Feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant cabozantinib and nivolumab in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 335-335
Author(s):  
Mark Yarchoan ◽  
Qingfeng Zhu ◽  
Jennifer N. Durham ◽  
Nicole Gross ◽  
Soren Charmsaz ◽  
...  

335 Background: Only 10-15% of newly diagnosed HCC patients are candidates for a potentially curative resection, and most patients who receive resection eventually recur. Historical systemic therapies including sorafenib, as well as locoregional therapies, have not demonstrated benefit in the perioperative setting. Novel combinations of targeted therapies and immunotherapies demonstrate higher response rates than sorafenib in HCC. Here, we report the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant combination therapy with cabozantinib plus nivolumab, followed by surgical resection, in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced HCC. Methods: We conducted an open-label, single-arm, phase I study in patients with HCC with borderline resectable or locally advanced HCC (including multinodular disease, portal vein involvement, or other high-risk features). Patients received 8 weeks of therapy with cabozantinib 40 mg oral daily plus nivolumab 240 mg IV every two weeks, followed by restaging and possible surgical resection. The primary endpoint was feasibility, defined by the percentage of patients experiencing a treatment-related adverse event that precluded continuing on to surgery within 60 days of the planned date for surgical evaluation. Results: We enrolled 15 patients of whom 14 patients completed neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgical evaluation. Adverse events were consistent with prior experience with these agents, and the trial met its primary endpoint, with no patients experiencing a treatment-related adverse event that precluded timely surgical assessment. Of patients completing neoadjuvant therapy, 1 patient declined surgery, 1 tumor could not be resected, and 12 patients underwent successful R0 surgical resection. 5/12 (41.7%) resected patients had a major or complete pathologic response. At a median follow up of one year, 4/5 pathologic responders are without recurrence. We performed an in-depth profiling of the surgical resection biospecimens and identified an enrichment of IFNγ+ effector memory CD4+ and granzyme B+ effector CD8+ T cells as well as tertiary lymphoid aggregates in the pathologic responders. We further analyzed the spatial relationships of cell types in responders and non-responders, which identified distinct spatial arrangement of B cells in responders, and proximity of arginase-1 expressing myeloid cells to T cells in nonresponders. Conclusions: This study is, to our knowledge, the first use of a targeted therapy in combination with an immune checkpoint inhibitor in the neoadjuvant setting in HCC, and the first use of modern systemic therapies to expand surgical resection criteria. Neoadjuvant cabozantinib and nivolumab is feasible, and may result in pathologic responses and long-term disease-free survival in a group of patients who may be outside traditional resection criteria. Clinical trial information: NCT03299946.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 473-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keli Turner ◽  
Sumana Narayanan ◽  
Kristopher Attwood ◽  
Steven N. Hochwald ◽  
Renuka V. Iyer ◽  
...  

473 Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly being utilized for locally advanced (LAPC)/borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC); however, long term follow up data is sparse. At our institution, we use FOLFIRINOX as the regimen of choice. Gemcitabine (Gem) and nab-Paclitaxel (Abraxane) is utilized in patients not suited for FOLFIRINOX or if they have poor radiographic response and/or develop significant toxicities to FOLFIRINOX. The aim of this study was to report our institutional experience with neoadjuvant therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of all patients with BRPC or LAPC who received FOLFIRINOX (or a modified regimen), Gem/nab-Paclitaxel, or both prior to surgical resection. FOLFIRINOX was typically given for 4 – 6 cycles while gem/nab-Paclitaxel was given for 2 cycles. Results: From January 2011 to December 2015, 39 patients were identified who met the study criteria. Eight patients received FOLFIRINOX alone (median age 62), 20 patients received FOLFIRINOX + Gem/nab-Paclitaxel, and 11 received only Gem/nab-Paclitaxel (median age 72). Eighteen patients (46%) completed the intended cycles of chemotherapy. Twenty two patients had a radiologic and/or biomarker response. Exploration was performed in 25 of 39 (64%) patients of whom 20 (51%) underwent curative resection. Of the 20 resected patients, there were no post-operative deaths. The median tumor size, median lymph node ratio, and R0 resection rates were 2.4 cm, 0, and 85% for the entire cohort. Median follow up was 20.7 months. The median overall survival for the resected cohort was not reached vs 13.5 months in the no resection group; two year overall survival for the resection vs. no resection groups was 87% vs 16% (p < .001). Conclusions: FOLFIRINOX and/or Gemcitabine/nab-Paclitaxel as neoadjuvant therapy for LAPC/BRPC is fairly well tolerated, leads to appreciable rates of margin negative surgical resection, and a significant overall survival advantage.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory C Wilson ◽  
Brent T Xia ◽  
Syed A Ahmed

Despite decades of advancement and research into the multimodal care of pancreatic cancer, mortality after the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma remains grim. The role of adjuvant therapy following surgical resection has been well established in the literature. However, adjuvant therapy is imperfect, and outside of a clinical trial, there are high rates of omission or delayed initiation of therapy. Neoadjuvant treatment strategies continue to be explored in the management of resectable, borderline-resectable, and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. With improved resection rates and the possibility for tumor downstaging, neoadjuvant therapy has become standard for patients with borderline-resectable and locally advanced unresectable tumors. Additional benefits of neoadjuvant therapy in the treatment of resectable tumors include improved completion rates of systemic therapy and R0 resection rates. Future clinical trials, including the use of novel treatment agents and combination treatment strategies in both neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimens, will add value to the treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Key words: adjuvant therapy, borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer, locally advanced pancreatic cancer, neoadjuvant therapy, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, resectable disease 


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Igor Macedo ◽  
Danny Yakoub ◽  
Vikas Dudeja ◽  
Nipun B. Merchant

The incidence of pancreatic cancer continues to rise, and it is now the third-leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Only 15 to 20% of patients are eligible to undergo potentially curative resection, as most tumors are deemed unresectable at the time of diagnosis because of either locally advanced disease or distant metastases. Improvements in preoperative CT imaging have enabled better determination of the extent of disease and allowed for better operative planning. Based on their relationship to the surrounding vasculature and structures and presence or absence of distant disease, pancreatic tumors are classified into four categories: resectable, borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC), locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), and metastatic. With the recent advent of more effective chemotherapy regimens, efforts have focused on using neoadjuvant therapy approaches to increase the likelihood of achieving an R0 in patients with BRPC and possibly convert unresectable, locally advanced tumors to potentially resectable tumors. Response with neoadjuvant therapy regimens has resulted in increased number of patients eligible for resection, many times requiring vascular resection. Herein, we describe recent changes in the classification, important surgical and pathologic considerations and updated multimodal therapeutic options in the complex management of BRPC and LAPC.  This review contains 5 figures, 2 tables, and 78 references. Key Words: borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, CA 19-9, FOLFIRINOX, locally advanced pancreatic cancer, nab-paclitaxel, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, pancreatectomy, portal vein resection, radiation therapy, gemcitabine


2019 ◽  
Vol 270 (2) ◽  
pp. 340-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgios Gemenetzis ◽  
Vincent P. Groot ◽  
Alex B. Blair ◽  
Daniel A. Laheru ◽  
Lei Zheng ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 78-78
Author(s):  
R. P. Merkow ◽  
K. Y. Bilimoria ◽  
M. McCarter ◽  
A. Stewart ◽  
W. B. Chow ◽  
...  

78 Background: Consensus guidelines recommend neoadjuvant chemo- or chemoradiation therapy as the preferred treatment for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma; however, it is unknown if this recommendation has been widely adopted in the U.S. Our objective was to examine esophageal cancer multimodal therapy and identify factors associated with the use of neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: From the National Cancer Data Base, patients with middle third, lower third and GE junction (GEJ) adenocarcinomas were identified. Patients who were clinical stage I-III and underwent surgical resection were included. Separate logistic regression models were developed to identify predictors of neoadjuvant therapy utilization and outcomes. Results: From 1998 to 2007, 8,051 patients underwent surgical resection for esophageal cancer: 16.3% stage I, 45.0% stage II and 38.7% stage III. For stage II/III tumors, neoadjuvant use increased (49.0% to 77.8%, p<0.001). After adjustment, factors associated with underuse of neoadjuvant therapy in stage II/III patients were older age, Black or Hispanic ethnicity, more severe comorbidities, tumor location (GEJ and middle vs. lower third), tumor size ≥ 2cm, stage II (vs. III) and geographic region. Stage II/III patients not receiving neoadjuvant had an over two fold increased risk of positive lymph nodes (OR 2.14. 95% CI 1.79 – 2.55, p<0.001). In addition, the positive surgical margin rate increased almost three fold (OR 2.80 95% CI 2.17-3.62, p<0.001) but 30-day postoperative mortality risk was not significantly affected (OR 1.50 95% CI 0.94-2.39; p=0.090). For stage I patients, neoadjuvant therapy decreased over time (38.0% to 11.4%, p<0.001). The overuse of neoadjuvant therapy was associated with higher tumor grade, larger tumor size, and low surgical case volume (all p<0.05). Conclusions: The adoption of neoadjuvant therapy has increased in the past decade; however, opportunity exists to improve guideline treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Registry-based feedback to individual hospitals, such as benchmark comparison tools, could help institutions provide care in concordance with national guidelines. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document