Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the changing impact of genetic and clinicopathologic factors on conditional overall survival (CS) over time in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis. BACKGROUND:CS estimates account for the changing likelihood of survival over time and may reveal the changing impact of prognostic factors as time accrues from the date of surgery. METHODS:CS analysis was performed in 1099 patients of an international, multi-institutional cohort. Three-year CS (CS3) estimates at the "xth" year after surgery were calculated as follows: CS3 = CS (x + 3)/CS (x). The standardized difference (d) between CS3 rates was used to estimate the changing prognostic power of selected variables over time. A d < 0.1 indicated very small differences between groups, 0.1 ≤ d < 0.3 indicated small differences, 0.3 ≤ d < 0.5 indicated moderate differences, and d ≥ 0.5 indicated strong differences. RESULTS:According to OS estimates calculated at the time of surgery, the presence of BRAF and KRAS mutations, R1 margin status, resected extrahepatic disease, patient age, primary tumor lymph node metastasis, tumor number, and carcinoembryonic antigen levels independently predicted worse survival. However, when temporal changes in the prognostic impact of these variables were considered using CS3 estimates, BRAF mutation dominated prognosis during the first year (d = 0.48), whereas surgeon-related variables (ie, surgical margin and resected extrahepatic disease) determined prognosis thereafter (d ≥ 0.5). Traditional clinicopathologic factors affected survival constantly, but only to a moderate degree (0.3 ≤ d < 0.5). CONCLUSIONS:The impact of genetic, surgery-related, and clinicopathologic factors on OS and CS3 changed dramatically over time. Specifically, BRAF mutation status dominated prognosis in the first year, whereas positive surgical margins and resected extrahepatic disease determined prognosis thereafter.

OBJECTIVES:To establish an evidence-based cut-off to differentiate between early and late recurrence and to compare clinicopathologic risk factors between the two groups. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA:A clear definition of "early recurrence" after pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection is currently lacking. METHODS:Patients undergoing pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2000 and 2013 were included. Exclusion criteria were neoadjuvant therapy and incomplete follow-up. A minimum P-value approach was used to evaluate the optimal cut-off value of recurrence-free survival to divide the patients into early and late recurrence cohorts based on subsequent prognosis. Potential risk factors for early recurrence were assessed with logistic regression models. RESULTS:Of 957 included patients, 204 (21.3%) were recurrence-free at last follow-up. The optimal length of recurrence-free survival to distinguish between early (n = 388, 51.5%) and late recurrence (n = 365, 48.5%) was 12 months (P < 0.001). Patients with early recurrence had 1-, and 2-year post-recurrence survival rates of 20 and 6% compared with 45 and 22% for the late recurrence group (both P < 0.001). Preoperative risk factors for early recurrence included a Charlson age-comorbidity index ≥4 (OR 1.65), tumor size > 3.0 cm on computed tomography (OR 1.53) and CA 19-9 > 210 U/mL (OR 2.30). Postoperative risk factors consisted of poor tumor differentiation grade (OR 1.66), microscopic lymphovascular invasion (OR 1.70), a lymph node ratio > 0.2 (OR 2.49), and CA 19-9 > 37 U/mL (OR 3.38). Adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 0.28) and chemoradiotherapy (OR 0.29) were associated with a reduced likelihood of early recurrence. CONCLUSION:A recurrence-free interval of 12 months is the optimal threshold for differentiating between early and late recurrence, based on subsequent prognosis.

BACKGROUND:Immune checkpoint inhibitors are not effective for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as single agents. Vaccine therapy may sensitize PDACs to checkpoint inhibitor treatments. Annexin A2 (ANXA2) is a pro-metastasis protein, previously identified as a relevant PDAC antigen that is expressed by a GM-CSF-secreting allogenic whole pancreatic tumor cell vaccine (GVAX) to induce an anti-ANXA2 antibody response in patients with PDAC. We hypothesized that an ANXA2-targeting vaccine approach not only provokes an immune response but also mounts anti-tumor effects. METHODS:We developed a Listeria-based, ANXA2-targeting cancer immunotherapy (Lm-ANXA2) and investigated its effectiveness within two murine models of PDAC. RESULTS:We show that Lm-ANXA2 prolonged the survival in a transplant model of mouse PDACs. More importantly, priming with the Lm-ANXA2 treatment prior to administration of anti-PD-1 antibodies increased cure rates in the implanted PDAC model and resulted in objective tumor responses and prolonged survival in the genetically engineered spontaneous PDAC model. In tumors treated with Lm-ANXA2 followed by anti-PD-1 antibody, the T cells specific to ANXA2 had significantly increased INFγ expression. CONCLUSIONS:For the first time, a listeria vaccine-based immunotherapy was shown to be able to induce a tumor antigen-specific T cell response within the tumor microenvironment of a "cold" tumor such as PDAC and sensitize the tumor to checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Moreover, this combination immunotherapy led to objective tumor responses and survival benefit in the mice with spontaneously developed PDAC tumors. Therefore, our study supports developing Lm-ANXA2 as a therapeutic agent in combination with anti-PD-1 antibody for PDAC treatment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS:Many patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma carry germline mutations associated with increased risk of cancer. It is not clear whether patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), which are precursors to some pancreatic cancers, also carry these mutations. We assessed the prevalence of germline mutations associated with cancer risk in patients with histologically confirmed IPMN. METHODS:We obtained nontumor tissue samples from 315 patients with surgically resected IPMNs from 1997 through 2017, and we sequenced 94 genes with variants associated with cancer risk. Mutations associated with increased risk of cancer were identified and compared with individuals from the Exome Aggregation Consortium. RESULTS:We identified 23 patients with a germline mutation associated with cancer risk (7.3%; 95% confidence interval, 4.9-10.8). Nine patients had a germline mutation associated with pancreatic cancer susceptibility (2.9%; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-5.4). More patients with IPMNs carried germline mutations in ATM (P < .0001), PTCH1 (P < .0001), and SUFU (P < .0001) compared with controls. Patients with IPMNs and germline mutations associated with pancreatic cancer were more like to have concurrent invasive pancreatic carcinoma compared with patients with IPMNs without these mutations (P < .0320). CONCLUSIONS:In sequence analyses of 315 patients with surgically resected IPMNs, we found that almost 3% to carry mutations associated with pancreatic cancer risk. More patients with IPMNs and germline mutations associated with pancreatic cancer had concurrent invasive pancreatic carcinoma compared with patients with IPMNs without these mutations. Genetic analysis of patients with IPMNs might identify those at greatest risk for cancer.

This study aimed to understand the biology of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma that arises in the remnant pancreas after surgical resection of a primary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, using integrated histological and molecular analysis. Patients who underwent a completion pancreatectomy for local recurrence following resection of a primary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were studied with histological analysis and next-generation sequencing of the primary and the recurrent cancer. Of six patients that met the inclusion criteria, three cases were classified as "true" recurrences, i.e., the primary and the cancer in the remnant pancreas shared both morphological features and molecular alterations. Two cases were identified as having independent cancers that exhibited different histological and molecular profiles. In the remaining case, the relationship could not be determined. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma that arises in the remnant pancreas can be either a second primary or a "true" relapse of the preceding primary. The differentiation of second primaries from local recurrences may have important implications for patient management.

BACKGROUND:Despite improvements in cancer management, most pancreatic cancers are still diagnosed at an advanced stage. We have recently identified promoter DNA methylation of the genes ADAMTS1 and BNC1 as potential blood biomarkers of pancreas cancer. In this study, we validate this biomarker panel in peripheral cell-free tumor DNA of patients with pancreatic cancer. RESULTS:Sensitivity and specificity for each gene are as follows: ADAMTS1 87.2% and 95.8% (AUC = 0.91; 95% CI 0.71-0.86) and BNC1 64.1% and 93.7% (AUC = 0.79; 95% CI 0.63-0.78). When using methylation of either gene as a combination panel, sensitivity increases to 97.3% and specificity to 91.6% (AUC = 0.95; 95% CI 0.77-0.90). Adding pre-operative CA 19-9 values to the combined two-gene methylation panel did not improve sensitivity. Methylation of ADAMTS1 was found to be positive in 87.5% (7/8) of stage I, 77.8% (7/9) of stage IIA, and 90% (18/20) of stage IIB disease. Similarly, BNC1 was positive in 62.5% (5/8) of stage I patients, 55.6% (5/9) of stage IIA, and 65% (13/20) of patients with stage IIB disease. The two-gene panel (ADAMTS1 and/or BNC1) was positive in 100% (8/8) of stage I, 88.9% (8/9) of stage IIA, and 100% (20/20) of stage IIB disease. The sensitivity and specificity of the two-gene panel for localized pancreatic cancer (stages I and II), where the cancer is eligible for surgical resection with curative potential, was 94.8% and 91.6% respectively. Additionally, the two-gene panel exhibited an AUC of 0.95 (95% CI 0.90-0.98) compared to 57.1% for CA 19-9 alone. CONCLUSION:The methylation status of ADAMTS1 and BNC1 in cfDNA shows promise for detecting pancreatic cancer during the early stages when curative resection of the tumor is still possible. This minimally invasive blood-based biomarker panel could be used as a promising tool for diagnosis and screening in a select subset of high-risk populations.

OBJECTIVE:Limited data exist on the impact of ascites in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We evaluated the survival outcomes of patients with PDAC and ascites. METHODS:Retrospective, single-institution, case-control study including patients with newly diagnosed PDAC from 2007 to 2016. One hundred fifty-four patients with ascites at diagnosis (case group) and 154 controls were matched on age, sex, stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance, surgical treatment, lymph node, and margin status. Ascites was defined as computed tomography-detected fluid in the pelvic/peritoneal cavity. Overall survival was compared between groups via Cox proportional hazards models with a gamma frailty term to account for the correlation between matched pairs on entire cohort and by disease stages for subgroup analysis. RESULTS:The 154 matched cases included 24 resectable, 19 borderline resectable, 51 locally advanced, and 60 metastatic disease. Patients with ascites had higher risk of death compared with those without (conditional hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-2.03; P < 0.001). Stratified analysis showed a significant association between ascites and poor prognosis in patients with localized disease (conditional hazard ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.24; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS:Radiographic ascites is a poor prognostic factor in PDAC. Our findings may aid physicians in considering systemic therapy prior to attempting local treatments.

Current evidence cannot support denying metastasectomy in otherwise resectable patients solely based on their overall KRAS or BRAF mutational status. The combination of KRAS or BRAF mutational status with certain clinicopathologic characteristics has defined groups of patients who may not derive benefit from metastasectomy, but external validation is needed. The effect of certain KRAS or BRAF variants on survival may be more pronounced and therefore future studies should consider them for surgical selection.

Background and objectives/UNASSIGNED:Sarcomas represent a heterogeneous group of tumors, and there is lack of data describing contemporary changes in patterns of care. We evaluated the epidemiology of sarcomas over 12 recent years. Methods/UNASSIGNED:The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database was queried for sarcoma cases from 2002-2014. Patient, tumor and treatment factors, and trends over time were studied overall and by subtype. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models and 5-year survival and cause-specific mortality (CSM) were summarized. Results/UNASSIGNED:There were 78,527 cases of sarcomas with an overall incidence of 7.1 cases per 100,000 people, increasing from 6.8 in 2002 to 7.7 in 2014. Sarcoma NOS(14.8%) and soft tissue(43.4%) were the most common histology and primary site, respectively. A majority of tumors were high-grade(33.6%) and >5 cm(51.3%). CSM was 28.6% and 5-year survival was 71.4%. Many patients had unknown-grade(42.2%), which associated with 2.6 times increased odds of no surgical intervention. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:This comprehensive national study highlights important trends including increasing incidence, changing histologic types, and underestimation of true incidence. A large proportion of sarcomas are inadequately staged (unknown-grade 42.2%) with lack of appropriate surgical treatment. Our study highlights need for standardization of care for sarcomas.