Esophagogastric cancers are aggressive malignancies, with poor prognosis despite current standard-of-care therapies. PD-1 inhibitors are a newer class of antitumor agents with the potential to improve outcomes among appropriately selected patients. This review provides an overview of the key trials that have guided the use of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in the refractory and first-line settings. We highlight recent studies investigating the role of genomic classification in predicting therapeutic activity of PD-1 inhibitors. In addition, there is a discussion of the use of different scoring systems and criteria to determine PD-L1 positivity, the impact on the therapeutic use of immune checkpoint inhibition with anti-PD-1 agents, and the controversies in current methods of PD-L1 testing and their implications in patient selection for anti-PD-1 therapy.

The rate of translational effort of nanomedicine requires strategic planning of nanosafety research in order to enable clinical trials and safe use of nanomedicine in patients. Herein, the experiences that have emerged based on the safety data of classic liposomal formulations in the space of oncology are discussed, along with a description of the new challenges that need to be addressed according to the rapid expansion of nanomedicine platform beyond liposomes. It is valuable to consider the combined use of predictive toxicological assessment supported by deliberate investigation on aspects such as absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) and toxicokinetic profiles, the risk that may be introduced during nanomanufacture, unique nanomaterials properties, and nonobvious nanosafety endpoints, for example. These efforts will allow the generation of investigational new drug-enabling safety data that can be incorporated into a rational infrastructure for regulatory decision-making. Since the safety assessment relates to nanomaterials, the investigation should cover the important physicochemical properties of the material that may lead to hazards when the nanomedicine product is utilized in humans.

Cetuximab and panitumumab are two distinct monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and both are widely used in combination with chemotherapy or as monotherapy to treat patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Although often considered interchangeable, the two antibodies have different molecular structures and can behave differently in clinically relevant ways. More specifically, as an immunoglobulin (Ig) G1 isotype mAb, cetuximab can elicit immune functions such as antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity involving natural killer cells, T-cell recruitment to the tumor, and T-cell priming via dendritic cell maturation. Panitumumab, an IgG2 isotype mAb, does not possess these immune functions. Furthermore, the two antibodies have different binding sites on the EGFR, as evidenced by mutations on the extracellular domain that can confer resistance to one of the two therapeutics or to both. We consider a comparison of the properties of these two antibodies to represent a gap in the literature. We therefore compiled a detailed, evidence-based educational review of the known molecular, clinical, and functional differences between the two antibodies and concluded that they are distinct therapeutic agents that should be considered individually during treatment planning. Available data for one agent can only partly be extrapolated to the other. Looking to the future, the known immune activity of cetuximab may provide a rationale for this antibody as a combination partner with investigational chemotherapy plus immunotherapy regimens for colorectal cancer.

Lessons learned

The safety profile in the gemcitabine/simtuzumab group was similar to that in the gemcitabine/placebo group.The addition of simtuzumab to gemcitabine does not improve clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma ABSTRACT: Background.The humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody simtuzumab inhibits the extracellular matrix-remodeling enzyme lysyl oxidase-like 2 maintaining pathological stroma in tumors.

Methods

Adult patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPaCa) were randomly assigned to receive intravenous gemcitabine, 1,000 mg/m², in combination with 200 or 700 mg simtuzumab or placebo. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.

Results

Of 240 patients, 80 were randomly assigned to gemcitabine/simtuzumab 700 mg, 79 to gemcitabine/simtuzumab 200 mg, and 81 to gemcitabine/placebo. After a median follow-up of 3.0, 1.9, and 3.4 months for gemcitabine/simtuzumab 700 mg, gemcitabine/simtuzumab 200 mg, and gemcitabine/placebo, respectively, the median PFS was 3.7 months (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI], p value vs placebo: 1.09 [0.74-1.61]; p = .73), 3.5 months (1.13 [0.76-1.66], p = .61]), and 3.7 months, respectively. Median OS was 7.6 months (0.83 [0.57-1.22]; p = .28), 5.9 months (1.07 [0.73-1.55]; p = .69), and 5.7 months, respectively. ORRs were 13.9%, 14.5%, and 23.5%, respectively. Simtuzumab was well tolerated.

Conclusion

The addition of simtuzumab to gemcitabine did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with mPaCa. The Oncologist 2017;22:241-e7.

Background

The randomized phase III RAINBOW trial established paclitaxel (pac) plus ramucirumab (ram) as a global standard for second-line (2L) therapy in advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, together gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). Patients (pts) receiving first-line (1L) FOLFOX often develop neuropathy that renders continued neurotoxic agents in the 2L setting unappealing and other regimens more desirable. As such, FOLFIRI-ram has become an option for patients with 2L GEA. FOLFIRI-ramucirumab (ram) has demonstrated safety and activity in 2L colorectal cancer, but efficacy/safety data in GEA are lacking.

Subjects, materials, and methods

Patients with GEA treated with 2L FOLFIRI-ram between August 2014 and April 2018 were identified. Clinicopathologic data including oxaliplatin neurotoxicity rates/grades (G), 2L treatment response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and molecular features were abstracted from three U.S. academic institutions. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to generate PFS/OS; the likelihood ratio test was used to determine statistical significance.

Results

We identified 29 pts who received 2L FOLFIRI-ram. All pts received 1L platinum + fluoropyrimidine, and 23 of 29 (79%) had post-1L neuropathy; 12 (41%) had G1, and 11 (38%) had G2. Patients were evenly split between esophagus/gastroesophageal junction (12; 41%) and gastric cancer (17; 59%). Among evaluable pts (26/29), the overall response rate was 23% (all partial response) with a disease control rate of 79%. Median PFS was 6.0 months and median OS was 13.4 months among all evaluable pts. Six- and 12-month OS were 90% (n = 18/20) and 41% (n = 7/17). There were no new safety signals.

Conclusion

We provide the first data suggesting FOLFIRI-ram is a safe, non-neurotoxic regimen comparing favorably with the combination of pac + ram used in the seminal RAINBOW trial.

Implications for practice

Results of this study provide initial support for the safety and efficacy of second-line (2L) FOLFIRI-ramucirumab (ram) after progression on first-line platinum/fluoropyrimidine in patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). The overall response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity profile compare favorably with paclitaxel (pac) + ram and highlight the importance of the ongoing phase II RAMIRIS trial examining FOLFIRI-ram versus pac + ram in 2L GEA (NCT03081143). FOLFIRI-ram may warrant consideration for inclusion as an alternate regimen in consensus guidelines for GEA.

The aims of this study were (i) to evaluate the effect of talazoparib (1 mg once daily) on cardiac repolarization in patients with advanced solid tumors by assessing corrected QT interval (QTc) and (ii) to examine the relationship between plasma talazoparib concentration and QTc. In this open-label phase 1 study, patients had continuous 12-lead ECG recordings at baseline followed by time-matched continuous ECG recordings and collection of talazoparib plasma pharmacokinetic samples predose and at 1, 2, 4, and 6 h postdose on treatment days 1 and 22 and before talazoparib administration on day 2. ECG recordings were submitted for independent central review where triplicate 10-s ECGs, extracted up to 15 min before pharmacokinetic samples, were assessed for RR, PR, QRS, and QT intervals and ECG morphology. QT interval was corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's (QTcF) and Bazett's (QTcB) formulae. Linear mixed-effects modeling was used to examine the relationship between QTc and RR interval change from baseline and plasma talazoparib concentration. Thirty-seven patients received talazoparib. Mean change in QTcF from time-matched baseline ranged from -3.5 to 6.9 ms, with the greatest change 1 h postdose on day 22. No clinically relevant changes in PR, QRS, QTcB, QTcF, or RR intervals, heart rate, or ECG morphology were observed. No concentration-dependent effect on heart rate or QTc was observed. No deaths, permanent treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were reported. Talazoparib (1 mg once daily) had no clinically relevant effects on cardiac repolarization.

The anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy is a standard of care in the first-line treatment of RAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and has demonstrated efficacy in later lines. Progressive disease (PD) occurs when tumours develop resistance to a therapy, although controversy remains about whether PD on a combination of chemotherapy and targeted agents implies resistance to both components. Here, we propose that some patients may gain additional clinical benefit from the reuse of cetuximab after having PD on regimens including cetuximab in an earlier treatment line. We conducted a non-systematic literature search in PubMed and reviewed published and ongoing clinical trials, focusing on later-line cetuximab reuse in patients with mCRC. Evidence from multiple studies suggests that cetuximab can be an efficacious and tolerable treatment when continued or when fit patients with mCRC are retreated with it after a break from anti-EGFR therapy. Furthermore, on the basis of available preclinical and clinical evidence, we propose that longitudinal monitoring of RAS status may identify patients suitable for such a strategy. Patients who experience progression on cetuximab plus chemotherapy but have maintained RAS wt tumour status may benefit from continuation of cetuximab with a chemotherapy backbone switch because they have probably developed resistance to the chemotherapeutic agents rather than the biologic component of the regimen. Conversely, patients whose disease progresses on cetuximab-based therapy due to drug-selected clonal expansion of RAS-mutant tumour cells may regain sensitivity to cetuximab following a defined break from anti-EGFR therapy. Looking to the future, we propose that RAS status determination at disease progression by liquid, needle or excisional biopsy may identify patients eligible for cetuximab continuation and rechallenge. With this approach, treatment benefit can be extended, adding to established continuum-of-care strategies in patients with mCRC.

AJCC staging of pancreatic cancer (PAC) is used to determine prognosis, yet survival within each stage shows wide variation and remains unpredictable. We hypothesized that tumor grade might be responsible for some of this variation and that the addition of grade to current AJCC staging would provide improved prognostication. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (1991–2005) was used to identify 8082 patients with resected PAC. The impact of grade on overall and stage-specific survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis. Variables in the model were age, sex, tumor size, lymph node status, and tumor grade. For each AJCC stage, survival was significantly worse for high-grade versus low-grade tumors. On multivariate analysis, high tumor grade was an independent predictor of survival for the entire cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.31–1.48) as well as for stage I (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07–1.54), stage IIA (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.26–1.61), stage IIB (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.27–1.50), stage III (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02–1.59), and stage IV (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.21–2.05) patients. The addition of grade to staging results in a statistically significant survival discrimination between all stages. Tumor grade is an important prognostic variable of survival in PAC. We propose a novel staging system incorporating grade into current AJCC staging for pancreas cancer. The improved prognostication is more reflective of tumor biology and may impact therapy decisions and stratification of future clinical trials.

Background

We recently reported, in a prospective randomized trial, that ultra-staging of patients with colon cancer is associated with significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) compared with conventional staging. That trial did not control for lymph node (LN) number or adjuvant chemotherapy use.

Study design

The current international prospective multicenter cooperative group trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00949312; "Ultra-staging in Early Colon Cancer") evaluates the 12-LN quality measure and nodal ultra-staging impact on DFS in patients not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Eligibility criteria included biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma; absence of metastatic disease; >12 LNs staged pathologically; pan-cytokeratin immunohistochemistry (IHC) of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-negative LNs; and no adjuvant chemotherapy.

Results

Of 445 patients screened, 203 patients were eligible. The majority of patients had intermediate grade (57.7%) and T3 tumors (64.9%). At a mean follow-up of 36.8 ± 22.1 months (range 0 to 97 months), 94.3% remain disease free. Recurrence was least likely in patients with ≥12 LNs, H&E-negative LNs, and IHC-negative LNs (pN0i-): 2.6% vs 16.7% in the pN0i+ group (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

This is the first prospective report to demonstrate that patients with optimally staged node-negative colon cancer (≥12 LNs, pN0i-) are unlikely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy; 97% remain disease free after primary tumor resection. Both surgical and pathologic quality measures are imperative in planning clinical trials in nonmetastatic colon cancer.

Background: AJCC staging of pancreatic cancer (PAC) is used to determine prognosis, yet survival within each stage shows wide variation and remains unpredictable. We hypothesized that tumor grade might be responsible for some of this variation and that the addition of grade to current AJCC staging would provide improved prognostication. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (1991-2005) was used to identify 8082 patients with resected PAC. The impact of grade on overall and stage-specific survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis. Variables in the model were age, sex, tumor size, lymph node status, and tumor grade. Results: For each AJCC stage, survival was significantly worse for high-grade versus low-grade tumors. On multivariate analysis, high tumor grade was an independent predictor of survival for the entire cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.31-1.48) as well as for stage I (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.54), stage IIA (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.26-1.61), stage IIB (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.27-1.50), stage III (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02-1.59), and stage IV (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.21-2.05) patients. The addition of grade to staging results in a statistically significant survival discrimination between all stages. Conclusions: Tumor grade is an important prognostic variable of survival in PAC. We propose a novel staging system incorporating grade into current AJCC staging for pancreas cancer. The improved prognostication is more reflective of tumor biology and may impact therapy decisions and stratification of future clinical trials. © 2010 Society of Surgical Oncology.