Plain language summary of SUNLIGHT: trifluridine/tipiracil and bevacizumab for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary describing the results from a phase 3 clinical trial called SUNLIGHT. The study looked at treatment with orally administered trifluridine/tipiracil plus intravenously administered bevacizumab in people with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that is refractory to treatment.This study included people whose cancer had grown or spread beyond its original location after no more than two previous treatments. People in the study received either the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab or they received trifluridine/tipiracil alone. The aims of the study were to see how long people lived after treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab compared with trifluridine/tipiracil alone and to find out how well the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab worked at slowing down the spread of the cancer. Researchers also looked at side effects from taking the medicines and at how treatment affected people's physical functioning. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: People in the combination group lived longer (a median of 10.8 months) than people who received trifluridine/tipiracil alone (7.5 months). In addition, the time it took for the cancer to worsen was longer for those who received the combination treatment (a median of 5.6 months) compared with those who received trifluridine/tipiracil alone (2.4 months). People's physical functioning took longer to worsen with combination therapy (a median of 9.3 months) than it did with trifluridine/tipiracil alone (6.3 months), as measured by the impact of treatment on people's ability to carry out daily living activities. The most common side effects in both treatment groups were low levels of white blood cells, known as neutrophils (neutropenia), nausea, and low levels of healthy red blood cells (anemia). WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: The results from the study suggest that treatment with oral trifluridine/tipiracil plus intravenous (IV) bevacizumab could help people with refractory mCRC live longer and maintain good physical functioning, and it could slow the worsening of their cancer.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04737187 (SUNLIGHT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic stomach or gastroesophageal junction cancers: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of two articles. The first article is about a clinical trial called SPOTLIGHT and it was published in the medical journal The Lancet in in April of 2023. The second article is about a clinical trial called GLOW and it was published in the medical journal Nature Medicine in July of 2023. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: Until recently, chemotherapy was the first treatment given to people with stomach cancer or gastroesophageal junction (or GEJ) cancer that is locally advanced unresectable or metastatic. When cancer cells have high amounts of the protein CLDN18.2 but do not have high amounts of the protein HER2, the cancer is known as CLDN18.2-positive (or CLDN18.2+) and HER2-negative (or HER2-). New medicines to treat cancer are being developed. These medicines attach to proteins on cancer cells to help the body recognize and kill cancer cells.The clinical trials SPOTLIGHT and GLOW included participants with CLDN18.2+ and HER2- stomach or GEJ cancer that was locally advanced unresectable or metastatic. These trials looked at whether adding a medicine called zolbetuximab to chemotherapy as the first treatment for cancer helped people live longer before their tumors grew bigger or new tumors grew, after starting the trial. These studies also looked at whether adding zolbetuximab to chemotherapy helped people live longer after starting the trial. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: In SPOTLIGHT and GLOW, on average, participants assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy lived 1.4 to 1.9 months longer before their tumors grew bigger or new tumors grew, after starting the trial, than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy. On average, participants assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy also lived 2.2 to 2.7 months longer, after starting the trial, than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy. These results suggest that zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy could be a new first treatment for people with CLDN18.2+ and HER2- stomach or GEJ cancer that is locally advanced unresectable or metastatic.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03504397 (SPOTLIGHT); NCT03653507 (GLOW).

The clinical trials SPOTLIGHT and GLOW showed that, on average, participants with stomach or GEJ cancer assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy lived 2.2 to 2.7 months longer than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy.

18F-AlF-NOTA-Octreotide Outperforms 68Ga-DOTATATE/NOC PET in Neuroendocrine Tumor Patients: Results from a Prospective, Multicenter Study.

18F-labeled somatostatin analogs (SSAs) could represent a valid alternative to the current gold standard, 68Ga-labeled SSAs, for somatostatin receptor imaging in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), given their logistic advantages. Recently, 18F-AlF-NOTA-octreotide (18F-AlF-OC) has emerged as a promising candidate, but a thorough comparison with 68Ga-DOTA-SSA in large patient groups is needed. This prospective, multicenter trial aims to demonstrate noninferiority of 18F-AlF-OC compared with 68Ga-DOTA-SSA PET in NET patients (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04552847). Methods: Seventy-five patients with histologically confirmed NET and routine clinical 68Ga-DOTATATE (n = 56) or 68Ga-DOTANOC (n = 19) PET, performed within a 3-mo interval of the study scan (median, 7 d; range, -30 to +32 d), were included. Patients underwent a whole-body PET 2 h after intravenous injection of 4 MBq/kg of 18F-AlF-OC. A randomized, masked consensus read was performed by 2 experienced readers to count tumor lesions. After unmasking, the detection ratio (DR) was determined for each scan, that is, the fraction of lesions detected on a scan compared with the union of lesions of both scans. The differential DR (DDR; difference in DR between 18F-AlF-OC and 68Ga-DOTATATE/NOC) per patient was calculated. Tracer uptake was evaluated by comparing SUVmax and tumor-to-background ratios in concordant lesions. Results: In total, 4,709 different tumor lesions were detected: 3,454 with 68Ga-DOTATATE/NOC and 4,278 with 18F-AlF-OC. The mean DR with 18F-AlF-OC was significantly higher than with 68Ga-DOTATATE/NOC (91.1% vs. 75.3%; P < 10-5). The resulting mean DDR was 15.8%, with a lower margin of the 95% CI (95% CI, 9.6%-22.0%) higher than -15%, which is the prespecified boundary for noninferiority. The mean DDRs for the 68Ga-DOTATATE and 68Ga-DOTANOC subgroups were 11.8% (95% CI, 4.3-19.3) and 27.5% (95% CI, 17.8-37.1), respectively. The mean DDR for most organs was higher than zero, except for bone lesions (mean DDR, -2.8%; 95% CI, -17.8 to 12.2). No significant differences in mean SUVmax were observed (P = 0.067), but mean tumor-to-background ratio was significantly higher with 18F-AlF-OC than with 68Ga-DOTATATE/NOC (31.7 ± 36.5 vs. 25.1 ± 32.7; P = 0.001). Conclusion: 18F-AlF-OC is noninferior and even superior to 68Ga-DOTATATE/NOC PET in NET patients. This validates 18F-AlF-OC as an option for clinical practice somatostatin receptor PET.

Trifluridine/tipiracil versus placebo in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer (TAGS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Trifluridine/tipiracil showed activity and was well tolerated in a phase 2 study of pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer done in Japan. We investigated whether the treatment was efficacious compared with placebo in a global population. METHODS: TAGS was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 110 academic hospitals in 17 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, non-resectable, metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (including adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction) as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging classification (7th edition) who had received at least two previous chemotherapy regimens and had experienced radiological disease progression were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via dynamic randomisation from a centralised interactive voice-response system to receive either oral trifluridine/tipiracil (35 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-5 and days 8-12 every 28 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care. Participants were allocated to groups by study-site personnel. Randomisation was stratified by region (Japan vs rest of world), ECOG performance status (0 vs 1), and previous treatment with ramucirumab (yes vs no). Both patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02500043. The trial, including follow-up of all participants, has been completed. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24, 2016, and Jan 5, 2018, 507 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 337 to the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 170 to the placebo group. Median overall survival was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·8-6·2) in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 3·6 months (3·1-4·1) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·56-0·85]; one-sided p=0·00029, two-sided p=0·00058). Grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause occurred in 267 (80%) patients in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 97 (58%) in the placebo group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause were neutropenia (n=114 [34%]) and anaemia (n=64 [19%]) in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and abdominal pain (n=15 [9%]) and general deterioration of physical health (n=15 [9%]) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 143 (43%) patients in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 70 (42%) in the placebo group. One treatment-related death was reported in each group (because of cardiopulmonary arrest in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and because of toxic hepatitis in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Trifluridine/tipiracil significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo and was well tolerated in this heavily pretreated population of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Trifluridine/tipiracil could be a new treatment option in this population who represent a high unmet medical need. FUNDING: Taiho Oncology and Taiho Pharmaceutical.

Quantitative imaging outperforms molecular markers when predicting response to chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To explore the integration of imaging and molecular data for response prediction to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighty-five rectal cancer patients underwent preoperative CRT. 18F-FDG PET/CT and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) were acquired before (TP1) and during CRT (TP2) and prior to surgery (TP3). Inflammatory cytokines and gene expression were analysed. Tumour response was defined as ypT0-1N0. Multivariate models were built combining the obtained parameters. Final models were calculated on the data combination with the highest AUC. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (26%) achieved ypT0-1N0 response. 18F-FDG PET/CT had worse predictive performance than DWI and T2-volumetry (AUC 0.61±0.04, 0.72±0.03, and 0.72±0.02, respectively). Combining all imaging parameters increased the AUC to 0.81±0.03. Adding cytokines or gene expression did not improve the AUC (AUC of 0.72±0.06 and 0.79±0.04 respectively). Final models combining 18F-FDG PET/CT, DWI, and T2-weighted volumetry at all TPs and using only TP1 and TP3, allowed ypT0-1N0 prediction with a 75% sensitivity, 94% specificity and PPV of 80%. CONCLUSIONS: Combining 18F-FDG PET/CT, DWI, and T2-weighted MRI volumetry obtained before CRT and prior to surgery may help physicians in selecting rectal cancer patients for organ-preservation.

Disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in adjuvant trials of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In investigations of the effectiveness of surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancers, overall survival (OS) is considered the gold standard endpoint. However, the disadvantage of using OS as the endpoint is that it requires an extended follow-up period. We sought to investigate whether disease-free survival (DFS) is a valid surrogate for OS in trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer. METHODS: The GASTRIC group initiated a meta-analysis of individual patient data collected in randomized clinical trials comparing adjuvant chemotherapy vs surgery alone for patients with curatively resected gastric cancer. Surrogacy of DFS was assessed through the correlation between the endpoints as well as through the correlation between the treatment effects on the endpoints. External validation of the prediction based on DFS was also evaluated. RESULTS: Individual patient data from 14 randomized clinical trials that included a total of 3288 patients were analyzed. The rank correlation coefficient between DFS and OS was 0.974 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.971 to 0.976). The coefficient of determination between the treatment effects on DFS and on OS was as high as 0.964 (95% CI = 0.926 to 1.000), and the surrogate threshold effect based on adjusted regression analysis was 0.92. In external validation, the six hazard ratios for OS predicted according to DFS were in very good agreement with those actually observed for OS. CONCLUSIONS: DFS is an acceptable surrogate for OS in trials of cytotoxic agents for gastric cancer in the adjuvant setting.

EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last twenty years however still considerable variation exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of cancer care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012 the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about colon and rectum was held looking for multidisciplinary consensus. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. METHODS: The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Experts commented and voted on the two web-based online voting rounds before the meeting (between 4th and 25th October and between the 20th November and 3rd December 2012) as well as one online round after the meeting (4th-20th March 2013) and were invited to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. All sentences that were voted on are available on the EURECCA website www.canceraudit.eu. The consensus document was divided in sections describing evidence based algorithms of diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and stage IV separately. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. RESULTS: The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to achieve European Consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues using the Delphi method. This consensus embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe.