Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session

383P - ctDNA response evaluation criteria in metastatic pancreatic cancer using aberrant methylation test

Date

27 Jun 2024

Session

Poster Display session

Presenters

Karen-Lise Spindler

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2024) 35 (suppl_1): S119-S161. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1481

Authors

K.G. Spindler1, S.C. Lindgaard2, J.S. Johansen2, L.H. Jensen3, T.F. Hansen4, M.M. Steiniche5, R.F. Andersen6

Author affiliations

  • 1 Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus/DK
  • 2 Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev/DK
  • 3 Vejle Sygehus Hospital, Vejle/DK
  • 4 University of Southern Denmark, Odense/DK
  • 5 Aarhus University Hospital, Århus N/DK
  • 6 Sygehus Lillebaelt - Vejle Sygehus, Vejle/DK

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 383P

Background

We have proposed criteria for early circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) response evaluations (ctDNA-RECIST) based on ddPCR analysis of ctDNA (Spindler et al. TAM 2023) in solid cancers, which are not validated in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The ctDNA aberrant methylation (AM) marker is a pragmatic ctDNA approach, feasible for clinical implementation. This pilot study aimed to demonstrate the relevance of the ctDNA AM analysis in PDAC and the ctDNA-RECIST criteria for future prospective studies.

Methods

Samples were drawn in EDTA tubes prior to first cycle (baseline (BL)), prior to the second cycle of palliative therapy and at the first imaging evaluation in 36 patients with advanced PDAC in the BIOPAC study (NCT03311776) treated as per clinical practice. Four ml was analyzed for AM of HOXA9 by ddPCR, 5 droplets defined positivity. The ctDNA response criteria were; ctDNA progression defined as an increasing value, where the confidence interval (CI) did not overlap with the baseline upper CI, partial response (PR) as a reduction in ctDNA with CI not overlapping the baseline lower CI. Descriptive statistical analysis and Kaplan Major statistics and log rank test was applied to identify relevance for further investigations.

Results

ctDNA test scored positive at BL in 25% (1 of 4) stage 3 and 75% of stage 4 cases, and ctDNA level was numerically higher in stage 4 (3.0%) compared to stage 3 disease (0.7%) and in patients with liver metastases (p=0.03). Patients with ctDNA BL levels above the median experienced shorter OS (HR=2.27, 95% CI 1.08-4.74), p=0.012). An early ctDNA progression (after first cycle) according to the ctDNA-RECIST implied a very short median OS (134 days) compared to patients with ctDNA stabilization or PR (211 and 364 days, p<0.01). ctDNA-PD was observed in cases with both high and very low concentrations of AM HOXA9 at baseline. The limited sample size did not allow for a multivariate analysis, but none of the analyzed co-parameters influenced the univariate analysis.

Conclusions

This study confirms the relevance of further analysis of ctDNA by HOXA9 and the potential utility of the ctDNA-RECIST criteria in metastatic PDAC. The ctDNA analysis will be used in prospective studies of ctDNA-RECIST in this disease.

Clinical trial identification

NCT03311776.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

The Danish Cancer Society.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.