIA) lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) has not been thoroughly investigated at genomic and transcriptional levels.

Methods

Data of genomic alterations and transcriptional-level changes of 355 stage I-IIIA LUSC patients were downloaded from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database, together with the clinicopathological information (training cohort). A validation cohort of 91 patients was retrospectively recruited. Data were analyzed and figures were plotted using the R software.

Results

Training cohort was established with 355 patients. TP53 (78%), TTN (68%), CSMD3 (39%), MUT16 (36%) and RYR2 (36%) were genes with the highest mutational frequency. BRINP3, COL11A1, GRIN2B, MUC5B, NLRP3 and TENM3 exhibited significant higher mutational frequency in stage III (P < 0.05). Patients with stage III also exhibited significantly higher tumor mutational burden (TMB) than those with stage I (P < 0.01). The mutational status of 10 genes were found to have significant stratification on patient prognosis. TMB at threshold of 25 percentile (TMB = 2.39 muts/Mb) also significantly stratified the patient prognosis (P = 0.0003). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed TTN, ADGRB3, MYH7 and MYH15 mutational status and TMB as independent risk factors. Further analysis of transcriptional profile revealed many significantly up- and down-regulated genes, and multivariate analysis found the transcriptional levels of seven genes as independent risk factors. Significant factors from the multivariate analyses were used to establish a Nomogram model to quantify the risk in prognosis of individual LUSC patients. The model was validated with a cohort containing 91 patients, which showed good predicting efficacy and consistency.

Conclusion

The influencing factors of prognosis of stage I-III LUSC patients have been revealed. Risk factors including gender, T stage, cancer location, and the mutational and transcriptional status of several genes were used to establish a Nomogram model to assess the patient prognosis. Subsequent validation proved its effectiveness.

Advances in Radiation Oncology for Pancreatic Cancer: An Updated Review

This review aims to summarize the recent advances in radiation oncology for pancreatic cancer. A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed database and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed, focusing on studies published within the last 10 years. Our search queried "locally advanced pancreatic cancer [AND] stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) [OR] hypofractionation [OR] magnetic resonance guidance radiation therapy (MRgRT) [OR] proton" and "borderline resectable pancreatic cancer [AND] neoadjuvant radiation" and was limited only to prospective and retrospective studies and metanalyses. For locally advanced pancreatic cancers (LAPC), retrospective evidence supports the notion of radiation dose escalation to improve overall survival (OS). Novel methods for increasing the dose to high risk areas while avoiding dose to organs at risk (OARs) include SBRT or ablative hypofractionation using a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique, MRgRT, or charged particle therapy. The use of molecularly targeted agents with radiation to improve radiosensitization has also shown promise in several prospective studies. For resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers (RPC and BRPC), several randomized trials are currently underway to study whether current neoadjuvant regimens using radiation may be improved with the use of the multi-drug regimen FOLFIRINOX or immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy for resectable mucosal melanoma

Background

Neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibition (CPI) has recently demonstrated impressive outcomes in patients with stage 3 cutaneous melanoma. However, the safety, efficacy, and outcome of neoadjuvant CPI in patients with mucosal melanoma (MM) are not well studied as MM is a rare melanoma subtype. CPI such as combination nivolumab and ipilimumab achieves response rates of 37-43% in unresectable or metastatic MM but there is limited data regarding the efficacy of these agents in the preoperative setting. We hypothesize that neoadjuvant CPI is a safe and feasible approach for patients with resectable MM.

Method

Under an institutionally approved protocol, we identified adult MM patients with resectable disease who received neoadjuvant anti-PD1 +/- anti-CTLA4 between 2015 to 2019 at our institution. Clinical information include age, gender, presence of nodal involvement or satellitosis, functional status, pre-treatment LDH, tumor mutation status, and treatment data was collected. Outcomes include event free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), pathologic response rate (PRR), and grade ≥3 toxicities.

Results

We identified 36 patients. Median age was 62; 58% were female. Seventy-eight percent of patients received anti-PD1 + anti-CTLA4. Node positive disease or satellite lesions was present at the time of treatment initiation in 47% of patients. Primary sites of disease were anorectal (53%), urogenital (25%), head and neck (17%), and esophageal (6%). A minority of patients did not undergo surgery due to complete response (n=3, 8%) and disease progression (n=6, 17%), respectively. With a median follow up of 37.9 months, the median EFS was 9.2 months with 3-year EFS rate of 29%. Median OS had not been reached and 3-year OS rate was 55%. ORR was 47% and PRR was 35%. EFS was significantly higher for patients with objective response and for patients with pathologic response. OS was significantly higher for patients with pathologic response. Grade 3 toxicities were reported in 39% of patients.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant CPI for resectable MM is a feasible approach with signs of efficacy and an acceptable safety profile. As there is currently no standard approach for resectable MM, this study supports further investigations using neoadjuvant therapy for these patients.

MATTERHORN: phase III study of durvalumab plus FLOT chemotherapy in resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer

Standard-of-care for resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer includes surgery and neoadjuvant-adjuvant 5-fluorouracil-leucovorin-oxaliplatin-docetaxel (FLOT) chemotherapy. Early-phase clinical studies support further clinical development of the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI); durvalumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer. Accumulating evidence indicates that ICIs combined with FLOT chemotherapy improve clinical outcomes in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer. We describe the rationale for and the design of MATTERHORN, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study investigating the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant-adjuvant durvalumab and FLOT chemotherapy followed by adjuvant durvalumab monotherapy in patients with resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer. The planned sample size is 900 patients, the primary end point is event-free survival and safety and tolerability will be evaluated. Clinical trial registration: NCT04592913 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The treatment of resectable gastric cancer: a literature review of an evolving landscape

Background and Objective

Gastric cancer carries a poor prognosis despite advances in treatment. Despite curative-intent surgery, the risk of recurrence is high. Perioperative treatment may improve rates of complete surgical resection and reduce the rate of recurrence. Treatment practices vary worldwide, while perioperative treatment is considered standard-of-care practice in Western countries, upfront surgery followed by adjuvant therapy is preferred in Asian countries. The current literature is complex to navigate with a plethora of studies available for review. The aim of this review is to summarise current evidence regarding the role of perioperative treatment in resectable gastric cancer and to explore future directions in research.

Methods

We searched the PubMed database for peer-reviewed original articles from phase III trials, published between 2002 to 2021 with regard to the treatment of resectable gastric cancer. Current active clinical trials regarding the use of targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors in perioperative and adjuvant therapy were identified using the ClinicalTrials.gov database from the US National Library of Medicine.

Key Content and Findings

Compared to surgery alone, the use of perioperative chemotherapy prior to resection of gastric cancer and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy after upfront surgery both improve survival in those with resectable gastric cancer. However, treatment practices vary worldwide. In clinical practice, patient factors such as functional status should be considered when considering treatment approach. Many current clinical trials explore the role of targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors in the perioperative setting, which appear to be promising.

Conclusions

Gastric cancer continues to carry a poor prognosis. The addition of targeted agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors in the perioperative setting appear to be promising although further research is required in this area to assess efficacy. Further clinical research is required to identify new agents and approaches to treatment to improve the survival of these patients.

Treatment of Resectable Gallbladder Cancer

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the most common biliary tract cancer worldwide and its incidence has significant geographic variation. A unique combination of predisposing factors includes genetic predisposition, geographic distribution, female gender, chronic inflammation, and congenital developmental abnormalities. Today, incidental GBC is the most common presentation of resectable gallbladder cancer, and surgery (minimally invasive or open) remains the only curative treatment available. Encouragingly, there is an important emerging role for systemic treatment for patients who have R1 resection or present with stage III-IV. In this article, we describe the pathogenesis, surgical and systemic treatment, and prognosis.

Real-world treatment patterns in resectable (stages I-III) non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic literature review

Aim: The aim of this systematic literature review was to describe treatment patterns in non-metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods: A search was conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Eligible studies were multicentered (>50 patients) and conducted after 2000 in North America, Europe and Asia. Results: Twenty studies met the eligibility criteria. Based on US and Canadian studies in the resectable population, the proportion of patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiotherapy increased with increasing stage (i.e., from <3% in stage I to about 40% in stage III and from 15% in stage I to 30% in stage III, respectively). Within the resectable population, the breakdown between bimodal and trimodal therapy was variable, suggesting that clinical practice is not uniform. Conclusion: Overall, studies were heterogeneous, precluding data extrapolation across regions. Despite heterogeneity and limited evidence, this review suggested an increase in neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy with increasing stage, generally in line with treatment guidelines.

Predictive Model of Early Death of Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma After Curative Resection: A SEER-Based Study

Objective

This study aims to determine the factors that predict early death and establish a predictive model for early death by analyzing clinical characteristics of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (R-PDAC) who die early after radical surgery.

Materials and Methods

This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent radical surgical resection for R-PDAC in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Patients with overall survival ≤ 12 months were assigned as early death group and above 1 year as the late death group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify factors significantly associated with early death. An early death predictive model was constructed based on the identified independent risk factors.

Results

A total of 9695 patients were analyzed, and the total incidence of early death was 30.72%. Multivariable analysis showed that factors significantly associated with early death included age at diagnosis, race, marital status, tumor location, tumor size, tumor grade, number of positive lymph nodes, number of examined lymph nodes, positive lymph node ratio, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. The predictive model showed good discrimination with a C-index of 0.722 (95% confidence interval: 0.711-0.733) and convincing calibration.

Conclusions

We developed a predictive model that may be easily applied to patients with R-PDAC after radical resection to predict the chance of death within 1 year. For patients with high risk of early death, neoadjuvant therapy should be considered. Even after radical resection, more aggressive adjuvant chemotherapy (with or without combined radiotherapy) must be used to minimize the chance of early death.

upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer: An update on a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains controversial in the treatment of pancreatic cancer (PC). Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery (US) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC). Eligible studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The endpoints assessed were R0 resection rate, pathological T stage < 2 rate, positive lymph node rate, and overall survival. A total of 4,588 potentially relevant studies were identified, and 13 studies were included in this study. In patients with RPC, this meta-analysis showed that NAT presented an increased R0 resection rate, pathological T stage < 2 rate, and a remarkably reduced positive lymph node rate compared to US. However, patients receiving NAT did not result in a significantly increased overall survival. These findings supported the application of NAT, especially as a patient selection strategy, in the management of RPC. Additional large clinical studies are needed to determine whether NAT is superior to US.

Management of Resectable Stage III-N2 Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) in the Age of Immunotherapy

Simple Summary

The treatment of resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer with N2 lymph node involvement is usually multimodal and is generally based on neoadjuvant chemotherapy +/− radiotherapy followed by surgery, but the cure rate is still low. Immunotherapy based on anti-PD1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors has improved survival in advanced and stage III non-resectable NSCLC patients and is being studied in earlier stages to improve the cure rate of lung cancer. In this article, we review all therapeutic approaches to stage III-N2 NSCLC, analysing both completed and ongoing studies that evaluate the addition of immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

Abstract

Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with N2 lymph node involvement is a heterogeneous group with different potential therapeutic approaches. Patients with potentially resectable III-N2 NSCLC are those who are considered to be able to receive a multimodality treatment that includes tumour resection after neoadjuvant therapy. Current treatment for these patients is based on neoadjuvant chemotherapy +/− radiotherapy followed by surgery and subsequent assessment for adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. In addition, some selected III-N2 patients could receive upfront surgery or pathologic N2 incidental involvement can be found a posteriori during analysis of the surgical specimen. The standard treatment for these patients is adjuvant chemotherapy and evaluation for complementary radiotherapy. Despite being a locally advanced stage, the cure rate for these patients continues to be low, with a broad improvement margin. The most immediate hope for improving survival data and curing these patients relies on integrating immunotherapy into perioperative treatment. Immunotherapy based on anti-PD1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors is already a standard treatment in stage III unresectable and advanced NSCLC. Data from the first phase II studies in monotherapy neoadjuvant therapy and, in particular, in combination with chemotherapy, are highly promising, with impressive improved and complete pathological response rates. Despite the lack of confirmatory data from phase III trials and long-term survival data, and in spite of various unresolved questions, immunotherapy will soon be incorporated into the armamentarium for treating stage III-N2 NSCLC. In this article, we review all therapeutic approaches to stage III-N2 NSCLC, analysing both completed and ongoing studies that evaluate the addition of immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

BRAF V600E potentially determines "Oncological Resectability" for "Technically Resectable" colorectal liver metastases

Despite reports on poor survival outcomes after hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) with BRAF V600E mutation (mBRAF) exist, the role of mBRAF testing for technically resectable cases remains unclear. A single-center retrospective study was performed to investigate the survival outcomes of patients who underwent upfront hepatectomy for solitary resectable CRLM with mBRAF between January 2005 and December 2017 and to compare them with those of unresectable cases with mBRAF. Of 172 patients who underwent initial hepatectomy for solitary resectable CRLM, mBRAF, RAS mutations (mRAS), and wild-type RAS/BRAF (wtRAS/BRAF) were observed in 5 (2.9%), 73 (42.4%), and 93 (54.7%) patients, respectively. With a median follow-up period of 72.8 months, mBRAF was associated with a significantly shorter OS (median, 14.4 months) than wtRAS/BRAF (median, not reached [NR]) (hazard ratio [HR], 27.6; p < 0.001) and mRAS (median, NR) (HR, 9.9; p < 0.001), and mBRAF had the highest HR among all the indicators in the multivariable analysis (HR, 17.0; p < 0.001). The median OS after upfront hepatectomy for CRLM with mBRAF was identical to that of 28 unresectable CRLM with mBRAF that were treated with systemic chemotherapy (median, 17.2 months) (HR, 0.78; p = 0.65). When technically resectable CRLM are complicated with mBRAF, its survival outcome becomes as poor as unresectable cases; therefore, those with mBRAF should be considered as oncologically unresectable. Patients with CRLM should undergo pre-treatment mBRAF testing regardless of technical resectability. Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000034557.

Neoadjuvant osimertinib with/without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for EGFR-mutated resectable non-small-cell lung cancer: NeoADAURA

Osimertinib is a third-generation, irreversible oral EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor), that potently inhibits EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor-sensitizing mutations and T790M resistance mutations together with efficacy in CNS metastases in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here we describe the rationale and design for the Phase III NeoADAURA study (NCT04351555), which will evaluate neoadjuvant osimertinib with or without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone prior to surgery, in patients with resectable stage II-IIIB N2 EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. The primary end point is centrally assessed major pathological response at the time of resection. Secondary end points include event-free survival, pathological complete response, nodal downstaging at the time of surgery, disease-free survival, overall survival and health-related quality of life. Safety and tolerability will also be assessed. Trial Registration number: NCT04351555 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Optimal Upfront Treatment in Surgically Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Candidates: A High-Volume Center Retrospective Analysis

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a devastating disease with only 15-20% of patients resectable at diagnosis. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for this cohort is becoming increasingly popular; however, there are no published randomized trials that support the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy over upfront surgery in resectable disease. This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted to compare both treatment pathways and to identify any potential prognostic markers. Medical records from one large volume pancreatic cancer center from 2013-2019 were reviewed and 126 patients with upfront resectable disease were analyzed. Due to a change in practice in our center patients treated prior to December 2016 received upfront surgery and those treated after this date received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Of these, 86 (68%) patients were treated with upfront surgery and 40 (32%) of patients were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Our results demonstrated that patients treated with upfront surgery with early-stage (1a) disease had a longer median OS compared to those treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (24 vs. 21 months, p = 0.028). This survival difference was not evident for all patients (regardless of stage). R0 resections were similar between groups (p = 0.605). We identified that both tumor viability (in neoadjuvant chemotherapy-treated patients) and tumor grade were useful prognostic markers. Upfront surgery for certain patients with low volume disease may be suitable despite the global trend towards neoadjuvant chemotherapy for all upfront resectable patients. A prospective clinical trial in this cohort incorporating biomarkers is needed to determine optimal therapy pathway.

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is the malignant tumor with the highest morbidity and mortality in the world. In recent ten years, with the emergence of new drugs and the optimization of treatment mode, the treatment of lung cancer is entering an era of precision and individualization. Neoadjuvant therapy can reduce tumor size, degrade tumor stage, kill circulating tumor cells and micrometastases in the body, afford operation possibility, and benefit the long-term survival of patients. However, the traditional neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with surgical treatment seems to have entered the bottleneck period of efficacy and is difficult to achieve breakthrough progress. At the same time, the amazing efficacy of immunotherapy is gradually innovating the treatment mode of lung cancer. In recent years, the research data of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) shows an explosive growth. Immunotherapy has been applied to the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. Therefore, some clinical trials have applied immunotherapy to neoadjuvant treatment of resectable NSCLC patients. In this paper, the efficacy, possible mechanisms, potential risks and existing problems of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable NSCLC patients are reviewed, and the future development direction of neoadjuvant immunotherapy is discussed.

Role of the preoperative circulating tumor DNA KRAS mutation in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer

Aim: The prognosis of resectable pancreatic cancer patients with the same stage of disease is highly variable. The purpose of this study is to establish a scoring system for preoperative screening of resectable patients. Materials & methods: The clinical information and laboratory tests of 105 resectable patients with pancreatic cancer were enrolled and analyzed. Results: The consistency of clinical stage and pathological stage was poor (κ = 0.193; p < 0.003). We performed a comprehensive scoring system with KRAS mutations in circulating tumor DNA (^mutKRAS ctDNA) for the resectable patients. Patients with higher scores were more prone to early postoperative recurrence and poorer prognosis. Conclusion: The scoring system can help preoperatively screen out resectable patients who are prone to early postoperative recurrence.

Identification of Resectable N2 in NSCLC: A Single Center Experience and Review of the SEER Database

Background

Non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) with ipsilateral and/or subcarinal mediastinal lymphatic spread (N2) is a heterogeneous disease. The role of surgical resection in patients with N2 NSCLC remains controversial and no survival-based definition of “resectable N2” exists. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the factors that potentially affect the survival of N2 NSCLC patients who receive surgical resection and to define “resectable N2” based on the survival benefits.

Methods

Data from the open Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from the National Cancer Institute in the United States were used to construct a nomogram. Patients who received surgery between 2010 and 2015 for N2 NSCLC were included. Independent prognostic factors for survival identified through Cox regression analysis were used to create the nomogram. The C-index, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses, calibration curves, and risk stratification were used to evaluate the nomogram. The nomogram was also validated using data from 222 patients from Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH). Furthermore, lung cancer–related deaths were compared using competitive risk analysis.

Results

In total, 4267 patients were included in the SEER cohort. Male gender, old age, high T stage and grade, adenosquamous and squamous cell carcinoma, lower lobe and overlapping lesions, extended lobe or bilobectomy and pneumonectomy, no chemotherapy, radiation before and after surgery, positive number of lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio (LNR) were identified as independent risk factors for higher mortality. The nomogram was created using these parameters. The C-index was 0.665 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.651-0.679) and 0.722 (95% CI, 0.620-0.824) in the SEER and PUMCH cohorts, respectively. The calibration curves showed satisfactory consistency between the predicted and actual survival status in both the SEER and PUMCH cohorts. Competitive risk analysis confirmed that the variables in the nomogram, except radiation, are risk factors for prognosis.

Conclusions

“Resectable N2” should be assessed by a multidisciplinary team. The novel nomogram developed in this study may help with clinical decision-making for this patient population.

Tolerability of Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Setting in Japanese Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer: Phase I Study

OBJECTIVE

The combination of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) has not been studied in Japanese patients with resectable pancreatic cancer (PC). This study aimed to assess the tolerability of adjuvant GnP in Japanese patients with resected PC.

METHODS

This was a Phase I, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study of patients with resected PC in Japan. Patients received 125 mg/m2 of nab-paclitaxel and 1000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle for a total of 6 cycles. The primary end point was tolerability, defined as the absence of specific grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events by the end of cycle 2. Secondary end points included safety, disease-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were enrolled between June 2016 and February 2017 (median age, 68 years; 51% male; stage II, 95%). Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel met the tolerability criteria in 39 of the 40 patients included in the tolerability analysis set (97.5%). The most common treatment-related adverse events were leukopenia, neutropenia, alopecia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. After a follow-up of 30.1 months, median disease-free survival was 17.0 months and median overall survival was not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that adjuvant GnP is tolerable in Japanese patients with resected PC.Clinical Trial Registration No.: JapicCTI-163179.

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy for melanoma

Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of immunotherapy, especially checkpoint blockade inhibitors, in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma. More recently, improvements in survival have been reported in patients with high-risk resectable melanoma when these agents are used in the adjuvant setting. Increasing interest in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for high-risk resectable melanoma has been fueled by early reports of significant efficacy. We review the rationale and data behind utilizing neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Analyzing outcomes of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment for borderline-resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the perioperative period at an academic institution

BACKGROUND

Only 15-20% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients are upfront surgical candidates at presentation, and for this cohort of patients, the 5-year survival is a mere 20% despite adjuvant therapy. Previous data indicate that in clinical practice most of these cases are "borderline-resectable," and there is currently no mature data on perioperative treatment.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective electronic chart review of patients with "borderline-resectable"PDAC treated at an academic comprehensive cancer center, dividing them into groups based on surgery alone, surgery plus neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or neoadjuvant plus adjuvant perioperative treatment groups. The objectives were to determine the median overall survival (mOS), progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Statistical analysis was performed to assess the association of demographic, tumor traits, and interventions with OS, PFS and DFS.

RESULTS

Only surgery followed by adjuvant therapy showed an increase in mOS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.22; 95% CI, 0.09-0.51; P<0.001), after adjustment for radiation (yes vs. no), resection margins (R0 vs. R1 or R2), and tumor location (head vs. body or tail). Patients who received adjuvant therapy after surgery had 2.1 times greater odds to be alive at 24 months after diagnosis than those who had surgery alone (P=0.015). PFS and DFS were not statistically significantly different among treatment groups after adjustment. Those whose disease was located in the head of the pancreas had a significantly improved OS (HR =0.27; 95% CI, 0.11-0.64; P=0.003), PFS (HR =0.40; 95% CI, 0.17-0.94; P=0.035), and DFS (HR =0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.67; P=0.004). Negative margins led to a significant improvement in PFS (HR =0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.57; P<0.001) and DFS (HR =0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.57; P<0.001). Those who received radiation had a non-significantly improved OS, PFS, and DFS (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study corroborated that patients treated with adjuvant therapy after surgical resection had an mOS benefit as reported on prior phase III clinical trials. Patients with "borderline-resectable" pancreatic cancer are encouraged to participate in a clinical trial or clinically be treated with adjuvant therapy until more mature results from the ongoing perioperative prospective study are available.

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Patients With Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Approximately 20% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients have (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer [(B)RPC] at diagnosis. Upfront resection with adjuvant chemotherapy has long been the standard of care for these patients. However, although surgical quality has improved, still about 50% of patients never receive adjuvant treatment. Therefore, recent developments have focused on a neoadjuvant approach. Directly comparing results from neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimens is challenging due to differences in patient populations that influence outcomes. Neoadjuvant trials include all patients who have (B)RPC on imaging, while adjuvant-only trials include patients who underwent a complete resection and recovered to a good performance status without any evidence of residual disease. Guidelines recommend neoadjuvant treatment for BRPC patients mainly to improve negative resection margin (R0) rates. For resectable PDAC, upfront resection is still considered the standard of care. However, theoretical advantages of neoadjuvant treatment, including the increased R0 resection rate, early delivery of systemic therapy to all patients, directly addressing occult metastatic disease, and improved patient selection for resection, may also apply to these patients. A systematic review by intention-to-treat showed a superior median overall survival (OS) for any neoadjuvant approach (19 months) compared to upfront surgery (15 months) in (B)RPC patients. A neoadjuvant approach was recently supported by three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). For resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant treatment was superior in a Japanese RCT of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with S-1 vs. upfront surgery, with adjuvant S-1 in both arms (median OS: 37 vs. 27 months, p = 0.015). A Korean trial of neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy vs. upfront resection in BRPC patients was terminated early due to superiority of the neoadjuvant group (median OS: 21 vs. 12 months, p = 0.028; R0 resection: 52 vs. 26%, p = 0.004). The PREOPANC-1 trial for (B)RPC patients also showed favorable outcome for neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy vs. upfront surgery (median OS: 17 vs. 14 months, p = 0.07; R0 resection: 63 vs. 31%, p < 0.001). FOLFIRINOX is likely a better neoadjuvant regimen, because of superiority compared to gemcitabine in both the metastatic and adjuvant setting. Currently, five RCTs evaluating neoadjuvant modified or fulldose FOLFIRINOX are accruing patients.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: An Evolving Paradigm Shift

Non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with a high rate of recurrence and lethality. In addition, less than half of all patients are able to complete systemic therapy after curative-intent pancreatectomy. With its well-known potential benefits, this report highlights the current prospective data relevant to the use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in resectable PDAC. Recently, there have been numerous reports, many of which consist of long-awaited multi-intuitional trial data evaluating the use of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy in non-metastatic PDAC as well as the use of combination chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant setting. Currently, recommended guidelines for neoadjuvant systemic therapy only exist for borderline-resectable and locally-advanced disease. Given the plethora of new data, there has been a shift in the paradigm of how resectable pancreatic cancer is treated at certain centers across the world. This review highlights the relevant available data from recent sentinel prospective trials and how they relate to the systemic treatment of resectable PDAC in the neoadjuvant setting.

Duration of chemotherapy prior to chemoradiation affects survival outcomes for resected stage I-II or unresected stage III pancreatic cancer

Background

For resected early stage pancreatic cancer, RTOG 9704 evaluated the outcome of 3 weeks of postoperative chemotherapy (C) followed by chemoradiation (CRT) and further C. For unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer, a recent literature review of prospective studies showed that the duration of induction C prior to CRT can impact survival. However, the ideal duration of C prior to CRT remains unclear for these patient cohorts. This National Cancer Database (NCDB) study was performed to compare the outcome of various durations of C prior to CRT.

Methods

The NCDB was queried for resected primary stage I‐II, cT1‐3N0‐1M0, and unresected stage III, cT4N0‐1M0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with C + CRT (2004‐2015). Cohorts I‐II and III included stage I‐II and stage III cases, respectively. Patients were stratified by short (short C) and long duration (long C) of chemotherapy based on their median durations. Baseline patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were examined. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Kaplan‐Meier analysis, multivariable Cox proportional hazards method, and propensity score matching were used.

Results

Among 1577 patients, cohort I‐II had 839 patients and cohort III had 738 patients. The longer duration of chemotherapy prior to CRT showed improved OS in the multivariate analysis in both cohort I‐II (hazards ratio [HR] 0.72, P < 0.001) and cohort III (HR 0.83, P = 0.03). Using 1:1 propensity score matching, 610 patients for cohort I‐II and 542 patients for cohort III were matched. After matching, long C remained statistically significant for improved OS compared with short C in both cohort I‐II (median OS 26.1 vs 21.9 months; P = 0.003) and cohort III (median OS 16.7 vs 14.2; P = 0.02).

Conclusion

Our NCDB study using propensity score‐matched analysis showed a survival benefit for using the longer duration of chemotherapy compared to the shorter duration for both resected stage I‐II and unresected stage III pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine-based regimens improves the prognosis of node positive resectable pancreatic head cancer

The effectiveness of preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy (NAC) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unclear. The present study retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of NAC with gemcitabine (GEM)-based regimens or GEM monotherapy for resectable PDAC. Between 2006 and 2015, NAC with GEM was performed in 52 cases (head 31, and body and tail 21) and compared with 34 resection-only cases serving as controls (head 20, and body and tail 14). According to the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors guidelines, the treatment effect was a partial response in 5 cases, stable disease in 45 cases, and progressive disease in 2 cases. Maximum standardized uptake values and carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) values were significantly reduced after preoperative chemotherapy. Using the Evans grading system, the treatment effect was grade I in 31 patients, grade IIa in 8, and grade IIb in 3 cases. There were significant differences in the overall survival rate between the NAC and control groups, only in the patients with node-positive pancreatic head cancer. Significantly higher CA19-9 values in peripheral blood and higher lymph node metastasis and plexus invasion rates were observed in early-recurring cases within a year. The preoperative CA 19-9 cutoff value as an early recurrence risk factor was calculated as 30 U/ml in the NAC group and 88 U/ml in the control group. NAC with GEM prolonged survival in patients with node-positive pancreatic head cancer. High CA19-9 values before operation, lymph node metastases and plexus invasion were risk factors for early tumor recurrence after surgery. Preoperative chemotherapy would be necessary for resectable pancreatic head cancer as lymph node metastasis was observed in >60% with resectable PDAC. Moreover, if normalization of CA19-9 values is not achieved with NAC, extension of preoperative chemotherapy should be considered as for borderline resectable PDAC cases.

Use of Machine-Learning Algorithms in Intensified Preoperative Therapy of Pancreatic Cancer to Predict Individual Risk of Relapse

Background: Although surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic cancer (PC), long-term outcomes of this treatment remain poor. The aim of this study is to describe the feasibility of a neoadjuvant treatment with induction polychemotherapy (IPCT) followed by chemoradiation (CRT) in resectable PC, and to develop a machine-learning algorithm to predict risk of relapse. Methods: Forty patients with resectable PC treated in our institution with IPCT (based on mFOLFOXIRI, GEMOX or GEMOXEL) followed by CRT (50 Gy and concurrent Capecitabine) were retrospectively analyzed. Additionally, clinical, pathological and analytical data were collected in order to perform a 2-year relapse-risk predictive population model using machine-learning techniques. Results: A R0 resection was achieved in 90% of the patients. After a median follow-up of 33.5 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18 months and median overall survival (OS) was 39 months. The 3 and 5-year actuarial PFS were 43.8% and 32.3%, respectively. The 3 and 5-year actuarial OS were 51.5% and 34.8%, respectively. Forty-percent of grade 3-4 IPCT toxicity, and 29.7% of grade 3 CRT toxicity were reported. Considering the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, the number of resected lymph nodes, the presence of perineural invasion and the surgical margin status, a logistic regression algorithm predicted the individual 2-year relapse-risk with an accuracy of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–0.84, p = 0.005). The model-predicted outcome matched 64% of the observed outcomes in an external dataset. Conclusion: An intensified multimodal neoadjuvant approach (IPCT + CRT) in resectable PC is feasible, with an encouraging long-term outcome. Machine-learning algorithms might be a useful tool to predict individual risk of relapse. A small sample size and therapy heterogeneity remain as potential limitations.

Comparison of neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective

The role of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) remains controversial. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery in RPC.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only patients with RPC who underwent tumor resection and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment were enrolled. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated employing fixed-effects or random-effects models. The HR and its 95% CI were extracted from each article that provided survival curve. Publication bias was estimated using funnel plots and Egger’s regression test.

Results

In total, eleven studies were included with 9,386 patients. Of these patients, 2,508 (26.7%) received NAT. For patients with RPC, NAT resulted in an increased R0 resection rate (OR=1.89; 95% CI=1.26–2.83) and a reduced positive lymph node rate (OR=0.34; 95% CI=0.31–0.37) compared with upfront surgery. Nevertheless, patients receiving NAT did not exhibit a significantly increased overall survival (OS) time (HR=0.91; 95% CI=0.79–1.05).

Conclusion

In patients with RPC, R0 resection rate and positive lymph node rate after NAT were superior to those of patients with upfront surgery. The NAT group exhibited no significant effect on OS time when compared with the upfront surgery group. However, this conclusion requires more clinical evidence to improve its credibility.

[Is preoperative systemic chemotherapy recommended for resectable colorectal liver metastases? Oncosurgical aspects]

Surgical resection is still the only curative treatment for colorectal liver metastases, but this is one part of a complex therapy. Nowadays a patient with colorectal liver metastasis is not treated only by a surgeon or by an oncologist or even only by an invasive radiologist. Collective decisions, complement treatments give the only chance to treat these patients for longer time. Patients with colorectal liver metastases could be regarded as patients with chronic disease. Specially interesting are the various treatment options of resectable colorectal liver metastases. The efficiency and necessity of preoperative chemotherapy are still a hot spot in the treatment of resectable liver metastases. In this study, we try to summarize the international and local experiences and the current evidence of the use of preoperative chemotherapy in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Orv Hetil. 2018; 159(21): 823-830.

Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin Might Provide Equal Benefit as Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients with Resectable Synchronous Colon Cancer and Liver-confined Metastases: A Nationwide Database Study

BACKGROUND

Although irinotecan and oxaliplatin are both standard treatments for advanced colon cancer, it remains unknown whether either is effective for patients with resectable synchronous colon cancer and liver-confined metastasis (SCCLM) after curative surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A population-based cohort of patients diagnosed with de novo SCCLM between 2004 and 2009 was established by searching the database of the Taiwan Cancer Registry and the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. Patients who underwent curative surgery as their first therapy followed by chemotherapy doublets were classified into the irinotecan group or oxaliplatin group accordingly. Patients who received radiotherapy or did not receive chemotherapy doublets were excluded.

RESULTS

We included 6,533 patients with de novo stage IV colon cancer. Three hundred and nine of them received chemotherapy doublets after surgery; 77 patients received irinotecan and 232 patients received oxaliplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy. The patients in both groups exhibited similar overall survival (median: not reached vs. 40.8 months, p=0.151) and time to the next line of treatment (median: 16.5 vs. 14.3 months, p=0.349) in both univariate and multivariate analyses. Additionally, patients with resectable SCCLM had significantly shorter median overall survival than patients with stage III colon cancer who underwent curative surgery and subsequent adjuvant chemotherapy, but longer median overall survival than patients with de novo stage IV colon cancer who underwent surgery only at the primary site followed by standard systemic chemotherapy (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Irinotecan and oxaliplatin exhibited similar efficacy in patients who underwent curative surgery for resectable SCCLM.

Primary systemic therapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using mFOLFIRINOX: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Surgery followed by gemcitabine and/or a fluoropyrimidine is standard therapy for resectable PDAC. mFOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² , irinotecan 180 mg/m² , leucovorin 400 mg/m² Day 1, 5-FU 2400 mg/m²  × 48 h IV, peg-filgrastim 6 mg SQ day 3, every 14 days) has substantial activity in metastatic PDAC. We wished to determine the tolerability/efficacy of peri-operative mFOLFIRINOX in resectable PDAC.

METHODS

Patients with resectable PDAC (ECOG PS 0/1) received four cycles of mFOLFIRINOX pre- and post-surgery. The primary endpoint was completion of preoperative chemotherapy plus resection. Secondary endpoints included completion of all therapy, R0 resection, treatment related toxicity, PFS, and OS.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients enrolled: median age 62 (47-78); 20/21 (95%) completed four cycles of preoperative mFOLFIRINOX; response by RECIST was 1 CR, 3 PR, 16 SD; 17/21 (81%) completed resection, 16/21 (76%) R0; 14/21 (66%) completed four cycles of postoperative mFOLFIRINOX. Grade 3 and 4 toxicity occurred in 23% and 14% patients pre-operatively, 26% and 6.0% post-operatively. Nine patients are alive with median follow-up of 27.7 (3.1-47.1) months.

CONCLUSIONS

PST using mFOLFIRINOX in resectable PDAC is feasible and tolerable. R0 resection rate is high and survival promising, requiring longer follow-up and larger studies for definitive assessment.

Preoperative transarterial chemoembolization for resectable hepatocellular carcinoma in Asia area: a meta-analysis of random controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically evaluate the influence of preoperative transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on long-term prognosis and perioperative safety.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Wanfang, CNKI, VIP data were searched, combined with Manual Retrieval and Cited Reference Search to collect the published randomized controlled trial (RCT) about the influence of pre-TACE for curative resection of HCC. The searching cutoff date was 2016/02/25, all the data obtained were statistically analyzed using RevMan5.2 software recommended by Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

A total of 5 RCT including 430 (pre-TACE group: 212, surgery alone group: 218) patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: there was no difference between the 2 groups on overall survival (OS) rate [HR 1.25, 95%CI (0.92-1.68)], disease free survival (DFS) rate [HR 0.95 (0.76-1.19)], perioperative mortality rate [OR 0.70 (0.22-2.30)], or blood loss [SMD 0.07 (-0.14-0.29)], whereas the subgroup analysis revealed that pre-TACE would result in longer operation time [SMD 0.31 (0.06-0.57)], higher postoperative morbidity rate [OR 1.90 (1.02-3.53)] and combined resection rate of perihepatic organs [OR 5.46 (2.73-11.78)] in subgroup with mean tumor diameter >5cm.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our study, pre-TACE treatment cannot improve the long-term prognosis of resectable HCC. With the growth of the tumor diameter, especially when it is over 5cm, it might add difficulties to surgery and affect the perioperative safety.

Clinical impact of neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Although the only curative strategy for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, up to 85% of patients relapse after surgery. The efficacy of neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) remains unclear and there is no systematic review focusing fully on this issue. Recently, two prospective trials of neoadjuvant treatment in RPC were terminated early because of slow recruiting and existing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have too small sample sizes. Therefore, to overcome probable biases, it would be more reasonable to include both RCTs and non-randomised studies (NRSs) with selected criteria. This review aims to investigate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CTx) and chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in RPC using RCTs and specific NRSs.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

This systematic review will include conventional RCTs as group I, and quasi-randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials and prospective cohort studies as group II. Two groups will be assessed and analysed separately. Comprehensive literature search will use Medline, Embase, Cochrane library and Scopus databases. Additionally, we will search references from relevant studies and abstracts from major conferences. Two authors will independently identify, screen, include studies, extract data and assess the risk of bias. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus with another author. An independent methodologist will categorise and assess NRSs to minimise heterogeneity. In each study group, meta-analysis will be conducted using a random-effect model and statistical heterogeneity will be evaluated using I(2)-statistics. Publication bias will be visualised with contour-enhanced funnel plots and analysed with Egger's test. In group I, cumulative meta-analysis will be considered because the CTx regimen and CRT protocol have changed. The quality of evidence will be summarised using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not use primary data, and formal ethical approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and committee conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42015023820.

Bevacizumab and Combination Chemotherapy in rectal cancer Until Surgery (BACCHUS): a phase II, multicentre, open-label, randomised study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with high-risk cancer of the rectum

BACKGROUND

In locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is the standard of care, but the risk of local recurrence is low with good quality total mesorectal excision (TME), although many still develop metastatic disease. Current challenges in treating rectal cancer include the development of effective organ-preserving approaches and the prevention of subsequent metastatic disease. Neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy (NACT) alone may reduce local and systemic recurrences, and may be more effective than postoperative treatments which often have poor compliance. Investigation of intensified NACT is warranted to improve outcomes for patients with LARC. The objective is to evaluate feasibility and efficacy of a four-drug regimen containing bevacizumab prior to surgical resection.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a multi-centre, randomized phase II trial. Eligible patients must have histologically confirmed LARC with distal part of the tumour 4-12 cm from anal verge, no metastases, and poor prognostic features on pelvic MRI. Sixty patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive folinic acid + flurourcil + oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) + bevacizumab (BVZ) or FOLFOX + irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) + BVZ, given in 2 weekly cycles for up to 6 cycles prior to TME. Patients stop treatment if they fail to respond after 3 cycles (defined as ≥ 30 % decrease in Standardised Uptake Value (SUV) compared to baseline PET/CT). The primary endpoint is pathological complete response rate. Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, MRI tumour regression grade, involved circumferential resection margin rate, T and N stage downstaging, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, local control, 1-year colostomy rate, acute toxicity, compliance to chemotherapy.

DISCUSSION

In LARC, a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen - if feasible, effective and tolerable would be suitable for testing as the novel arm against the current standards of short course preoperative radiotherapy (SCPRT) and/or fluorouracil (5FU)-based CRT in a future randomised phase III trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial identifier BACCHUS: NCT01650428.

Changing treatment patterns in elderly patients with resectable colon cancer

AIM

To evaluate changing treatment patterns and survival outcomes of elderly patients (age 70 years or older) with resectable colon cancer over the past 15 years.

METHODS

A total of 857 patients aged over 70 years who were managed for a resectable colon cancer between 1994 and 2010 were identified and their clinical variables were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The patients' median age was 74 years (range: 70-94 years). In all, 171 patients (20%) were stage I, 375 (43.8%) were stage II and 311 (36.3%) were stage III. Over 95% of all patients underwent surgery regardless of age or diagnosis year. In stage III colon cancer the proportion of patients who received adjuvant treatment increased the more recent the year of diagnosis (1994-2000, 47%; 2001-2005, 66%; 2006-2010, 70%; P = 0.017). According to analysis by age group, older patients were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy in both stage II (more than 75 years, 47.3%; 70-74 years, 59.4%; P < 0.001) and stage III (more than 75 years, 51.1%; 70-74 years, 76.7%; P < 0.001). Age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in stage II colon cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients with resectable colon cancer received surgical treatment in more than 95% of cases without reference to age or diagnosis year. The proportion of patients who received adjuvant treatment increased according to the recency of diagnosis, but decreased abruptly according to increase in age.

Ribonucleotide reductase M2 does not predict survival in patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Ribonucleotide reductase M2 (RRM2) was associated with pancreatic tumor progression and resistance to gemcitabine. This study aimed to determine if RRM2 protein expression was prognostic in patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma and predictive of adjuvant gemcitabine benefit.

METHODS

117 patients underwent tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 10/1999 to 12/2007. We constructed tissue microarrays from paraffin-embedded tumors and determined RRM2 protein expression using immunohistochemistry and grouped as negative or positive. We estimated overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using the Kaplan-Meier method and examined the prognostic and predictive value of RRM2 expression using Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

RRM2 expression showed no prognostic value in the entire group regarding OS (median OS 30.9 months in RRM2-positive versus 13.7 months in RRM2-negative, P = 0.26) and PFS (median OS 20.6 months in RRM2-positive versus 11.8 months in RRM2-negative, P = 0.46). RRM2 expression did not predict adjuvant gemcitabine benefit in the subgroup of 44 patients who received gemcitabine therapy (median OS 31.2 versus 15.2 months, P = 0.62; median PFS 11.3 versus 14.0 months, P = 0.35). Cox proportional hazards regression showed no prognostic effect of RRM2 expression on OS and PFS in the subgroup of 44 patients. However, the number of positive lymph nodes and perineural invasion were prognostic factors for OS (HR 1.2, P = 0.005) and for PFS (HR 5.5, P = 0.007), respectively.

CONCLUSION

RRM2 protein expression in pancreatic adenocarcinoma is neither prognostic nor predictive of adjuvant gemcitabine benefit in patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Early mortality risk score: identification of poor outcomes following upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Identifying pancreatic cancer patients at high risk of early mortality following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is important for treatment decisions in a multidisciplinary setting. This study examines the preoperative predictors of early mortality following PD and combines these variables into an early mortality risk score (EMRS).

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent PD for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between 30 August 1993 and 28 February 2005 were reviewed. Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify predictors of early mortality, defined as death at 9 and 12 months. EMRS was constructed from univariate associated risk factors (age >75 years, tumor size ≥ 3 cm, poor differentiation, co-morbid diseases) with each factor assigned 1 point (range of 0-4). EMRS was evaluated as an independent predictor of death at 9 and 12 months.

RESULTS

On univariate analysis, risk factors for death at 9 months included age ≥ 75 years (RR, 1.6; p = .009), comorbid disease (RR, 1.5; p = 0.020), tumor ≥ 3 cm (RR, 1.4; P = 0.050), and poor differentiation (RR, 2.1; P < 0.001). EMRS was associated with early mortality among those who did (p = 0.038) and did not receive adjuvant treatment (p < 0.001). A modified EMRS without tumor differentiation was also associated with early mortality (p < 0.001). Results persisted when reanalyzed using death at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

EMRS may identify patients at risk of early mortality following PD who may be candidates for alternatively sequenced treatment protocols. Prospective validation of this EMRS is needed.