Efficacy and Toxicity of (Chemo)Radiation Therapy in HIV+ Patients with Squamous Cell Anal Cancer, a Subgroup Analysis of the National Multicenter Cohort FFCD-ANABASE.

PURPOSE: The influence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection on clinical outcomes in patients receiving (chemo)radiation therapy (RT) for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is debated. The objective of this study was to compare efficacy and safety according to HIV status in patients with SCCA treated with C/RT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between January 2015 and April 2020, 488 patients with a known HIV status (17.6% HIV+) were treated with radiation therapy for SCCA and included in the FFCD-ANABASE multicentric prospective cohort. Clinical outcomes including overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival, colostomy-free survival, response rate at 4 to 6 months, cancer-specific survival, relapse-free survival, and severe acute and late toxicity were compared between HIV+ and HIV- patients. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 35.8 months. HIV+ patients were younger (P < .01) and predominantly male (P < .01). Intensity modulated radiation therapy was performed in 80.7% of patients, and 80.9% received concurrent chemotherapy. A higher proportion of HIV+ patients received induction chemotherapy compared with HIV- patients. No statistically significant difference in overall treatment time or severe acute and late toxicities was found between HIV+ and HIV- patients. In univariate analyses, OS (HR = 2.1 [CI 95% 1.2;3.5], P = .007), locoregional recurrence-free survival (HR = 1.7 [1.1;2.7], P = .02), and colostomy-free survival (HR = 1.7 [1.1;2.6], P = .01) were significantly shorter in HIV+ patients than in HIV- patients. Response rate, cancer-specific survival, and relapse-free survival were not significantly different. The recurrence site was significantly different according to HIV status. In the multivariate analysis, prognostic factors for OS were a World Health Organization performance status of ≥1 for the whole population, as well as HIV+ status for the subgroup of women. CONCLUSIONS: HIV+ patients treated with chemo-RT for SCCA have poorer clinical outcomes, especially women. No difference was found in toxicity according to HIV status with intensity modulated radiation therapy technique.

Lung Cancers: Parenchymal Biochemistry and Mechanics.

Parenchyma of pulmonary cancers acquires contractile properties that resemble those of muscles but presents some particularities. These non-muscle contractile tissues could be stimulated either electrically or chemically (KCl). They present the Frank-Starling mechanism, the Hill hyperbolic tension-velocity relationship, and the tridimensional time-independent tension-velocity-length relationship. Relaxation could be obtained by the inhibition of crossbridge molecular motors or by a decrease in the intracellular calcium concentration. They differ from muscles in that their kinetics are ultraslow as evidenced by their low shortening velocity and myosin ATPase activity. Contractility is generated by non-muscle myosin type II A and II B. The activation of the ß-catenin/WNT pathway is accompanied by the high level of the non-muscle myosin observed in lung cancers.

Adjuvant chemotherapy benefit according to T and N stage in small bowel adenocarcinoma: a large retrospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Small bowel adenocarcinoma is a rare cancer, and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for localized disease is still debated. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included all consecutive patients who underwent curative surgical resection for localized small bowel adenocarcinoma between 1996 and 2019 from 3 French cohort studies. Prognostic and predictive factors of adjuvant chemotherapy efficacy were analyzed for disease-free survival and overall survival. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was applied in the Cox regression model using the propensity score derived from multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients were included: median age, 63.5 years; duodenum location, 53.5%; and tumor stage I, II, and III in 31 (8.7%), 144 (40.7%), and 179 (50.6%) patients, respectively. The adjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 0 (0%), 66 (48.5%), and 143 (80.3%) patients with stage I, II, and III, respectively (P < .0001). In the subgroup analysis by inverse probability of treatment weighting method, a statistically significant disease-free survival and overall survival benefit in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy was observed in high-risk stage II (T4 and/or <8 lymph nodes examined) and III (T4 and/or N2) but not for low-risk stage II (T3 and ≥8 lymph nodes examined) and III (T1-3/N1) tumors (Pinteraction < .05). Furthermore, tumor location in jejunum and ileum was also a statistically significant predictive factor of response to adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III tumors (Pinteraction < .05). CONCLUSION: In localized small bowel adenocarcinoma, adjuvant chemotherapy seems to provide a statistically significant survival benefit for high-risk stage II and III tumors and for jejunum and ileum tumor locations.

Beyond atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: overall efficacy and safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in a real-world setting.

Background: In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressing after atezolizumab and bevacizumab, the optimal therapeutic sequence is still unclear and no second-line agent has proven its efficacy. Objectives: The aim of this retrospective multicenter real-world cohort study was to provide an evaluation of the efficacy and safety of the use of second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in this population. Methods: All patients with advanced HCC, treated in first-line setting by atezolizumab-bevacizumab, and who received at least one dose of treatment with TKI were included in this study. All the data were retrospectively collected from medical records. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), overall global survival (OGS), and safety. A total of 82 patients were included in this study. Results: Patients were assigned to the regorafenib group (n = 29, 35.4%) or other TKI (sorafenib n = 41, lenvatinib n = 8, or cabozantinib n = 4) group (n = 53). PFS was not significantly different between the two groups [2.6 versus 2.8 months, HR 1.07 (95% CI: 0.61-1.86), p = 0.818]. Median PFS rates were 2.6, 4.4, and 2.8 months in sorafenib-, lenvatinib-, and cabozantinib group, respectively. OS was statistically different between the regorafenib group and other TKI group [15.8 versus 7.0 months, HR 0.40 (95% CI: 0.20-0.79), p = 0.023]. When adjusting on confounding factors, there was still a difference in OS favoring the regorafenib group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.35, p = 0.019). OGS of patients who received regorafenib was improved compared to other TKI [18.6 versus 15.0 months, HR 0.42 (95% CI: 0.22-0.84), p = 0.036]. Twenty percent of patients had grade 3 and none had grade 4 or 5 adverse events. In patients who experienced disease progression and fit for a third-line treatment, 80% and 50% received cabozantinib in regorafenib group and other TKI group, respectively. Conclusion: Efficacy of any TKI in the second-line setting was not affected by atezolizumab-bevacizumab treatment as first-line therapy. The safety profile in the second-line setting was consistent with the results shown in pivotal studies. PFS rates of patients were similar, regardless of TKI type. Regorafenib was associated with better OS and OGS rates compared to other TKI. These data need to be confirmed in prospective comparative studies.

Complete pathological response after chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors in deficient MMR metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of a retrospective multicenter study.

About 5% of the patients with metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) present microsatellite instability (MSI)/deficient mismatch repair system (dMMR). While metastasectomy is known to improve overall and progression-free survival in mCRC, specific results in selected patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC are lacking. Our study aimed to describe metastasectomy results, characterize histological response and evaluate pathological complete response (pCR) rate in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC. We retrospectively reviewed data from all consecutive patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC who underwent surgical metastasectomy between January 2010 and June 2021 in 17 French centers. Primary outcome was to assess the pCR rate defined by tumor regression grade (TRG) 0. Secondary endpoints included relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), and explored TRG as predictive factor for RFS and OS. Among the 88 patients operated, 109 metastasectomies were performed in 81 patients after neoadjuvant treatment [chemotherapy ± targeted therapy (CTT): 69, 85.2%; immunotherapy (ICI): 12, 14.8%], and pCR was achieved in 13 (16.1%) patients. Among the latter, pCR rate were 10.2% in the patients having received CTT (N = 7) and 50.0% in the patients treated with ICI (N = 6). Radiological response did not predict TRG. With a median follow-up of 57.9 (IQR 34.2-81.6) months, median RFS was 20.2 (15.4-not reached) months, median OS was not reached. Major pathological responses (TRG0 + TRG1) were significantly associated with longer RFS (HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.55; P = .006). The pCR rate of 16.1% achieved with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC is consistent with previously reported rates in pMMR/MSS mCRC. Immunotherapy showed better pCR rate than chemotherapy ± targeted therapy. Further prospective trials are needed to validate immunotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in resectable/potentially resectable dMMR/MSI mCRC and identify predictive factors for pCR.

Perioperative Cetuximab with Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil in Esogastric Adenocarcinoma: A Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: While perioperative chemotherapy provides a survival benefit over surgery alone in gastric and gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinomas, the results need to be improved. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative cetuximab combined with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received six cycles of cetuximab, cisplatin, and simplified LV5FU2 before and after surgery. The primary objective was a combined evaluation of the tumor objective response (TOR), assessed by computed tomography, and the absence of major toxicities resulting in discontinuation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) (45% and 90%, respectively). RESULTS: From 2011 to 2013, 65 patients were enrolled. From 64 patients evaluable for the primary endpoint, 19 (29.7%) had a morphological TOR and 61 (95.3%) did not stop NCT prematurely due to major toxicity. Sixty patients (92.3%) underwent resection. Sixteen patients (/56 available, 28.5%) had histological responses (Mandard tumor regression grade ≤3). After a median follow-up of 44.5 months, median disease-free and overall survival were 24.4 [95% CI: 16.4-39.4] and 40.3 months [95% CI: 27.5-NA], respectively. CONCLUSION: Adding cetuximab to the NCT regimen in operable G/GEJ adenocarcinomas is safe, but did not show enough efficacy in the present study to meet the primary endpoint (NCT01360086).

Daily practices in chemotherapy for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: METESTOMAC French prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Around 50% of gastric cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Several chemotherapy regimens are now internationally validated. Few data are available on the routine daily management of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancers. We aimed to describe chemotherapy practices, tolerance, and efficacy overall survival (OS) and Progression free survival (PFS) in a prospective French cohort. METHODS: Patients starting palliative chemotherapy were prospectively enrolled in 49 French centres. The primary objective was to report and describe patients' characteristics and treatment strategies. Secondary objectives were OS, PFS, objective response rate, adverse events rate, performance status deterioration during the chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were included; 179 were analysed. Most patients received platinium-based chemotherapy as the first treatment and FOLFIRI as second; 62.0% of patients received a second line, and 32.4% a third line. More than two thirds of Her2-positive patients were first treated with trastuzumab. The FOLFIRI regimen was the most frequently used second-line therapy. Median OS was 13.3 months, similar whatever the chemotherapy or combinations used in the first line. One- and 2-year OS increased with the number of chemotherapy lines received, from respectively 24.7% and 5.7% (1 line), to 46.9% and 12.4% (2 lines) and 88.1% and 29.9% (3 or more lines) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that treatment strategies in France are based on a succession of doublets, making it possible to offer a second and third line of treatment more often. This treatment strategy must be taken into account for future trials with immunotherapy combinations.

FOLFIRI plus BEvacizumab or aFLIbercept after FOLFOX-bevacizumab failure for COlorectal cancer (BEFLICO): An AGEO multicenter study.

After failure of first line FOLFOX-bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), adding either bevacizumab or aflibercept to second-line FOLFIRI increases survival compared to FOLFIRI alone. In this French retrospective multicentre cohort, we included patients with a mCRC treated with either FOLFIRI-aflibercept or FOLFIRI-bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR: CR + PR + SD) and safety. We included 681 patients from 36 centers, 326 and 355 in the aflibercept and bevacizumab groups, respectively. Median age was 64.2 years and 45.2% of patients were men. Most patients had RAS-mutated tumors (80.8%) and synchronous metastases (85.7%). After a median follow up of 31.2 months, median OS was 13.0 months (95% CI: 11.3-14.7) and 10.4 months (95% CI: 8.8-11.4) in the bevacizumab and aflibercept groups, respectively (P < .0001). Median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI: 5.4-6.5) and 5.1 months (95% CI: 4.3-5.6) (P < .0001). After adjustment on age, PS, PFS of first line, primary tumor resection, metastasis location and RAS/BRAF status, bevacizumab was still associated with better OS (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59-0.86, P = .0003). FOLFIRI-bevacizumab combination was associated with longer OS and PFS, and a better tolerability, as compared to FOLFIRI-aflibercept after progression on FOLFOX-bevacizumab.

First-line chemotherapy with raltitrexed in metastatic colorectal cancer: an Association des Gastro-entérologues Oncologues (AGEO) multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: In case of contraindication or intolerance to fluoropyrimidines, raltitrexed is a validated alternative in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), associated or not with oxaliplatin. Little is known about the outcomes of raltitrexed combined with irinotecan or targeted therapies. METHODS: This retrospective multicentre study enroled mCRC patients treated with first-line raltitrexed-based chemotherapy. Treatment-related toxicities were recorded. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from treatment start. RESULTS: 75 patients were treated with raltitrexed alone, TOMOX, or TOMIRI with or without bevacizumab. Grade 3-4 adverse events were seen in 31% of patients, without significant difference between the different treatment schedules. amongst the 36 patients with a history of fluoropyrimidine-induced cardiac toxicity, none developed cardiovascular events on raltitrexed. Median PFS and OS were 10.6 (95% CI 8.2 - 13.1) and 27.4 months (95% CI 24.1-38.1), respectively. Considering the chemotherapy regimen, TOMOX was significantly associated with better PFS and OS compared to TOMIRI and raltitrexed alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mCRC not eligible for fluoropyrimidines, first-line raltitrexed-based chemotherapy had an acceptable safety profile. PFS and OS were consistent with usual survival data in mCRC, and significantly better in patients treated with TOMOX, independently of associated targeted therapies.

Chemotherapy use in end-of-life digestive cancer patients: a retrospective AGEO observational study.

BACKGROUND: The use of chemotherapy (CT) near the end-of-life (EOL) is an important issue in oncology since it could degrade quality of life. CT near EOL is still poorly studied, with no dedicated study in gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients. AIM: To analyze in GI cancer patients the factors associated with the use of CT within 3- and 1-month before patients' death. METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS: All consecutive patients who died from a GI cancer in 10 French tertiary care hospitals during 2014 were included in this retrospective study. Clinical, demographical and biological data were collected and compared between patients receiving or not CT within 3- and 1-month before death. Variables associated with overall survival (OS) was also determined using of univariate and multivariate analyses with a Cox model. RESULTS: Four hundred and thirty-seven patients with a metastatic GI cancer were included in this study. Among them, 293 pts (67.0%) received CT within 3-months before death, and 121 pts (27.7%) received CT within 1-month before death. Patients receiving CT within 3-months before death were significantly younger (median age: 65.5 vs 72.8 years, p < 0.0001), with a better PS (PS 0 or 1: 53.9 vs 29.3%, p < 0.0001) and a higher albumin level (median: 32.8 vs 31.0 g/L, p = 0.048). Similar results were found for CT within 1 month before death. Palliative care team intervention was less frequent in patients who received CT in their last month of life (39.7% vs 51.3%, p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, median OS from diagnosis was shorter in the group receiving CT within 1-month before death (HR = 0.59; 95% CI [0.48-0.74]). CONCLUSION: In GI-cancer patients, CT is administered within 3- and 1-month before death, in two and one third of patients, respectively. Patients receiving CT within 1-month before death, had more aggressive disease with poor OS. Palliative care team intervention was associated with less administration of CT in the last month of life. These results highlight the need to better anticipate the time to stop CT treatment in the end-of-life and the importance of an active collaboration between oncology and palliative care teams.

Skeletal muscle loss during chemotherapy and its association with survival and systemic treatment toxicity in metastatic colorectal cancer: An AGEO prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: We showed in a previous study that the PG-SGA score is associated with survival and chemotherapy-related toxicities in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The objective was to evaluate the association between pretherapeutic sarcopenia and variation in skeletal muscle index (SMI) during treatment with these outcomes in the same population. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, observational study enrolled non-pretreated mCRC patients. SMI was measured on routine CT scan at day 0 (D0) and day 60 (D60). Nutritional factors were collected at D0. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from treatment start. RESULTS: 149 patients were included from 7/2013 to 11/2016. Pretherapeutic sarcopenia was not significantly associated with survival or chemotherapy-related toxicities. The decrease in SMI > 14% was significantly associated with shorter PFS (6 vs 9 mo; HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-3.1, p = 0.02) and OS (8.5 vs 26 mo; HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-4.8, p = 0.002), independently of hypoalbuminemia and malnutrition defined by PG-SGA. Patients with a SMI decrease > 14% had a higher rate of grade ≥ 2 clinical toxicities (40% vs 22%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.7, p = 0.02), but the difference was not statistically significant in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess prospectively the association of skeletal muscle loss with survival and treatment toxicities in non-pretreated patients with mCRC. Pretherapeutic sarcopenia was not associated with poor outcomes, but the loss of skeletal muscle mass within 60 days from treatment start was highly prognostic, independently of other prognostic and nutritional factors.

Prognostic factors of colorectal cancer patients with brain metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Brain metastases (BMs) from colorectal cancer (CRC) are rare (≈2%) but are increasing with the improvement of CRC prognosis. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic factors of BM from CRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included all consecutive patients with BM from CRC diagnosed between 2000 and 2017. THEORY/CALCULATION: Prognostic factors of OS were evaluated in univariate (log-rank test) and multivariate analyses (Cox regression model). These prognostic factors could help the management of patients with BM from CRC. RESULTS: A total of 358 patients were included with a median age of 65.5 years. Primary tumors were mostly located in the rectum (42.4%) or left colon (37.2%) and frequently KRAS-mutated (56.9%). The median time from metastatic CRC diagnosis to BM diagnosis was 18.5 ± 2.5 months. BMs were predominantly single (56.9%) and only supratentorial (54.4%). BM resection was performed in 33.0% of the cases and 73.2% of patients had brain radiotherapy alone or after surgery. Median OS was 5.1 ± 0.3 months. In multivariate analysis, age under 65 years, ECOG performance status 0-1, single BM and less than 3 chemotherapy lines before BM diagnosis were associated with better OS. Prognostic scores, i.e. recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), Disease Specific-Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA), Gastro-Intestinal-Graded Prognostic Assessment (GI-GPA) and the nomogram were statistically significantly associated with OS but the most relevant prognosis criteria seemed the ECOG performance status 0-1. CONCLUSIONS: ECOG performance status, number of BM and number of chemotherapy lines are the most relevant factors in the management of patients with BM from CRC.

Phase 2 trial comparing sorafenib, pravastatin, their combination or supportive care in HCC with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is limited data regarding the role for systemic treatment in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. METHODS: PRODIGE 21 was a multicentric prospective non-comparative randomized trial. Patients were randomized to receive sorafenib (Arm A), pravastatin (Arm B), sorafenib-pravastatin (Arm C) combination, or best supportive care (Arm D). Primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP), secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 160 patients were randomized and 157 patients were included in the final analysis. 86% of patients were BCLC C and 55% had macrovascular invasion. The safety profiles of the drugs were as expected. Median TTP was 3.5, 2.8, 2.0 and 2.2 months in arms A, B, C and D, respectively, but analysis was limited by the number of patients deceased without radiological progression (59%). Median OS was similar between the four arms: 3.8 [95% CI: 2.4-6.5], 3.1 [95% CI: 1.9-4.3], 4.0 [95% CI: 3.2-5.5] and 3.5 months [95% CI: 2.2-5.4] in arms A, B, C and D, respectively. Median OS was 4.0 months [95% CI: 3.3-5.5] for patients treated with sorafenib, vs 2.9 months [95% CI: 2.2-3.9] for patients not treated with sorafenib. In patients with ALBI grade 1/2, median OS was 6.1 months [95% CI: 3.8-8.3] in patients treated with sorafenib vs 3.1 months [95% CI: 1.9-4.8] for patients not treated with sorafenib. CONCLUSION: In the overall Child-Pugh B population, neither sorafenib nor pravastatin seemed to provide benefit. In the ALBI grade 1/2 sub-population, our trial suggests potential benefit of sorafenib. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was referenced in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01357486).

Reasons for chemotherapy discontinuation and end-of-life in patients with gastrointestinal cancer: A multicenter prospective AGEO study.

BACKGROUND: Previous research on chemotherapy discontinuation has mainly focused on predictive factors and outcomes. Few data are available on the reasons for chemotherapy discontinuation. The main objective was to identify the reasons for chemotherapy discontinuation in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. The secondary objectives were to describe the announcement of chemotherapy discontinuation and the time between chemotherapy discontinuation and death. METHODS: This prospective multicenter French cohort included patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer, for whom chemotherapy was discontinued between May 2016 and January 2018. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients were analyzed. The first cause of chemotherapy discontinuation was the impairment of general condition (asthenia, cachexia). Complications such as sepsis, jaundice or occlusion, were the second most frequent cause. Progression was observed at chemotherapy discontinuation in two-thirds of cases. The announcement of the chemotherapy discontinuation was made formally in 74% of cases, with a follow-up by a palliative care team initiated in 50% of cases. Sixty-nine percent of the patients received chemotherapy during the last three months of life and 26% during the last month. The median time between chemotherapy discontinuation and death was 65 days (IQR: 36.5-109): 44% of patients died at the hospital, 39% in a palliative care unit and 16% at home. CONCLUSION: Impairment of general condition was the major reason for chemotherapy discontinuation in patients with gastrointestinal cancers. Complications such as jaundice, sepsis or occlusion, were important reasons for discontinuation and could explain our shorter time between chemotherapy discontinuation and death, compared to other oncology sub-specialties.

Baseline Splenic Volume as a Prognostic Biomarker of FOLFIRI Efficacy and a Surrogate Marker of MDSC Accumulation in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Predictive biomarkers of response to chemotherapy plus antiangiogenic for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are lacking. The objective of this study was to test the prognostic role of splenomegaly on baseline CT scan. METHODS: This study is a sub-study of PRODIGE-9 study, which included 488 mCRC patients treated by 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and bevacizumab in first line. The association between splenic volume, and PFS and OS was evaluated by univariate and multivariable Cox analyses. The relation between circulating monocytic Myeloid derived suppressor cells (mMDSC) and splenomegaly was also determined. RESULTS: Baseline splenic volume > 180 mL was associated with poor PFS (median PFS = 9.2 versus 11.1 months; log-rank p = 0.0125), but was not statistically associated with OS (median OS = 22.6 versus 28.5 months; log-rank p = 0.1643). The increase in splenic volume at 3 months had no impact on PFS (HR 0.928; log-rank p = 0.56) or on OS (HR 0.843; log-rank p = 0.21). Baseline splenic volume was positively correlated with the level of baseline circulating mMDSC (r = 0.48, p-value = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Baseline splenomegaly is a prognostic biomarker in patients with mCRC treated with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab, and a surrogate marker of MDSC accumulation.

Withholding the Introduction of Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: Impact on Outcomes in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Tumors: A Multicenter AGEO Study (the WAIT or ACT Study).

BACKGROUND: Patients with RAS wild-type (WT) nonresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may receive either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) combined with first-line, 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Without the RAS status information, the oncologist can either start chemotherapy with bevacizumab or wait for the introduction of the anti-EGFR. Our objective was to compare both strategies in a routine practice setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, propensity score-weighted study included patients with a RAS WT nonresectable mCRC, treated between 2013 and 2016 by a 5-FU-based chemotherapy, with either delayed anti-EGFR or immediate anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Primary criterion was overall survival (OS). Secondary criteria were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: A total of 262 patients (129 in the anti-VEGF group and 133 in the anti-EGFR group) were included. Patients receiving an anti-VEGF were more often men (68% vs. 56%), with more metastatic sites (>2 sites: 15% vs. 9%). The median delay to obtain the RAS status was 19 days (interquartile range: 13-26). Median OS was not significantly different in the two groups (29 vs. 30.5 months, p = .299), even after weighting on the propensity score (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.08, p = .2024). The delayed introduction of anti-EGFR was associated with better median PFS (13.8 vs. 11.0 months, p = .0244), even after weighting on the propensity score (HR = 0.74, 95% CI, 0.61-0.90, p = .0024). ORR was significantly higher in the anti-EGFR group (66.7% vs. 45.6%, p = .0007). CONCLUSION: Delayed introduction of anti-EGFR had no deleterious effect on OS, PFS, and ORR, compared with doublet chemotherapy with anti-VEGF. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: For RAS/RAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, patients may receive 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In daily practice, the time to obtain the RAS status might be long enough to consider two options: to start the chemotherapy with bevacizumab, or to start without a targeted therapy and to add the anti-EGFR at reception of the RAS status. This study found no deleterious effect of the delayed introduction of an anti-EGFR on survival, compared with the introduction of an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor from cycle 1. It is possible to wait one or two cycles to introduce the anti-EGFR while waiting for RAS status.

Prognosis and chemosensitivity of deficient MMR phenotype in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: An AGEO retrospective multicenter study.

Mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) and/or microsatellite instability-high (MSI) colorectal cancers (CRC) represent about 5% of metastatic CRC (mCRC). Prognosis and chemosensitivity of dMMR/MSI mCRC remain unclear. This multicenter study included consecutive patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC from 2007 to 2017. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) in a population receiving first-line chemotherapy. Associations between chemotherapy regimen and survival were evaluated using a Cox regression model and inverse of probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology in order to limit potential biases. Overall, 342 patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC were included. Median PFS and overall survival (OS) on first-line chemotherapy were 6.0 and 26.3 months, respectively. For second-line chemotherapy, median PFS and OS were 4.4 and 21.6 months. Longer PFS (8.1 vs. 5.4 months, p = 0.0405) and OS (35.1 vs. 24.4 months, p = 0.0747) were observed for irinotecan-based chemotherapy compared to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. The association was no longer statistically significant using IPTW methodology. In multivariable analysis, anti-VEGF as compared to anti-EGFR was associated with a trend to longer OS (HR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.00-3.19, p = 0.0518), whatever the backbone chemotherapy used. Our study shows that dMMR/MSI mCRC patients experienced short PFS with first-line chemotherapy with or without targeted therapy. OS was not different according to the chemotherapy regimen used, but a trend to better OS was observed with anti-VEGF. Our study provides some historical results concerning chemotherapy in dMMR/MSI mCRC in light of the recent nonrandomized trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Three fluoropyrimidine-based regimens in routine clinical practice after nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: An AGEO multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: A combination of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (N+G) has recently become a standard first-line treatment in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA), but there are currently no published data concerning second-line treatment after N+G. The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival outcomes and tolerability of three usual fluoropyrimidine-based regimens FOLFOX, FOLFIRI and FOLFIRINOX after N+G failure in MPA patients. METHODS: Patients receiving N+G as first-line regimen were prospectively identified in 11 French centers between January 2014 and January 2017. After disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, patients eligible for second-line therapy were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was overall survival following the second-line regimen. Secondary endpoints were objective response, progression-free survival and safety. RESULTS: Out of 137 patients treated with N+G as first-line regimen, 61 (44.5%) received second-line chemotherapy, including FOLFOX (39.4%), FOLFIRI (34.4%) or FOLFIRINOX (26.2%). Baseline characteristics were not different between the 3 groups. In particular, median age was 71.7 years, sex ratio was 1/1, and performance status (PS) was 0 in 11.5% of case. Main grade 3 toxicities were neutropenia (4.9%) and nausea (3.3%), without major differences between the groups. No toxic death was observed. Median second-line progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.95 (95% CI: 2.3-5.4) and 5.97 months (95% CI: 4.0-8.0), respectively, with no difference between the 3 groups. Median OS from the start of first-line chemotherapy was 12.7 months (10.4-15.1) and was significantly better in patients receiving FOLFIRI after N+G failure, 18.4 months (95% CI: 11.7-24.1, P<0.05), as compared with FOLFOX or FOLFIRINOX (10.4 and 12.3 months, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that second-line fluoropyrimidine-based regimens after N+G failure are feasible, have a manageable toxicity profile in selected patients with MPA, and are associated with promising clinical outcomes, in particular when combined with irinotecan. Randomized phase 3 trials are needed to confirm this trend.

Efficacy and Safety of Aflibercept in Combination With Chemotherapy Beyond Second-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma Patients: An AGEO Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Although no data have been reported beyond second-line therapy, aflibercept is approved in this setting in many countries. We conducted a multicenter study to analyze the efficacy and safety of a aflibercept-chemotherapy regimen beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with aflibercept beyond second-line therapy were included. Objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were included. Median OS and PFS were 7.6 months (95% confidence interval, 6.2-9.3) and 3.3 months (95% confidence interval, 2.7-3.8), respectively. The best response rates were partial response 6.9%, stable disease 38.5%, progressive disease 42.5%, and not evaluable 12%. According to whether patients received previous FOLFIRI (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin)-bevacizumab or not, OS was 7.7 and 8.1 months (P = .31), and PFS was 2.9 and 3.9 months (P = .02), respectively. Interestingly, PFS and OS were both significantly improved by 4% and 5% per month, respectively, without antiangiogenic treatment before the initiation of the aflibercept regimen. The negative effect of prior FOLFIRI-bevacizumab or shorter time since last bevacizumab was maintained in multivariate analysis for both OS and PFS. CONCLUSION: The aflibercept-chemotherapy regimen is a therapeutic option in patients with chemorefractory disease beyond second-line therapy, in particular in patients with an antiangiogenic-free interval.

Folfirinox versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: a comparative propensity score study.

BACKGROUND: Folfirinox (FFX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) are both standard first-line treatments in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, data comparing these two chemotherapeutic regimens and their sequential use remain scarce. METHODS: Data from two independent cohorts enrolling patients treated with FFX (n = 107) or GN (n = 109) were retrospectively pooled. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the secondary endpoint. A propensity score based on age, gender, performance status (PS), and presence of liver metastases was used to make groups comparable. RESULTS: In the whole study population, OS was significantly higher in FFX (14 months; 95% CI: 10-21) than in GN groups (9 months; 95% CI: 8-12) before (p = 0.008) and after (p = 0.021) adjusting for age, number of metastatic sites, liver metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis and CA19.9 level at baseline. PFS tends to be higher in FFX (6 months) than GN groups (5 months; p = 0.053). After matching (n = 49/group), patients were comparable for all baseline characteristics including PS. In the matched population, there was a trend toward greater OS in patients treated with FFX (HR = 0.67; p = 0.097). However, survival in each group was not solely a result of the first-line regimen. The proportion of patients who were fit for GN after FFX failure (FFX-GN sequence) was higher (46.9%) than the reverse sequence (20.4%; p = 0.01), which suggests a higher feasibility for the FFX-GN sequence. Corresponding median OS were 19 months versus 9.5 months, respectively (p = 0.094). CONCLUSION: This study shows greater OS with FFX than with GN in patients with mPC. GN after FFX failure appears more feasible than the reverse sequence.