Arturo Loaiza‐Bonilla

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). RESULTS: A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT04354701.

IMPORTANCE: Autophagy is a mechanism of treatment resistance to chemotherapy that has a role in the maintenance of pancreatic cancer. Hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQ) is an inhibitor of autophagy that inhibits the fusion of the autophagosome to the lysosome. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether HCQ improves overall survival at 1 year in combination with gemcitabine hydrochloride and nab-paclitaxel (GA) among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted between March 18, 2013, and November 16, 2017, at the University of Pennsylvania, HonorHealth, and The Johns Hopkins University among 112 patients with previously untreated metastatic or advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate marrow and organ function. All efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat population. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive GA with or without HCQ. All patients received standard doses of GA, and those randomized to receive HCQ were treated continuously with 600 mg orally twice daily. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Overall survival at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (45 women and 67 men; median age, 65 years; range, 43-86 years) were enrolled; 55 were randomized to receive GA plus HCQ, and 57 to receive GA. Overall survival at 12 months was 41% (95% CI, 27%-53%) in the HCQ group and 49% (95% CI, 35%-61%) in the non-HCQ group. Median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-9.3 months) in the HCQ group and 6.4 months (95% CI, 4.5-7.6 months) in the non-HCQ group. Median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.2 months) in the HCQ group and 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.3-15.5 months) in the non-HCQ group. Overall response rate was 38.2% (n = 21) in the HCQ group and 21.1% (n = 12) in the non-HCQ group (P = .047). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events that differed between the HCQ and non-HCQ groups were neutropenia (23 of 54 [42.6%] vs 12 of 53 [22.6%]), anemia (2 of 54 [3.7%] vs 9 of 53 [17.0%]), fatigue (4 of 54 [7.4%] vs 0), nausea (5 of 54 [9.3%] vs 0), peripheral neuropathy (7 of 54 [13.0%] vs 3 of 53 [5.7%]), visual changes (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0), and neuropsychiatric symptoms (3 of 54 [5.6%] vs 0). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The addition of HCQ to block autophagy did not improve the primary end point of overall survival at 12 months. These data do not support the routine use of GA plus HCQ for metastatic pancreatic cancer in the absence of a biomarker. However, improvement seen in the overall response rate with HCQ may indicate a role for HCQ in the locally advanced setting, where tumor response may permit resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01506973.

BACKGROUND: 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) is superior to gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who have a good performance status. We investigated this combination as neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). METHODS: In this retrospective series, we included patients with unresectable LAPC who received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with growth factor support. The primary analysis endpoint was R0 resection rate. RESULTS: Eighteen treatment-naïve patients with unresectable or borderline resectable LAPC were treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. The median age was 57.5 years and all had ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Eleven (61 %) had tumors in the head of the pancreas and 9 (50 %) had biliary stents placed prior to chemotherapy. A total of 146 cycles were administered with a median of 8 cycles (range 3-17) per patient. At maximum response or tolerability, 7 (39 %) were converted to resectability by radiological criteria; 5 had R0 resections, 1 had an R1 resection, and 1 had unresectable disease. Among the 11 patients who remained unresectable after FOLFIRINOX, 3 went on to have R0 resections after combined chemoradiotherapy, giving an overall R0 resection rate of 44 % (95 % CI 22-69 %). After a median follow-up of 13.4 months, the 1-year progression-free survival was 83 % (95 % CI 59-96 %) and the 1-year overall survival was 100 % (95 % CI 85-100 %). Grade 3/4 chemotherapy-related toxicities were neutropenia (22 %), neutropenic fever (17 %), thrombocytopenia (11 %), fatigue (11 %), and diarrhea (11 %). Common grade 1/2 toxicities were neutropenia (33 %), anemia (72 %), thrombocytopenia (44 %), fatigue (78 %), nausea (50 %), diarrhea (33 %) and neuropathy (33 %). CONCLUSIONS: FOLFIRINOX followed by chemoradiotherapy is feasible as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with unresectable LAPC. The R0 resection rate of 44 % in this population is promising. Further studies are warranted.

Importance: COVID-19 is a life-threatening illness for many patients. Prior studies have established hematologic cancers as a risk factor associated with particularly poor outcomes from COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies have established a beneficial role for anti-COVID-19 interventions in this at-risk population. Convalescent plasma therapy may benefit immunocompromised individuals with COVID-19, including those with hematologic cancers. Objective: To evaluate the association of convalescent plasma treatment with 30-day mortality in hospitalized adults with hematologic cancers and COVID-19 from a multi-institutional cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry with propensity score matching evaluated patients with hematologic cancers who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Data were collected between March 17, 2020, and January 21, 2021. Exposures: Convalescent plasma treatment at any time during hospitalization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis with adjustment for potential confounders was performed. Hazard ratios (HRs) are reported with 95% CIs. Secondary subgroup analyses were conducted on patients with severe COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilatory support and/or intensive care unit admission. Results: A total of 966 individuals (mean [SD] age, 65 [15] years; 539 [55.8%] male) were evaluated in this study; 143 convalescent plasma recipients were compared with 823 untreated control patients. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, convalescent plasma treatment was associated with improved 30-day mortality (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.97). This association remained significant after propensity score matching (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29-0.92). Among the 338 patients admitted to the intensive care unit, mortality was significantly lower in convalescent plasma recipients compared with nonrecipients (HR for propensity score-matched comparison, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80). Among the 227 patients who required mechanical ventilatory support, mortality was significantly lower in convalescent plasma recipients compared with nonrecipients (HR for propensity score-matched comparison, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14-0.72). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest a potential survival benefit in the administration of convalescent plasma to patients with hematologic cancers and COVID-19.

Background This two-stage, multi-institutional, randomized phase 2 trial assessed the toxicity and response rate associated with two treatment schedules of the histone deacetylase inhibitor, vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid; SAHA) in patients with relapsed acute myeloid leukemia and in selected untreated patients with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia.Design and Methods Patients with relapsed or untreated acute myeloid leukemia who were not candidates for chemotherapy entered one of the two treatment arms. In both arms a total dose of 8400 mg of vorinostat was delivered in each 21-day cycle of treatment: in arm A the dose regimen was 400 mg daily whereas in arm B the dose regimen was 200 mg three times daily for 14 days followed by 1 week rest.Results Data from all 37 patients were used for the analyses. In arm A (n=15), the confirmed complete remission rate was 0% (95% CI, 0% to 23%); this arm was closed at the planned interim analysis. In arm B (n=22), the confirmed complete remission rate was 4.5% (1 response; 95% CI, 0.4% to 24%), with a duration of response exceeding 398 days. The median time to treatment failure in arm A was 42 days (95% CI, 26 to 57); although a minimum of four cycles of treatment were planned, 11 patients (79%) received no more than two cycles. The median time to treatment failure in arm B was 46 days (95% CI, 20 to 71); 13 patients (59%) received no more than two cycles of treatment.Conclusions Vorinostat monotherapy demonstrated minimal activity in this group of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Therapy was discontinued in many patients before the planned four cycles had been administered, either because of failure of vorinostat to control the leukocyte count or patients’ and physicians’ preference. Future studies of vorinostat in acute myeloid leukemia should focus on combinations with other drugs with which it might interact pharmacodynamically. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00305773.