Practical considerations in screening for genetic alterations in cholangiocarcinoma

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) encompasses diverse epithelial tumors historically associated with poor outcomes due to an aggressive disease course, late diagnosis, and limited benefit of standard chemotherapy for advanced disease. Comprehensive molecular profiling has revealed a diverse landscape of genomic alterations as oncogenic drivers in CCA. TP53 mutations, CDKN2A/B loss, and KRAS mutations are the most common genetic alterations in CCA. However, intrahepatic CCA (iCCA) and extrahepatic CCA (eCCA) differ substantially in the frequency of many alterations. This includes actionable alterations, such as isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations and a large variety of FGFR2 rearrangements, which are found in up to 29% and ∼10% of patients with iCCA, respectively, but are rare in eCCA. FGFR2 rearrangements are currently the only genetic alteration in CCA for which a targeted therapy, the fibroblast growth factor receptor 1-3 inhibitor pemigatinib, has been approved. However, favorable phase III results for IDH1-targeted therapy with ivosidenib in iCCA have been published, and numerous other alterations are actionable by targeted therapies approved in other indications. Recent advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) have led to the development of assays that allow comprehensive genomic profiling of large gene panels within 2-3 weeks, including in vitro diagnostic tests approved in the United States. These assays vary regarding acceptable source material (tumor tissue or peripheral whole blood), genetic source for library construction (DNA or RNA), target selection technology, gene panel size, and type of detectable genomic alterations. While some large commercial laboratories offer rapid and comprehensive genomic profiling services based on proprietary assay platforms, clinical centers may use commercial genomic profiling kits designed for clinical research to develop their own customized laboratory-developed tests. Large-scale genomic profiling based on NGS allows for a detailed and precise molecular diagnosis of CCA and provides an important opportunity for improved targeted treatment plans tailored to the individual patient's genetic signature.

Safety and effectiveness of bevacizumab treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: final results from the Avastin(®) Registry - Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) observational cohort study

AIMS

The Avastin(®) Registry - Investigation of Effectiveness and Safety (ARIES) observational cohort study (OCS) was designed to prospectively examine outcomes associated with bevacizumab-containing treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a community-based setting, where patient populations are less restricted than those in randomised trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with mCRC who were eligible for bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy in first- or second-line treatment were enrolled from November 2006 to September 2008. There were no protocol-specified treatment regimens; the dose and schedule of bevacizumab and chemotherapy were at the treating physician's discretion. The objectives in the ARIES OCS included analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, treatment patterns and safety in each of the first- and second-line treatment cohorts.

RESULTS

ARIES enrolled 1550 patients with mCRC receiving first-line therapy with bevacizumab. The median follow-up time was 20.6 months. The median PFS in this cohort was 10.2 months (95% confidence interval 9.8-10.6) and the median overall survival was 23.2 months (95% confidence interval 21.2-24.8). In a separate cohort of 482 patients with second-line mCRC, the median follow-up time was 16.9 months, the median PFS and overall survival from the start of second-line treatment to the end of follow-up was 7.9 months (95% confidence interval 7.2-8.3) and 17.8 months (95% confidence interval 16.5-20.7), respectively. Incidences of known bevacizumab-associated adverse events in ARIES were generally consistent with those previously reported in OCSs and randomised trials.

CONCLUSION

Results from the prospective ARIES OCS add further evidence to support the effectiveness and safety of bevacizumab when added to first- and second-line treatment regimens for patients with mCRC in community treatment settings.

VEGF remains an interesting target in advanced pancreas cancer (APCA): results of a multi-institutional phase II study of bevacizumab, gemcitabine, and infusional 5-fluorouracil in patients with APCA

BACKGROUND

We investigated the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab combined with gemcitabine followed by infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients with advanced pancreas cancer (APCA).

DESIGN

Patients with untreated APCA received bevacizumab 10 mg/kg, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) over 100 min, and 5-FU 2400 mg/m(2) over 48 h on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months from initiation of therapy. If PFS at 6 months was ≥41%, the regimen would be considered promising.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were enrolled in the study; of which, 39 were evaluable for primary end point. PFS at 6 months was 49% (95% CI 34% to 64%). Median PFS was 5.9 months (95% CI 3.5 to 8.1) and median overall survival (OS) was 7.4 months (95% CI 4.7 to 11.2). Partial response and stable disease occurred in 30% and 45% of patients, respectively. Treatment-related hypertension and normal baseline albumin correlated with an improved response rate, PFS and OS. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities included fatigue (14%), hypertension (5%), and venous thrombosis (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study met its primary end point. Further investigation of anti-VEGF therapy in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based therapy is warranted in APCA. Treatment-related hypertension and normal baseline albumin may predict for the efficacy of bevacizumab and should be investigated in prospective studies.

Phase II trial of neoadjuvant full-dose gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and radiation (RT) in patients with resectable (R) or borderline resectable (BR) pancreatic cancer

239

Background: We previously developed a regimen of full dose gemcitabine (gem), oxaliplatin (ox) and RT to maximize systemic and loco-regional disease control in pancreas cancer (JCO 25:4587, 2007). A multi-institution phase II trial was conducted to test efficacy of this regimen as neoadjuvant therapy in R/BR disease.

Methods: Eligibility criteria included path confirmation, no metastasis, R/BR lesion, PS ≤2, and adequate organ function. Treatment consisted of 2, 28 day cycles of gem (1g/m2 over 30 min D1, 8, 15) and ox (85mg/m2 D1, 15) with RT during cycle 1 (30Gy in 2Gy fractions). Pts were then re-evaluated for surgery. Resected pts received 2 additional cycles of chemotherapy.

Results: 68 evaluable pts were treated at 4 centers in 2007-2010. Median age was 64 (42-83), 32 men, PS 0:1:2 in 40:26:2. Median tumor size 3.2 cm (1.4–7.8), lesion in head 49, body 9, tail 10, R in 24 and BR in 44. 66 pts (97%) completed cycle 1/RT and 61 (90%) cycle 2. Therapy related adverse events ≥ grade 3 in cycles1/2 included ANC (32%), plts (24%), GI (16%), biliary/cholangitis (15%). Best response in primary was partial (10%) or stable (81%). 20 pts not operated on protocol: 8 progression (4 local, 4 distant), 8 judged not resectable, 3 toxicity, 1 early death. Of 48 laparotomies,10 not resected due to vascular involvement (6) or M1 disease (4). Resection completed in 15 of 18 R pts (13 R0, 2 R1) and 23 of 30 BR pts (19 R0, 2 R1, 2 R2). 26 pts received post-op therapy. With median fu 11.3 mos (0.7-35), 42 pts are alive, 20 pts are NED. Median survival (OS) for all pts is 21.2 mos (95%CI 13.3-not defined [ND]), resected 31.1 mos (95%CI 13.7-ND), unresected 16.0 mos (95%CI 5.8-ND). Time to treatment failure (death, progression, toxicity, no resection) and OS in R pts are 9.1 mos (95%CI 2.4-23.8) and 31.1 mos (95%CI 9.8-ND) and in BR pts 5.5 mos (95%CI 2.4-11.8) and 18.0 mos (95%CI 13.3-ND). Correlation of pathologic response and outcome is ongoing.

Conclusions: Neoadjuvant therapy with full dose gem, ox and RT was possible in a large proportion of pts with localized pancreas cancer and resulted in a high percentage of R0 resections. Results are particularly encouraging given a majority of pts with BR disease.

[Table: see text]

Similarities in treatment (Tx) patterns and clinical outcomes (CO) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) initially treated with FOLFOX/BV or FOLFIRI/BV: Results from ARIES, a bevacizumab (BV) observational study

480

Background: COs associated with varying Tx patterns in mCRC pts are poorly understood because patterns diverge from the randomized trials (RCT). The RCTs of BV (Avastin) plus chemotherapy (CT) in mCRC pts continued BV until progressive disease (PD), even if CT was stopped/changed. Some RCTs of BV+CT in mCRC show ∼50% of pts stopping Tx early for reasons other than PD with possible lessening of benefit. It is unclear if this is due to use of a particular CT regimen or other practice pattern. While the beneficial effect of post-PD BV Tx has been shown in ARIES (HR 0.52 BBP vs No BBP) [A Cohn, ASCO 2010], the effect of stopping BV or CT before PD is unclear. ARIES, a community based observational study with a large cohort of 1st line BV-treated mCRC pts, will assess the COs associated with different 1st line Tx patterns (BV and CT) based on real world practice.

Methods: ARIES enrolled mCRC pts receiving first- or second-line CT+BV. No Tx regimens or assessments are protocol specified. Data are collected prospectively at baseline (BL) and quarterly. Analyses included first-line pts with PD. Tx patterns of pts initially treated with FOLFOX/BV or FOLFIRI/BV are described and preliminary COs (PFS and OS) are estimated from K-M curves. Tx duration is calculated from enrollment date.

Results: As of 2/5/10, 1,548 first-line mCRC pts enrolled (median follow up = 21 m); 1,133 pts had PD. Of 1,133 pts with PD, most had FOLFOX/BV (63%) or FOLFIRI/BV (16%) as first CT. BL characteristics were similar, but the FOLFOX/BV group had more stage 4 pts (74%). Main reasons for stopping BV include AE, max benefit achieved and CT holiday. Tx patterns and COs are in the table.

Conclusions: ARIES first-line mCRC pts treated with FOLFOX/BV or FOLFIRI/BV had similar Tx patterns and COs despite the common opinion that they may differ in tolerability and possibly effectiveness. Additional analyses will assess the impact of stopping BV and/or CT before PD.

[Table: see text]

[Table: see text]