Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author: Nitya Raj x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All Modify Search
Nitya Raj Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Nitya Raj in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Youyun Zheng Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Youyun Zheng in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Haley Hauser Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Haley Hauser in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Joanne Chou Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Joanne Chou in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Johnathan Rafailov Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Johnathan Rafailov in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jad Bou-Ayache Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Jad Bou-Ayache in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Peter Sawan Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Peter Sawan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jamie Chaft Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Jamie Chaft in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jennifer Chan Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Search for other papers by Jennifer Chan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Kimberly Perez Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Search for other papers by Kimberly Perez in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Charles Rudin Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Charles Rudin in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Laura Tang Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Laura Tang in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Diane Reidy-Lagunes Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Diane Reidy-Lagunes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus is an established therapy for well-differentiated (WD) foregut neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Pre-clinical data demonstrates a potential synergistic role for cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibition and everolimus to treat this disease. In this phase II multicenter study, patients with advanced foregut WDNETs received combination ribociclib and everolimus until confirmed disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The first 12 patients received ribociclib 300 mg three weeks in a row with a 1 week break and everolimus 2.5 mg daily (recommended phase II dose). Due to unexpected hematologic and infectious toxicities, the trial was put on hold, modified, and an additional 9 patients received ribociclib 200 mg and everolimus 2.5 mg daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Archived pre-treatment tumor was profiled by next-generation sequencing to evaluate for genomic markers of drug response. Twenty-one patients were treated (median age, 56; range, 24 to 77). The study did not meet the pre-specified criteria to advance to stage two. No patients experienced an objective response. Thirteen patients (62%) experienced stable disease. Median progression-free survival was 7.7 months (95% CI, 2.8 months to not reached). Eleven of the first 12 patients (92%) developed grade 2 or more myelosuppression. Ten patients (84%) experienced treatment interruption and 8 patients (67%) required dose reduction. Genetic testing in archival tumor tissue samples failed to identify a predictive biomarker of disease stabilization. The combination of ribociclib and everolimus had insufficient activity to warrant further investigation in foregut WDNETs.

Restricted access
Darren Cowzer Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Darren Cowzer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Ronak H Shah Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Ronak H Shah in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Joanne F Chou Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Joanne F Chou in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Ritika Kundra Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Ritika Kundra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Sippy Punn Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Sippy Punn in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Laura Fiedler Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Laura Fiedler in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
April DeMore Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by April DeMore in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Marinela Capanu Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Marinela Capanu in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Michael F Berger Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
Department of Pathology and laboratory medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Michael F Berger in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Diane Reidy-Lagunes Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Diane Reidy-Lagunes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Nitya Raj Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Nitya Raj in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

In advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNEN), there are little data detailing the frequency of genetic alterations identified in cell free DNA (cfDNA), plasma–tissue concordance of detected alterations, and clinical utility of cfDNA. Patients with metastatic PanNENs underwent cfDNA collection in routine practice. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cfDNA and matched tissue when available was performed. Clinical actionability of variants was annotated by OncoKB. Thirty-two cfDNA samples were analyzed from 25 patients, the majority who had well-differentiated intermediate grade disease (13/25; 52%). Genomic alterations were detected in 68% of patients and in 66% of all cfDNA samples. The most frequently altered genes were DAXX (28%), TSC2 (24%), MEN1 (24%), ARID1B (20%), ARID1A (12%), and ATRX (12%). Twenty-three out of 25 (92%) patients underwent tumor tissue NGS. Tissue–plasma concordance for select genes was as follows:DAXX (95.7%), ARID1A (91.1%), ATRX (87%), TSC2 (82.6%), MEN1 (69.6%). Potentially actionable alterations were identified in cfDNA of 8 patients, including TSC2 (4; level 3b), ATM (1; level 3b), ARID1A (2; level 4), and KRAS (1; level 4). An ETV6:NTRK fusion detected in tumor tissue was treated with larotrectinib; at progression, sequencing of cfDNA identified an NTRK3 G623R alteration as the acquired mechanism of resistance; the patient enrolled in a clinical trial of a second-generation TRK inhibitor with clinical benefit. In metastatic PanNENs, cfDNA-based NGS identified tumor-associated mutations in 66% of plasma samples with a high level of plasma-tissue agreement in PanNEN-associated genes. Clonal evolution, actionable alterations, and resistance mechanisms were detected through circulating cfDNA genotyping.

Restricted access
Jennifer R Eads Division of Hematology and Oncology, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for other papers by Jennifer R Eads in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Thorvardur R Halfdanarson Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for other papers by Thorvardur R Halfdanarson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Tim Asmis Division of Medical Oncology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Search for other papers by Tim Asmis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Andrew M Bellizzi Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA

Search for other papers by Andrew M Bellizzi in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Emily K Bergsland Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

Search for other papers by Emily K Bergsland in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Arvind Dasari Division of Gastrointestinal Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for other papers by Arvind Dasari in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Ghassan El-Haddad Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida, USA

Search for other papers by Ghassan El-Haddad in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Michael Frumovitz Division of Gynecologic Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for other papers by Michael Frumovitz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Joshua Meyer Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for other papers by Joshua Meyer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Erik Mittra Division of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA

Search for other papers by Erik Mittra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Sten Myrehaug Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Search for other papers by Sten Myrehaug in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Eric Nakakura Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

Search for other papers by Eric Nakakura in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Nitya Raj Department of Medicine, Gastrointestinal Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Nitya Raj in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Heloisa P Soares Division of Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

Search for other papers by Heloisa P Soares in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Brian Untch Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Brian Untch in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Namrata Vijayvergia Department of Hematology and Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Search for other papers by Namrata Vijayvergia in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Jennifer A Chan Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Search for other papers by Jennifer A Chan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

High-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms are a rare disease entity and account for approximately 10% of all neuroendocrine neoplasms. Because of their rarity, there is an overall lack of prospectively collected data available to advise practitioners as to how best to manage these patients. As a result, best practices are largely based on expert opinion. Recently, a distinction was made between well-differentiated high-grade (G3) neuroendocrine tumors and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, and with this, pathologic details, appropriate imaging practices and treatment have become more complex. In an effort to provide practitioners with the best guidance for the management of patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract, pancreas, and gynecologic system, the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society convened a panel of experts to develop a set of recommendations and a treatment algorithm that may be used by practitioners for the care of these patients. Here, we provide consensus recommendations from the panel on pathology, imaging practices, management of localized disease, management of metastatic disease and surveillance and draw key distinctions as to the approach that should be utilized in patients with well-differentiated G3 neuroendocrine tumors vs poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas.

Open access
James C Yao University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for other papers by James C Yao in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jonathan Strosberg Department of GI Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA

Search for other papers by Jonathan Strosberg in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Nicola Fazio European Institute of Oncology, IEO, IRCCS, Milan, Italy

Search for other papers by Nicola Fazio in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Marianne E Pavel Department of Medicine 1, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany

Search for other papers by Marianne E Pavel in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Emily Bergsland UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California, USA

Search for other papers by Emily Bergsland in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Philippe Ruszniewski Hôpital Beaujon, University of Paris, Paris, France

Search for other papers by Philippe Ruszniewski in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Daniel M Halperin University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for other papers by Daniel M Halperin in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Daneng Li City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center and Beckman Research Institute, Duarte, California, USA

Search for other papers by Daneng Li in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Salvatore Tafuto Sarcomas and Rare Tumours Unit, Istituto Nazionale Tumori, IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy

Search for other papers by Salvatore Tafuto in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Nitya Raj Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA

Search for other papers by Nitya Raj in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Davide Campana Department of Clinical Medicine, Sant’Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, ENETS Center of Excellence, Bologna, Italy

Search for other papers by Davide Campana in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Susumu Hijioka National Cancer Center Japan Tsukiji Campus, Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, Tokyo, Japan

Search for other papers by Susumu Hijioka in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Markus Raderer Clinical Division of Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Search for other papers by Markus Raderer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Rosine Guimbaud CHU de Toulouse, Toulouse, France

Search for other papers by Rosine Guimbaud in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Pablo Gajate Hospital Universitário Ramón y Cajal, Clinical Oncology Department, Madrid, Spain

Search for other papers by Pablo Gajate in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Sara Pusceddu Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy

Search for other papers by Sara Pusceddu in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Albert Reising Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA

Search for other papers by Albert Reising in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Evgeny Degtyarev Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA

Search for other papers by Evgeny Degtyarev in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Mark Shilkrut Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA

Search for other papers by Mark Shilkrut in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Simantini Eddy Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA

Search for other papers by Simantini Eddy in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Simron Singh Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada

Search for other papers by Simron Singh in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Spartalizumab, a humanized anti-programmed death protein 1 (PD-1) MAB, was evaluated in patients with well-differentiated metastatic grade 1/2 neuroendocrine tumors (NET) and poorly differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas (GEP-NEC). In this phase II, multicenter, single-arm study, patients received spartalizumab 400 mg every 4 weeks until confirmed disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was confirmed overall response rate (ORR) according to blinded independent review committee using response evaluation criteria in solid tumors 1.1. The study enrolled 95 patients in the NET group (30, 32 and 33 in the thoracic, gastrointestinal, and pancreatic cohorts, respectively), and 21 patients in the GEP-NEC group. The ORR was 7.4% (95% CI: 3.0, 14.6) in the NET group (thoracic, 16.7%; gastrointestinal, 3.1%; pancreatic, 3.0%), which was below the predefined success criterion of ≥10%, and 4.8% (95% CI: 0.1, 23.8) in the GEP-NEC group. In the NET and GEP-NEC groups, the 12-month progression-free survival was 19.5 and 0%, respectively, and the 12-month overall survival was 73.5 and 19.1%, respectively. The ORR was higher in patients with ≥1% PD-L1 expression in immune/tumor cells or ≥1% CD8+ cells at baseline. The most common adverse events considered as spartalizumab-related included fatigue (29.5%) and nausea (10.5%) in the NET group, and increased aspartate and alanine aminotransferases (each 14.3%) in the GEP-NEC group. The efficacy of spartalizumab was limited in this heterogeneous and heavily pre-treated population; however, the results in the thoracic cohort are encouraging and warrants further investigation. Adverse events were manageable and consistent with previous experience.

Restricted access