While tumor-tissue remains the ‘gold standard’ for genetic analysis in cancer patients, it is challenged with the advent of circulating cell-free tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis from blood samples. Here, ...we broaden our previous study on the clinical validation of plasma DNA in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, by evaluating its clinical utility under standard management care.
Concordance and data turnaround-time of ctDNA when compared with tumor-tissue analysis were studied in a real-time blinded prospective multicenter clinical study (n = 140 metastatic colorectal patients). Results are presented according to STARD criteria and were discussed in regard with clinical outcomes of patients.
Much more mutations were found by ctDNA analysis: 59%, 11.8% and 14.4% of the patients were found KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutant by ctDNA analysis instead of 44%, 8.8% and 7.2% by tumor-tissue analysis. Median tumor-tissue data turnaround-time was 16 days while 2 days for ctDNA analysis. Discordant samples analysis revealed that use of biopsy, long delay between tumor-tissue and blood collection and resection of the tumor at time of blood draw, tumor site, or type of tissue analyzed seem to affect concordance. Altogether, the clinical data with respect to the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor response (RAS status) and the prognosis (BRAF status) of those discordant patients do not appear contradictory to the mutational status as determined by plasma analysis. Lastly, we present the first distribution profile of the RAS and BRAF hotspot mutations as determined by ctDNA analysis (n = 119), revealing a high proportion of patients with multiple mutations (45% of the population and up to 5 mutations) and only 24% of WT scored patients for both genes. Mutation profile as determined from ctDNA analysis with using various detection thresholds highlights the importance of the test sensitivity.
Our study showed that ctDNA could replace tumor-tissue analysis, and also clinical utility of ctDNA analysis by considerably reducing data turnaround time.
Inhibition of tumor growth factor-β (TGF-β) receptor type I potentiated the activity of sorafenib in preclinical models of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Galunisertib is a small-molecule selective ...inhibitor of TGF-β1 receptor type I, which demonstrated activity in a phase 2 trial as second-line HCC treatment.
The combination of galunisertib and sorafenib (400 mg BID) was tested in patients with advanced HCC and Child-Pugh A liver function without prior systemic therapy. Galunisertib dose was administered 80 or 150 mg b.i.d. orally for 14 days every 28 days in safety lead-in cohorts; in the expansion cohort, all patients received galunisertib 150 mg b.i.d. Objectives included time-to-tumor progression, changes in circulating alpha fetoprotein and TGF-β1, safety, overall survival (OS), response rate, and pharmacokinetics (PK).
Patients (n = 47) were enrolled from 5 non-Asian countries; 3 and 44 patients received the 80 mg and 150 mg b.i.d. doses of galunisertib, respectively. The pharmacokinetics and safety profiles were consistent with monotherapy of each drug. For the 150 mg b.i.d. galunisertib cohort, the median time-to-tumor progression was 4.1 months; the median OS was 18.8 months. A partial response was seen in 2 patients, stable disease in 21, and progressive disease in 13. TGF-β1 responders (decrease of >20% from baseline) vs nonresponders had longer OS (22.8 vs 12.0 months, P = 0.038).
The combination of galunisertib and sorafenib showed acceptable safety and a prolonged OS outcome.
After surgical resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), patients are predominantly treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, commonly consisting of gemcitabine (GEM)-based regimens or the ...modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) regimen. While mFFX regimen has been shown to be more effective than GEM-based regimens, it is also associated with higher toxicity. Current treatment decisions are based on patient performance status rather than on the molecular characteristics of the tumor. To address this gap, the goal of this study was to develop drug-specific transcriptomic signatures for personalized chemotherapy treatment.
We used PDAC datasets from preclinical models, encompassing chemotherapy response profiles for the mFFX regimen components. From them we identified specific gene transcripts associated with chemotherapy response. Three transcriptomic artificial intelligence signatures were obtained by combining independent component analysis and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-random forest approach. We integrated a previously developed GEM signature with three newly developed ones. The machine learning strategy employed to enhance these signatures incorporates transcriptomic features from the tumor microenvironment, leading to the development of the ‘Pancreas-View’ tool ultimately clinically validated in a cohort of 343 patients from the PRODIGE-24/CCTG PA6 trial.
Patients who were predicted to be sensitive to the administered drugs (n = 164; 47.8%) had longer disease-free survival (DFS) than the other patients. The median DFS in the mFFX-sensitive group treated with mFFX was 50.0 months stratified hazard ratio (HR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-0.44, P < 0.001 and 33.7 months (stratified HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.59, P < 0.001) in the GEM-sensitive group when treated with GEM. Comparatively patients with signature predictions unmatched with the treatments (n = 86; 25.1%) or those resistant to all drugs (n = 93; 27.1%) had shorter DFS (10.6 and 10.8 months, respectively).
This study presents a transcriptome-based tool that was developed using preclinical models and machine learning to accurately predict sensitivity to mFFX and GEM.
•Transcriptomic signatures were developed for key pancreatic cancer drugs to enable personalized treatment.•The Pancreas-View tool integrates four drug signatures to assist informed therapeutic decisions.•Signatures accurately identify high responder patients, indicative of improved DFS and cancer-specific survival.•Clinical validation involving a cohort of 343 patients confirms the efficacy of this signature approach.•Transcriptomic signatures that integrate predictors from preclinical models and machine learning offer a rationalized treatment strategy.
Although increased rates of solid organ cancers have been reported following liver transplantation (LT), the impact of quantitative exposure to calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) remains unclear. We have ...therefore probed the relationship between the development of solid organ cancers following LT and the level of CNI exposure. This prospective single‐center study was conducted between 1995 and 2008 and is based on 247 tacrolimus‐treated liver transplant recipients who survived at least 1 year following surgery. The incidence of cancer was recorded, and the mean blood concentration of tacrolimus (TC) was determined at 1 and 3 years following LT. The study results indicate that 43 (17.4%) patients developed de novo solid cancers. Mean TC during the first year after LT was significantly higher in patients who developed solid organ tumors (10.3 ± 2.1 vs. 7.9 ± 1.9 ng/mL, p < 0.0001). Independent risks factors in multivariate analysis were tobacco consumption before LT (OR = 5.42; 95% CI 1.93–15.2, p = 0.0014) and mean annual TC during the first year after LT (p < 0.0001; OR = 2.01; 95% CI 1.57–2.59, p < 0.0001). Similar effects were observed in 216 patients who received tacrolimus continuously for ≥3 years. It appears therefore that CNI should be used with caution after LT, and that new immunosuppressive therapies could deliver significant clinical benefits in this regard.
This study reports that the risk of solid cancer after liver transplantation increases with early exposure to tacrolimus, and that there is a dose‐response relationship that is independent of the smoking habits of the patients.
This trial evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of combined sorafenib and irinotecan (NEXIRI) as second- or later-line treatment of patients with KRAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), ...who had progressed after irinotecan-based chemotherapy.
In Phase I, in a 3+3 dose escalation schedule, patients received irinotecan (125, 150 or 180 mg m(-2) every 2 weeks), in combination with 400 mg sorafenib b.d. The primary end point was the maximum-tolerated dose of irinotecan. In Phase II, the primary end point was disease control rate (DCR). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity.
Phase I included 10 patients (median age 63 (49-73)); no dose-limiting toxicity was seen. In Phase II, 54 patients (median age 60 (43-80) years) received irinotecan 180 mg m(-)(2) every 2 weeks with sorafenib 400 mg b.d. Nine patients (17%) remained on full-dose sorafenib. The DCR was 64.9% (95% CI, 51-77). Median PFS and OS were 3.7 (95% CI, 3.2-4.7) and 8.0 (95% CI, 4.8-9.7) months, respectively. Toxicities included Grade 3 diarrhoea (37%), neutropenia (18%), hand-foot syndrome (13%) and Grade 4 neutropenia (17%).
The NEXIRI regimen showed promising activity as second- or later-line treatment in this heavily pretreated mCRC population (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00989469).
Liver stereotactic body radiotherapy is a developing technique for the treatment of primary tumours and metastases. Its implementation is complex because of the particularities of the treated organ ...and the comorbidities of the patients. However, this technique is a treatment opportunity for patients otherwise in therapeutic impasse. The scientific evidence of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy has been considered by the French health authority as insufficient for its widespread use outside specialized and experienced centers, despite a growing and important number of retrospective and prospective studies, but few comparative data. This article focuses on the specific features of stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver treatments and the results of published studies of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy performed with classic linear accelerators and dedicated radiosurgery units.
PDF
