The relevance of KRAS mutation alleles to clinical outcome remains inconclusive in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We conducted a retrospective study of 803 patients with PDAC (42% with metastatic disease) at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Overall survival (OS) analysis demonstrated that KRAS mutation status and subtypes were prognostic (p < 0.001). Relative to patients with KRAS wildtype tumors (median OS 38 months), patients with KRAS^G12R had a similar OS (median 34 months), while patients with KRAS^Q61 and KRAS^G12D mutated tumors had shorter OS (median 20 months [HR: 1.9, 95% CI 1.2–3.0, p = 0.006] and 22 months [HR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.3–2.3, p < 0.001], respectively). There was enrichment of KRAS^G12D mutation in metastatic tumors (34% vs 24%, OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.2–2.4, p = 0.001) and enrichment of KRAS^G12R in well and moderately differentiated tumors (14% vs 9%, OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.05–2.99, p = 0.04). Similar findings were observed in the external validation cohort (PanCAN’s Know Your Tumor® dataset, n = 408).

Purpose: Appendiceal adenocarcinoma is a rare malignancy with distinct histopathologic subtypes and a natural history with metastasis primarily limited to the peritoneum. Little is known about the molecular pathogenesis of appendiceal adenocarcinoma relative to common tumors. Experimental Design: We analyzed molecular data for patients within the Guardant Health database with appendix cancer (n = 718). We then identified patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma at our institution (from October 2004–September 2022) for whom ctDNA mutation profiling (liquid biopsy) was performed (n = 168) and extracted clinicopathologic and outcomes data. Of these 168 patients, 57 also had tissue-based tumor mutational profiling, allowing for evaluation of concordance between liquid and tissue assays. Results: The mutational landscape of ctDNA in appendiceal adenocarcinoma is distinct from tissue-based sequencing, with TP53 being the most frequently mutated (46%). Relative to other tumors, appendiceal adenocarcinoma seems less likely to shed ctDNA, with only 38% of patients with metastatic appendiceal adenocarcinoma having detectable ctDNA (OR = 0.26; P < 0.0001 relative to colorectal cancer). When detectable, the median variant allele frequency was significantly lower in appendiceal adenocarcinoma (0.4% vs. 1.3% for colorectal cancer; P ≤ 0.001). High-grade, signet ring, or colonic-type histology, metastatic spread beyond the peritoneum, and TP53 mutation were associated with detectable ctDNA. With respect to clinical translation, patients with detectable ctDNA had worse overall survival (HR = 2.32; P = 0.048). In the Guardant Health cohort, actionable mutations were found in 93 patients (13.0%). Conclusions: Although metastatic appendiceal adenocarcinoma tumors are less likely to shed tumor DNA into the blood relative to colorectal cancer, ctDNA profiling in appendiceal adenocarcinoma has clinical utility.

PURPOSE: Dynamic operations platforms allow for cross-platform data extraction, integration, and analysis, although application of these platforms to large-scale oncology enterprises has not been described. This study presents a pipeline for automated, high-fidelity extraction, integration, and validation of cross-platform oncology data in patients undergoing treatment for rectal cancer at a single, high-volume institution. METHODS: A dynamic operations platform was used to identify patients with rectal cancer treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2016 and 2022 who had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging and preoperative treatment details available in the electronic health record (EHR). Demographic, clinicopathologic, tumor mutation, radiographic, and treatment data were extracted from the EHR using a methodology adaptable to any disease site. Data accuracy was assessed by manual review. Accuracy before and after implementation of synoptic reporting was determined for MRI data. RESULTS: A total of 516 patients with localized rectal cancer were included. In the era after institutional adoption of synoptic reports, the dynamic operations platform extracted T (tumor) category data from the EHR with 95% accuracy compared with 87% before the use of synoptic reports, and N (lymph node) category with 88% compared with 58%. Correct extraction of pelvic sidewall adenopathy was 94% compared with 78%, and extramural vascular invasion accuracy was 99% compared with 89%. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation data were 99% accurate for patients who had synoptic data sources. CONCLUSION: Using dynamic operations platforms enables automated cross-platform integration of multiparameter oncology data with high fidelity in patients undergoing multimodality treatment for rectal cancer. These pipelines can be adapted to other solid tumors and, together with standardized reporting, can increase efficiency in clinical research and the translation of actionable findings toward optimizing patient outcomes.

PURPOSE: Conventional surveillance methods are poorly sensitive for monitoring appendiceal cancers (AC). This study investigated the utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in evaluating systemic therapy response and recurrence after surgery for AC. METHODS: Patients from two specialized centers who underwent tumor-informed ctDNA testing (Signatera) were evaluated to determine the association between systemic therapy and ctDNA detection. In addition, the accuracy of ctDNA detection during surveillance for the diagnosis of recurrence after complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for grade 2-3 ACs with peritoneal metastases (PM) was investigated. RESULTS: In this cohort of 94 patients with AC, most had grade 2-3 tumors (84.0%) and PM (84.0%). Fifty patients completed the assay in the presence of identifiable disease, among which ctDNA was detected in 4 of 7 (57.1%), 10 of 16 (62.5%), and 19 of 27 (70.4%) patients with grade 1, 2, and 3 diseases, respectively. Patients who had recently received systemic chemotherapy had ctDNA detected less frequently (7 of 16 [43.8%] v 26 of 34 [76.5%]; odds ratio, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.82]; P = .02). Among 36 patients with complete CRS for grade 2-3 AC-PM, 16 (44.4%) developed recurrence (median follow-up, 19.6 months). ctDNA detection was associated with shorter recurrence-free survival (median 11.3 months v not reached; hazard ratio, 14.1 [95% CI, 1.7 to 113.8]; P = .01) and showed high accuracy for the detection of recurrence (sensitivity 93.8%, specificity 85.0%). ctDNA was more sensitive than carcinoembryonic antigen (62.5%), CA19-9 (25.0%), and CA125 (18.8%) and was the only elevated biomarker in four (25%) patients with recurrence. CONCLUSION: This study revealed a reduced ctDNA detection frequency after systemic therapy and accurate recurrence assessment after CRS. These findings underscore the role of ctDNA as a predictive and prognostic biomarker for grade 2-3 AC-PM management.

The prognosis for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor. Secondary brain metastasis (Br-M) occurs in less than 1% of patients. Clinical characteristics and molecular alterations have not been characterized in this rare patients’ subset. The Foundry software platform was used to retrospectively query electronic health records for patients with Br-M secondary to PDAC from 2005 to 2023; clinical, molecular, and overall survival (OS) data were analyzed. Br-M was diagnosed in 44 patients with PDAC. Median follow-up was 78 months; median OS from initial PDAC diagnosis was 47 months. Median duration from PDAC diagnosis to Br-M detection was 24 months; median OS from Br-M diagnosis was 3 months. At Br-M diagnosis, 82% (n = 36) of patients had elevated CA19-9. Lung was the most common preexisting metastatic location (71%) with Br-M, followed by liver (66%). Br-M were most frequently observed in the frontal lobe (34%, n = 15), cerebellar region (23%, n = 10), and leptomeninges (18%, n = 8). KRAS mutations were detected in 94.1% (n = 16) of patients who had molecular data available (n = 17) with KRAS^G12V being the most frequent subtype 47% (n = 8); KRAS^G12D in 29% (n = 5); KRAS^G12R in 18% (n = 3). Patients who underwent Br-M surgical resection (n = 5) had median OS of 8.6 months, while median OS following stereotactic radiosurgery only (n = 11) or whole-brain radiation only (n = 20) was 3.3 and 2.8 months, respectively. Br-M is a late PDAC complication, resulting in an extremely poor prognosis especially in leptomeningeal disease. KRAS was mutated in 94.1% of the patients and the KRAS^G12V subtype was prevalent.

Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma (AA) is a rare gastrointestinal cancer with no FDA-approved targeted therapies. Here, we retrospectively compare BRAF-mutant AA and colorectal cancer (CRC). BRAF mutation is rare in AA (3%). Unlike CRC, BRAF^V600E AA is not associated with poor prognosis, female sex, microsatellite instability, mucinous histology, or poor differentiation. In both cancers, BRAF^V600E but not atypical BRAF mutations are mutually exclusive with other Ras-activating mutations. BRAF^V600E + EGFR inhibition shows efficacy in BRAF^V600E AA (disease control rate = 80%, median progression-free survival = 7.1 months).