Quality of life in the FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-global randomised trials of selective internal radiotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) is a liver-directed treatment involving the injection of yttrium-90 microspheres into the blood supply of liver tumours. There are very few studies assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients treated with SIRT. Patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC) were randomised in the FOXFIRE (FFr; ISRCTN83867919), SIRFLOX (SF; NCT00724503) and FOXFIRE-Global (FFrG; NCT01721954) trials of first-line oxaliplatin-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) chemotherapy combined with SIRT versus FOLFOX alone. HRQOL was assessed using the three-level EQ-5D, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EORTC Colorectal Liver Metastases cancer module (EORTC QLQ-LMC21) at baseline, ≤3 months, 6 months, 12 months and annually thereafter from randomisation, and at disease progression. Analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. In total, 554 patients were randomised to SIRT + FOLFOX and 549 patients to FOLFOX alone. HRQOL was statistically significant lower in SIRT + FOLFOX patients ≤3 months after SIRT administration in all three instruments, particularly global health, physical and role functioning and symptoms of fatigue, nausea/vomiting and appetite loss. By accepted thresholds, these differences were deemed not clinically important. Differences between SIRT + FOLFOX and FOLFOX alone over the 2-year follow up and at disease progression were also not clinically important. Although there is some decrease in HRQOL for up to 3 months following SIRT, the addition of SIRT to FOLFOX chemotherapy does not change HRQOL to a clinically important degree in metastatic CRC patients.

First-line selective internal radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global): a combined analysis of three multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) in third-line or subsequent therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer has clinical benefit in patients with colorectal liver metastases with liver-dominant disease after chemotherapy. The FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global randomised studies evaluated the efficacy of combining first-line chemotherapy with SIRT using yttrium-90 resin microspheres in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with liver metastases. The studies were designed for combined analysis of overall survival. METHODS: FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global were randomised, phase 3 trials done in hospitals and specialist liver centres in 14 countries worldwide (Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Portugal, South Korea, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WHO performance status 0 or 1) with liver metastases not suitable for curative resection or ablation were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (FOLFOX: leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX plus single treatment SIRT concurrent with cycle 1 or 2 of chemotherapy. In FOXFIRE, FOLFOX chemotherapy was OxMdG (oxaliplatin modified de Gramont chemotherapy; 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, L-leucovorin 175 mg or D,L-leucovorin 350 mg infusion over 2 h, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). In SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global, FOLFOX chemotherapy was modified FOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, 200 mg leucovorin, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). Randomisation was done by central minimisation with four factors: presence of extrahepatic metastases, tumour involvement of the liver, planned use of a biological agent, and investigational centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, using a two-stage meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data. All three trials have completed 2 years of follow-up. FOXFIRE is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83867919. SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00724503 (SIRFLOX) and NCT01721954 (FOXFIRE-Global). FINDINGS: Between Oct 11, 2006, and Dec 23, 2014, 549 patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOX alone and 554 patients were assigned FOLFOX plus SIRT. Median follow-up was 43·3 months (IQR 31·6-58·4). There were 411 (75%) deaths in 549 patients in the FOLFOX alone group and 433 (78%) deaths in 554 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group. There was no difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·90-1·19; p=0·61). The median survival time in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group was 22·6 months (95% CI 21·0-24·5) compared with 23·3 months (21·8-24·7) in the FOLFOX alone group. In the safety population containing patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, as treated, the most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (137 [24%] of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone vs 186 (37%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 244 (43%) of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone and 274 (54%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT. 10 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and 11 patients in the FOLFOX alone group died due to an adverse event; eight treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and three treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX alone group. INTERPRETATION: Addition of SIRT to first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for patients with liver-only and liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve overall survival compared with that for FOLFOX alone. Therefore, early use of SIRT in combination with chemotherapy in unselected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer cannot be recommended. To further define the role of SIRT in metastatic colorectal cancer, careful patient selection and studies investigating the role of SIRT as consolidation therapy after chemotherapy are needed. FUNDING: Bobby Moore Fund of Cancer Research UK, Sirtex Medical.

ICECREAM: randomised phase II study of cetuximab alone or in combination with irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with either KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PI3KCA wild type, or G13D mutated tumours.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease has progressed on oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens may benefit from EGFR-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies if they do not contain mutations in the KRAS gene (are "wild type"). It is unknown whether these antibodies, such as cetuximab, are more efficacious in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer as monotherapy, or in combination with irinotecan. Lack of mutation in KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA predicts response to EFGR-inhibitors. The ICECREAM trial examines the question of monotherapy versus combination with chemotherapy in two groups of patients: those with a "quadruple wild type" tumour genotype (no mutations in KRAS, NRAS, PI3KCA or BRAF genes) and those with the specific KRAS mutation in codon G13D, for whom possibly EGFR-inhibitor efficacy may be equivalent. METHODS AND DESIGN: ICECREAM is a randomised, phase II, open-label, controlled trial comparing the efficacy of cetuximab alone or with irinotecan in patients with "quadruple wild type" or G13D-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer, whose disease has progressed on, or who are intolerant of oxaliplatin- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the 6-month progression-free survival benefit of the treatment regimen. Secondary endpoints are response rate, overall survival, and quality of life. The tertiary endpoint is prediction of outcome with further biological markers. International collaboration has facilitated recruitment in this prospective trial of treatment in these infrequently found molecular subsets of colorectal cancer. DISCUSSION: This unique trial will yield prospective information on the efficacy of cetuximab and whether this is further enhanced with chemotherapy in two distinct populations of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the "quadruple wild type", which may 'superselect' for tumours sensitive to EGFR-inhibition, and the rare KRAS G13D mutated tumours, which are also postulated to be sensitive to the drug. The focus on establishing both positive and negative predictive factors for the response to targeted therapy is an attempt to improve outcomes, reduce toxicity and contain treatment costs. Tissue and blood will yield a resource for molecular studies. Recruitment, particularly of patients with the rare G13D mutation, will demonstrate the ability for international collaboration to run prospective trials in small colorectal cancer molecular subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000901808 , registered 16 August 2012.

Phase II trial of selective internal radiation therapy and systemic chemotherapy for liver-predominant metastases from pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This prospective, open-label phase II study assessed the impact of liver-directed therapy with selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) and systemic chemotherapy on progression-free survival (PFS) in liver-dominant metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Patients received yttrium-90-labelled ((90)Y) resin microspheres (SIR-Spheres; Sirtex Medical Limited, Sydney, Australia) as a single procedure on day 2 of the first weekly cycle of 5-fluorouracil (5FU; 600 mg/m(2)) with the option to switch to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) after 8 weeks of 5FU. Statistical analysis was conducted using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA). The primary endpoint of the study was PFS in the liver, with a median of ≥ 16 weeks defined as the threshold for clinical significance. PFS and overall survival (OS) were summarised by the Kaplan-Meier method using non-parametric estimates of the survivor function. RESULTS: Fourteen eligible patients were enrolled; ten had primary tumour in situ and eight had liver-only metastases. Patients received a median (90)Y activity of 1.1 GBq and 8 weekly doses of 5FU; seven patients received a median of two doses of gemcitabine. Disease control in the liver was 93% (two confirmed partial responses [PR], one unconfirmed PR, ten stable disease). Median reduction in cancer antigen 19-9 was 72%. Median PFS was 5.2 months in the liver, which met the primary endpoint of the study, and 4.4 months at any site. PFS was prolonged in those with a resected primary compared with patients with primary in situ (median 7.8 vs. 3.4 months; p = 0.017). Median OS was 5.5 months overall and 13.6 months in patients with a resected primary. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in eight (57%) patients during days 0-60. There was one sudden death and another patient who died from possible treatment-related liver failure 7.0 months after SIRT. CONCLUSIONS: SIRT and chemotherapy appears to be an effective treatment for liver metastases from pancreatic cancer, likely to be of most benefit in selected patients with a resected primary tumour and liver only disease. Significant toxicity was observed and the safety of this approach in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer will need to be confirmed in subsequent studies. Further study is warranted with SIRT and modern chemotherapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12606000015549.

Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 resin microspheres plus standard systemic chemotherapy regimen of FOLFOX versus FOLFOX alone as first-line treatment of non-resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer: the SIRFLOX study.

BACKGROUND: In colorectal cancer (CRC), unresectable liver metastases are linked to poor prognosis. Systemic chemotherapy with regimens such as FOLFOX (combination of infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin) is the standard first-line treatment. The SIRFLOX trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of combining FOLFOX-based chemotherapy with Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT or radioembolisation) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres (SIR-SpheresR; Sirtex Medical Limited, North Sydney, Australia). METHODS/DESIGN: SIRFLOX is a randomised, multicentre trial of mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy+/-SIRT as first-line treatment of patients with liver-only or liver-predominant metastatic CRC (mCRC). The trial aims to recruit adult chemotherapy-naive patients with proven liver metastases with or without limited extra-hepatic disease, a life expectancy of >=3 months and a WHO performance status of 0-1. Patients will be randomised to receive either mFOLFOX6 or SIRT+mFOLFOX6 (with a reduced dose of oxaliplatin in cycles 1-3 following SIRT). Patients in both arms can receive bevacizumab at investigator discretion. Protocol chemotherapy will continue until there is unacceptable toxicity, evidence of tumour progression, complete surgical resection or ablation of cancerous lesions, or the patient requests an end to treatment. The primary endpoint of the SIRFLOX trial is progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints include: PFS in the liver; tumour response rate (liver and any site); site of tumour progression; health-related quality of life; toxicity and safety; liver resection rate; and overall survival. Assuming an increase in the median PFS from 9.4 months to 12.5 months with the addition of SIRT to mFOLFOX6, recruiting >=450 patients will be sufficient for 80% power and 95% confidence. DISCUSSION: The SIRFLOX trial will establish the potential role of SIRT+standard systemic chemotherapy in the first-line management of mCRC with non-resectable liver metastases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SIRFLOX ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00724503. Registered 25 July 2008.

Maintenance with rituximab is safe and not associated with severe or uncommon infections in patients with follicular lymphoma: results from the phase IIIb MAXIMA study.

Previous randomized trials have demonstrated that rituximab maintenance (R-maintenance) can prolong time to progressive disease in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL). The phase IIIb MAXIMA study (NCT00430352) was a large prospective evaluation of R-maintenance in a daily care setting. The primary objective was safety. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival, overall survival, time to next lymphoma treatment, and partial response (PR) to complete response/unconfirmed (CR/CRu) conversion rate. Patients (n = 545) with first-line or relapsed FL who responded to 8 cycles of rituximab-based induction received R-maintenance every 2 months for 2 years. At study entry, 380 patients had CR or CRu, and 165 had PR. The median age was 57.0 years. The most common non-hematologic adverse events (AEs, excluding infusion-related reactions) were cough (9.9 % of patients), fatigue (7.5 %), nasopharyngitis (7.1 %), back pain (6.5 %), diarrhea (6.9 %), arthralgia (6.0 %), headache and hypertension (5.2 % each), and pyrexia (5.1 %). The majority of AEs were grade 1 or 2. Grade 3, 4, and 5 infections occurred in 21 (3.9 %), 2 (0.4 %), and 1 (0.2 %) patient, respectively. Fifty-one hematologic AEs occurred in 6.6 % (n = 35) of patients. Grade 3/4 prolonged neutropenia and hypogammaglobulinemia occurred in 13 (2.4 %) and 5 (0.9 %) patients, respectively. All cases of prolonged neutropenia or hypogammaglobulinemia were manageable and resolved. Fast infusion did not alter the safety profile. Efficacy was comparable with results from previous trials. R-maintenance is safe in a daily care setting for patients with first-line or relapsed FL.

Early results from implementation of a 'watch and wait' protocol for complete clinical response following chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant long course chemoradiotherapy (NLCRT) for rectal cancer can result in complete pathological response (pCR). In 2017, we started offering patients who had a complete clinical response (cCR), a choice between total mesorectal excision (TME) and an intensive surveillance or 'watch and wait' (W&W) program. We report the early outcomes of this prospective study. METHODS: All patients undergoing NLCRT from 2017 to 2019 were included. All patients were restaged at 8 weeks, and those who had a cCR were offered TME or W&W. RESULTS: Of 59 patients who underwent NLCRT, 55 had restaging. Eleven of these patients had a cCR (20%). Three chose to have TME and all had a pCR. Eight were enrolled in W&W. Two patients were diagnosed with local regrowth and underwent TME at 7 and 17 months after NLCRT. A further nine patients, who were surgically unfit or refused TME, and had an excellent response to NLCRT, but one that did not reach criteria for a cCR, were also managed with W&W. Of these, two patients developed regrowth with distant metastases. From 2017 to 2019, of the 17 patients who were managed with a W&W approach, 13 patients have remained regrowth free after a median of 28 (13-58) months of W&W. CONCLUSION: Preliminary findings suggest management with W&W, following cCR, may be a safe alternative to TME. There have so far been no instances of distant failure, and those with cCR that had regrowth, were identified early and successfully managed with salvage TME.

Cetuximab for the treatment of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cetuximab, an IgG1 chimeric monoclonal antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), has activity against colorectal cancers that express EGFR. METHODS: From December 2003 to August 2005, 572 patients who had colorectal cancer expressing immunohistochemically detectable EGFR and who had been previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin or had contraindications to treatment with these drugs underwent randomization to an initial dose of 400 mg of cetuximab per square meter of body-surface area followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg per square meter plus best supportive care (287 patients) or best supportive care alone (285 patients). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: In comparison with best supportive care alone, cetuximab treatment was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival (hazard ratio for death, 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.92; P=0.005) and in progression-free survival (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.80; P<0.001). These benefits were robust after adjustment in a multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model. The median overall survival was 6.1 months in the cetuximab group and 4.6 months in the group assigned to supportive care alone. Partial responses occurred in 23 patients (8.0%) in the cetuximab group but in none in the group assigned to supportive care alone (P<0.001); the disease was stable in an additional 31.4% of patients assigned to cetuximab and in 10.9% of patients assigned to supportive care alone (P<0.001). Quality of life was better preserved in the cetuximab group, with less deterioration in physical function and global health status scores (both P<0.05). Cetuximab treatment was associated with a characteristic rash; a rash of grade 2 or higher was strongly associated with improved survival (hazard ratio for death, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.50; P<0.001). The incidence of any adverse event of grade 3 or higher was 78.5% in the cetuximab group and 59.1% in the group assigned to supportive care alone (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cetuximab improves overall survival and progression-free survival and preserves quality-of-life measures in patients with colorectal cancer in whom other treatments have failed. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00079066 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Capecitabine as adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin is the standard adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. The oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine is an established alternative to bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated capecitabine in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 1987 patients with resected stage III colon cancer to receive either oral capecitabine (1004 patients) or bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen; 983 patients) over a period of 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was at least equivalence in disease-free survival; the primary safety end point was the incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxic effects due to fluoropyrimidines. RESULTS: Disease-free survival in the capecitabine group was at least equivalent to that in the fluorouracil-plus-leucovorin group (in the intention-to-treat analysis, P<0.001 for the comparison of the upper limit of the hazard ratio with the noninferiority margin of 1.20). Capecitabine improved relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04) and was associated with significantly fewer adverse events than fluorouracil plus leucovorin (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oral capecitabine is an effective alternative to intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer.

Observed benefit and safety of aflibercept in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: An age-based analysis from the randomized placebo-controlled phase III VELOUR trial.

OBJECTIVES: Aflibercept (ziv-aflibercept) significantly improves progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when added to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI), compared with FOLFIRI alone, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with oxaliplatin-based therapy. This subset analysis of the VELOUR study investigates aflibercept plus FOLFIRI versus placebo plus FOLFIRI according to age. METHODS: Efficacy and safety were analyzed by treatment arm and age (≥ or <65years). RESULTS: Overall, 443 patients were ≥65years old (205 in aflibercept arm; 238 in placebo arm) and 783 were <65years old (407 in aflibercept arm; 376 in placebo arm). Median OS was 12.6 versus 11.3months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.85; 95.34% CI 0.68-1.07) in patients ≥65years old and 14.5 versus 12.5months (HR: 0.80; 95.34% CI 0.67-0.95) in those patients <65years old, for patients receiving FOLFIRI plus aflibercept or placebo, respectively. There was no interaction between treatment and age. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable for patients <65years and ≥65years old. The incidence of grade 3/4 AEs was higher for patients ≥65years old than for those <65years old in both the aflibercept (89.3% versus 80.5%) and placebo (67.4% versus 59.4%) arms. Interaction tests for grade 3/4 antiangiogenic agent-related AEs suggested no heterogeneity between the older and younger patient populations (p>0.1). CONCLUSION: A limited but consistent benefit on both OS and PFS was associated with the addition of aflibercept to FOLFIRI compared with placebo in patients <65 and ≥65years old, with a marked but manageable increase in the toxicity profile in older patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.govNCT00561470.

Effect of Primary Tumor Side on Survival Outcomes in Untreated Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer When Selective Internal Radiation Therapy Is Added to Chemotherapy: Combined Analysis of Two Randomized Controlled Studies.

BACKGROUND: The primary tumor side is emerging as a major prognostic factor for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We examined the survival data from 2 randomized studies to determine whether the outcomes differ between patients with mCRC with right-sided primary (RSP) tumors and those with left-sided primary (LSP) tumors after selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) plus mFOLFOX6 (folinic acid [leucovorin], 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin) chemotherapy, versus chemotherapy alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Separate and combined analyses were performed on the data from the SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE global trials, which compared chemotherapy plus SIRT with chemotherapy alone for patients with mCRC liver metastases. The primary tumor side data were prospectively collected. The principal outcome measure was overall survival (OS) stratified by treatment and primary tumor side. RESULTS: In the combined analysis of all 739 patients enrolled, SIRT had no effect on OS (median OS, 24.3 vs. 24.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.021; P = .810). For the 179 patients (24.2%) with a RSP tumor, OS was improved with the addition of SIRT (median, 22.0 vs. 17.1 months HR, 0.641; P = .008). The addition of SIRT was not associated with a significant difference in OS among the 540 patients with a LSP tumor (median, 24.6 vs. 26.6 months; HR, 1.120; P = .264). A test of treatment interaction by primary tumor side was statistically significant for RSP and SIRT (P = .002). CONCLUSION: The addition of SIRT for patients with RSP tumors, but not for those with LSP tumors, was associated with a statistically and clinically significant OS gain.

Cetuximab Alone or With Irinotecan for Resistant KRAS-, NRAS-, BRAF- and PIK3CA-wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The AGITG Randomized Phase II ICECREAM Study.

BACKGROUND: The Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation (ICECREAM) study assessed the efficacy of cetuximab monotherapy compared with cetuximab combined with chemotherapy for quadruple wild-type (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, or P13KCA exon 20) metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial and randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2 cetuximab weekly, with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2016, 48 patients were recruited. Two were ineligible, and 2 were not evaluable for response. Characteristics were balanced, except gender (male, 62% vs. 72%) and primary sidedness (left, 95% vs. 68%). For cetuximab compared with cetuximab-irinotecan, progression-free survival was 14% versus 41% (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.78; P = .008); response rate was 10% (2 partial responses) versus 38% (1 complete, 8 partial); P = .04. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were less with cetuximab monotherapy (23% vs. 50%); global and specific quality of life scores did not differ. CONCLUSION: In comparison with cetuximab alone, cetuximab plus irinotecan increases the response rate and delays progression in irinotecan-resistant RAS wild-type colorectal cancer. This echoes data from molecularly unselected patients.

Mapping EORTC-QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-3L in patients with colorectal cancer.

AIMS: The primary aim of this study was to perform a mapping of the EORTC-QLQ-C30 scores to EQ-5D-3L for the SIRFLOX study; a large dataset of patients with previously untreated liver-only or liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A secondary aim was to compare the predictive validity of existing mappings from EORTC-QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-3L conducted in other cancers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Questionnaires (completed within 529 patients) were used in a linear mixed regression to model EQ-5D-3L utility values (scored using the UK tariff) as a function of the five function scores, nine symptom scores, and the global score from the EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire. A Tobit regression was also performed. The mean EQ-5D-3L values for the SIRFLOX trial were calculated and compared with predicted EQ-5D-3L values derived using published mapping algorithms. RESULTS: The linear mixed regression model provided a satisfactory mapping between the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and the EQ-5D-3L, whilst the Tobit model did not perform as well. When utilities from the SIRFLOX data were calculated with previously published mapping studies, three out of five studies performed well (< 10% mean difference). LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of the study was the lack of meaningful observations post-progression (67 paired observations). For this reason, this study was unable to test whether the mapping holds by disease stage. Additionally, although the study adds to the literature of mappings to the EQ-5D-3L, it is not known how results would differ using the EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSION: This study is the first of its kind in liver-only or liver-dominant mCRC, and mCRC in general. The mapping constructed showed a good fit to the data and provides practitioners with an additional mapping between EORTC-QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-3L using a large dataset (529 patients, 707 paired observations). The study also confirmed the generalizability of mappings published by Proskorovsky, Kontodimopoulos, and Longworth to liver-only or liver-dominant mCRC.

Protocol for Combined Analysis of FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global Randomized Phase III Trials of Chemotherapy +/- Selective Internal Radiation Therapy as First-Line Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In colorectal cancer (CRC), unresectable liver metastases are associated with a poor prognosis. The FOXFIRE (an open-label randomized phase III trial of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and folinic acid +/- interventional radioembolization as first-line treatment for patients with unresectable liver-only or liver-predominant metastatic colorectal cancer), SIRFLOX (randomized comparative study of FOLFOX6m plus SIR-Spheres microspheres versus FOLFOX6m alone as first-line treatment in patients with nonresectable liver metastases from primary colorectal carcinoma), and FOXFIRE-Global (assessment of overall survival of FOLFOX6m plus SIR-Spheres microspheres versus FOLFOX6m alone as first-line treatment in patients with nonresectable liver metastases from primary colorectal carcinoma in a randomized clinical study) clinical trials were designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combining first-line chemotherapy with selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres, also called transarterial radioembolization. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis is to prospectively combine clinical data from 3 trials to allow adequate power to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy with SIRT on overall survival. METHODS: Eligible patients are adults with histologically confirmed CRC and unequivocal evidence of liver metastases which are not treatable by surgical resection or local ablation with curative intent at the time of study entry. Patients may also have limited extrahepatic metastases. Final analysis will take place when all participants have been followed up for a minimum of 2 years. RESULTS: Efficacy and safety estimates derived using individual participant data (IPD) from SIRFLOX, FOXFIRE, and FOXFIRE-Global will be pooled using 2-stage prospective meta-analysis. Secondary outcome measures include progression-free survival (PFS), liver-specific PFS, health-related quality of life, response rate, resection rate, and adverse event profile. The large study population will facilitate comparisons of low frequency adverse events and allow for more robust safety analyses. The potential treatment benefit in those patients who present with disease confined to the liver will be investigated using 1-stage IPD meta-analysis. Efficacy will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis will assess the impact of SIRT combined with chemotherapy on overall survival in the first-line treatment of metastatic CRC. If positive, the results will change the standard of care for this disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FOXFIRE ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN83867919; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN83867919 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oN7axrvA). SIRFLOX ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00724503; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ct2/show/NCT00724503 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oN7lEGbD). FOXFIRE-Global ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01721954; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01721954 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/ 6oN7vvQvG).

SIRFLOX: Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing First-Line mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Versus mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Plus Selective Internal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: SIRFLOX was a randomized, multicenter trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres to standard fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with liver metastases plus or minus limited extrahepatic metastases were randomly assigned to receive either modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX6; control) or mFOLFOX6 plus SIRT (SIRT) plus or minus bevacizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at any site as assessed by independent centralized radiology review blinded to study arm. RESULTS: Between October 2006 and April 2013, 530 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (control, 263; SIRT, 267). Median PFS at any site was 10.2 v 10.7 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12; P = .43). Median PFS in the liver by competing risk analysis was 12.6 v 20.5 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P = .002). Objective response rates (ORRs) at any site were similar (68.1% v 76.4% in control v SIRT; P = .113). ORR in the liver was improved with the addition of SIRT (68.8% v 78.7% in control v SIRT; P = .042). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events, including recognized SIRT-related effects, were reported in 73.4% and 85.4% of patients in control versus SIRT. CONCLUSION: The addition of SIRT to FOLFOX-based first-line chemotherapy in patients with liver-dominant or liver-only metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve PFS at any site but significantly delayed disease progression in the liver. The safety profile was as expected and was consistent with previous studies.

Response to Cetuximab With or Without Irinotecan in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Harboring the KRAS G13D Mutation: Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group ICECREAM Study.

PURPOSE: RAS mutations predict lack of response to epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but preclinical studies and retrospective clinical data suggest that patients with tumors harboring the exon 2 KRAS G13D mutation may benefit from cetuximab. We aimed to assess cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with molecularly selected (G13D mutation) chemotherapy-refractory mCRC in a randomized phase II trial of this rare molecular subtype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with chemotherapy-refractory KRAS G13D mutation-positive mCRC who had progressed within 6 months of irinotecan therapy were randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) loading dose and then 250 mg/m(2) once per week with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) once every 2 weeks. The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary end points were response rate, overall survival, quality of life, and toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty-one of 53 patients recruited over 2 years were eligible. The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 10% (95% CI, 2% to 26%) for cetuximab versus 23% (95% CI, 9% to 40%) for cetuximab plus irinotecan with a hazard ratio of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.32). Response and stable disease rates were 0% and 58% for monotherapy versus 9% and 70% for combination treatment, respectively. Overall survival and quality of life were similar; toxicities were higher with combination therapy. CONCLUSION: In patients with G13D-mutated chemotherapy-refractory mCRC, there was no statistically significant improvement in disease control at 6 months with either cetuximab monotherapy or cetuximab plus irinotecan. No responses were seen with single-agent cetuximab. The responses observed with the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan may reflect true drug synergy or persistent irinotecan sensitivity. The ICECREAM (Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation Among Patients with a G13D Mutation) study demonstrates the need to prospectively evaluate hypotheses that were previously supported by retrospective analyses and exemplifies the value of international collaboration in trials of rare molecular subtypes.

Aflibercept Plus FOLFIRI vs. Placebo Plus FOLFIRI in Second-Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: a Post Hoc Analysis of Survival from the Phase III VELOUR Study Subsequent to Exclusion of Patients who had Recurrence During or Within 6 Months of Completing Adjuvant Oxaliplatin-Based Therapy.

The aim of this post hoc analysis of the VELOUR study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00561470) was to investigate the treatment effect of adding aflibercept to second-line infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had failed any prior oxaliplatin-containing regimen. Adjuvant rapid relapsers (ARR), who were enrolled directly following relapse during or within 6 months of completion of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy (N = 124, including 17 patients who also received bevacizumab as part of their adjuvant therapy), were excluded from the original VELOUR intention-to-treat (ITT) population (N = 1226). After exclusion of the ARR, overall survival (OS) in the ITT minus ARR (ITT-ARR) population (N = 1102) was longer in the aflibercept plus FOLFIRI arm than in the placebo plus FOLFIRI arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.90; median survival difference 1.87 months]. In the subgroup of patients assigned to the prior bevacizumab stratum at randomization, OS was numerically longer in the aflibercept plus FOLFIRI arm than in the placebo plus FOLFIRI arm (HR 0.81; 95 % CI 0.63-1.04; median survival difference 2.14 months). Comparison of the post hoc analysis results with the primary analysis from VELOUR suggests that the inclusion of the directly enrolled ARR may have understated the aflibercept treatment benefit for both bevacizumab-pretreated and bevacizumab-naïve patients in the strictly second-line setting although no definitive conclusion may be inferred. The benefit associated with the addition of aflibercept to second-line FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC was observed whatever the timing of first-line disease progression. There were no unexpected safety concerns.

Superior survival with capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: phase III trial results.

PURPOSE: Docetaxel and capecitabine, a tumor-activated oral fluoropyrimidine, show high single-agent efficacy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and synergy in preclinical studies. This international phase III trial compared efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine/docetaxel therapy with single-agent docetaxel in anthracycline-pretreated patients with MBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 255) or to docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 256). RESULTS: Capecitabine/docetaxel resulted in significantly superior efficacy in time to disease progression (TTP) (hazard ratio, 0.652; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.545 to 0.780; P =.0001; median, 6.1 v 4.2 months), overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.634 to 0.947; P =.0126; median, 14.5 v 11.5 months), and objective tumor response rate (42% v 30%, P =.006) compared with docetaxel. Gastrointestinal side effects and hand-foot syndrome were more common with combination therapy, whereas myalgia, arthralgia, and neutropenic fever/sepsis were more common with single-agent docetaxel. More grade 3 adverse events occurred with combination therapy (71% v 49%, respectively), whereas grade 4 events were slightly more common with docetaxel (31% v 25% with combination). CONCLUSION: The significantly superior TTP and survival achieved with the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), with the manageable toxicity profile, indicate that this combination provides clear benefits over single-agent docetaxel 100 mg/m(2). Docetaxel/capecitabine therapy is an important treatment option for women with anthracycline-pretreated MBC.

Time course of safety and efficacy of aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who progressed on previous oxaliplatin-based therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously-treated with oxaliplatin benefit significantly from the addition of aflibercept to FOLFIRI in relation to overall survival, progression-free survival and response rate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The results for efficacy and safety over the time course of the VEGF Trap (aflibercept) with irinotecan in colorectal cancer after failure of oxaliplatin regimen trial were analysed based on data from 1226 patients randomised to receive FOLFIRI plus either aflibercept (n=612) or placebo (n=614). Hazard ratios (HR) by 6-month time period were estimated using a piecewise Cox proportional hazard model. Severity of adverse events (AEs) was graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria, version 3.0. RESULTS: The estimated probabilities of survival were 38.5% versus 30.9% at 18 months, 28.0% versus 18.7% at 24 months and 22.3% versus 12.0% at 30 months, for the aflibercept- and placebo-treated arms, respectively. The proportional improvement in the HR over time was consistent with the survival probability results; survival at 24 months was improved by 50% and almost doubled at 30 months. The majority of worst-grade AEs occurred within the first four cycles of treatment and in a small percent of treatment cycles and were mostly reversible. Common chemotherapy- and anti-vascular epithelial growth factor (VEGF)-associated AEs occurred rarely and in a small proportion of cycles with the majority being of single occurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of aflibercept to FOLFIRI showed a continued and persistent improvement in overall survival over time in patients with mCRC. Although grade 3-4 AEs were more frequent in the aflibercept arm, they occurred in early treatment cycles and decreased sharply following initial presentation.