Despite aggressive adjuvant management, a high percentage of patients who undergo appropriate surgical resection for pancreatic cancer will see their cancer recur and thus will not be cured. An important paradigm shift to achieve better outcomes has been therapy sequence, with neoadjuvant chemotherapy preceding surgery. Patients with a borderline resectable cancer, or patients with a resectable cancer but who have other high-risk features, are ideal candidates to consider for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Among the high-risk features, a baseline elevated CA 19-9 concentration can be particularly useful, as its response trend during neoadjuvant chemotherapy can offer important insights into the prognosis after surgery. When selecting a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen, response data available for the use of FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine and nabpaclitaxel in the metastatic setting support their use in this space. FOLFIRINOX is perhaps the preferred regimen, given its proven adjuvant benefit and possibly its superior tumor response rate; still, patient tolerance and thus ability to complete recommended treatment must be carefully considered. This review presents the evidence supporting neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer, the factors to consider when making such a recommendation, the selection of specific regimens, and our institutional approach using these tools.

Objectives: Acinar cell carcinoma (ACC) accounts for about 1% of pancreatic cancers. The molecular and clinical features of ACC are less characterized than those of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical and molecular features of ACC patients who underwent germline and/or somatic molecular testing at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2008 to 2022 and two cases from 2023–2024 who underwent RNA and TME analysis by Boston Gene. Patient information was extracted from our institutional database with the approval of the Institutional Review Board. Results: We identified 16 patients with available molecular testing results. Fourteen patients had metastatic disease, one had borderline resectable disease, and one had localized resectable disease at diagnosis. Fifteen patients were wild type for KRAS (one patient had unknown KRAS status). Somatic/germline mutations of DNA damage repair genes (BRCA1/2, PALB2, and ATM) were present in 5 of 12 patients tested for these genes. One patient was found to have RET fusion and responded favorably to selpercatinib for over 42 months. The median overall survival (OS) was 24 months for patients with metastatic disease. One of the additional two cases who underwent BostonGene testing was found to have NTRK1 fusion. RNA and TME analysis by Boston Gene of the two cases reported immune desert features and relatively lower RNA levels of CEACAM5, CD47, CD74, and MMP1 and higher RNA levels of CDH6 compared with PDAC.

Acinar cell carcinoma (ACC) accounts for about 1% of pancreatic cancers. The molecular and clinical features of ACC are less characterized than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical and molecular features of ACC patients who underwent germline and/or somatic molecular testing at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2008 to 2022. Patient information was extracted from our institutional database with the approval of Institutional Review Board. We identified 16 patients with available molecular testing results. Fourteen patients had metastatic disease, 1 had borderline resectable disease, and 1 had localized resectable disease at diagnosis. Fifteen patients were wild type for KRAS (1 patient had unknown KRAS status). Somatic/germline mutations of DNA damage repair genes (BRCA1/2, PALB2, and ATM) were present in 5 of 12 patients tested for these genes. One patient was found to have RET fusion and responded favorably to selpercatinib for over 42 months. The median overall survival (OS) was 24 months for patients with metastatic disease. One of the additional two cases which had BostonGene tests was found to have NTRK1 fusion. RNA and TME analysis by BostonGene of the two cases reported immune desert features and relatively lower RNA levels of CEACAM5, CD47, CD74 and MMP1 and higher CDH6 compared with PDAC.

CDK4/6 inhibition in pancreatic cancer: lessons learned as the therapeutic landscape evolves

Background: Gemcitabine, cisplatin and durvalumab or pembrolizumab are standard first-line treatments for advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (BTC). Older patients with BTC may be frail or have contraindications to cisplatin. At our institution, oxaliplatin has been used as an alternative to cisplatin. Methods: In this evaluation, we report the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine with oxaliplatin and durvalumab as a first-line treatment of BTC. The primary objective was overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives included time to progression (TTP), disease control rate (DCR), and the incidence of treatment-related toxicities. Results: Twenty-nine patients were included. The majority were Caucasian (97%) and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–1 (97%). Median age was 72 years old. Sixty-six percent had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Baseline renal insufficiency and/or hearing impairment were the most common reasons for cisplatin contraindication. Median follow-up was 20.6 months. Treatment cycles were every 28 days with durvalumab (1500 mg) given on day 1 and gemcitabine (range 600 mg/m²–1000 mg/m²) plus oxaliplatin (median dose 70 mg/m²) given on days 1 and 15. Median OS was 15.7 months (95% CI: 6.9-NA), median TTP was 6.7 months (95% CI 3.88-NA), and DCR was 76%. Median time on treatment was 3.15 months. Twelve patients (41%) required a dose adjustment, with myelosuppression as the most common toxicity. Conclusions: Oxaliplatin, in combination with durvalumab and gemcitabine, is a suitable platinum substitute for advanced BTC patients when cisplatin is contraindicated. Our analysis showed similar efficacy and no new safety concerns. Given the small sample size, our analysis is hypothesis-generating and calls for a larger prospective analysis.