Faculty Bibliography

Background: Despite the recent progress made with front-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), most patients (pts) will either relapse or be refractory to treatment. Others may not even be eligible due to the toxicity profile of the available options or due to clinical deterioration. Once the disease progresses following front-line treatment, there is no accepted standard of care. Treatment options are clearly needed for patients with refractory disease. Approximately 5% of unselected PC pts, 10% of PC patients of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, and up to 19% of familial PC cases, harbor a germline BRCA mutation. Though less well characterized to date, somatic BRCA mutations also appear to play a significant role in PC. Clinical data have shown that pts with BRCA-mutant (BRCA^mut) tumors, including those with PC, respond to treatment with a PARP inhibitor (PARPi). Early data suggest that other genomic characteristics may be surrogate biomarkers of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and define a larger group of responders than just BRCA mutation(s) alone. Rucaparib, an oral PARPi, is being developed for treatment of cancers associated with HRD due to a BRCA mutation or other homologous recombination pathway defect. Rucaparib has a desirable PK profile, is well tolerated, and has demonstrated clinical activity (RECIST and/or CA-125 responses) in patients with BRCA^mut pancreatic, ovarian, or breast cancer in an ongoing Phase 1/2 study (NCT01482715). Three studies are currently ongoing in ovarian cancer and a trial in BRCA^mut pancreatic cancer is now planned. The clinical activity of PARPi, including rucaparib, in BRCA^mut PC, combined with the paucity of active 2nd-line therapies, support evaluation of rucaparib in PC pts with a BRCA mutation. Methods: Study CO-338-023 (NCT02042378) is a single-arm, open-label Phase 2 trial of continuous monotherapy rucaparib in up to 100 pts with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (or related subtype) who are known to harbor a deleterious BRCA mutation (germline or somatic). Pts must have received at least 1, but no more than 2, prior regimens for locally advanced or metastatic disease and have relapsed / progressive disease confirmed by radiologic assessment, or are no longer able to tolerate chemotherapy due to toxicity, and radiologic assessment confirms stable or progressive disease. Other key inclusion criteria include measurable disease, ECOG Performance Status 0 or 1, and adequate organ function. Pts with endocrine tumors or who received prior PARPi treatment are excluded. Pts will take 600 mg BID rucaparib continuously and be evaluated for safety every 2-4 wks, disease status (CT scans, CA19-9) every 4-8 wks until disease progression, and then for survival every 4 wks. Blood and archival tumor tissue (if available) will be collected from all pts. The primary endpoint is ORR by RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints include duration of response, PFS, OS, and safety. Exploratory analyses include gene sequence and structural rearrangements of tumor DNA and evaluation of circulating tumor DNA. A group sequential interim monitoring plan will be implemented to stop the study early for either superior efficacy or futility. Interim analyses will occur after every 10th patient enrolled has sufficient disease assessment data available. If robust activity is observed in the BRCA^mut PC population, the trial may be broadened to include PC pts with HRD due to other than a BRCA mutation

Through the contribution of a very large number of single-arm phase II trials and many less randomized phase III trials, the standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer has evolved to either combination chemotherapy plus radiation or combination chemotherapy. In this review, we focus on the key findings of these studies and selected meta-analyses that have led to this evolution. We note differences in outcomes for adenocarcinomas of the esophagus when compared to squamous cell esophageal cancers. Despite progress in developing a consensus for therapy, the outcome for patients with locally advanced remains poor. We complete the review by noting newer areas of investigation seeking to provide targeted and more personalized therapy to patients with esophageal cancer.

Objective: Current national guidelines include category 1 recommendations for perioperative chemotherapy or adjuvant chemoradiation with surgical resection for patients with stage IB-IIIB gastric cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials in which chemotherapy was prospectively tested against chemoradiation with surgical resection. Methods: We electronically searched PubMed and EMBASE for randomized, controlled clinical trials involving patients with gastric adenocarcinoma, status post-R0 resection. The interventions compared were adjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiation, with any chemotherapy regimen. The primary outcomes of interest were disease-free survival and overall survival. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model was used to calculate effect sizes. Results: Six trials that included 1,171 patients were evaluated; 599 were randomized to adjuvant chemoradiation and 572 to chemotherapy alone. Chemoradiation was associated with a significant increase in disease-free survival (odds ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.03) when compared to chemotherapy alone. However, there was no significant difference in overall survival (odds ratio 1.27, 95% confidence interval 0.95-1.71). Five trials found no statistically significant differences in toxicities between the two groups. Conclusion: In patients with gastric cancer status post-R0 resection, adjuvant chemoradiation was associated with higher disease-free survival when compared to chemotherapy alone. It remains appropriate to design trials testing new systemic agents with radiotherapy. (c) 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.

PURPOSE: Pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma is associated with improved survival. The Southwest Oncology Group designed a trimodality, phase II, single-arm trial with objectives of achieving a pCR rate of 40% with prospective exploratory analyses of intratumoral molecular markers postulated to affect response and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinically staged II or III esophageal adenocarcinoma received oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on days 1, 15, and 29; protracted-infusion fluorouracil (PI-FU) 180 mg/m(2)/d on days 8 through 43; and external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) 5 days a week at 1.8 Gy/d for 25 fractions; surgery was performed 28 to 42 days after neoadjuvant therapy. Chemotherapy was planned after surgery. Tumors were analyzed for mRNA expression and polymorphisms in genes involved in drug metabolism and DNA repair. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were evaluable. Two deaths (2.2%) were attributable to preoperative therapy, and two deaths (2.2%) were attributable to surgery. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were recorded for 47.3% and 19.4% of patients, respectively. Seventy-nine patients (84.9%) underwent surgery; 67.7% of patients had R0 resections. Twenty-six patients (28.0%) had confirmed pCR (95% CI, 19.1% to 38.2%). At a median follow-up of 39.2 months, estimates of median and 3-year overall survival (OS) were 28.3 months and 45.1%, respectively. Intratumoral ERCC-1 gene expression was inversely related to progression-free survival and OS. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant oxaliplatin, PI-FU, and EBRT for esophageal adenocarcinoma is active and tolerable. Because the regimen failed to meet the primary end point, it does not define a new standard. However, future trials can be built on this platform to validate the role of ERCC-1 in determining the best systemic regimen for individual patients.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal adenocarcinomas commonly express the epidermal growth factor receptor. This trial assessed the 6-month overall survival probability in metastatic esophageal cancer patients treated with cetuximab as second-line therapy. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label phase II study of single-agent cetuximab for metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma patients who failed one prior chemotherapy regimen. Adequate organ function and Zubrod performance status of 0 to 2 were required. Patients received cetuximab 400 mg/m intravenously (IV) on week 1 and 250 mg/m IV weekly thereafter. The primary objective was to determine 6-month overall survival. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, response rate, and toxicity. Tumor tissue was collected for correlative studies. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were registered, with eight ineligible or never treated. Fifty-five eligible patients (49 men, 6 women; median age = 61.2 years [range, 30.7-88.5]) were enrolled. Twenty patients survived more than 6 months for a 6-month overall survival rate of 36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24-50%). The median overall survival was 4.0 months (95% CI: 3.2-5.9). Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.7-1.9). One partial response and two unconfirmed partial responses were observed. Two patients experienced grade 4 fatigue. There was one treatment-related death due to pneumonitis. Germline polymorphisms of epidermal growth factor receptor, epidermal growth factor, interleukin (IL)-8, cyclooxygenase (COX)-2, vascular epidermal growth factor receptor (VEGF), CCND1, neuropilin 1 (NRP1), and K-ras mutational status were not associated with response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-month overall survival rate of 36% observed on this study failed to meet the primary survival objective. Thus, cetuximab alone cannot be recommended in the second-line treatment of metastatic esophageal cancer.

Rituximab plus intravenous bolus chemotherapy is a standard treatment for immunocompetent patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Some studies have suggested that rituximab is associated with excessive toxicity in HIV-associated NHL, and that infusional chemotherapy may be more effective. We performed a randomized phase 2 trial of rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) given either concurrently before each infusional etoposide, vincristine, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone (EPOCH) chemotherapy cycle or sequentially (weekly for 6 weeks) after completion of all chemotherapy in HIV-associated NHL. EPOCH consisted of a 96-hour intravenous infusion of etoposide, doxorubicin, and vincristine plus oral prednisone followed by intravenous bolus cyclophosphamide given every 21 days for 4 to 6 cycles. In the concurrent arm, 35 of 48 evaluable patients (73%; 95% confidence interval, 58%-85%) had a complete response. In the sequential arm, 29 of 53 evaluable patients (55%; 95% confidence interval, 41%-68%) had a complete response. The primary efficacy endpoint was met for the concurrent arm only. Toxicity was comparable in the 2 arms, although patients with a baseline CD4 count less than 50/microL had a high infectious death rate in the concurrent arm. We conclude that concurrent rituximab plus infusional EPOCH is an effective regimen for HIV-associated lymphoma.