The aim of this study was to determine the risk factors for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors. The authors conducted a retrospective study in which patie...

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is crucial in precision oncology, yet its real-world utility remains unclear. Here we analyzed data from the Japanese nationwide Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics database, including clinical and genetic data from 54,185 patients with advanced solid tumors (consisting of 81 common and rare tumor types) who received CGP with a targeted sequencing panel covering 324 genes as part of their clinical care. We assessed the prognostic value of CGP-guided clinical evidence-level classification, showing that alterations predicting response to Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency-approved or Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies and to therapies supported by well-powered studies with expert consensus are detected in 16.6% and 8.1% of patients, respectively, and are associated with better prognosis than those with lower clinical evidence levels. Only 8% of patients receive CGP-guided approved–experimental genomic biomarker-linked therapies, although the proportion has improved over time. Substantial differences were observed across tumor types, with the proportions exceeding 20% in thyroid and lung cancers but remaining below 2% in pancreatic and liver cancers. Tumor-agnostic biomarker analyses reveal that tumor mutational burden (TMB) ≥20 mutations per megabase predicts better outcome across tumor types, regardless of microsatellite instability status, in TMB-high patients receiving pembrolizumab. Conversely, extramammary Pagetʼs disease is exceptionally resistant to pembrolizumab. The large-scale nationwide database allows evaluating inter-tumor type differences and investigating evidence-scarce situations, delineating where CGP offers greater benefit. These real-world findings complement those from clinical trials and prospective sequencing projects regarding CGP, providing valuable information for individualized treatment.

Nivolumab (NIVO) plus low-dose ipilimumab (IPI) has shown a promising survival benefit in first-line treatment of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) colorectal cancer. We hypothesized that this regimen might also be beneficial for MSI-H gastric cancer (GC), which accounts for ~5% of all GC cases. NO LIMIT (WJOG13320G/CA209-7W7) is an investigator-initiated, single-arm, open-label, 14-center phase 2 trial of NIVO plus low-dose IPI for MSI-H GC in the first-line setting. Eligibility criteria include unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic gastric or esophagogastric junction cancer with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma; confirmed MSI-H status with the MSI-IVD Kit (FALCO); no prior systemic anticancer therapy; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1; and a measurable lesion per RECIST 1.1. The primary objective of the study is to determine the overall response rate (ORR) for the NIVO+IPI regimen as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points include progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, safety, tolerability, and biomarkers. The number of patients was set at 28 on the basis of the threshold and expected ORR values of 35 and 65%, respectively, with a one-sided alpha error of 0.025 and power of 0.80. Subjects will receive treatment with nivolumab (240 mg) biweekly in combination with ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 6 weeks. The results of this study should clarify the therapeutic potential of NIVO+IPI for MSI-H GC in the first-line setting. Trial registration: JapicCTI-205400.

Background: Ramucirumab (RAM) with weekly paclitaxel (wPTX) is a standard second-line therapy for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer. Nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PTX), an albumin-bound form of PTX, was developed to improve the therapeutic index of taxane treatment. However, the ABSOLUTE trial showed the non-inferiority of weekly nab-PTX (w-nab-PTX) to wPTX with respect to overall survival (OS) as second-line therapy for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer, and subgroup analysis of patients with peritoneal dissemination showed favourable OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in the w-nab-PTX arm compared to those in the wPTX arm. This study evaluated whether w-nab-PTX plus RAM is more effective than wPTX plus RAM for patients with peritoneal dissemination. Methods: The P-SELECT trial (WJOG10617G) is a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised phase II study evaluating wPTX plus RAM (arm A) versus w-nab-PTX plus RAM (arm B). Key eligibility criteria include the following: 1) histologically proven adenocarcinoma, 2) unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer, 3) peritoneal dissemination, 4) intolerance or refractory to first-line therapy including fluoropyrimidines, and 5) ECOG Performance Status (PS) 0–2. Patients are randomised to either arm at a 1:1 ratio stratified by institution, PS, and severity of ascites. PTX (80 mg/m²; days 1, 8, and 15) and RAM (8 mg/kg; days 1 and 15) are administered every 4 weeks in arm A, while nab-PTX (100 mg/m²; days 1, 8, and 15) instead of PTX is administered in arm B. The primary endpoint is OS, and the main secondary endpoints are PFS, objective response rate, safety, neuropathy-specific quality of life, and biomarkers. To maintain a probability of ≥70% to ensure the hazard ratio for OS in arm B is lower than 0.90, 105 subjects are required. The study was initiated in October 2018 and is being conducted in 58 centres of the West Japan Oncology Group. Discussion: The results of this study will determine whether w-nab-PTX plus RAM has the potential to be a preferred therapeutic option for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination, compared to wPTX plus RAM. Trial registration: This study was prospectively registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs031180022, October 1, 2018).

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treatment. However, the 5-fluorouracil plus L-leucovorin and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen is available in Japan as an alternative to cisplatin-based chemotherapy, but its efficacy and safety remain unclear. Hence, we aimed to evaluate patients with advanced ESCC who received FOLFOX therapy retrospectively. Patients with advanced ESCC who received FOLFOX therapy at 18 institutions between April 2019 and October 2020 were included. Fifty-two patients received first-line FOLFOX treatment, while 39 received later-line FOLFOX treatment. The median progression-free survival, median overall survival, and objective response rate were 3.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0–5.0), 13.9 months (95% CI: 10.3–17.9 months), and 35% in the first-line group and 2.4 months (95% CI: 2.1–3.8 months), 7.2 months (95% CI: 5.3–9.8 months), and 4% in the later-line group, respectively. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (23%) and anemia (12%) in the first-line group and neutropenia (18%), anorexia (13%), anemia (10%), and nausea (10%) in the later-line group. First-line FOLFOX treatment is suitable for patients with advanced ESCC. However, FOLFOX has shown limited efficacy as a later-line treatment.