Search

Introduction: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) represents the complexity of interaction between cancer and cells of the tumor microenvironment (TME). Immune cells affect tumor cell behavior, thus driving cancer progression. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are responsible of the desmoplastic and fibrotic reaction by regulating deposition and remodeling of extracellular matrix (ECM). As tumor-promoting cells abundant in PDAC ECM, CAFs represent promising targets for novel anticancer interventions. However, relevant clinical trials are hampered by the lack of specific markers and elusive differences among CAF subtypes. Indeed, while single-cell transcriptomic analyses have provided important information on the cellular constituents of PDACs and related molecular pathways, studies based on the identification of protein markers in tissues aimed at identifying CAF subtypes and new molecular targets result incomplete., Methods: Herein, we applied multiplexed Imaging Mass Cytometry (IMC) at single-cell resolution on 8 human PDAC tissues to depict the PDAC composing cells, and profiling immune cells, endothelial cells (ECs), as well as endocrine cells and tumor cells., Results: We focused on CAFs by characterizing up to 19 clusters distinguished by phenotype, spatiality, and interaction with immune and tumor cells. We report evidence that specific subtypes of CAFs (CAFs 10 and 11) predominantly are enriched at the tumor-stroma interface and closely associated with tumor cells. CAFs expressing different combinations of FAP, podoplanin and cadherin-11, were associated with a higher level of CA19-9. Moreover, we identified specific subsets of FAP + and podoplanin + /cadherin-11 + CAFs enriched in patients with negative prognosis., Discussion: The present study provides new general insights into the complexity of the PDAC microenvironment by defining phenotypic heterogeneities and spatial distributions of CAFs, thus suggesting different functions of their subtypes in the PDAC microenvironment., Competing Interests: LR reports grant/research funding to institution from Agios, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, Fibrogen, Incyte, IPSEN, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Servier, Taiho Oncology, TransThera Sciences, and Zymeworks; consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Elevar Therapeutics, Exelixis, Genenta, Hengrui, Incyte, IPSEN, IQVIA, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Servier, Taiho Oncology, and Zymeworks; lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Guerbet, Incyte, IPSEN, Roche, and Servier; and travel expenses from AstraZeneca. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision. The reviewer MM declared a shared affiliation, with no collaboration, with the authors to the handling editor at the time of the review., (Copyright © 2024 Erreni, Fumagalli, D’Anna, Sollai, Bozzarelli, Nappo, Zanini, Parente, Garlanda, Rimassa, Terracciano, Biswas, Zerbi, Mantovani and Doni.)

Purpose: The clinical outcome and the efficacy of chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients with BRCA1/2 Variants of Unknown Significance (VUS) is unknown. We explored the effects of chemotherapy with or without Platinum in non metastatic and metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with BRCA1/2 VUS., Methods: A retrospective analysis of non-metastatic or metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with gBRCA1/2 VUS treated in 13 Italian centers between November 2015 and December 2020 was performed. All patients were assessed for toxicity and RECIST 1.1 response. Metastatic patients were evaluated for survival outcome., Results: 30 pancreatic cancer patients with gBRCA1/2 VUS were considered: 20 were M+ and 10 were non-M+. Pl-CT was recommended to 16 patients: 10 M+ (6 FOLFIRINOX and 4 PAXG) and 6 non-M+ (3 FOLFIRINOX and 3 PAXG); 11 patients received Nabpaclitaxel-Gemcitabine (AG; 8 M+) and 3 patients (2 M+) were treated with Gemcitabine (G). The RECIST 1.1 response rate was 27% for AG and 44% for Pl-CT (22% for (m) FOLFIRINOX and 71% PAXG). 1 year Progression-Free Survival was 37.5% for patients treated with AG and 33% in the Pl-CT subgroup. Median Overall Survival (OS) was 23.5 months for patients treated with AG and 14 months for the Pl-CT subgroup. 1 Year and 2 Year OS were numerically better for AG (1 Year OS: 75% vs 60% and 2 Year OS: 50% and 20% in AG and Pl-CT subgroups, respectively) as well., Conclusions: Pl-CT does not seem to be associated with a better outcome compared to AG chemotherapy in PDAC patients with BRCA 1/2 VUS., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) + surgical resection for pancreatic cancer (PC) has gained consensus in recent years. Pathological response (PR) is generally assessed according to the College of American Pathologists grading system, ranging from 0 (complete response) to 3 (no response). The aim of our study is to evaluate the PR in a series of resections for PC after NAT and its prognostic implication. 112 patients undergone NAT and resection for PC between 2011 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. PR was 0/1, 2 and 3 in 18 (15%), 79 (61%) and 29 (24%) cases, respectively. Chemotherapy regimens different from FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (OR 11.61 (2.53-53.36), p = 0.002) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 11.28 (1.89-67.23), p = 0.008) were associated to PR-3. Median follow-up was 25.8 (3.6-130.5) months. For PR-0/1, PR-2 and PR-3, median DFS was 45.8, 11.5, 4.6 months (p < 0.0001), respectively, while median OS was not reached, 27.1 and 17.5 months (p = 0.0006), respectively. At univariate analysis, PR-0/1 was significantly associated to better DFS and OS (HR 0.33 (0.17-0.67), p = 0.002; HR 0.20 (0.07-0.54), p = 0.002, respectively). At multivariate analysis, pancreaticoduodenectomy (HR 0.50 (0.30-0.84), p = 0.009), LNR (HR 27.14 (1.21-608.9), p = 0.038) and lymphovascular invasion (HR 1.99 (1.06-3.76), p = 0.033) were independently associated to DFS; pre-treatment CA 19.9 value (HR 1.00 (1.00-1.00), p = 0.025), post-treatment resectability status (HR 0.51 (0.28-0.95), p = 0.035), pancreaticoduodenectomy (HR 0.56 (0.32-0.99), p = 0.050), severe morbidity (2.99 (1.22-7.55), p = 0.017), LNR (HR 56.8 (2.08-1548.3), p = 0.017), lymphovascular invasion (HR 2.18 (1.08-4.37), p = 0.029) were independently associated to OS. PR did not reach statistical significance at multivariate analysis. A favorable PR is observed only in a limited number of cases. The prognostic role of PR, despite being promising, remains unclear and further multicentric studies are needed., (© 2023. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Aim: The gold standard of care for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the integrated treatment of surgery and chemotherapy (ChT), but about 50% of patients present with unresectable disease. Our study evaluated the efficacy in terms of local control, survival and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)., Methods: A retrospective study (STEP study) analyzed patients with LAPC treated with a dose of 45 Gy in 6 fractions. Local control (LC), distant progression free survival (DPFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were analyzed according to the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: A total of 142 patients were evaluated. Seventy-six patients (53.5%) received induction ChT before SBRT. The median follow-up was 11 months. One-, 2- and 3-year LC rate was 81.9%, 69.1% and 58.5%. Median DPFS was 6.03 months; 1- and 2-year DPFS rate was 19.9% and 4.5%. Median OS was 11.6 months and 1-, 2- and 3-year OS rates were 45.4%, 16.1%, and 9.8%. At univariate analysis, performed by the log-rank test, age < 70 years ( p = 0.037), pre-SBRT ChT ( p = 0.004) and post-SBRT ChT ( p = 0.019) were associated with better OS. No patients experienced G3 toxicity., Conclusion: SBRT represents an effective and safe therapeutic option in the multimodal treatment of patients with LAPC in terms of increased LC. When SBRT was sequentially integrated with ChT, the treatment proved to be promising in terms of OS as well.

There are different cancers in the peri-ampullary region, including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), duodenum cancers (DCs), and ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC). Here, significant morphological-molecular characterizations should be necessary for the distinction of primary tumours and classifications of their subtypes of cancers. The sub classification of AACs might include up to five different variants, according to different points of view, concerning the prevalence of the two more-cellular components found in the ampulla. In particular, regarding the AACs, the most important subtypes are represented by the intestinal (INT) and the pancreato-biliary (PB) ones. The subtyping of AACs is essential for diagnosis, and their identifications have been impacting clinical management responses to treatments and overall survival (os) after surgery. Pb is associated with a worse clinical outcome. Otherwise, the criteria, through which are possible to attribute its subtype classification, are not well established. A triage of immune markers represented by CK7, CK20, and CDX-2 seem to represent the best compromise in order to split the cohort of AAC patients in the INT and PB groups. The test of choice for the sub-classification of AACs is represented by the immuno-histochemical approach, in which its molecular classification acquires its diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic value for both the INT and PB patients.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a dismal disease with a poor 5-year overall survival rate (~10%). The revolution of immunotherapy in clinical oncology has not substantially changed clinical outcome for patients with PDAC. Despite outstanding efforts, neither immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone, nor in combination with chemotherapy or targeted therapies have shown encouraging results. This failure mirrors the lack of knowledge about the real key players of immune system senescence and the complexity of the tumor microenvironment in PDAC. However, some hope can be derived from PARP-inhibitor combinations, vaccines, and CAR-T-cells therapy. In this review, we comprehensively summarize the latest updates about the use of ICIs in PDAC, focusing on clinical evidence and ongoing studies highlighting explanations for the failure of immunotherapy and possible solutions.

Background: Survival after surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains poor, due to early recurrence (ER) of the disease. A global definition of ER is lacking and different cut-off values (6, 8, and 12 months) have been adopted. The aims of this study were to define the optimal cut-off for the definition of ER and predictive factors for ER., Methods: Recurrence was recorded for all consecutive patients undergoing upfront surgery for PDAC at our institute between 2010 and 2017. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were utilized, to estimate the optimal cut-off for the definition of ER as a predictive factor for poor post-progression survival (PPS). To identify predictive factors of ER, univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used., Results: Three hundred and fifty one cases were retrospectively evaluated. The recurrence rate was 76.9%. ER rates were 29.0%, 37.6%, and 47.6%, when adopting 6, 8, and 12 months as cut-offs, respectively. A significant difference in median PPS was only shown between ER and late recurrence using 12 months as cut-off ( p = 0.005). In the multivariate analysis, a pre-operative value of CA 19-9 > 70.5 UI/L (OR 3.10 (1.41-6.81); p = 0.005) and the omission of adjuvant treatment (OR 0.18 (0.08-0.41); p < 0.001) were significant predictive factors of ER., Conclusions: A twelve-months cut-off should be adopted for the definition of ER. Almost 50% of upfront-resected patients presented ER, and it significantly affected the prognosis. A high preoperative value of CA 19-9 and the omission of adjuvant treatment were the only predictive factors for ER.

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) harbouring germline BRCA1-2 pathogenic variants (gBRCA1-2pv) is a distinct nosological entity. Information on second-line therapy (2LT) outcome in this setting is lacking., Methods: Data of gBRCA1-2pv metastatic PDAC patients treated with chemotherapy were collected. A primary analysis of 2LT RECIST response, median progression-free survival (mPFS 2 ) and overall survival (mOS 2 ), was performed. A secondary analysis addressed the impact of timing of platinum introduction on the outcome of patients receiving at least a first-line combination chemotherapy (1LT)., Results: Eighty-four gBRCA1-2pv metastatic PDAC patients were enrolled. The primary analysis, including 43 patients, highlighted a significant improvement of mPFS 2 and a doubled response rate, in the platinum-based 2LT subgroup as compared to the platinum-free (8.8 versus 3.7 months, p = 0.013). Seventy-seven patients were included in the secondary analysis. Median PFS 1 of 3- and 4-drug platinum-based 1LT significantly outperformed both platinum-free combinations and platinum-based doublets (11.4 versus 6.4 versus 7.9 months, p = 0.01). Albeit still immature, data on mOS paralleled those on mPFS., Conclusions: This study highlighted the beneficial role of platinum agents in gBRCA1-2pv PDAC patients also in second-line treatment setting. However, our data suggest that early use of 3- and 4-drug platinum-based chemotherapy combinations provides a survival outcome advantage., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Information about the adherence to scientific societies guidelines in the 'real-world' therapeutic management of oncological patients are lacking. This multicenter, prospective survey was aimed to improve the knowledge relative to 2017-2018 recommendations of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM)., Patients and Methods: Treatment-naive adult patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled. Group A received adjuvant therapy, group B received primary chemotherapy, and group C had metastatic disease. The results on patients accrued until 31 October 2019 with a mature follow-up were presented., Results: Since July 2017, 833 eligible patients of 923 (90%) were enrolled in 44 Italian centers. The median age was 69 years (range 36-89 years; 24% >75 years); 48% were female; 93% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) score of 0 or 1; group A: 16%, group B: 30%; group C: 54%; 72% Nord, 13% Center, 15% South. In group A, guidelines adherence was 68% [95% confidence interval (CI) 59% to 76%]; 53% of patients received gemcitabine and 15% gemcitabine + capecitabine; median CA19.9 was 29 (range 0-7300; not reported 15%); median survival was 36.4 months (95% CI 27.5-47.3 months). In group B, guidelines adherence was 96% (95% CI 92% to 98%); 55% of patients received nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine, 27% FOLFIRINOX, 12% gemcitabine, and 3% clinical trial; median CA19.9 was 337 (range 0-20220; not reported 9%); median survival was 18.1 months (95% CI 15.6-19.9 months). In group C, guidelines adherence was 96% (95% CI 94% to 98%); 71% of patients received nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine, 16% gemcitabine, 8% FOLFIRINOX, and 4% clinical trial; liver and lung metastases were reported in 76% and 23% of patients, respectively; median CA19.9 value was 760 (range 0-1374500; not reported 9%); median survival was 10.0 months (95% CI 9.1-11.1 months)., Conclusions: The GARIBALDI survey shows a very high rate of adherence to guidelines and survival outcome in line with the literature. CA19.9 testing should be enhanced; nutritional and psychological counseling represent an unmet need. Enrollment to assess adherence to updated AIOM guidelines is ongoing., Competing Interests: Disclosure RM declares grants or contracts from AstraZeneca and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Eli Lilly, PANAVANCE, Celgene, AstraZeneca, Viatris, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Servier, SOTIO, and Baxter. BF declares payment for consulting fees from Servier and AAA Novartis and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Eli Lilly, MSD, EISAI, and Bayer. MM declares grants or contracts from Roche and Novartis, payment for consulting fees from Viatris, AstraZeneca, MSD, and Merck; payment for participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Novartis. CL declares payment for consulting fees from Astrazeneca e Merck and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Pfizer, Ipsen and Celgene. DMMC declares payment for participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from OncoSil and Olaparib and for Leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid from Editorial Board Future Oncology. SM declares payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Eli Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Italfarmaco, and BMS and for participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Eli Lilly, Merck, Pfizer, Janssen, and BMS; payment or has a leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid from AIOM Sicilia. GE declares payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Viatris, Amgen, and AstraZeneca and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ipsen and Viatris. SC declares payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, Merk, Servier, Bayer, and Sanofi and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, Merk, and Servier. GGC declares payment for attending meetings and/or travel from Incyte, Eli Lilly, Amgen, and MSD and for the participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Eli Lilly, MSD, and AstraZeneca. ME declares payment for consulting fees from MSD. GM declares consulting fees from Italfarmaco, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Roche, Merck, Eli Lilly, Servier, and Amgen. PL declares consulting fees from Ipsen and Italfarmaco. CP declares institutional grants from Ely Lilly, Bayer, and Roche; consulting fees from BMS, Ely Lilly, Novartis, and Merck and for the participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for BMS, Amgen, and Novartis. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The different oncological outcomes of invasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (I-IPMN) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are debated. This study aimed to compare disease recurrence patterns and histopathological characteristics in patients with resected I-IPMN and PDAC., Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing surgical resection for stage I-III I-IPMN or PDAC between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy or resected for Tis neoplasia were excluded. All surgical specimens were re-staged according to AJCC-8th-edition., Results: A total of 330 patients were included, of whom 43 had I-IPMN and 287 had PDAC. Median follow-up time was 26.7 (1.3-92.3) months and estimated median disease-free survival (DFS) was 60.3 months (47.2-73.4) for I-IPMN and 23.8 (19.3-28.2) months for PDAC (p < 0.001). During follow-up, 32.6% of I-IPMN and 67.9% of PDAC patients experienced recurrence (p < 0.001). The sites of first recurrence were the lungs (38.5% vs 13.1%, p = 0.027), liver (28.6% vs 45.0%, p = 0.180) and local (15.4% vs 36.6%, p = 0.101) for I-IPMN and PDAC, respectively. At multivariate analysis, I-IPMN histology remained an independent predictive factor for longer DFS (OR 0.528, CI 95% 0.278-1.000, p = 0.050), regardless of stage or adjuvant chemotherapy. I-IPMN and PDAC differed in rates of neuroinvasion (51.2% vs 97.2%) and positive lymph node status (N+) (46.5% vs 82.7%), especially in patients with lower T status., Conclusion: I-IPMN showed a different recurrence pattern compared to PDAC, with a higher lung tropism, and longer DFS. This different biological behavior is associated with lower rates of neuroinvasion and nodal involvement, especially in early-stage disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2022 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: It is unclear whether invasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) has different clinical and prognostic characteristics, beyond histological factors, when compared to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)., Aims: compare prognostic features of resected PDAC and invasive IPMN METHODS: A retrospective study of patients resected for PDAC or invasive IPMN realized at Humanitas Cancer Center's Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Milan, Italy, between 2010 and 2016. Data recorded included patient demographics, onset symptoms, preoperative health status, tumor features, histology and surgical characteristics. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier and prognostic factors for survival were assessed by multivariate Cox regression., Results: A total of 332 patients were included (PDAC, n = 289; invasive IPMN, n = 43). Patients with invasive IPMN had better overall survival than PDAC patients (median: 76.6 versus 25.6 months; 5-year OS rate: 65.4% vs. 14.2%; p < 0.001). PDAC histology was associated with a significantly higher risk of death than IPMN (hazard ratio 1.815, 95% CI: 1.02, 3.24; p = 0.044). Survival was also worse with PDAC in early-stage disease (IA-IB-IIA, N0). In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of worse survival included perineural invasion, preoperative ASA physical status ≥3 and pain at diagnosis., Conclusions: Patients with IPMN had a better prognosis than PDAC patients, regardless of disease stage., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None., (Copyright © 2021 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Germline BRCA1-2 pathogenic variants (gBRCA1-2pv)-related pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) showed increased sensitivity to DNA cross-linking agents. This study aimed at exploring safety profile, dose intensity, and activity of different chemotherapy regimens in this setting., Patients and Methods: gBRCA1-2pv PDAC patients of any age and clinical tumor stage who completed a first course of chemotherapy were eligible. A descriptive analysis of chemotherapy toxicity, dose intensity, response, and survival outcomes was performed., Results: A total of 85 gBRCA1-2pv PDAC patients treated in 21 Italian centers between December 2008 and March 2021were enrolled. Seventy-four patients were assessable for toxicity and dose intensity, 83 for outcome. Dose intensity was as follows: nab-paclitaxel 72%, gemcitabine 76% (AG); cisplatin 75%, nab-paclitaxel 73%, capecitabine 73%, and gemcitabine 65% (PAXG); fluorouracil 35%, irinotecan 58%, and oxaliplatin 64% (FOLFIRINOX). When compared with the literature, grade 3-4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and diarrhea were increased with PAXG, and unmodified with AG and FOLFIRINOX. RECIST responses were numerically higher with the three- (81%) or four-drug (73%) platinum-containing regimens that outperformed AG (41%) and oxaliplatin-based doublets (56%). Carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) reduction >89% at nadir was reported in two-third of metastatic patients treated with triplets and quadruplets, as opposed to 33% and 45% of patients receiving oxaliplatin-based doublets or AG, respectively. All patients receiving AG experienced disease progression, with a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 6.4 months, while patients treated with platinum-containing triplets or quadruplets had an mPFS >10.8 months. Albeit still immature, data on overall survival seemed to parallel those on PFS., Conclusions: Our data, as opposed to figures expected from the literature, highlighted that platinum-based regimens provoked an increased toxicity on proliferating cells, when dose intensity was maintained, or an as-expected toxicity, when dose intensity was reduced, while no change in toxicity and dose intensity was evident with AG. Furthermore, an apparently improved outcome of platinum-based triplets or quadruplets over other regimens was observed., Competing Interests: Disclosure MN reports travel expenses from Celgene; speaker honorarium from Accademia della Medicina; and consultant honoraria from EMD Serono. IG serves on the advisory board of Amgen, Takeda, and Eisai. GT reports travel expenses and personal honoraria for advisory boards from Celgene, Merck, AstraZeneca, Servier, and BMS. SC reports travel expenses and personal honoraria for the following companies: Amgen, Bayer, Eli Lilly, and Servier (as speaker); Amgen, Eli Lilly, Bayer, Baxter, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Servier (on advisory boards). Amgen, Baxter, Eli Lilly, Celgene, Novartis, and MSD (as consultant); receiving research grant from Celgene and Eisai. MM reports personal honoraria as speaker or consultant for the following companies: AstraZeneca, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, EUSA Pharma, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Ipsen, and Mylan. MR reports travel expenses and personal honoraria for advisory boards from Celgene, Merck, AstraZeneca, Baxalta (2016), Baxter, Sanofi (2017), Servier, Shire, Eli Lilly, Pfizer (2016), Novocure (2016), and Novartis (2016); personal honoraria for steering committee work for AstraZeneca, and nonremunerated steering committee activities for Boston Pharmaceuticals. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ampullary carcinoma (AC) is histologically classified as intestinal (In-AC), pancreaticobiliary (Pb-AC) or mixed-AC. The prognostic role of AC subtypes has been debated and remains unclear. The aims of this study were to evaluate outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for each subtype of AC and to compare these with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [PDAC] and distal cholangiocarcinoma [DCC]., Methods: PDs performed for AC between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. Histological subtype was obtained for all patients. One-year, 3-year and 5-year disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were calculated. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to compare Pb-AC, In-AC and mixed-AC. Comparison with PDs performed for PDAC and DCC during the same period was also performed., Results: A total of 97 patients undergoing PD for AC were evaluated: 34 (35.1%) In-AC, 54 (55.7%) Pb-AC and 9 mixed-AC (9.3%). DFS and OS rates for Pb-AC were significantly lower compared to In-AC (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01), but similar to mixed-AC (p = 0.3 and p = 0.4). Adjuvant therapy was not associated with increased survival, regardless of the histological subtype (p > 0.05). During the same period, 337 and 53 PDs for PDAC and DCC, respectively, were performed. In-AC was associated with significantly better outcomes compared to PDAC and DCC (p < 0.001); DFS and OS rates for Pb-AC and mixed AC were significantly higher compared to PDAC (p < 0.001), but similar to DCC (p > 0.05)., Conclusions: Pb-AC has significantly worse survival compared to In-AC. Moreover, mixed-AC should be considered as Pb-AC. Pb-AC and mixed-AC seem to have better prognosis compared to PDAC, but similar to DCC., (Copyright © 2021 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Regorafenib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, proved to be active in patients with soft tissue sarcomas (STS)., Methods: We conducted an open-label, non-randomized, single-center phase II study in advanced pretreated STS patients. Patients received regorafenib 160 mg daily on days 1 enrule 21 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) at 8 weeks. Toxicity was registered., Results: Between April 2015 and November 2016, 21 patients were enrolled in the trial. A total of 13 out of 21 evaluable patients (61.9%) were progression-free at 8 weeks. Median PFS was 3.8 months (95% CI: 2.1-9.4). Median overall survival was 14.8 months (95% CI: 7.7-27.8). In the intention-to-treat population, we reported a PFS of 66.7% at 3 months (95% CI: 40.4-83.4) and 16.7% at 12 months (95% CI: 4.1-36.5). As per the RECIST criteria, the response rate was 4.7% (1 partial response out of 21 evaluable patients) with a clinical benefit rate of 61.9%; no complete response was observed. Treatment was well tolerated., Conclusion: Regorafenib shows signs of clinical activity in patients with advanced STS., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02307500.

Objectives: To evaluate the role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as a local ablative treatment (LAT) in oligometastatic pancreatic cancer., Methods: Patients affected by histologically confirmed stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma were included in this analysis. Endpoints are local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: From 2013 to 2017, a total of 41 patients were treated with SBRT on 64 metastases. Most common sites of disease were lung (29.3%) and liver (56.1%). LC at 1 and 2 years were 88.9% (95% CI 73.2-98.6) and 73.9% (95% CI 50-87.5), respectively. Median LC was 39.9 months (95% CI 23.3-not reached).PFS rates at 1 and 2 years were 21.9% (95% CI 10.8-35.4) and 10.9% (95% CI 3.4-23.4), respectively. Median PFS was 5.4 months (95%CI 3.1-11.3).OS rates at 1 and 2 years were 79.9% (95% CI 63.7-89.4) and 46.7% (95% CI 29.6-62.2). Median OS was 23 months (95%CI 14.1-31.8)., Conclusions: Our results, although based on a retrospective analysis of a small number of patients, show that patients with oligometastatic pancreatic cancer may benefit from local treatment with SBRT. Larger studies are warranted to confirm these results., Advances in Knowledge: Selected patients affected by oligometastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma can benefit from local ablative approaches, like SBRT.

Aim: Regorafenib may be active in different cancer types. This Phase II trial included patients with various refractory cancer types treated with regorafenib. Here, we report the results of the pancreatic adenocarcinoma cohort. Methods: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 8 weeks; further investigation of regorafenib would be warranted with a PFS rate ≥50%. Results:  A total of 20 patients were enrolled. The best response was stable disease in four patients (20%). The 8-week PFS rate was 25% with a median PFS of 1.7 months (95% CI: 1.5-2.0). A total of 13 patients (65%) experienced grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events. Conclusion: The study did not meet its primary end point. Further investigation of regorafenib monotherapy in this setting is not recommended. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02307500.