Introduction: Stereotactic MR-guided Adaptive RadioTherapy (SMART) is a novel process to treat pancreatic tumors. We present an update of the data from our prospective registry of SMART for pancreatic tumors. Materials and methods: After the establishment of the SMART indication in a multidisciplinary board, we included all patients treated for pancreatic tumors. Primary endpoints were acute and late toxicities. Secondary endpoints were survival outcomes (local control, overall survival, distant metastasis free survival) and dosimetric advantages of adaptive process on targets volumes and OAR. Results: We included seventy consecutive patients in our cohort between October 2019 and April 2022. The prescribed dose was 50 Gy in 5 consecutive fractions. No severe acute SMART related toxicity was noted. Acute and late Grade ≤ 2 gastro intestinal were low. Daily adaptation significantly improved PTV and GTV coverage as well as OAR sparing. With a median follow-up of 10.8 months since SMART completion, the median OS, 6-months OS, and 1-year OS were 20.9 months, 86.7% (95% CI: (75–93%), and 68.6% (95% CI: (53–80%), respectively, from SMART completion. Local control at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were, respectively, 96.8 % (95% CI: 88–99%), 86.5 (95% CI: 68–95%), and 80.7% (95% CI: 59–92%). There was no grade > 2 late toxicities. Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancers (LAPC) and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancers (BRPC) patients (52 patients) had a median OS, 6-months OS, and 1-year OS from SMART completion of 15.2 months, 84.4% (95% CI: (70–92%)), and 60.5% (95% CI: (42–75%)), respectively. The median OS, 1-year OS, and 2-year OS from initiation of induction chemotherapy were 22.3 months, 91% (95% CI: (78–97%)), and 45.8% (95% CI: (27–63%)), respectively. Twenty patients underwent surgical resection (38.7 % of patients with initially LAPC) with negative margins (R0). Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the largest series of SMART for pancreatic tumors. The treatment was well tolerated with only low-grade toxicities. Long-term OS and LC rates were achieved. SMART achieved high secondary resection rates in LAPC patients.

Liver stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a local treatment that provides good local control and low toxicity. We present the first clinical results from our prospective registry of stereotactic MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) for liver metastases. All patients treated for liver metastases were included in this prospective registry study. Stereotactic MRgRT indication was confirmed by multidisciplinary specialized tumor boards. The primary endpoints were acute and late toxicities. The secondary endpoints were survival outcomes (local control, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival, intrahepatic relapse-free survival). Twenty-six consecutive patients were treated for thirty-one liver metastases between October 2019 and April 2022. The median prescribed dose was 50 Gy (40–60) in 5 fractions. No severe acute MRgRT-related toxicity was noted. Acute and late gastrointestinal and liver toxicities were low and mostly unrelated to MRgRT. Only 5 lesions (16.1%) required daily adaptation because of the proximity of organs at risk (OAR). With a median follow-up time of 17.3 months since MRgRT completion, the median OS, 1-year OS and 2-year OS rates were 21.7 months, 83.1% (95% CI: 55.3–94.4%) and 41.6% (95% CI: 13.5–68.1%), respectively, from MRgRT completion. The local control at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years was 90.9% (95% CI: 68.3–97.7%). To our knowledge, we report the largest series of stereotactic MRgRT for liver metastases. The treatment was well-tolerated and achieved a high LC rate. Distant relapse remains a challenge in this population.

Palbociclib is a good candidate for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) due to its narrow therapeutic range and frequency of toxicities, particularly high-grade neutropenia. In this prospective, bicentric clinical trial, we evaluated the palbociclib exposure–toxicity relationship and determined the relevant sources of palbociclib pharmacokinetic variability, including drug–drug interactions (DDI). We followed 58 patients (mean age: 62.9 years) for 1 year. The geometric median of palbociclib plasma trough concentration (C_trough) was 74.1 ng/mL. Neutropenia occurred in 70.7% of patients (high grade in 67.2% of patients). High-grade neutropenia occurrence during the first two palbociclib cycles was higher in patients with lower neutrophil count at initiation (p = 0.002). Palbociclib plasma C_trough was correlated with high-grade neutropenia occurrence during the first two cycles (p = 0.024, OR 5.51). Co-treatment with agents that may interfere with palbociclib PK significantly influenced palbociclib C_trough (p < 0.05). CYP3A4/P-glycoprotein inhibitors increased by 25% palbociclib C_trough (p = 0.035), while antacids reduced it by 20% (p = 0.036). However, DDI did not have any significant effect on high-grade neutropenia occurrence (p > 0.05). This study confirms the major role of TDM to manage palbociclib safe use from the first week of treatment, particularly the significant incidence of hematological toxicity. Moreover, this first dedicated prospective study confirmed the importance of characterizing co-treatments to limit the DDI risk with oral-targeted therapies.

Background: Data on the performance of the Khorana, PROTECHT, and ONKOTEV risk assessment models (RAMs) to predict venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) receiving outpatient chemotherapy remain limited. We performed a head-to-head comparison of these RAMs in patients with newly diagnosed PC enrolled in the nationwide, multicenter, and prospective BACAP cohort. Methods: The Khorana, PROTECHT, and ONKOTEV scores were calculated at enrollment prior to chemotherapy. Patients were stratified into intermediate- and high-VTE-risk groups according to each RAM. The primary study outcome was VTE at a 6-month follow-up. The accuracy and discriminatory performance of the scores were assessed by calculating time-dependent Brier scores and c-indexes. Sub-distribution hazard ratios (SHRs) between high- and intermediate-risk patients were estimated. Results: Of 762 PC patients, 73 developed VTE within 6 months. In the competing risk analysis, the cumulative incidence of VTE at 6 months was 16.4% (95% CI, 13.8–19.1). The time-dependent Brier score was 0.14 (95% CI, 0.12–0.15) for all scores, indicating well-calibrated predictions. The respective time-dependent c-index of the Khorana, the PROTECHT, and the ONKOTEV scores was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.46–0.55), 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49–0.51), and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.48–0.58), indicating poor discrimination. The SHRs between high- and intermediate-risk patients ranged from 1.05 (95% CI, 0.76–1.44) for the ONKOTEV score to 1.06 (95% CI, 0.77–1.45) for the Khorana score. Conclusion: In newly diagnosed PC patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy, the Khorana, PROTECHT, and ONKOTEV scores demonstrated a poor performance in predicting VTE at 6 months, highlighting the need for new tools to guide thromboprophylaxis decisions.