Trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic gastroesophageal junction cancer: a subgroup analysis from the phase 3 TAGS study

Background Patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC) have poor survival outcomes, and GEJC-specific data from trials evaluating agents in gastric cancers (GCs) as a whole are lacking. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) was approved for previously treated metastatic GC or GEJC (mGC/mGEJC) based on results of the phase 3 TAGS trial. Subgroup analyses by primary tumor type (GC or GEJC) in TAGS are reported here. Methods Pa tients with mGC/mGEJC treated with ≥ 2 prior chemotherapy regimens were randomized (2:1) to receive FTD/TPI or placebo, plus best supportive care. A pre-planned sub-analysis was performed to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes by primary tumor type (GEJC or GC). Results Of 507 randomized patients, 145 (29%) had GEJC and 360 (71%) had GC as the primary disease site. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between the GEJC and GC subgroups, except that more patients in the GEJC subgroup had received ≥ 3 prior regimens (72 vs. 59% in the GC subgroup). Survival benefit with FTD/TPI was observed in both subgroups. The overall survival hazard ratio for FTD/TPI vs placebo was 0.75 (95% CI 0.50–1.11) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.52–0.87) in the GEJC and GC subgroups, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events of any cause were reported in 75 (77%) and 192 (81%) FTD/TPI-treated patients in the GEJC and GC subgroups, respectively. No new safety concerns were noted with FTD/TPI. Conclusion As in patients with GC, FTD/TPI showed an efficacy benefit in patients with GEJC in the TAGS trial, along with demonstrating a manageable safety profile.

Biologic subtypes of melanoma predict survival benefit of combination anti-PD1+anti-CTLA4 immune checkpoint inhibitors versus anti-PD1 monotherapy

PurposeAnti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1)±anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA4) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapeutic options for metastatic melanoma. We assessed whether biologic subtype according to primary tumor type or genomic subtype can function as predictive biomarkers for anti-PD1±anti-CTLA4 ICI in patients with advanced melanoma.MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective cohort analysis of patients who received anti-PD1±anti-CTLA4 ICI for advanced melanoma between 2012 and 2019. Primary tumor type, BRAF and NRAS mutation status, and other covariates were abstracted from chart review. Log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess differences in clinical progression-free (cPFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsWe identified 230 patients who received 249 lines of anti-PD1±anti-CTLA4 ICI for unresectable or metastatic disease. Of these patients, 74% were cutaneous, 11% mucosal, 8% unknown primary and 7% acral. BRAF and NRAS mutations were identified in 35% and 28% of patients, respectively. In multivariable analyses of the entire cohort, acral or mucosal primary tumor type, >3 metastatic sites, elevated LDH were predictive of shorter cPFS and OS. Combination ICI therapy was associated with longer cPFS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.86, p=0.007) and OS (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.65, p<0.001). Combination ICI was significantly associated with longer OS in unknown primary and mucosal melanoma. There was a non-significant trend toward longer OS with anti-PD1+anti-CTLA4 in cutaneous melanoma, but not in acral melanoma. In multivariable analyses, combination ICI was associated with longer OS in NRAS (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.62, p=0.003, n=69) and BRAF V600E/K (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.90, p=0.024, n=86) mutant melanoma but not BRAF/NRAS wild-type (n=94) melanoma.ConclusionsIn our cohort, primary melanoma tumor type and genomic subtype were independent predictive markers of cPFS and OS for patients with metastatic melanoma receiving anti-PD1 ICI. Primary tumor type and genomic subtype—including NRAS—should be further evaluated in prospective clinical trials to determine their value as predictive markers. Biologic subtypes may facilitate clinical decision-making when recommending combination ICI treatment (anti-PD1±anti-CTLA4) versus anti-PD1 alone for patients with metastatic melanoma.

Brain metastasis PD-L1 and CD8 expression is dependent on primary tumor type and its PD-L1 and CD8 status

BackgroundBrain metastases (Bmets) are frequent; however, limited data exist on the efficacy of immunotherapy in these lesions. The aims of the study were to analyze the immunohistochemical expressions of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and CD8 in Bmets and to compare them with their expressions in paired primary tumors, as well as correlate the results with clinicopathological features.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of 233 patients with Bmets and 111 paired primaries. Clinical, histological, and molecular data were recorded and compared with the immunohistochemical results of PD-L1 and CD8 expressions. The statistical analysis included χ2 test, Cramer’s V test, factorial analyses of variance, simple regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank product limit estimation.ResultsPD-L1 expression was found in 23.6% of Bmets and in 29.0% of primary tumors with concordant expression between them in 75.5% of cases. Bmets PD-L1 expression was associated with primary tumor PD-L1 expression and the primary tumor type. Significant CD8 peritumoral expression was found in 68.6% of Bmets and in 87.7% of primary tumors. CD8 expression was concordant between primary and metastatic tumors in 73.3% of cases. Bmets CD8 expression was associated with primary tumor CD8 expression and primary tumor type. PD-L1 expression was associated with CD8 expression in both primary and metastatic tumors. The concordance between primary and metastatic tumor PD-L1 expression was independent of all factors studied. The concordance between primary and metastatic CD8 expressions was marginally associated to the time of Bmets development. No prognostic role for PD-L1 and CD8 expression in Bmets was found.ConclusionPD-L1 and CD8 Bmets expressions are associated with the primary tumor type and its PD-L1 and CD8 expressions. No factor predicts the discordance for PD-L1 expression, while time to Bmets development is associated with CD8 expression discordance.

A multicenter, descriptive epidemiologic survey of the clinical features of spinal metastatic disease in China

Background: Spinal metastases have unique epidemiological features and treatment methods. Unfortunately, the relative scarcity of spinal metastases has limited the widespread development of descriptive epidemiological studies, especially in Asian countries. The purpose of this study was to describe the epidemiological characteristics of patients with metastatic spinal tumors in China between 2007 and 2019.Methods: From January 2007 and July 2019, data on patients with spinal metastases were collected from five cancer centers in China, and demographic characteristics, primary tumor types, segments and numbers of vertebral lesions, disease-related scores, and treatment methods were reviewed.Results: A total of 2228 patients with spinal metastases were reviewed in this study, including 1279 male patients and 949 female patients, and the male to female ratio was 1.35: 1. More than half of patients developed metastatic diseases between the ages of 50 years and 69 years (64%). Overall, lung cancer (824 cases, 37%) was the most common primary tumor type and the most common level of spinal involvement was multi-level of metastases (860 cases, 39%). 705 patients (32%) had undergone surgical treatments, 1028 patients (46%) had undergone radiotherapy for metastatic vertebrae, and 855 patients (38%) had received systemic treatments. The age, primary tumor type, number of involved vertebrae, Frankel grade, and spinal instability neoplastic score would affect the surgical decision-making.Conclusions: This study provides insight into the epidemiological characteristics of spinal metastasis and health care service utilization in spinal metastasis patients in China.

Prognostic factors and a new scoring system for survival of patients irradiated for bone metastases

Background Personalized therapy for bone metastases should consider the patients’ remaining lifespan. Estimation of survival can be facilitated with scoring tools. A new tool was developed, specifically designed to estimate 12-month survival. Methods In 445 patients irradiated for bone metastases, radiotherapy regimen plus 13 factors (age, gender, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), primary tumor type, interval between cancer diagnosis and RT of bone metastases, visceral metastases, other (non-irradiated) bone metastases, sites of bone metastases, number of irradiated sites, pathological fracture, fractionation of RT, pre-RT surgery, pre-RT administration of bisphosphonates/denosumab, pre-RT systemic anticancer treatment) were retrospectively analyzed for survival. Factors achieving significance (p < 0.05) or borderline significance (p < 0.055) on multivariate analysis were used for the scoring system. Twelve-month survival rates were divided by 10 (factor scores); factor scores were summed for each patient (patient scores). Results On multivariate analysis, survival was significantly associated with KPS (hazard ratio (HR) 1.91, p < 0.001) and primary tumor type (HR 1.12, p < 0.001); age achieved borderline significance (HR 1.14, p = 0.054). These factors were used for the scoring tool. Patient scores ranged from 8 to 17 points. Three groups were designated: 8–9 (A), 10–14 (B) and 15–17 (C) points. Twelve-month survival rates were 9, 38 and 72% (p < 0.001); median survival times were 3, 8 and 24 months. Conclusions This new tool developed for patients irradiated for bone metastases at any site without spinal cord compression allows one to predict the survival of these patients and can aid physicians when assigning the treatment to individual patients.

Simultaneous primary cancer occurrence of melanoma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma in leptomeningeal metastases: a case report

Background Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is a predominantly late stage, devastating complication of a variety of malignant solid tumors. Diagnosis relies predominantly on neurological, radiographic, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) assessments. Recently, liquid biopsy tests derived from CSF has shown to be a feasible, noninvasive promising approach to tumor molecular profiling for proper brain cancer diagnostic treatment, thereby providing an opportunity for CSF-based personalized medicine. However, LM is typically misleadingly assumed to originate from only one primary tumor type. Case presentation In this case report, we provide first evidence of the co-occurrence of LM originating from more than one primary tumor types. Discussion and conclusions Based on this patient case profile, the co-occurrence of LM from two or more primary tumor types should be accounted for when deriving diagnostic conclusions from liquid biopsy tests.