ADJUBIL: phase II study of adjuvant immunotherapy with STRIDE regimen with/without capecitabine in biliary tract cancers.

Biliary tract cancer is a highly heterogeneous group of gastrointestinal cancers, and the only curative treatment is surgery, which is only applicable at early stages of the malignancy. ADJUBIL, a phase II trial (NCT05239169), aims to evaluate immunotherapy with durvalumab and tremelimumab with or without capecitabine in adjuvant situations for biliary tract cancers. A total of 40 prospective patients will be randomly assigned following surgery, consisting of a two-arm feasibility pilot part with a pick-the-winner design with durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination with or without capecitabine.

This article describes the design of a phase II clinical trial called ADJUBIL, which evaluates the use of immunotherapy (durvalumab and tremelimumab) with or without classic chemotherapy (capecitabine) in biliary tract cancer patients who have undergone curative surgery. This type of treatment is also called adjuvant therapy, meaning it is used after the primary treatment. Biliary tract cancer is a rare type of liver cancer, often diagnosed late. Following surgery, patients may experience an early return of the disease, called tumor relapse. To avoid or delay tumor relapse, patients need extra treatment. Pure chemotherapy (capecitabine) is the standard after curative surgery. For patients with no option for cure, chemotherapy together with new powerful immunotherapy has become standard. This study will recruit 40 adult patients with tumor removal, who will be randomly divided into two groups. Half of them will be treated with immunotherapy only (durvalumab and tremelimumab). The other half will be treated with capecitabine together with immunotherapy. This study will continue for 12 months, but the treatment can be stopped if, for example, the tumor reoccurs or any possible side effect of the therapy is detected. The most effective treatment type will be selected. This type of selection is called pick-the winner.

Long-term outcome in patients with mantle cell lymphoma following high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Long-term clinical and molecular remissions in patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) have been evaluated in only a few studies. DESIGN AND METHODS: Sixty-five patients with MCL received ASCT (54 first-line ASCT, 10 second-line ASCT, and 1 third-line ASCT). In the case of long-term remission (≥5 years; n = 27), peripheral blood was tested for minimal residual disease (MRD) by t(11;14)- and IGH-PCR at the last follow-up. RESULTS: Ten-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and freedom from progression (FFP) after first-line ASCT were 64%, 52%, and 59% versus after second-line ASCT 50%, 20%, and 20%, respectively. Five-year OS, PFS, and FFP for the first-line cohort were 79%, 63%, and 69%, respectively. Five-year OS, PFS, and FFP after second-line ASCT were 60%, 30%, and 30%, respectively. Treatment-related mortality (3 months after ASCT) was 1.5%. So far 26 patients developed sustained long-term clinical and molecular complete remissions of up to 19 years following ASCT in first treatment line. CONCLUSION: Sustained long-term clinical and molecular remissions are achievable following ASCT.

Naldemedine versus placebo in opioid-induced constipation: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a frequent adverse event among patients receiving chronic pain therapy that is requiring opioids. Naldemedine was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat OIC and appears to be more efficient than any other peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist. This meta-analysis aimed at assessing the available data on naldemedine in terms of efficacy. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and ClinicalTrials on 24 May 2022 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing naldemedine to placebo among patients reporting OIC. RESULTS: Evaluation of 6 RCTs enrolling 2769 participants showed significantly greater respondence to treatment (OR=2.48; 95% CI: 2.02 to 3.06; p<0.00001), change in weekly spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) (mean difference=1.45; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.76; p<0.00001), complete SBMs (mean difference=0.89; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.17; p<0.00001) and SBMs without straining (mean difference=0.89; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.17; p<0.00001) for patients treated with naldemedine. We found no difference in numeric pain rating scales after one (mean difference=0.05; 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.31; p=0.73) and two weeks of treatment (mean difference= -0.04; 95% CI: -0.31 to 0.22; p=0.75). Funding and clinical diversity were possible risks of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Naldemedine improves a variety of bowel function parameters while preserving analgesia, confirming its efficacy for patients with OIC. However, head-to-head trials are needed to establish naldemedine as treatment of first choice for laxative-refractory OIC. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022281353.

Herpes zoster prophylaxis with low-dose acyclovir in patients with malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma treated with autologous stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster (HZ) is a frequent complication after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The option of zoster prophylaxis with an antiviral drug is described in the literature, but there is no consensus on the drug and the dosage. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the records of 310 patients treated with ASCT who were controlled regularly regarding HZ inter alia for at least 24 months following ASCT. Since 01/2015 patients received prophylactic low-dose acyclovir (400 mg per day) during the first 12 months following discharge after ASCT (n = 107). RESULTS: Twenty percent of patients without this kind of prophylaxis and 2.8% of patients with prophylaxis developed HZ (p < .001). No patient with this prophylaxis developed HZ in the first year after ASCT, 2.8% of patients in the second year after ASCT. A prognostic factor was the kind of diagnosis: 30% of lymphoma patients and 14% of myeloma patients developed HZ in the first 24 months after ASCT without prophylaxis, but only 6.3% and 0% of patients with prophylaxis, respectively. Neither an increase of HZ cases following prophylaxis nor acyclovir refractory HZ cases were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Zoster prophylaxis with low-dose acyclovir over 12 months after ASCT is effective and well tolerated.

Combination of treosulfan, fludarabine and cytarabine as conditioning in patients with acute myeloid leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome and myeloproliferative neoplasms.

PURPOSE: Treosulfan and fludarabine (Treo/Flu) were successfully introduced into toxicity-reduced conditioning for SCT. However, the risk of post-SCT relapse remains a matter of concern. We report the results of a novel individual treatment approach with Treo/Flu and cytarabine (Treo/Flu/AraC) conditioning prior to allogeneic SCT in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), or myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN). METHODS: Seventy-seven patients (median age 54 years) at high risk of disease relapse due to unfavorable cytogenetics or failure to achieve complete remission prior to SCT were included. Median follow-up was 3.2 years. RESULTS: The 1-, 2- and 3-year RFS rates were 49.4%, 41.7%, and 37.6% and OS rates were 59.3%, 49.3%, and 45.4%, respectively. Cumulative incidence of NRM was 10% at 100 days, 18.8% at 1 year and 20.1% at 2 years. The cumulative incidence of relapse increased from 31% at 1 year to 38.5% after 3 years. The cumulative incidences of engraftment, chimerism, graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) and toxicities were acceptable and comparable with similar patients conditioned with Treo/Flu or FLAMSA-RIC. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Treo/Flu/AraC provides tolerable, feasible, and effective conditioning for patients with AML, MDS or MPN, even in advanced disease states. The incidence of NRM and relapse is acceptable in this heavily pre-treated population with high-risk disease. Future research will aim to confirm these initial findings and include a larger number of participants in a prospective trial.

Long-term remissions in patients with early relapse of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma following high-dose chemotherapy, autologous stem cell transplantation, and radiotherapy of residual disease.

PURPOSE: The prognosis of an early relapse of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) appears to be poor following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The aim of this study is to contribute data to the open question on whether additional radiotherapy can improve the outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients with an early relapse (median 4 months after the end of initial immunochemotherapy, range 1-11) of DLBCL have been treated in our institution with high-dose therapy (usually the BEAM protocol) and ASCT since 2008 (median age 61 years, range 28-73). Twenty-three patients received ASCT in a second treatment line, 25 in a third line (19 refractory to second-line salvage therapy, 5 after second relapse). Fifteen of these 48 patients received radiotherapy (36-50 Gy, median 40) of residual masses after ASCT. RESULTS: Three-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after second-line ASCT were 61 and 57%, after third-line ASCT 47 and 44%, respectively, without significant differences. A prognostic factor was the International Prognostic Index (IPI) at the start of salvage therapy. Three-year OS and PFS in low-risk patients were 69 and 69%, in low-intermediate-risk 63 and 53%, and in high-intermediate-risk 23 and 23%, respectively (p = 0.033). Twenty-three patients achieved a sustained complete remission (13-146 months, median 62). CONCLUSION: Sustained long-term remissions can be achieved in patients with early relapse of DLBCL following ASCT in a second or third treatment line, particularly in patients with low- and low-intermediate-risk IPI, following radiotherapy of residual disease after ASCT. Further investigations are required to clarify which patients need an alternative therapy (potentially CAR T­cells or allogeneic transplantation).

TGFB-induced factor homeobox 1 (TGIF) expression in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequent female cancer and preferentially metastasizes to bone. The transcription factor TGFB-induced factor homeobox 1 (TGIF) is involved in bone metabolism. However, it is not yet known whether TGIF is associated with BC bone metastasis or patient outcome and thus of potential interest. METHODS: TGIF expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in 1197 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples from BC patients treated in the GAIN (German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-Positive) study with two adjuvant dose-dense schedules of chemotherapy with or without bisphosphonate ibandronate. TGIF expression was categorized into negative/low and moderate/strong staining. Endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and time to primary bone metastasis as first site of relapse (TTPBM). RESULTS: We found associations of higher TGIF protein expression with smaller tumor size (p = 0.015), well differentiated phenotype (p < 0.001) and estrogen receptor (ER)-positive BC (p < 0.001). Patients with higher TGIF expression levels showed a significantly longer disease-free (DFS: HR 0.75 [95%CI 0.59-0.95], log-rank p = 0.019) and overall survival (OS: HR 0.69 [95%CI 0.50-0.94], log-rank p = 0.019), but no association with TTPBM (HR 0.77 [95%CI 0.51-1.16]; p = 0.213). Univariate analysis in molecular subgroups emphasized that elevated TGIF expression was prognostic for both DFS and OS in ER-positive BC patients (DFS: HR 0.68 [95%CI 0.51-0.91]; log-rank p = 0.009, interaction p = 0.130; OS: HR 0.60 [95%CI 0.41-0.88], log-rank p = 0.008, interaction p = 0.107) and in the HER2-negative subgroup (DFS:HR 0.67 [95%CI 0.50-0.88], log-rank p = 0.004, interaction p = 0.034; OS: HR 0.57 [95%CI 0.40-0.81], log-rank p = 0.002, interaction p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that moderate to high TGIF expression is a common feature of breast cancer cells and that this is not associated with bone metastases as first site of relapse. However, a reduced expression is linked to tumor progression, especially in HER2-negative breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ; registration number: NCT00196872 .

Long-term outcome in patients with follicular lymphoma following high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To contribute data on long-term outcome and potential curative impact of ASCT in FL, especially following HDT with the BEAM protocol (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan), given very limited data on this topic in the literature. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with FL (n = 76) were treated in our institution with HDT and ASCT. In the case of long-term remission (≥8 years), peripheral blood was tested for minimal residual disease by t(14;18)- and IGH-PCR, including the last follow-up. RESULTS: 10-year overall survival, progression-free survival, and freedom from progression (FFP) after first-line ASCT (n = 20) were 80%, 60%, and 69%, after second-line ASCT (n = 48, following BEAM) 66%, 38%, and 41%, after third/fourth-line ASCT (n = 8) 33%, 25%, and 25%, respectively. Prognostic factors for FFP were treatment line and FLIPI (Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index). 10-year FFP for second-line ASCT and low-risk FLIPI at relapse was 69%, intermediate-risk 28%, and high-risk 25% (P < .05). 26 patients developed sustained long-term clinical and molecular remissions of up to 27 years. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained long-term clinical and molecular complete remissions up to 27 years can be achieved following ASCT (including HDT with BEAM in second treatment line), indicating a potential curative impact of ASCT in FL.

The Screening and COnsensus Based on Practices and Evidence (SCOPE) Program-Results of a Survey on Daily Practice Patterns for Patients with mCRC.

The SCOPE project aimed to better understand practice patterns, identify drivers for treatment goals, and determine third- and fourth-line treatment choices for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The survey was developed by an expert panel of gastrointestinal oncologists. Questions concerned general practice patterns, and treatment decisions for three hypothetical patient case scenarios. Participants had to routinely manage patients with mCRC. We present results from 629 participants who provided input on patient treatment scenarios (data cutoff: 17/01/2020). Prolonging overall survival (OS; 51%) was the main aim in first line. In third line, quality of life (QOL) was the primary goal (34%). Forty-three percent also cited efficacy-focused goals; 18% and 13% noted prolonging OS and improving progression-free survival as main aims, respectively. For fit and active patients, 89% of respondents considered trifluridine-tipiracil an appropriate third-line treatment; regorafenib (31%) or clinical trial enrollment (29%) were the fourth-line options. For patients with comorbidities and limited caregiver support, trifluridine-tipiracil was the preferred third-line treatment (70%). For KRAS-mutated patients with comorbidities and adverse events who received prior oxaliplatin, 90% considered oxaliplatin rechallenge an unsuitable third-line treatment, mainly due to the risk of cumulative toxicity (75%). In the third/fourth-line settings, trifluridine-tipiracil followed by regorafenib was the most common option (54%); 17% chose regorafenib followed by trifluridine-tipiracil. Efficacy coupled with QOL are important goals in third-line treatment. Daily practice patterns reflect the guideline recommendations in third- and fourth-line settings, with a trend toward using trifluridine-tipiracil versus regorafenib in KRAS-wildtype and KRAS-mutant tumors.

Relationships Between Köhne Category/Baseline Tumor Load and Early Tumor Shrinkage, Depth of Response, and Outcomes in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), there are limited data on associations between early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and patient characteristics. METHODS: Data from patients with RAS wild-type mCRC who had participated in the PRIME (NCT00364013) and PEAK (NCT00819780) studies were analyzed retrospectively. ETS and DpR were assessed by baseline Köhne category/BRAF status (PRIME) and baseline tumor load (pooled PRIME and PEAK). RESULTS: Analysis populations included 436 to 665 patients. Patients' chances of achieving ETS of 30% or greater were 63.8%, 50.4%, and 41.9% in the low-, medium-, and high-risk Köhne categories, and 21.7% in those with BRAF mutations. Corresponding percentages for the highest DpR classification (71%-100%) were 47.7% (low risk), 23.6% (medium risk), 10.0% (high risk), and 4.2% (BRAF mutant). No clear relationship was observed between baseline tumor load and ETS or DpR. An ETS of 30% or greater and higher DpR values were associated with statistically significant prolongation of median progression-free survival and overall survival. CONCLUSION: Patients with mCRC categorized at baseline by the Köhne criteria as high risk or with BRAF mutations have lower chances of achieving an ETS of 30% or greater or a high DpR. Baseline tumor load was not predictive of ETS or DpR. Favorable ETS or DpR is associated with improved progression-free and overall survival.

Adding cetuximab to paclitaxel and carboplatin for first-line treatment of carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP): results of the Phase 2 AIO trial PACET-CUP.

BACKGROUND: Patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) have a dismal prognosis, even when treated with multi-agent chemotherapy. We hypothesised that adding the epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor cetuximab to standard first-line chemotherapy with paclitaxel and carboplatin would improve PFS and RR in unfavourable CUP. METHODS: This open-labelled, multicentre Phase 2 study included patients with unfavourable, untreated adeno- or undifferentiated CUP. Patients were randomised to receive either paclitaxel/carboplatin (group A) or paclitaxel/carboplatin plus cetuximab (group B) every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles followed by cetuximab maintenance in group B. The primary endpoint was PFS in the two groups. Secondary endpoints were RR, toxicity and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One-hundred-and-fifty patients were randomised (group A = 72, group B = 78). The median PFS and OS for all patients were 3.8 and 8.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.9-4.8 and 6.8-9.5). There was no significant difference in PFS (3.7 vs 4.6 months, HR 0.98) or OS (8.1 vs 7.4, HR 1.1) between the two treatment groups. Response rate tended to be better for chemotherapy plus cetuximab compared to chemotherapy alone (22% vs 15%). Adverse events grade ≥3 were comparable between the two groups, except for significantly increased skin toxicity in the cetuximab arm. CONCLUSIONS: Cetuximab plus paclitaxel/carboplatin did not improve PFS, OS and RR in metastatic CUP compared to paclitaxel/carboplatin alone. Addition of cetuximab resulted in additional skin toxicity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00894569.

Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Testing prior to Treatment with 5-Fluorouracil, Capecitabine, and Tegafur: A Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: 5-Fluorouracil (FU) is one of the most commonly used cytostatic drugs in the systemic treatment of cancer. Treatment with FU may cause severe or life-threatening side effects and the treatment-related mortality rate is 0.2-1.0%. SUMMARY: Among other risk factors associated with increased toxicity, a genetic deficiency in dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), an enzyme responsible for the metabolism of FU, is well known. This is due to variants in the DPD gene (DPYD). Up to 9% of European patients carry a DPD gene variant that decreases enzyme activity, and DPD is completely lacking in approximately 0.5% of patients. Here we describe the clinical and genetic background and summarize recommendations for the genetic testing and tailoring of treatment with 5-FU derivatives. The statement was developed as a consensus statement organized by the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology in cooperation with 13 medical associations from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Key Messages: (i) Patients should be tested for the 4 most common genetic DPYD variants before treatment with drugs containing FU. (ii) Testing forms the basis for a differentiated, risk-adapted algorithm with recommendations for treatment with FU-containing drugs. (iii) Testing may optionally be supplemented by therapeutic drug monitoring.

Current therapy of advanced colorectal cancer according to RAS/RAF mutational status.

Colorectal cancer is a clinically and molecularly heterogeneous disease. Currently, extended RAS and BRAF mutation testing is obligatory in routine clinical practice before starting any treatment in the metastatic setting. Treatment decision making also includes assessment of the clinical condition of the patient, definition of the treatment goal, and consideration of the primary tumor site. Biological treatment is part of the first-line drug combination unless contraindicated. Mutational status is significantly associated with the outcome of patients and is strongly predictive for anti-EGFR-targeted therapy. The prognosis of RAS mutant CRC is clearly inferior to wild-type cases. RAS remains an elusive target, and specific treatment options are not yet available. Recently, promising results of a direct KRAS G12C inhibitor have been reported; however, further confirmation is needed. The biomarker landscape in mCRC is evolving; new promising markers are awaited with the chance of more precise targeted treatment.

Impact of Primary Tumour Location and Early Tumour Shrinkage on Outcomes in Patients with RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Following First-Line FOLFIRI Plus Panitumumab.

OBJECTIVE: Data from a trial of first-line panitumumab plus FOLFIRI (folinic acid, infusional 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan) in metastatic colorectal cancer were retrospectively analysed to investigate the effects of primary tumour location and early tumour shrinkage on outcomes. METHODS: Patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer from a single-arm, open-label phase II study (NCT00508404) were included. Tumours located from the splenic flexure to rectum and in the caecum to transverse colon were defined as left- and right-sided, respectively. Baseline characteristics were summarised by primary tumour location and the effects of primary tumour location on outcomes-including objective response rate, resection rate, depth of response, duration of response and progression-free survival-were analysed. Progression-free survival and objective response rate were analysed by early tumour shrinkage status. RESULTS: Primary tumour location was determined in 52/69 (75%) patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer; 45 (87%) had left-sided disease. Median progression-free survival was longer in patients with left-sided tumours (11.2 vs. 7.2 months for right-sided disease) and more of these patients experienced early tumour shrinkage ≥ 30% (53% vs. 29%). Early tumour shrinkage ≥ 30% was associated with improved progression-free survival irrespective of tumour location. More patients with early tumour shrinkage ≥ 30% achieved a partial or complete response. Objective response rate, duration of response, depth of response and resection rates were similar in patients with left- and right-sided tumours. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis has confirmed a prognostic effect of primary tumour location in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first-line panitumumab plus FOLFIRI. Early tumour shrinkage was associated with improved progression-free survival irrespective of tumour location. In right-sided disease, early tumour shrinkage may identify a subgroup of patients who might respond to panitumumab. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00508404.

Relevance of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes, PD-1 and PD-L1 in patients with high-risk, nodal-metastasised breast cancer of the German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive study.

BACKGROUND: Immune cell infiltration in breast cancer is important for the patient's prognosis and response to systemic therapies including immunotherapy. We sought to investigate the prevalence of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and their association with immune checkpoints such as programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) in high-risk, node-positive breast cancer of the adjuvant German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive (GAIN-1) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated TILs by haematoxylin and eosin staining and PD-1 and PD-L1 (SP263 assay) expression by immunohistochemistry in 1318 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded breast carcinomas. The association of TILs with PD-1, PD-L1, molecular intrinsic subtypes, outcome and therapy regimens (dose-dense [dd] epirubicin, paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide [EPC] and dd epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel and capecitabine [EC-PwX]) was statistically tested. RESULTS: Overall TILs density was significantly associated with the expression of PD-1 and PD-L1 in immune cells (each p < 0.0001) and PD-L1 in tumour cells (p = 0.0051). TILs were more common in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive tumours (each p < 0.0001). On multivariate Cox regression analyses, patients with breast cancer without TILs had an unfavourable disease-free survival (DFS) in the EPC arm compared with the EC-PwX arm (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69 [0.44-1.06], p = 0.0915); but no differences were seen in tumours with TILs (HR = 1.24 [0.92-1.67], p = 0.1566, interaction p = 0.0336). PD-1-positive immune cells in TNBC were associated with a significantly better DFS (HR = 0.50 [0.25-0.99], p = 0.0457). PD-L1 expression had no impact on patient outcome. CONCLUSIONS: TILs predict the benefit of intensified ddEPC compared with ddEC-PwX therapy in node-positive, high-risk breast cancer. TILs, PD-1 and PD-L1 are linked to each other indicating tumour immunogenicity. Moreover, PD-1-positive immune cells have a positive prognostic impact in TNBC. CLINICAL TRIAL: NCT00196872.

Imatinib dose reduction in major molecular response of chronic myeloid leukemia: results from the German Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Study IV.

Standard first-line therapy of chronic myeloid leukemia is treatment with imatinib. In the randomized German Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Study IV, more potent BCR-ABL inhibition with 800 mg ('high-dose') imatinib accelerated achievement of a deep molecular remission. However, whether and when a de-escalation of the dose intensity under high-dose imatinib can be safely performed without increasing the risk of losing deep molecular response is unknown. To gain insights into this clinically relevant question, we analyzed the outcome of imatinib dose reductions from 800 mg to 400 mg daily in the Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Study IV. Of the 422 patients that were randomized to the 800 mg arm, 68 reduced imatinib to 400 mg after they had achieved at least a stable major molecular response. Of these 68 patients, 61 (90%) maintained major molecular remission on imatinib at 400 mg. Five of the seven patients who lost major molecular remission on the imatinib standard dose regained major molecular remission while still on 400 mg imatinib. Only two of 68 patients had to switch to more potent kinase inhibition to regain major molecular remission. Importantly, the lengths of the intervals between imatinib high-dose treatment before and after achieving major molecular remission were associated with the probabilities of maintaining major molecular remission with the standard dose of imatinib. Taken together, the data support the view that a deep molecular remission achieved with high-dose imatinib can be safely maintained with standard dose in most patients. Study protocol registered at clinicaltrials.gov 00055874.

The changing face of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Introduction: Since late 1990's therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients has changed considerable, and the combination of doublet or triplet chemotherapy and a targeted agent are now routinely used. With the introduction of more intensified regimens, it has become even more important to identify patients that will benefit from and can tolerate therapy. Furthermore, the increasing understanding of the biology of mCRC has led to the discovery of new potential targets. Therefore, therapy of patients with mCRC has undergone considerable change from 'one strategy fits all' towards a more personalized therapy. Areas covered: We present an overview of the recent literature on approved systemic treatment of mCRC however with focus on how the treatment strategy has changed based on clinical and molecular parameters that presently are used routinely in the clinical situation. Expert commentary: The face of treatment of mCRC has changed from 'one strategy fits all' to a personalized approach in which both clinical, molecular parameters and the aim of therapy have to be taking into account when planning the optimal treatment strategy for the individual mCRC patient.

Reporting of patient characteristics and stratification factors in phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient characteristics and stratification factors are important factors influencing trial outcomes. Uniform reporting on these parameters would facilitate cross-study comparisons and extrapolation of trial results to clinical practice. In 2007, standardisation on patient characteristics reporting and stratification in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) trials was proposed. We investigated the reporting of prognostic factors and implementation of this proposal in mCRC trials published from 2005 to 2016. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase (January 2005 - June 2016) for first-line phase 3 mCRC trials. Patient characteristics reporting and use of stratification factors were extracted and analysed for adherence to the proposal from 2007. RESULTS: Sixty-seven trials (35,315 patients) were identified, reporting 48 different patient characteristics (median: 9 [range: 5-18] per study). Age, gender, performance status (PS), primary tumour site and adjuvant chemotherapy were frequently reported (87%-100%), in contrast to laboratory values, such as alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase and white blood cell count (10%-25%). We identified 29 different stratification factors (median: 3 [range: 1-9] per study). The most common strata were PS and treatment centre (>60%). A median of 8/12 (range: 4-11) of the proposed parameters was reported. Although the percentage of studies reporting each factor slightly increased over time, there was no significant correlation between publication year and adherence to the proposal from 2007. CONCLUSIONS: We observed persistent heterogeneity in the reporting of patient characteristics and use of stratification factors in first-line mCRC trials. The proposal from 2007 has not led to increased uniformity of patient characteristics reporting and use of stratification over time. There is an urgent need to address this issue to improve the interpretation of trial results.

Survival Outcomes in Patients With RAS Wild Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Classified According to Köhne Prognostic Category and BRAF Mutation Status.

BACKGROUND: Köhne prognostic score is used to classify patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) as high, intermediate, or low risk. Using data from 2 phase III trials, we analyzed survival in patients categorized according to Köhne prognostic category and virus-induced rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) mutation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRIME (Panitumumab Randomized Trial In Combination With Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer to Determine Efficacy) (first-line) and 20050181 (second-line) were studies of chemotherapy with or without panitumumab. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed retrospectively in rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (RAS) wild type (WT) and RAS WT+BRAF WT mCRC in each Köhne category, and in BRAF mutant (MT) mCRC. RESULTS: In PRIME (n = 495) and 20050181 (n = 420), 53 (11%) and 44 (10%) patients, respectively, had BRAF MT mCRC. Of the RAS WT+BRAF WT/unknown populations, 85/267/90 and 82/211/83 were categorized as high/medium/low risk, respectively. PFS and OS hazard ratios (HRs), adjusted for Köhne group, for patients with RAS WT + BRAF WT/unknown mCRC favored panitumumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in both studies. In PRIME, the PFS HR was 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.90) and OS HR was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.64-0.95). In 20050181, PFS and OS HRs were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65-0.99) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.62-0.99), respectively. Median PFS and OS were lower in patients with BRAF MT mCRC than in any of the 3 risk categories for patients with RAS WT+BRAF WT/unknown mCRC. CONCLUSION: During first- and second-line treatment, Köhne prognostic score allows accurate risk classification in RAS WT mCRC. BRAF MT mCRC should be classified as high risk regardless of other parameters. Panitumumab with chemotherapy might provide survival benefits versus chemotherapy alone in RAS WT and RAS WT+BRAF WT/unknown mCRC, overall and across risk categories.