Progression-Free Survival as Early Efficacy Endpoint in Resectable Esophageal Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Systematic Review

To investigate literature-based evidence regarding progression-free survival (PFS) as an early efficacy endpoint in patients with resectable esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy, this study identified large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with strict quality control. Twenty-four RCTs involving 7,514 patients were included. Trial-level correlation analysis was conducted to analyze the relationship between PFS hazard ratio (HR) and overall survival (OS) HR, Δ median PFS and Δ median OS. Correlation analysis at the neoadjuvant treatment arm level was performed between 1- to 5-year PFS and 5-year OS, median PFS and median OS. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients treated with standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT). The correlation was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient r in weighted linear regression, with weight equal to patient size. In trial-level correlation, PFS were strongly associated with OS HR (r, 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.97]) and Δ median survival (r, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.54-0.96]). In neoadjuvant treatment arms, there was a strong correlation between 1 to 5-year PFS rates and 5-year OS (r, 0.83-0.95), and median PFS and median OS (r, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]). NCRT subgroup analysis demonstrated acceptable consistency. In conclusion, we recommend PFS as an early efficacy endpoint in resected esophageal or GEJ cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy.

Neoadjuvant PD-1 Blockade Combined With Chemotherapy Followed by Concurrent Immunoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Anal Canal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients: Antitumor Efficacy, Safety and Biomarker Analysis

BackgroundAnal canal squamous cell carcinoma (ACSCC) is an exceedingly rare malignant neoplasm with challenges in sphincter preservation, treatment toxicities and long-term survival. Little is known concerning the activity of PD-1 antibodies in locally advanced ACSCC. This study reports on the efficacy and toxicities of a neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade combined with chemotherapy followed by concurrent immunoradiotherapy in ACSCC patients, and describes biomarkers expression and mutation signatures.MethodsIn this cohort study, patients were treated as planned, including four cycles of neoadjuvant PD-1 antibody toripalimab combined with docetaxol and cisplatin, followed by radiotherapy and two cycles of concurrent toripalimab. Multiplex immunofluorescence staining (mIHC) with PD-L1, CD8, CD163, Pan-Keratin and DAPI was performed with the pretreatment tumor tissue. Whole exome sequencing was performed for the primary tumor and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The primary endpoint was the complete clinical response (cCR) rate at 3 months after overall treatment. Acute and late toxicities graded were assessed prospectively.ResultsFive female patients with a median age of 50 years old (range, 43-65 years old), finished treatment as planned. One patient had grade 3 immune related dermatitis. Two patients had grade 3 myelosuppression during neoadjuvant treatment. No severe radiation-related toxicities were noted. Four patients with PD-L1 expression >1% achieved a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment. and the other patient with negative PD-L1 expression also achieved a cCR at 3 months after radiotherapy. All the patients were alive and free from disease and had a normal quality of life, with 19.6-24 months follow up. Inconsistent expression of PD-L1 and CD163 was detected in 3 and 5 patients, respectively. TTN, POLE, MGAM2 were the top mutation frequencies, and 80 significant driver genes were identified. Pathway analysis showed enrichment of apoptosis, Rap1, Ras, and pathways in cancer signaling pathways. Eight significantly deleted regions were identified.ConclusionsThis small cohort of locally advanced ACSCC patients had quite satisfactory cCR and sphincter preservation rate, after neoadjuvant PD-1 antibody toripalimab combined with chemotherapy followed by concurrent immunoradiotherapy, with mild acute and long-term toxicities.

Predictive Value of Serum Aurora A, Thymidine Kinase 1, and HER3/ErbB3 in Breast Cancer Patients Before Neoadjuvant Treatment

Further personalization is needed to improve the outcomes of breast cancer treatment. It is necessary to find new inexpensive and easily evaluated predictive markers. In this study, we determined serum level of Aurora A (AURKA), thymidine kinase 1 (TK1) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 3 (HER3) by enzyme immunoassay ELISA. We collected peripheral blood sera of 119 women with breast cancer before neoadjuvant treatment and the control group of 47 randomly selected healthy women. After treatment we analyzed clinical data: age, initial TNM stage, tumor receptors expression: estrogen (ER), progesterone (PGR), epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2), Ki67, histological malignancy grade, biological subtype, and response to neoadjuvant treatment in residual cancer burden (RCB) classification. Pathologic complete response (PCR) was achieved in 41 patients (34.45%). In univariate analysis patients with higher AURKA levels were more likely to obtain PCR (p=0.039). In multivariate analysis we used the logit regression model with PCR as the dependent. The effect of AURKA concentration ≥4.75 ng / mL on the chance of achieving PCR was found (OR: 3.5; 95%CI: 1.2-10.1; p = 0.023). Other significant PCR factors included: node status (OR: 0.503; 95% CI: 0.263-0.965; p = 0.039), negative PGR expression (OR: 0.104; 95% CI: 0.038-0.284; p < 0.001), and Ki67 >20% (OR: 5.44; 95% CI: 1.24-23,9; p < 0.025). There was no significance in marker concentrations and clinical features nor between breast cancer patients and control group. The outcomes suggest that serum AURKA level is a potential PCR prediction marker in neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment. Further studies are needed to confirm our observations.

Efficacy and Safety of Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel Compared to Docetaxel as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for HER2-Negative Breast Cancer

BackgroundNanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer remains controversial. We conducted a retrospective study to compare the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel with those of docetaxel as neoadjuvant regimens for HER2-negative breast cancer.MethodsIn this retrospective analysis, a total of 159 HER2-negative breast cancer patients who had undergone operation after NAC were consecutively analyzed from May 2016 to April 2018. Patients were classified into the nab-paclitaxel group (n = 79, nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m2, epirubicin 75 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2) and the docetaxel group (n = 80, docetaxel 75 mg/m2, epirubicin 75 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2) according to the drug they received for neoadjuvant treatment. The efficacy and adverse events were evaluated in the two groups.ResultsThe pathological complete response (pCR)(ypT0/isN0) rate was significantly higher in the nab-paclitaxel group than in the docetaxel group (36.71% vs 20.00%; P = 0.031). The multivariate analysis revealed that therapeutic drugs, lymph node status, and tumor subtype were the most significant factor influencing treatment outcome. At a median follow-up of 47 months, disease-free survival (DFS) was not significantly different in those assigned to nab-paclitaxel compared with docetaxel (82.28% vs 76.25%; P = 0.331). The incidence of peripheral sensory neuropathy in the nab-paclitaxel group was higher than that in the docetaxel group (60.76% vs 36.25%; P = 0.008), while the incidence of arthralgia was observed more frequently in the docetaxel group (57.50% vs 39.97%; P = 0.047).ConclusionsCompared with docetaxel, nab-paclitaxel achieved a higher pCR rate, especially those patients with triple-negative breast cancer or lymph node negative breast cancer. However, there was no significant difference in DFS between the two groups. This study provides a valuable reference for the management of patients with HER2-negative breast cancer.

Three Perspectives: The Approach of Neoadjuvant Treatment of Rectum Cancer According to Medical Oncologists, Radiation Oncologists, and Surgeons

Purpose Two treatment modalities are considerable for radiation therapy: short-course radiotherapy and immediate surgery or chemoradiation with 5-Fluorouracil based chemotherapy with delayed surgery. In this study, we try to evaluate the real-life treatment approaches of medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists for neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancers. Method The online survey form was established via Google Forms. The survey was taken voluntarily by medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, and general surgeons. Results One hundred eighty-three of the participants were medical oncologists while 36 were radiotherapists and 36 were surgeons. Most of the study population preferred long-course radiation therapy and chemotherapy which was consisting eighty-five percent. Two-thirds of the participants apply chemotherapies before operation. The most frequent chemotherapy cycles for the pre-operative setting were ‘three’ or ‘four-or-more’ with the percent of 27,8 and 25,1 respectively. Medical oncologists had a significantly higher tendency of offering chemotherapy between radiation therapy and surgery compared with the other groups. The optimal time of surgery was different between groups. There was no difference among groups between surgery and the ‘watch & wait’ strategy. A significant difference was observed between groups in offered neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Conclusion In our study, we found the new pre-operative chemotherapy regimen with short-course radiotherapy was slowly adopted in current practice. Also, medical oncologists tend pre-operative chemotherapy compared with other groups. The optimal surgery time for patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment is still controversial.

Prognosis of Upfront Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

BackgroundThe rate of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasing, but upfront resection is still offered to most patients with resectable or borderline resectable disease. Encouraging data reported in adjuvant chemotherapy trials prompts surgeons towards upfront surgery, but such trials are subject to a significant selection bias. This systematic review aims to summarize available high-quality evidence regarding survival of patients treated with upfront surgery for PDAC.MethodsPubmed, Cochrane, and Web of Science Databases were interrogated for prospective studies published between 2000 and 2021 that included at least a cohort of patients treated with upfront surgery for resectable or borderline resectable PDAC. The Cochrane Collaboration’s risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2) was used to assess risk of bias in all randomized studies. Patient weighted median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated.ResultsOverall, 8,341 abstracts were screened, 17 reports were reviewed in full text, and finally 5 articles and 1 conference abstract underwent data extraction. Included studies were published between 2014 and 2021. All studies were RCTs comparing different neoadjuvant treatment strategies to upfront surgery. Three studies included only resectable PDAC patients, two studies recruited patients with resectable and borderline resectable disease, and one study selected only borderline resectable patients. A total of 439 patients were included in the upfront resection cohorts of the 6 studies, ranging between 20 to 180 patients per study. The weighted median OS after upfront surgery was 18.8 (95% CI 12.4 – 20.6) months. Median DFS was 9 (95% CI 1.6 – 12.5) months. Resection rate was 74.5% (range 65-90%). Adjuvant treatment was initiated in 68% (range 43-77%) of resected patients.ConclusionsHigh-quality data for PDAC patients undergoing upfront surgery is scarce. Meta-analysis from the included studies showed a significantly shorter OS and DFS compared to recently published studies focusing on adjuvant combination chemotherapy, suggesting that the latter may overestimate survival due to the exclusion of most patients scheduled for upfront surgery.

Role of ctDNA in Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is currently classified by immunohistochemistry. However, technological advances in the detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) have made new options available for diagnosis, classification, biological knowledge, and treatment selection. Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease and ctDNA can accurately reflect this heterogeneity, allowing us to detect, monitor, and understand the evolution of the disease. Breast cancer patients have higher levels of circulating DNA than healthy subjects, and ctDNA can be used for different objectives at different timepoints of the disease, ranging from screening and early detection to monitoring for resistance mutations in advanced disease. In early breast cancer, ctDNA clearance has been associated with higher rates of complete pathological response after neoadjuvant treatment and with fewer recurrences after radical treatments. In metastatic disease, ctDNA can help select the optimal sequencing of treatments. In the future, thanks to new bioinformatics tools, the use of ctDNA in breast cancer will become more frequent, enhancing our knowledge of the biology of tumors. Moreover, deep learning algorithms may also be able to predict breast cancer evolution or treatment sensitivity. In the coming years, continued research and the improvement of liquid biopsy techniques will be key to the implementation of ctDNA analysis in routine clinical practice.

Biomarkers of Response to Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation in Localised Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a hormone driven cancer, characterised by defects in androgen receptor signalling which drive the disease process. As such, androgen targeted therapies have been the mainstay for PCa treatment for over 70 years. High-risk PCa presents unique therapeutic challenges, namely in minimising the primary tumour, and eliminating any undetected micro metastases. Trials of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy aim to address these challenges. Patients typically respond well to neoadjuvant treatment, showing regression of the primary tumour and negative surgical margins at the time of resection, however the majority of patients relapse and progress to metastatic disease. The mechanisms affording this resistance are largely unknown. This commentary attempts to explore theories of resistance more broadly, namely, clonal evolution, cancer stem cells, cell persistence, and drug tolerance. Moreover, it aims to explore the application of these theories in the PCa setting. This commentary also highlights the distinction between castration resistant PCa, and neoadjuvant resistant disease, and identifies the markers and characteristics of neoadjuvant resistant disease presented by current literature.