Search

Background: Futibatinib is the only covalent inhibitor of FGFR1-4 to gain regulatory approval in oncology. Here, we present genomic analyses of tissue biopsies and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from patients with one of nearly 20 tumor types treated with futibatinib in the phase I/II FOENIX study., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients included those with ctDNA samples collected per protocol at baseline and/or progression on futibatinib in the phase Ib portion of the study for FGF/FGFR-altered advanced solid tumors or the phase II portion of the study for FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement-positive cholangiocarcinoma. Assessments included analytical concordance between tumor and ctDNA analyses for detection of FGFR alterations, association of ctDNA-detected co-occurring genomic alterations with response to futibatinib, and determination of patterns of acquired resistance following progression on futibatinib., Results: Among 300 patients treated with futibatinib, 226 were eligible for this analysis, including 139 (62%) with cholangiocarcinoma. Among patients with known FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements, FGFR1 fusions, FGFR3 fusions, or FGFR2 amplifications per tissue analysis, detection rates in ctDNA for these aberrations were 84%, 0%, 11%, and 59%, respectively. Objective response rates on futibatinib were not significantly different between patients with TP53 altered versus unaltered solid tumors; progression-free survival was reduced in patients with CDKN2B altered versus unaltered cholangiocarcinoma (median, 4.8 versus 11.0 months; P=0.03). Acquired resistance to futibatinib was frequently polyclonal and driven by an array of mutations within the relevant FGFR kinase domain, predominantly V565L, V565F, and N550K variants., Conclusions: In this largest and most systematic analysis of acquired resistance to an FGFR inhibitor from prospective clinical trials, emergence of secondary FGFR2 kinase domain mutations was observed in most patients receiving clinical benefit to futibatinib. ctDNA analysis shows clinically relevant potential as a noninvasive method for assessing genomic profiles, identifying patients who may benefit from FGFR inhibitor treatment, and exploring acquired resistance mechanisms., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

What Is This Summary About?: Researchers combined information from three separate phase 1 and 2 clinical trials, including over 400 people who had one of 33 different cancer types and who all received futibatinib in their clinical trial. This type of study is called a pooled analysis. Futibatinib is taken orally (by mouth) as a tablet and works by reducing the activity of a group of proteins called fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFRs). FGFRs drive the growth of some cancers, especially cancer cells with changes in FGFR genes that make the proteins more active. Researchers wanted to look at how common some side effects were in people treated with futibatinib, how soon the side effects happened after taking futibatinib, and how they could be managed. Researchers also wanted to provide recommendations to other health care professionals on how to manage these side effects in people with cancer., What Were the Results?: In this analysis, the researchers focused on side effects that they had seen in previously completed trials of futibatinib. Overall, futibatinib was safe and tolerable. Most people (82%) had a high phosphate level in their blood (hyperphosphatemia), 27% had nail disorders, 27% had liver side effects (changes in liver-related laboratory tests), 19% had a sore mouth (stomatitis), 13% had hand-foot syndrome (palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome), 9% had a rash, 8% developed changes in the back of the eye (retinal disorders), and 4% of people developed cataracts. Most side effects were mild/moderate and reversible. The median time it took from starting treatment to experiencing a severe side effect ranged from 9 days (hyperphosphatemia) to 125 days (cataracts). Some side effects tended to occur early, while others developed later. Only 2% of people stopped taking futibatinib due to treatment-related side effects, and futibatinib caused no deaths., What Do the Results Mean?: The side effects from taking futibatinib were manageable and similar in people with different types of cancer. To fully understand the safety of futibatinib, researchers will need to look at what side effects are reported in people taking futibatinib over a longer time in the real-world setting (outside of clinical trials).

Background: The multi-centre two-stage SCALOP-2 trial (ISRCTN50083238) assessed whether dose escalation of consolidative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or concurrent sensitization using the protease inhibitor nelfinavir improve outcomes in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) following four cycles of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel., Methods: In stage 1, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of nelfinavir concurrent with standard-dose CRT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) was identified from a cohort of 27 patients. In stage 2, 159 patients were enrolled in an open-label randomized controlled comparison of standard versus high dose (60 Gy in 30 fractions) CRT, with or without nelfinavir at MTD. Primary outcomes following dose escalation and nelfinavir use were respectively overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Results: High dose CRT did not improve OS (16.9 (60 % confidence interval, CI 16.2-17.7) vs. 15.6 (60 %CI 14.3-18.2) months; adjusted hazard ratio, HR 1.13 (60 %CI 0.91-1.40; p = 0.68)). Similarly, median PFS was not improved by nelfinavir (10.0 (60 %CI 9.9-10.2) vs. 11.1 (60 %CI 10.3-12.8) months; adjusted HR 1.71 (60 %CI 1.38-2.12; p = 0.98)). Local progression at 12 months was numerically lower with high-dose CRT than with standard dose CRT (n = 11/46 (23.9 %) vs. n = 15/45 (33.3 %)). Neither nelfinavir nor radiotherapy dose escalation impacted on treatment compliance or grade 3/4 adverse event rate. There were no sustained differences in HRQoL scores between treatment groups over 28 weeks post-treatment., Conclusions: Dose-escalated CRT may improve local tumour control and is well tolerated when used as consolidative treatment in LAPC but does not impact OS. Nelfinavir use does not improve PFS., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Futibatinib, a covalently-binding inhibitor of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)1-4 gained approval for the treatment of refractory, advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) harboring an FGFR2 fusion/other rearrangement. An integrated analysis was performed to evaluate safety and provide guidance on the management of futibatinib-associated adverse events (AEs) in patients with unresectable/metastatic tumors, including iCCA., Patients and Methods: Data from three global phase I or II studies of futibatinib (NCT02052778; JapicCTI-142552) were pooled. AEs were graded per NCI CTCAE v4.03, where applicable. Safety was analyzed for patients receiving any futibatinib starting dose (overall population) and in those receiving the approved starting dose of 20 mg once every day., Results: In total, 469 patients with one of 33 known tumor types were analyzed, including 318 patients who received futibatinib 20 mg every day. AEs of clinical interest (AECI; any grade/grade ≥3) in the overall population included hyperphosphatemia (82%/19%), nail disorders (27%/1%), hepatic AEs (27%/11%), stomatitis (19%/3%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPES; 13%/3%), rash (9%/0%), retinal disorders (8%/0%), and cataract (4%/1%). Median time to onset of grade ≥3 AECIs ranged from 9 days (hyperphosphatemia) to 125 days (cataract). Grade ≥3 hyperphosphatemia, hepatic AEs, PPES, and nail disorders resolved to grade ≤2 within a median of 7, 7, 8, and 28 days, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs were rare (2%), and no treatment-related deaths occurred. AE management included phosphate-lowering medication and dose adjustments., Conclusions: Futibatinib showed a consistent and manageable safety profile across patients with various tumor types. AECIs were mostly reversible with appropriate clinical management., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

What Is This Summary About?: This summary describes the results from a phase 2 study called FOENIXCCA2. The study evaluated treatment with futibatinib in people with a rare form of advanced bile duct cancer called intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (or iCCA), where the tumors have changes in the structure of a gene called FGFR2. These changes include FGFR2 gene fusions. Bile duct cancer often returns after surgery or cannot be treated by surgery because the tumor has spread, so it requires treatment with chemotherapy. People live for a median of 1 year after their first chemotherapy treatment and 6 months after their second treatment. This study included people whose cancer had grown/spread after one or more chemotherapy treatments. The aims of the study were to see if futibatinib could shrink the size of tumors and stop the cancer from growing/spreading and to see how long people lived when treated with futibatinib. Clinicians also looked at side effects from taking futibatinib and at how it affected people's quality of life., What Were the Results?: Futibatinib treatment shrank tumors in over 80% of people who received treatment. Tumors shrank by at least 30% in 42% of people. Futibatinib stopped tumors from growing/spreading for a median of 9.7 months. People who took the medicine lived for a median of 21.7 months, and 72% of people were still alive after 1 year. Side effects from taking futibatinib were like those reported for similar medicines, and clinicians considered the side effects to be manageable by adjusting the dose of futibatinib or treating the side effects. Most people reported that their quality of life stayed the same or improved during the first 9 months of taking futibatinib., What Do the Results Mean?: The results support the use of futibatinib for treating people with advanced bile duct cancer. Based on the results of this study, futibatinib is now approved in the US, Europe, and Japan. Futibatinib is approved for treating adults with advanced bile duct cancer who have received previous treatment for their cancer, and whose tumors have a gene fusion or other change in the FGFR2 gene. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02052778 (FOENIX-CCA2).

Background: Real-world data on treatment patterns/outcomes for metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPAC) are limited. This study aims to assess real-world treatment patterns, survival outcomes, and prognostic/predictive factors in patients with mPAC., Methods: Retrospective, observational, chart-review involving medical oncologists and gastroenterologists from five European countries. Physicians reported information on disease and patient characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment for patients diagnosed with mPAC from January-October 2016. Outcomes included median progression-free survival (mPFS), median overall survival (mOS), and the impact of baseline performance status on survival. Univariate/multivariate regression analyses were undertaken to identify prognostic/predictive factors., Results: Three hundred four physicians and 3432 patients were included. First-line therapies included modified (m)FOLFIRINOX (28.4%), gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (28.0%), and gemcitabine monotherapy (23.0%). Frequent second-line therapies were gemcitabine monotherapy (25.0%), fluorouracil (5-FU) + oxaliplatin (21.8%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (16.7%). Most frequent first- to second-line treatment sequences were gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel followed by fluoropyrimidine combinations. Longest unadjusted estimated mOS was observed with (m)FOLFIRINOX followed by gemcitabine-based combinations (19.1 months). Multivariate analysis identified significant prognostic/predictive factors for OS and PFS including performance status and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) levels., Conclusions: Treatment and treatment sequences were generally in accordance with guidelines at the time of the study. Identification of prognostic/predictive factors for survival may help inform the individualised management of mPAC patients in the future., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Importance: Personalized treatment approaches for patients with oligometastatic colorectal liver metastases are critically needed. We previously defined 3 biologically distinct molecular subtypes of colorectal liver metastases: (1) canonical, (2) immune, and (3) stromal., Objective: To independently validate these molecular subtypes in the phase 3 New EPOC randomized clinical trial., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective secondary analysis of the phase 3 New EPOC randomized clinical trial included a bi-institutional discovery cohort and multi-institutional validation cohort. The discovery cohort comprised patients who underwent hepatic resection for limited colorectal liver metastases (98% received perioperative chemotherapy) from May 31, 1994, to August 14, 2012. The validation cohort comprised patients who underwent hepatic resection for liver metastases with perioperative chemotherapy (fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan based) with or without cetuximab from February 26, 2007, to November 1, 2012. Data were analyzed from January 18 to December 10, 2021., Interventions: Resected metastases underwent RNA sequencing and microRNA (miRNA) profiling in the discovery cohort and messenger RNA and miRNA profiling with microarray in the validation cohort., Main Outcomes and Measures: A 31-feature (24 messenger RNAs and 7 miRNAs) neural network classifier was trained to predict molecular subtypes in the discovery cohort and applied to the validation cohort. Integrated clinical-molecular risk groups were designated based on molecular subtypes and the clinical risk score. The unique biological phenotype of each molecular subtype was validated using gene set enrichment analyses and immune deconvolution. The primary clinical end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: A total of 240 patients were included (mean [range] age, 63.0 [56.3-68.0] years; 151 [63%] male), with 93 in the discovery cohort and 147 in the validation cohort. In the validation cohort, 73 (50%), 28 (19%), and 46 (31%) patients were classified as having canonical, immune, and stromal metastases, respectively. The biological phenotype of each subtype was concordant with the discovery cohort. The immune subtype (best prognosis) demonstrated 5-year PFS of 43% (95% CI, 25%-60%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.20-0.68) and OS of 63% (95% CI, 40%-79%; HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17-0.86), which was statistically significantly higher than the canonical subtype (worst prognosis) at 14% (95% CI, 7%-23%) and 43% (95% CI, 32%-55%), respectively. Adding molecular subtypes to the clinical risk score improved prediction (the Gönen and Heller K for discrimination) from 0.55 (95% CI, 0.49-0.61) to 0.62 (95% CI, 0.57-0.67) for PFS and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.52-0.66) to 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70) for OS. The low-risk integrated group demonstrated 5-year PFS of 44% (95% CI, 20%-66%; HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.19-0.76) and OS of 78% (95% CI, 44%-93%; HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.84), superior to the high-risk group at 16% (95% CI, 10%-24%) and 43% (95% CI, 32%-52%), respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: In this prognostic study, biologically derived colorectal liver metastasis molecular subtypes and integrated clinical-molecular risk groups were highly prognostic. This novel molecular classification warrants further study as a possible predictive biomarker for personalized systemic treatment for colorectal liver metastases., Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN22944367.

Background: Alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 ( FGFR2 ) have emerged as promising drug targets for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a rare cancer with a poor prognosis. Futibatinib, a next-generation, covalently binding FGFR1-4 inhibitor, has been shown to have both antitumor activity in patients with FGFR -altered tumors and strong preclinical activity against acquired resistance mutations associated with ATP-competitive FGFR inhibitors., Methods: In this multinational, open-label, single-group, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with unresectable or metastatic FGFR2 fusion-positive or FGFR2 rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and disease progression after one or more previous lines of systemic therapy (excluding FGFR inhibitors). The patients received oral futibatinib at a dose of 20 mg once daily in a continuous regimen. The primary end point was objective response (partial or complete response), as assessed by independent central review. Secondary end points included the response duration, progression-free and overall survival, safety, and patient-reported outcomes., Results: Between April 16, 2018, and November 29, 2019, a total of 103 patients were enrolled and received futibatinib. A total of 43 of 103 patients (42%; 95% confidence interval, 32 to 52) had a response, and the median duration of response was 9.7 months. Responses were consistent across patient subgroups, including patients with heavily pretreated disease, older adults, and patients who had co-occurring TP53 mutations. At a median follow-up of 17.1 months, the median progression-free survival was 9.0 months and overall survival was 21.7 months. Common treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were hyperphosphatemia (in 30% of the patients), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 7%), stomatitis (in 6%), and fatigue (in 6%). Treatment-related adverse events led to permanent discontinuation of futibatinib in 2% of the patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Quality of life was maintained throughout treatment., Conclusions: In previously treated patients with FGFR2 fusion or rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, the use of futibatinib, a covalent FGFR inhibitor, led to measurable clinical benefit. (Funded by Taiho Oncology and Taiho Pharmaceutical; FOENIX-CCA2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02052778.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Personalized treatment approaches for patients with limited liver metastases from colorectal cancer are critically needed. By leveraging three large, independent cohorts of patients with colorectal liver metastases (n = 336), we found that a proliferative subtype associated with elevated CIN70 scores is linked to immune exclusion, increased metastatic proclivity, and inferior overall survival in colorectal liver metastases; however, high CIN70 scores generate a therapeutic vulnerability to DNA-damaging therapies leading to improved treatment responses. We propose CIN70 as a candidate biomarker to personalize systemic treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. These findings are potentially broadly applicable to other human cancers., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Importance: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) variations occur in up to approximately 20% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the ClarIDHy trial, progression-free survival as determined by central review was significantly improved with ivosidenib vs placebo., Objective: To report the final overall survival (OS) results from the ClarIDHy trial, which aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1-vs placebo for patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical phase 3 trial was conducted from February 20, 2017, to May 31, 2020, at 49 hospitals across 6 countries among patients aged 18 years or older with cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation whose disease progressed with prior therapy., Interventions: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ivosidenib, 500 mg, once daily or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted if patients had disease progression as determined by radiographic findings., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival as determined by blinded independent radiology center (reported previously). Overall survival was a key secondary end point. The primary analysis of OS followed the intent-to-treat principle. Other secondary end points included objective response rate, safety and tolerability, and quality of life., Results: Overall, 187 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 33-83 years]) were randomly assigned to receive ivosidenib (n = 126; 82 women [65%]; median age, 61 years [range, 33-80 years]) or placebo (n = 61; 37 women [61%]; median age, 63 years [range, 40-83 years]); 43 patients crossed over from placebo to ivosidenib. The primary end point of progression-free survival was reported elsewhere. Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4 months) with ivosidenib vs 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1 months) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.56-1.12]; 1-sided P = .09). When adjusted for crossover, median OS with placebo was 5.1 months (95% CI, 3.8-7.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.34-0.70]; 1-sided P < .001). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event (≥5%) reported in both groups was ascites (11 patients [9%] receiving ivosidenib and 4 patients [7%] receiving placebo). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events considered ivosidenib related were reported in 3 patients (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients receiving ivosidenib reported no apparent decline in quality of life compared with placebo., Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that ivosidenib was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS benefit vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. These data, coupled with supportive quality of life data and a tolerable safety profile, demonstrate the clinical benefit of ivosidenib for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02989857.

Background: Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine the benefit derived from second-line FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer., Methods: The ABC-06 clinical trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial done in 20 sites with expertise in managing biliary tract cancer across the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically or cytologically verified locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma) with documented radiological disease progression to first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally to active symptom control (ASC) and FOLFOX or ASC alone. FOLFOX chemotherapy was administered intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , L-folinic acid 175 mg [or folinic acid 350 mg], fluorouracil 400 mg/m 2 [bolus], and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m 2 as a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion). Randomisation was done following a minimisation algorithm using platinum sensitivity, serum albumin concentration, and stage as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is complete and the final results are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01926236, and EudraCT, 2013-001812-30., Findings: Between March 27, 2014, and Jan 4, 2018, 162 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ASC plus FOLFOX (n=81) or ASC alone (n=81). Median follow-up was 21·7 months (IQR 17·2-30·8). Overall survival was significantly longer in the ASC plus FOLFOX group than in the ASC alone group, with a median overall survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 5·4-7·6) in the ASC plus FOLFOX group versus 5·3 months (4·1-5·8) in the ASC alone group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·031). The overall survival rate in the ASC alone group was 35·5% (95% CI 25·2-46·0) at 6 months and 11·4% (5·6-19·5) at 12 months, compared with 50·6% (39·3-60·9) at 6 months and 25·9% (17·0-35·8) at 12 months in the ASC plus FOLFOX group. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported in 42 (52%) of 81 patients in the ASC alone group and 56 (69%) of 81 patients in the ASC plus FOLFOX group, including three chemotherapy-related deaths (one each due to infection, acute kidney injury, and febrile neutropenia). The most frequently reported grade 3-5 FOLFOX-related adverse events were neutropenia (ten [12%] patients), fatigue or lethargy (nine [11%] patients), and infection (eight [10%] patients)., Interpretation: The addition of FOLFOX to ASC improved median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression on cisplatin and gemcitabine, with a clinically meaningful increase in 6-month and 12-month overall survival rates. To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective, randomised study providing reliable, high-quality evidence to allow an informed discussion with patients of the potential benefits and risks from second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. Based on these findings, FOLFOX should become standard-of-care chemotherapy in second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer and the reference regimen for further clinical trials., Funding: Cancer Research UK, StandUpToCancer, AMMF (The UK Cholangiocarcinoma Charity), and The Christie Charity, with additional funding from The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation and the Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award for translational research., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AL has received travel and educational support from Ipsen, Pfizer, Bayer, AAA, SirtEx, Novartis, Mylan, and Delcath; speaker honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Ipsen, and Incyte; advisory honoraria from EISAI, Nutricia Ipsen, QED, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. AL is also a member of the Knowledge Network and NETConnect Initiatives funded by Ipsen. DHP declares research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Nucana, and Sirtex; and consulting or advisory roles for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Servier, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. HSW has participated in advisory boards for Incyte, Bayer, Roche/Genentech/Foundation Medicine, SIRTEX Medical, Celgene, and Zymeworks; has been a NICE expert for Bayer (uncompensated); and reports consultancies for ONCOSIL; speaker-related honoraria and travel support from BTG/Biocompatibles, Merck KGaA, and BMS; participation in trials steering committee for Pfizer and Zymeworks; creation of educational materials for AstraZeneca; and receipt of research funding from Sirtex, outside of the submitted work. PJR declares research grants from Sanofi and Bayer; consulting or advisory roles for Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Sirtex, and Roche; speaker fees from Amgen, Roche, and Servier; and travel grants from Bayer, Roche, and Servier, outside of the submitted work. YTM declares speaker honoraria and advisory roles for Bayer, Eisai, and Roche, outside of the submitted work. JW declares research grants from AstraZeneca and Sanofi-Genzyme and consulting or advisory roles for Lilly, AstraZeneca, Sanofi Genyme, Eisai, AAA, Roche, Novartis, and Ipsen, outside of the submitted work. AM declares research grants from Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Bayer; speaker fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer Ipsen, EUSA Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pfizer; and advisory roles for Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Leo, Pfizer, Merck, and Ipsen, outside of the submitted work. JSW has received educational support for travel and conference attendance from Mylan and Ipsen, and speaker honoraria from Mylan, outside of the submitted work. JR declares research grants, speaker fees, and advisory roles for Ipsen, Novartis, and AAA, outside of the submitted work. JAB declares consulting or advisory roles for Merck Serono, Servier, Roche, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Incyte, and Basilea; and travel support from MSD Oncology, Merck Serono, Servier, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, outside of the submitted work. JWV declares consulting or advisory roles for Agios, AstraZeneca, Delcath Systems, Keocyt, Genoscience Pharma, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck, Mundipharma EDO, Novartis, PCI Biotech, Pfizer, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, QED, and Wren Laboratories; speakers' bureau for Imaging Equipment, Ipsen, Novartis, and Nucana; and travel grants from Celgene and Nucana, outside of the submitted work. AAr, SF, RG, KP, AAn, TI, CH, SB, WDR, and LMD declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background : Patients with cholangiocarcinoma often have indwelling biliary stents or catheters which are prone to obstructions and/or infections; studies show that 20-40% present with fever and/or jaundice requiring urgent treatment in the outpatient setting for which there are no uniform guidelines. The goal was to develop an expert panel consensus on this topic using the modified RAND/UCLA Delphi process to rate treatment appropriateness. Methods : Thirteen expert physicians from relevant specialties, geography, and practice settings were recruited for the panel. Patient scenarios were developed and panelists rated the therapies before and after a face-to-face discussion. The appropriateness of various therapies was rated on a scale from 1-9 and classified as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain. Scenarios with greater than 2 (>2) ratings of 1-3 (inappropriate) and greater than 2 (>2) ratings of 7-9 (appropriate) were considered to have disagreement and were not assigned an appropriateness rating. Results : Panelists were from all US regions and the UK (8%) and had practiced for a mean 16.5 years (4-33 years). Panelists rated 480 scenarios before the meeting and re-rated 288 of the clinical scenarios after the meeting. The panelists agreed that ongoing treatment with chemotherapy did not influence decision-making and, therefore, 192 scenarios were excluded from the final list. Disagreement decreased from 37.5% before to 10.4% after the meeting. Consensus on stent/tube manipulation and inpatient antibiotic therapy was obtained and summarized in patients as "appropriate" or "maybe appropriate" based on a patient's bilirubin level at presentation. Conclusions : The Delphi process produced consensus guidelines to fill an unmet need in the urgent management of ascending cholangitis in patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

Background: The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis showed a significant reduction in progression-free survival in patients allocated to cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with those given chemotherapy alone. The focus of the present analysis was to assess the effect on overall survival., Methods: New EPOC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13, and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases and a WHO performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. Randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer, and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 administered intravenously over 2 h, l-folinic acid (175 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h) or d,l-folinic acid (350 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h), and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m 2 administered intravenously over 5 min, followed by a 46 h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m 2 repeated every 2 weeks (regimen one), or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m 2 administered intravenously over 2 h and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-14 repeated every 3 weeks (regimen two). Patients who had received adjuvant oxaliplatin could receive irinotecan 180 mg/m 2 intravenously over 30 min with fluorouracil instead of oxaliplatin (regimen three). Cetuximab was given intravenously, 500 mg/m 2 every 2 weeks with regimen one and three or a loading dose of 400 mg/m 2 followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg/m 2 with regimen two. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was published previously. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, preoperative response, pathological resection status, and safety. Trial recruitment was halted prematurely on the advice of the Trial Steering Committee on Nov 1, 2012. All analyses (except safety) were done on the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 22944367., Findings: Between Feb 26, 2007, and Oct 12, 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or without cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out 5 years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol, at a median follow-up of 66·7 months (IQR 58·0-77·5). Median progression-free survival was 22·2 months (95% CI 18·3-26·8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15·5 months (13·8-19·0) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17, 95% CI 0·87-1·56; p=0·304). Median overall survival was 81·0 months (59·6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55·4 months (43·5-71·5) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (HR 1·45, 1·02-2·05; p=0·036). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of preoperative response or pathological resection status between groups. Five deaths might have been treatment-related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were: neutrophil count decreased (26 [19%] of 134 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 21 [15%] of 137 in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group), diarrhoea (13 [10%] vs 14 [10%]), skin rash (one [1%] vs 22 [16%]), thromboembolic events (ten [7%] vs 11 [8%]), lethargy (ten [7%] vs nine [7%]), oral mucositis (three [2%] vs 14 [10%]), vomiting (seven [5%] vs seven [5%]), peripheral neuropathy (eight [6%] vs five [4%]), and pain (six [4%] vs six [4%])., Interpretation: Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival in some studies in patients with advanced, inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant disadvantage in terms of overall survival. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting., Funding: Cancer Research UK., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Local treatment of metastases by surgical resection or other ablative therapies is technically feasible in an increasing number of patients with multi-organ metastatic cancer. This results in a growing debate on whether patients with extensive disease, that is traditionally deemed unresectable, may benefit from local treatment of metastases when added to standard palliative systemic therapy. For selected patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer, local treatment of metastases has become the standard of care based on retrospective reports showing long-term survival rates. In addition to systemic therapy, preliminary evidence suggests that patients with extensive metastatic colorectal cancer may also benefit from local treatment. Here, we present the future perspectives based on the available literature on local treatment approaches in colorectal cancer., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) has a poor prognosis. Cediranib, in addition to cisplatin/gemcitabine [CisGem], improved the response rate, but did not improve the progression-free survival (PFS) in the ABC-03 study. Minimally invasive biomarkers predictive of cediranib benefit may improve patient outcomes., Methods: Changes in 15 circulating plasma angiogenesis or inflammatory-related proteins and cytokeratin-18 (CK18), measured at baseline and during therapy until disease progression, were correlated with overall survival (OS) using time-varying covariate Cox models (TVC)., Results: Samples were available from n = 117/124 (94%) patients. Circulating Ang1&2, FGFb, PDGFbb, VEGFC, VEGFR1 and CK18 decreased as a result of the therapy, independent of treatment with cediranib. Circulating VEGFR2 and Tie2 were preferentially reduced by cediranib. Patients with increasing levels of VEGFA at any time had a worse PFS and OS; this detrimental effect was attenuated in patients receiving cediranib. TVC analysis revealed CK18 and VEGFR2 increases correlated with poorer OS in all patients (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively)., Conclusions: Rising circulating VEGFA levels in patients with ABC, treated with CisGem, are associated with worse PFS and OS, not seen in patients receiving cediranib. Rising levels of markers of tumour burden (CK18) and potential resistance (VEGFR2) are associated with worse outcomes and warrant validation.

Background: The SCOPE-1 study tested the role of adding cetuximab to conventional definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), and demonstrated greater toxicity and worse survival outcomes. We present the long-term outcomes and patterns of recurrence., Methods: SCOPE-1 was a phase II/III trial in which patients were randomised to cisplatin 60 mg m -2 (day 1) and capecitabine 625 mg m -2 bd (days 1-21) for four cycles +/- cetuximab 400 mg m -2 day 1 then by 250 mg m -2 weekly. Radiotherapy consisted of 50 Gy/25# given concurrently with cycles 3 and 4. Recruitment was between February 2008 and February 2012, when the IDMC recommended closure on the basis of futility., Results: About 258 patients (dCRT=129; dCRT+cetuximab (dCRT+C)=129) were recruited from 36 centres. About 72.9% (n=188) had squamous cell histology. The median follow-up (IQR) was 46.2 (35.9-48.3) months for surviving patients. The median overall survival (OS; months; 95% CI) was 34.5 (24.7-42.3) in dCRT and 24.7 (18.6-31.3) in dCRT+C (hazard ratio (HR)=1.25, 95% CIs: 0.93-1.69, P=0.137). Median progression-free survival (PFS; months; 95% CI) was 24.1 (15.3-29.9) and 15.9 (10.7-20.8) months, respectively (HR=1.28, 95% CIs: 0.94-1.75; P=0.114). On multivariable analysis only earlier stage, full-dose RT, and higher cisplatin dose intensity were associated with improved OS., Conclusions: The mature analysis demonstrates that the dCRT regimen used in the study provided useful survival outcomes despite its use in patients who were largely unfit for surgery or who had inoperable disease. Given the competing risk of systemic and local failure, future studies should continue to focus on enhancing local control as well as optimising systemic therapy.

Background: The addition of cetuximab (CTX) to perioperative chemotherapy (CT) for operable colorectal liver metastases resulted in a shorter progression-free survival. Details of disease progression are described to further inform the primary study outcome., Methods: A total of 257 KRAS wild-type patients were randomised to CT alone or CT with CTX. Data regarding sites and treatment of progressive disease were obtained for the 109 (CT n=48, CT and CTX n=61) patients with progressive disease at the cut-off date for analysis of November 2012., Results: The liver was the most frequent site of progression (CT 67% (32/48); CT and CTX 66% (40/61)). A higher proportion of patients in the CT and group had multiple sites of progressive disease (CT 8%, 4/48; CT and CTX 23%, 14/61 P=0.04). Further treatment for progressive disease is known for 84 patients of whom 69 received further CT, most frequently irinotecan based. Twenty-two patients, 11 in each arm, received CTX as a further line agent., Conclusions: Both the distribution of progressive disease and further treatment are as expected for such a cohort. The pattern of disease progression seen is consistent with failure of systemic micrometastatic disease control rather than failure of local disease control following liver surgery.

Biliary tract cancer, or cholangiocarcinoma, arises from the biliary epithelium of the small ducts in the periphery of the liver (intrahepatic) and the main ducts of the hilum (extrahepatic), extending into the gallbladder. The incidence and epidemiology of biliary tract cancer are fluid and complex. It is shown that intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is on the rise in the Western world, and gallbladder cancer is on the decline. Radiation therapy has emerged as an important component of adjuvant therapy for resected disease and definitive therapy for locally advanced disease. The emerging sophisticated techniques of imaging tumors and conformal dose delivery are expanding the indications for radiotherapy in the management of bile duct tumors. As we understand more about the molecular pathways driving biliary tract cancers, targeted therapies are at the forefront of new therapeutic combinations. Understanding the gene expression profile and mutational burden in biliary tract cancer allows us to better discern the pathogenesis and identify promising new developmental therapeutic targets.

Background: Despite advances in imaging techniques, peritoneal and/or metastatic disease have been identified by staging laparoscopy in up to 50 % of patients with a negative preoperative imaging. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been recently shown as a prognostic factor in gastric and esophageal cancers., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 117 patients with early gastric and lower esophagus adenocarcinoma that were referred for staging laparoscopy in the last two years in the University College Hospital, London. Complete blood count was performed preceding staging laparoscopy. The NLR was calculated by dividing the absolute neutrophil count by the absolute lymphocyte count; a high NLR was defined ≥3.28. We evaluated the predictive power of a high NLR for a positive staging laparoscopy., Results: The median age was 66.7 years; 87 (74.4 %) were male. Forty-four percent of the tumors were located at the gastroesophageal junction, 18 % were esophageal, and 38 % were gastric. Twenty-five (21.4 %) patients were found to have peritoneal or metastatic disease on staging laparoscopy. NLR ≥3.28 was an independent predicting factor for the discovery of peritoneal and/or metastatic disease (OR 3.9, 95 % CI: 1.54-9.86, p = 0.005). The median value of NLR was significantly higher in patients for whom the laparoscopy had discovered peritoneal or metastatic disease, than in those it had not (3.3 vs. 2.2, p = 0.011)., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the NLR may be reliable for predicting the presence of peritoneal or metastatic involvement on staging laparoscopy, in patients with early gastric cancer or lower esophageal cancer.

Background: Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer; expression of VEGF and its receptors is associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess the effect of the addition of cediranib (an oral inhibitor of VEGF receptor 1, 2, and 3) to cisplatin and gemcitabine on progression-free survival., Methods: In this multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 2 study, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed or cytologically confirmed advanced biliary tract cancer from hepatobiliary oncology referral centres in the UK. Patients were eligible if they had an ECOG performance status of 0-1 and an estimated life expectancy of longer than 3 months. Patients were given first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy (25 mg/m(2) cisplatin and 1000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine [on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, for up to eight cycles]) with either 20 mg oral cediranib or placebo once a day until disease progression. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) with a minimisation algorithm, incorporating the stratification factors: extent of disease, primary disease site, previous treatment, ECOG performance status, and centre. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00939848, and was closed on Sept 30, 2014; results of the final analysis for the primary endpoint are presented., Findings: Between April 5, 2011, and Sept 28, 2012, we enrolled 124 patients (62 in each group). With a median follow-up of 12·2 months (IQR 7·3-18·5), median progression-free survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·5-9·3) in the cediranib group and 7·4 months (5·7-8·5) in the placebo group (HR 0·93, 80% CI 0·74-1·19, 95% CI 0·65-1·35; p=0·72). Patients who received cediranib had more grade 3-4 toxic effects than did patients who received placebo: hypertension (23 [37%] vs 13 [21%]; p=0·05), diarrhoea (eight [13%] vs two [3%]; p=0·05); platelet count decreased (ten [16%] vs four [6%]; p=0·09), white blood cell decreased (15 [24%] vs seven [11%]; p=0·06) and fatigue (16 [24%] vs seven [11%]; p=0·04)., Interpretation: Cediranib did not improve the progression-free survival of patients with advanced biliary tract cancer in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, which remains the standard of care. Although patients in the cediranib group had more adverse events, we recorded no unexpected toxic effects. The role of VEGF inhibition in addition to chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer remains investigational., Funding: Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2015 Valle et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Molecular characteristics of cancer vary between individuals. In future, most trials will require assessment of biomarkers to allocate patients into enriched populations in which targeted therapies are more likely to be effective. The MRC FOCUS3 trial is a feasibility study to assess key elements in the planning of such studies., Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced colorectal cancer were registered from 24 centres between February 2010 and April 2011. With their consent, patients' tumour samples were analysed for KRAS/BRAF oncogene mutation status and topoisomerase 1 (topo-1) immunohistochemistry. Patients were then classified into one of four molecular strata; within each strata patients were randomised to one of two hypothesis-driven experimental therapies or a common control arm (FOLFIRI chemotherapy). A 4-stage suite of patient information sheets (PISs) was developed to avoid patient overload., Results: A total of 332 patients were registered, 244 randomised. Among randomised patients, biomarker results were provided within 10 working days (w.d.) in 71%, 15 w.d. in 91% and 20 w.d. in 99%. DNA mutation analysis was 100% concordant between two laboratories. Over 90% of participants reported excellent understanding of all aspects of the trial. In this randomised phase II setting, omission of irinotecan in the low topo-1 group was associated with increased response rate and addition of cetuximab in the KRAS, BRAF wild-type cohort was associated with longer progression-free survival., Conclusions: Patient samples can be collected and analysed within workable time frames and with reproducible mutation results. Complex multi-arm designs are acceptable to patients with good PIS. Randomisation within each cohort provides outcome data that can inform clinical practice.

Background: Second-line chemotherapy for patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma refractory to platinum and fluoropyrimidines has not shown benefits in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We assessed whether the addition of docetaxel to active symptom control alone can improve survival and HRQoL for patients., Methods: For this open-labelled, multicentre trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older from 30 UK centres. Patients were eligible if they had an advanced, histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus, oesophagogastric junction, or stomach that had progressed on or within 6 months of treatment with a platinum-fluoropyrimidine combination. Patients could have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. We randomly assigned patients using a central, computerised minimisation procedure to receive docetaxel plus active symptom control, or active symptom control alone (1:1; stratified by disease status, disease site, duration of response to previous chemotherapy, and performance status). Docetaxel was given at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This is the report of the planned final analysis. This study is an International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN13366390., Findings: Between April 21, 2008, and April 26, 2012, we recruited 168 patients, allocating 84 to each treatment group. After a median follow-up of 12 months [IQR 10-21]) and 161 (96%) deaths (80 in the docetaxel group, 81 in the active symptom control group), median overall survival in the docetaxel group was 5.2 months (95% CI 4.1-5.9) versus 3.6 months (3.3-4.4) in the active symptom control group (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92; p=0.01). Docetaxel was associated with higher incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia (12 [15%] patients vs no patients), infection (15 [19%] patients vs two [3%] patients), and febrile neutropenia (six [7%] patients vs no patients). Patients receiving docetaxel reported less pain (p=0.0008) and less nausea and vomiting (p=0.02) and constipation (p=0.02). Global HRQoL was similar between the groups (p=0.53). Disease specific HRQoL measures also showed benefits for docetaxel in reducing dysphagia (p=0.02) and abdominal pain (p=0.01)., Interpretation: Our findings suggest that docetaxel can be recommended as an appropriate second-line treatment for patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma that is refractory to treatment with platinum and fluoropyrimidine., Funding: Cancer Research UK., (Copyright © 2014 Ford et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is an alternative to surgery for the curative treatment of oesophageal carcinoma. The SCOPE1 trial aimed to investigate the addition of cetuximab to cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based definitive CRT in patients with localised oesophageal squamous-cell cancer and adenocarcinomas to assess activity, safety, and feasibility of use., Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older from UK radiotherapy centres who had non-metastatic, histologically confirmed carcinoma of the oesophagus (adenocarcinoma, squamous-cell, or undifferentiated; WHO status 0-1; stage I-III disease) and been selected to receive definitive CRT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a central computerised system using stratified minimisation (with an 80:20 random element) to receive CRT alone or CRT with cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by 250 mg/m(2) weekly), stratified by recruiting hospital, primary reason for not having surgery, tumour histology, and tumour stage. CRT consisted of cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) (day 1) and capecitabine 625 mg/m(2) twice daily (days 1-21) for four cycles; cycles three and four were given concurrently with 50 Gy in 25 fractions of radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were treatment failure free at week 24 for the phase 2 trial and overall survival for the phase 3 trial, both measured from randomisation. We analysed data by intention to treat. This trial is an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number 47718479., Findings: 258 patients (129 assigned to each treatment group) from 36 UK centres were recruited between Feb 7, 2008, and Feb 22, 2012. Recruitment was stopped without continuation to phase 3 because the trial met criteria for futility, but we continued to follow-up recruited patients until all had reached at least 24-week follow-up (median follow-up of patients who survived was 16.8 months [IQR 11.2-24.5]). Fewer patients were treatment failure free at 24 weeks in the CRT plus cetuximab group (79 of 119 patients [66·4%, 90% CI 58·6-73·6]) than in the CRT only group (93 of 121 patients [76.9%, 69.7-83.0]). The CRT plus cetuximab group also had shorter median overall survival (22.1 months [95% CI 15.1-24.5] vs 25.4 months [20.5-37.9]; adjusted HR 1.53 [95% CI 1.03-2.27]; p=0.035). Patients who received CRT plus cetuximab had more non-haematological grade 3 or 4 toxicities (102 [79%] of 129 patients vs 81 [63%] of 129 patients; p=0.004). The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities were low white blood cell count (14 [11%] in the CRT plus cetuximab group vs 21 [16%] in the CRT only group), low absolute neutrophil count (15 [12%] vs 24 [19%]), fatigue (26 [20%] vs 25 [19%]), and dysphagia (35 [27%] vs 37 [29%])., Interpretation: The addition of cetuximab to standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy cannot be recommended for patients with oesophageal cancer suitable for definitive CRT., Funding: Cancer Research UK., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess CA-125 as a measure of response in patients treated with paclitaxel., Patients and Methods: One hundred forty-four patients treated with paclitaxel derived from four different trials and 625 patients treated with platinum from two trials were analyzed using precisely defined 50% and 75% reductions in CA-125. The standard and CA-125 response rates to paclitaxel and platinum were compared. In addition, we analyzed individual patient groups in which there was a difference in response according to the two response criteria., Results: Patients with stable disease as determined by standard criteria who were treated with platinum and responded according to CA-125 criteria have an improved median progression-free survival compared with patients with stable disease who did not respond according to CA-125 criteria (10.6 v 4.8 months; P<.001). Standard and CA-125 response rates for patients treated with platinum (58.93% v 61.31%, respectively) and paclitaxel (30.65% v 31.67%, respectively) were very similar, as were rates of false-positive prediction of response by CA-125 (platinum 2.2% and paclitaxel 2.9%). Responders to paclitaxel had a significantly improved progression-free survival compared with non-responders by both standard criteria (median progression-free survival, 6.8 v 2.5 months; P<.001) and CA-125 criteria (median progression-free survival, 6.8 v 3.4 months; P<.001)., Conclusion: Forassessing activity of therapy for ovarian cancer, these data show that precise 50% or 75% CA-125 response criteria are as sensitive as standard response criteria. We propose that they may be used as a measure of response in lieu of or in addition to standard response criteria in clinical trials involving epithelial ovarian cancer. Sensitivity is maintained whether patients are treated with platinum or paclitaxel.

Ovarian tumours of non-epithelial origin are less common than those of epithelial origin but must be distinguished from these as their natural history and management differ. As these tumours are rare, histological review by an expert in the field is essential. There have been no randomised trials to outline the management of these tumours and therefore this paper represents a review of descriptive data. Non-epithelial ovarian tumours, which represent approximately 50% of all ovarian tumours and approximately 25% of malignant ovarian tumours, are outlined. Lymphomas and metastatic tumours should be treated the same as when found in other sites and will not be discussed further.

The bystander effect is an important part of tumor kill using gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy (GDEPT). Recently, we have described a novel enzyme prodrug system using bacterial nitroreductase and the prodrug CB1954 (NTR/CB1954). We demonstrate here the presence of a cell-permeable cytotoxic activity in the conditioned growth medium of nitroreductase (NTR)-transduced cells treated with CB1954 and show that its appearance corresponds to the appearance of two metabolites of CB1954 previously identified (Friedlos et al., 1992). The degree of bystander effect and the degree of transferred cytotoxicity correlates with the level of NTR enzyme expression. Two other prodrugs for NTR show little bystander killing and do not produce detectable cell permeable metabolites. The elucidation of the mechanism of the bystander effect may allow the more effective use of NTR/CB1954.

A recombinant retrovirus encoding E. coli nitroreductase (NTR) was used to infect mammalian cells. NIH3T3 cells expressing NTR were killed by the prodrug CB1954, which NTR converts to a bifunctional alkylating agent. Admixed, unmodified NIH3T3 cells could also be killed. In contrast to the Herpes simplex virus (HSV) thymidine kinase (TK)/ganciclovir(GCV) enzyme/prodrug system, NTR/CB1954 cell killing was effective in non-cycling cells. Co-operative killing was observed when cells expressing both NTR and TK were treated with a combination of CB1954 and GCV. NTR expression in human melanoma, ovarian carcinoma or mesothelioma cells also rendered them sensitive to CB1954 killing. These data suggest that delivery of the NTR gene to human tumours, followed by treatment with CB1954, may provide a novel tumour gene therapy approach.

The histological and immunocytochemical appearances of skin with altered pigmentation from two patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy for melanoma were examined. In both patients, there was a clinical response to treatment coincident with depigmentation of skin and hair. Skin biopsies showed extensive infiltration with CD8+ and CD4+ lymphocytes rather than CD57+ in the depigmented areas suggestive of a specific MHC-related cytotoxic T-cell activity against melanocytes. In keeping with this, MHCII expression was markedly up-regulated. These observations suggest the development of a simultaneous anti-tumour and anti-melanocyte immune response stimulated by chemoimmunotherapy, possibly against the same or similar antigens.

We describe a case of hypercalcaemia secondary to recurrent malignant phaeochromocytoma. Parathyroid-related protein (PTHrp 1-86) immunoreactivity was identified in plasma and PTHrp was identified by immunocytochemistry in tumour tissue.