Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Identifying ineffective practices that have been used in oncology is important in reducing wasted resources and harm. We sought to examine the prevalence of practices that are being used but have been shown in RCTs to be ineffective (medical reversals) in published oncology studies. Methods We cross-sectionally analyzed studies published in three high-impact oncology medical journals (2009–2018). We abstracted data relating to the frequency and characterization of medical reversals. Results Of the 64 oncology reversals, medications (44%) represented the most common intervention type (39% were targeted). Fourteen (22%) were funded by pharmaceutical/industry only and 56% were funded by an organization other than pharmaceutical/industry. The median number of years that the practice had been in use prior to the reversal study was 9 years (range 1–50 years). Conclusion Here we show that oncology reversals most often involve the administration of medications, have been practiced for years, and are often identified through studies funded by non-industry organizations.

Background Guidelines show that for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a combination of three‐drug regimens, fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin and bevacizumab (BVZ), is one of the first‐line standard therapies. BVZ is generally well tolerated; however, it is associated with infrequent, life‐threatening side effects such as severe hypertension (HTN) (5%–18%), Grade ≥3 arterial thromboembolism (ATE) (2.6%), Grade ≥3 hemorrhagic events (1.2%–4.6%), and gastrointestinal perforation (0.3%–2.4%). This meta‐analysis aims to evaluate the additive risk of BVZ‐induced severe HTN and thromboembolism when BVZ is combined with a standard chemotherapy regime in patients with mCRC. Methods Our search was conducted from January 29, 2022, to February 22, 2022, through databases of PubMed, clinicaltrial.gov, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Data analysis from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical trials was conducted using Review Manager V.5.4, comparing BVZ‐chemotherapy to chemotherapy only, focusing on cardiovascular AE such as HTN and arterial and venous thromboembolism. Results The analysis from 26 clinical trials and RCTs showed that the odds of HTN were about four times higher, and ATE subgroup analysis of 11 studies showed over two times higher odds of ATE in patients being treated with BVZ compared to the chemotherapy‐only group. Conclusion BVZ, when added to the standard chemotherapy regimen for mCRC, was associated with higher odds of developing HTN and thromboembolism, specifically ATE, than the chemotherapy‐only group. Our findings are significant as they provide vital information in analyzing the risk–benefit ratio of adding BVZ to the standard chemotherapy regime in patients with mCRC, especially in patients with vascular comorbidities.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a heterogenous group of malignancies originating from neuroendocrine cells of the gastrointestinal tract, the incidence of which has been increasing for several decades. While there has been significant progress in the development of therapeutic options for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, these remain limited both in quantity and durability of benefit. This review examines the latest research elucidating the mechanisms of both up-front resistance and the eventual development of resistance to the primary systemic therapeutic options including somatostatin analogues, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with lutetium Lu 177 dotatate, everolimus, sunitinib, and temozolomide-based chemotherapy. Further, potential strategies for overcoming these mechanisms of resistance are reviewed in addition to a comprehensive review of ongoing and planned clinical trials addressing this important challenge.

Key Clinical Message Immunotherapy is considered first line in patients with dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Recent studies have also shown promising results with neoadjuvant immunotherapy in locally advanced CRC. We report a case in which neoadjuvant immunotherapy with pembrolizumab resulted in complete pathologic response at time of resection as well as saved the patient the morbidity associated with a hepatectomy. We also completed a scoping review of the literature which suggests promising tumor responses with treatment in dMMR CRC. Further randomized control trials to determine the magnitude of response and optimal regimen are needed.

HER2 is overexpressed or amplified in a subset of biliary tract cancer. Zanidatamab, a bispecific antibody targeting two distinct HER2 epitopes, exhibited tolerability and preliminary anti-tumour activity in HER2-expressing or HER2 (also known as ERBB2)-amplified treatment-refractory biliary tract cancer. HERIZON-BTC-01 is a global, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2b trial of zanidatamab in patients with HER2-amplified, unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer with disease progression on previous gemcitabine-based therapy, recruited at 32 clinical trial sites in nine countries in North America, South America, Asia, and Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with HER2-amplified biliary tract cancer confirmed by in-situ hybridisation per central testing, at least one measurable target lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were assigned into cohorts based on HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) score: cohort 1 (IHC 2+ or 3+; HER2-positive) and cohort 2 (IHC 0 or 1+). Patients received zanidatamab 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate in cohort 1 as assessed by independent central review. Anti-tumour activity and safety were assessed in all participants who received any dose of zanidatamab. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04466891, is ongoing, and is closed to recruitment. Between Sept 15, 2020, and March 16, 2022, 87 patients were enrolled in HERIZON-BTC-01: 80 in cohort 1 (45 [56%] were female and 35 [44%] were male; 52 [65%] were Asian; median age was 64 years [IQR 58–70]) and seven in cohort 2 (five [71%] were male and two [29%] were female; five [71%] were Asian; median age was 62 years [IQR 58–77]). At the time of the data cutoff (Oct 10, 2022), 18 (21%) patients (17 in cohort 1 and one in cohort 2) were continuing to receive zanidatamab; 69 (79%) discontinued treatment (radiographic progression in 64 [74%] patients). The median duration of follow-up was 12·4 months (IQR 9·4–17·2). Confirmed objective responses by independent central review were observed in 33 patients in cohort 1 (41·3% [95% CI 30·4–52·8]). 16 (18%) patients had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events; the most common were diarrhoea (four [5%] patients) and decreased ejection fraction (three [3%] patients). There were no grade 4 treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. Zanidatamab demonstrated meaningful clinical benefit with a manageable safety profile in patients with treatment-refractory, HER2-positive biliary tract cancer. These results support the potential of zanidatamab as a future treatment option in HER2-positive biliary tract cancer. Zymeworks, Jazz, and BeiGene.

Background Neoadjuvant treatment with nab‐paclitaxel and gemcitabine for potentially operable pancreatic adenocarcinoma has not been well studied in a prospective interventional trial and could down‐stage tumors to achieve negative surgical margins. Methods A single‐arm, open‐label phase 2 trial (NCT02427841) enrolled patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma deemed to be borderline resectable or clinically node‐positive from March 17, 2016 to October 5, 2019. Patients received preoperative gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and nab‐paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, 15, every 28 days for two cycles followed by chemoradiation with 50.4 Gy intensity‐modulated radiation over 28 fractions with concurrent fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. After definitive resection, patients received four additional cycles of gemcitabine and nab‐paclitaxel. The primary endpoint was R0 resection rate. Other endpoints included treatment completion rate, resection rate, radiographic response rate, survival, and adverse events. Results Nineteen patients were enrolled, with the majority having head of pancreas primary tumors, both arterial and venous vasculature involvement, and clinically positive nodes on imaging. Among them, 11 (58%) underwent definitive resection and eight of 19 (42%) achieved R0 resection. Disease progression and functional decline were primary reasons for deferring surgical resection after neoadjuvant treatment. Pathologic near‐complete response was observed in two of 11 (18%) resection specimens. Among the 19 patients, the 12‐month progression‐free survival was 58%, and 12‐month overall survival was 79%. Common adverse events were alopecia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, myalgia, peripheral neuropathy, rash, and neutropenia. Conclusion Gemcitabine and nab‐paclitaxel followed by long‐course chemoradiation represents a feasible neoadjuvant treatment strategy for borderline resectable or node‐positive pancreatic cancer.

Many FDA-approved cancer therapies, whether as a multiagent combination or as a single agent, have demonstrated only modest clinical benefit. To investigate the drug development landscape, this analysis focuses on whether newly approved drugs are added to existing standards as combination therapy or replace a former drug as monotherapy. A retrospective analysis of package inserts and corresponding trials for the treatment of nonhematology solid tumor malignancies from January 2011 to December 2023 was conducted to categorize an approval as monotherapy or combination therapy. Drug characteristics, treatment indications, study design, approval history, and efficacy results were compared between the 2 cohorts. Among the 292 approval entries and 110 drugs, 193 (66.1%) were monotherapies and 99 (33.9%) were combinations. Combinations, when compared with monotherapies, were more frequently approved as regular than accelerated approval (85 [85.9%] vs 132 [68.4%], P <.01), in the first-line setting (66 [66.7%] vs 69 [35.8%], P <.01), and with overall survival as the criteria (49 [49.5%] vs 40 [20.7%], P <.01). Monotherapies were more likely to be novel drugs compared with combinations (80 [41.5%] vs 14 [14.1%] P <.01). Monotherapies were more likely to be small molecule targeted agents, while combinations were more likely to be immunotherapies (P <.02). There was no difference comparing the time-to-event endpoints and validated clinical benefit scale, but the median response rate of combinations (46%) was higher than monotherapies (34%, P <.01). Given that clinical benefit appears limited in combination therapy compared with monotherapy, drug development could focus on simplifying cancer therapies toward patient-centered paradigms.

Abstract Background Recent trials testing immune-checkpoint inhibitors in esophago-gastric malignancies have shown mixed results. We aim to assess key subgroups using the ASCO Net Health Benefit Score (NHBS) and ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). Materials and Methods A search for phase III trials of FDA-approved anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 drugs in esophago-gastric cancer trials was identified using www.clinicaltrials.gov. These published studies were scored using the ASCO NHBS and ESMO MCBS. The ASCO NHBS scores were compared by primary site of cancer (esophageal vs gastric) and PD-L1 expression using the Mann-Whitney test and the ESMO-MCBS grading, by Fisher’s Exact test. Results Fifteen of 45 clinical trials were included. Of them, 6 were primarily esophageal cancer trials, and 9 were primarily gastric cancer trials. Ten stratified their analysis based on PD-L1 expression. The ASCO NHBS score was higher (mean 40, range 20 to 56.6 vs. mean 12, range −1.1 to 18.4, P < .01) for esophageal cancer than gastric cancer. No difference was observed in survival and response endpoints between the 2 groups. Similarly, the ESMO MCBS scored higher for esophageal cancer group than gastric cancer (P < .05). Additionally, the scores were higher in those with high PD-L1 expression vs. low PD-L1 (mean 36, range 11.2-66.6 vs. mean 14, range −19.5 to 43.6, P < .05). Conclusion The ASCO NHB and ESMO scores were consistently higher among esophageal cancer trials than gastric cancer trials and in those with high PD-L1 expression than low expression. Histology and PD-L1 expression should be considered when discussing value of immunotherapy to patients. Although survival has improved over the past several decades, esophageal and gastric cancers still have poor survival outcomes. This article reviews the risks and benefits of immunotherapy in different subgroups for treatment of esophageal and gastric cancers.

Background Most patients treated with the standard dosing protocol (SDP) of hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) floxuridine require dose holds and reductions, thereby limiting their HAI therapy. We hypothesized that a modified dosing protocol (MDP) with a reduced floxuridine starting dose would decrease dose holds, dose reductions, and have similar potential to convert patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (uCRLM) to resection. Patients and Methods We reviewed our institutional database of patients with uCRLM treated with HAI between 2016 and 2022. In 2019, we modified the floxuridine starting dose to 50% (0.06 mg/kg) of the SDP (0.12 mg/kg). We compared treatment related outcomes between the SDP and MDP cohorts. Results Of n = 33 patients, 15 (45%) were treated on the SDP and 18 (55%) with our new institutional MDP. The MDP cohort completed more cycles before a dose reduction (mean 4.2 vs. 2), received more overall cycles (median 7.5 vs. 5), and averaged 39 more days of treatment (all P < 0.05). The SDP experienced more dose reductions (1.4 vs. 0.61) and dose holds (1.2 vs. 0.2; both P < 0.01). Of the patients in each group potentially convertible to hepatic resection, three patients (23%) in the SDP and six patients (35%) in the MDP group converted to resection ( P = 0.691). Overall, four patients (27%) in the SDP developed treatment ending biliary toxicity compared with one patient (6%) in the MDP. Conclusions A 50% starting dose of HAI floxuridine provides fewer treatment disruptions, more consecutive floxuridine cycles, and a similar potential to convert patients with initially uCRLM for disease clearance.