The tyranny of non-inferiority trials.

Opportunities to decrease the toxicity and cost of approved treatment regimens with lower dose, less frequent, or shorter duration alternative regimens have been limited by the perception that alternatives must be non-inferior to approved regimens. Non-inferiority trials are large and expensive to do, because they must show statistically that the alternative and approved therapies differ in a single outcome, by a margin far smaller than that required to demonstrate superiority. Non-inferiority's flaws are manifest: it ignores variability expected to occur with repeated evaluation of the approved therapy, fails to recognise that a trial of similar design will be labelled as superiority or non-inferiority depending on whether it is done prior to or after initial registration of the approved treatment, and relegates endpoints such as toxicity and cost. For example, while a less toxic and less costly regimen of 3 months duration would typically be required to demonstrate efficacy that is non-inferior to that of a standard regimen of 6 months to displace it, the longer duration therapy has no such obligation to prove its superiority. This situation is the tyranny of the non-inferiority trial: its statistics perpetuate less cost-effective regimens, which are not patient-centred, even when less intensive therapies confer survival benefits nearly identical to those of the standard, by placing a disproportionately large burden of proof on the alternative. This approach is illogical. We propose that the designation of trials as superiority or non-inferiority be abandoned, and that randomised, controlled trials should henceforth be described simply as "comparative".

Outcomes of Distal Rectal Cancer Patients Who Did Not Qualify for Watch-and-Wait: Comparison of Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection.

INTRODUCTION: Total mesorectal excision (TME) with intersphincteric resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis (ISR-CAA) has been shown to be oncologically safe in patients with distal rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. The introduction of the watch-and-wait (WW) strategy for rectal cancer patients with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy is changing the profile of patients undergoing TME surgery immediately following neoadjuvant treatment. The outcomes of ISR-CAA for patients with locally advanced rectal cancers not qualifying for WW have not been investigated. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing the outcomes of ISR-CAA and abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients with distal rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy and not qualifying for WW, at a comprehensive cancer center with an established WW program. The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients had ISR-CAA and 79 had APR. Median follow-up was 61.1 months. The two groups were similar in sex, tumor stage, grade, and distance from the anal verge, but patients in the APR group were older on average. An R0 resection was achieved in 94% of ISR-CAA patients and 91% of APR patients. Patients in the ISR-CAA group had a lower 5-year rate of local recurrence-free survival (79% vs. 93%; p = 0.038) compared with the APR group; however, 5-year disease-free survival did not differ significantly between groups (67% for ISR-CAA and 64% for APR; p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: The local recurrence rate after ISR-CAA may be higher than after APR for patients without a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy requiring TME surgery.

Long term outcomes in patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) of chemotherapy has demonstrated disease control and suggested improvement in overall survival (OS) in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC). We report herein the long-term results and role of molecular alterations of a phase II clinical trial of HAI chemotherapy plus systemic chemotherapy, with a retrospective cohort of patients treated with HAI at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. METHODS: This secondary analysis of a single-institution, phase 2 trial and retrospective cohort of unresectable IHC treated with HAI floxuridine (FUDR) plus systemic gemcitabine and oxaliplatin. The primary aim was to assess long-term oncologic outcomes. A subset underwent tissue-based genomic sequencing, and molecular alterations were correlated with progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were treated on trial with a median follow up of 76.9 months. Median PFS was 11.8 months (95% CI11-15.1). The median OS was 26.8 months (95% CI20.9-40.6). The 1-, 2- and 5-year OS rate was 89.5%, 55%, and 21% respectively. Nine (24%) received HAI with mitomycin C post FUDR progression with an objective response rate of 44% and a median PFS of 3.93 (2.33-NR) months. One-hundred and seventy patients not treated on the clinical trial were included in a retrospective analysis. Median PFS and OS was 7.93 (95%CI: 7.27-10.07) and 22.5 (95%CI : 19.5-28.3) months, respectively. Alterations in the TP53 and cell-cycle pathway had a worse PFS to HAI based therapy compared to wildtype disease. CONCLUSION: In locally advanced IHC, HAI with FUDR in combination with systemic therapy can offer long term durable disease control. Molecular alterations may predict for response.

Chemoradiotherapy plus induction or consolidation chemotherapy as total neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: Pooled analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-12 and the OPRA randomized phase 2 trials.

BACKGROUND: Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has been used for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The optimal sequence of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and chemotherapy (CT) is a matter of debate. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-12 and OPRA multicenter, randomized phase 2 trials to identify patient subsets that could benefit from one TNT sequence over the other regarding disease-free survival (DFS). Patients with stage II/III rectal cancer were randomized to CRT (50.4-54 Gy) with either induction (INCT-CRT) or consolidation CT (CRT-CNCT) with fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (CAO/ARO/AIO-12 and OPRA) or capecitabine and oxaliplatin (OPRA) followed by mandatory total mesorectal excision (TME) (CAO/ARO/AIO-12) or selective watch-and-wait surveillance (OPRA). 311 and 324 patients were recruited from June 15, 2015 to January 31, 2018; and from April 12, 2014 to March 30, 2020 in the two trials, respectively. Pretreatment clinical and tumor characteristics included were age, sex, ECOG, cT-category, cN-category, clinical UICC stage, location from anal verge, and tumor grade. FINDINGS: In total, 628 eligible patients were included in the pooled analysis (CAO/ARO/AIO-12, n = 304; OPRA, n = 324). Of those, 313 were randomly assigned to the INCT-CRT group, and 315 to the CRT-CNCT group. Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR, 35-49) months in the CAO/ARO/AIO-12 trial and 61,2 months (IQR, 42-68,4) in the OPRA trial. Pooled analysis of baseline clinical and tumor characteristics did not identify any subgroups of patients that would benefit by the one TNT sequence over the other with regard to DFS. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first pooled analysis of two randomized trials after direct head-to-head comparison of both TNT sequences. Both trials reported higher rates of complete response with CRT-CNCT, and this should be considered the preferred TNT sequence if organ preservation is a priority.

Colonic Adenosquamous Carcinoma: A Single-Center Review of Patient Clinicopathologic Characteristics, Genetics, and Clinical Outcomes.

(1) Background: Adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) is a rare subtype of colon cancer. Its rarity makes characterization challenging, although colonic ASC is believed to present at more advanced stages and have worse outcomes versus adenocarcinoma. This study aims to characterize the clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes of colonic ASC. (2) Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective review of patients diagnosed with colonic ASC from 2000 to 2020. Data extracted included patient demographics, staging at diagnosis, tumor clinicopathologic and genetic characteristics, and clinical outcomes. (3) Results: Among 61,126 patients with colorectal cancer, 13 (0.02%) had colonic ASC, with a mean age at diagnosis of 48.7 years. The cecum/ascending colon was the most common primary site (6/13, 46.2%), and all except one patient was diagnosed with Stage III or IV disease. Among the eight patients with mismatch repair genetics available, only one was mismatch repair deficient. Eleven patients (84.6%) underwent surgery, and 11 likewise received some form of chemotherapy. Recurrence occurred in 7 of 13 patients (53.8%), and the overall five-year survival rate was 38.5%. The median survival rate was 39.4 months overall (30.5 months for Stage III, 23.7 months for Stage IV). (4) Conclusions: Overall, colonic ASC is rare, and this cohort of colonic ASC patients demonstrated advanced stage at diagnosis, frequent recurrence, and poor overall survival. Additional research remains to compare these characteristics with those of comparably staged adenocarcinoma and to develop specific management recommendations.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The determination of an optimal treatment plan for an individual patient with rectal cancer is a complex process. In addition to decisions relating to the intent of rectal cancer surgery (ie, curative or palliative), consideration must also be given to the likely functional results of treatment, including the probability of maintaining or restoring normal bowel function/anal continence and preserving genitourinary functions. Particularly for patients with distal rectal cancer, finding a balance between curative-intent therapy while having minimal impact on quality of life can be challenging. Furthermore, the risk of pelvic recurrence is higher in patients with rectal cancer compared with those with colon cancer, and locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Careful patient selection and the use of sequenced multimodality therapy following a multidisciplinary approach is recommended. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, including the addition of endoscopic submucosal dissection as an option for early-stage rectal cancer, updates to the total neoadjuvant therapy approach based on the results of recent clinical trials, and the addition of a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management approach for clinical complete responders to neoadjuvant therapy.

Watch and Wait in Rectal Cancer Patients with Residual Mucin on MRI following Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) leads to a clinical complete response (cCR) in a significant proportion of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), allowing for possible nonoperative management. The presence of mucin on MRI after NAT leads to uncertainty about residual disease and appropriateness of a watch-and-wait (WW) strategy in patients with no evidence of disease on proctoscopy (endoscopic cCR). METHODS: MRI reports for LARC patients seen between July 2016 and January 2020 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were queried for presence of mucin in the tumor bed on MRI following NAT. Clinicodemographic, pathologic, and outcome data were compiled and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 71 patients with mucin on post-treatment MRI, 20 had a cCR and 51 had abnormalities on endoscopy and/or physical exam. One patient with a cCR opted out of WW; thus, 19 patients (27%) entered WW and 52 patients (73%) were planned for surgery (Non-WW). Of the 19 WW patients, 15 (79%) have had no local regrowth with median follow-up of 50 months (range, 29-76 months), while 4 (21%) experienced regrowth between 9 and 29 months after neoadjuvant therapy. Of the 52 patients who were planned to have surgery (Non-WW), 49 underwent resection while 3 developed metastatic disease that precluded curative-intent surgery. Five (10%) of the 49 patients who underwent surgery, including the one with an endoscopic cCR, had a pathologic complete response. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of mucin after NAT for LARC does not preclude WW management in otherwise appropriate candidates who achieve an endoscopic cCR.

Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment. METHODS: A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L. CONCLUSION: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC.

Colon Cancer, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Management of disseminated metastatic CRC involves various active drugs, either in combination or as single agents. The choice of therapy is based on consideration of the goals of therapy, the type and timing of prior therapy, the mutational profile of the tumor, and the differing toxicity profiles of the constituent drugs. This manuscript summarizes the data supporting the systemic therapy options recommended for metastatic CRC in the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer.

Penile-scrotal erythrodysesthesia among rectal cancer patients receiving fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiation: a case report series.

BACKGROUND: Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) is a slowly developing cutaneous reaction commonly experienced by patients treated with fluoropyrimidines. While erythrodysesthesia normally presents in a palmar-plantar distribution, it can also present with genital involvement, but this presentation is likely underreported and incorrectly attributed to an acute reaction from radiation therapy. This article aims to define erythrodysesthesia of the penis and scrotum as a rare but significant side effect of capecitabine. CASE PRESENTATION: We identified five cases of moderate to severe penis and scrotal erythrodysesthesia over a 2-year period at a large tertiary cancer center, representing an estimated incidence of 3.6% among male patients with rectal cancer who were treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiation within our institution. CONCLUSIONS: Improved understanding of erythrodysesthesia involving the penis and scrotum can facilitate early identification and treatment of symptoms, and possibly prevent the discontinuation or delay of cancer treatment in patients treated with capecitabine and similar drugs. These clinical advances would improve and prolong patient quality of life during cancer treatment and prevent complications that result in hospitalization.

Evaluating the utility of ZNF331 promoter methylation as a prognostic and predictive marker in stage III colon cancer: results from CALGB 89803 (Alliance).

While epigenomic alterations are common in colorectal cancers (CRC), few epigenomic biomarkers that risk-stratify patients have been identified. We thus sought to determine the potential of ZNF331 promoter hypermethylation (mZNF331) as a prognostic and predictive marker in colon cancer. We examined the association of mZNF331 with clinicopathologic features, relapse, survival, and treatment efficacy in patients with stage III colon cancer treated within a randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial (CALGB/Alliance89803). Residual tumour tissue was available for genomic DNA extraction and methylation analysis for 385 patients. ZNF331 promoter methylation status was determined by bisulphite conversion and fluorescence-based real-time polymerase chain reaction. Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the prognostic and predictive role of mZNF331 in this well-annotated dataset, adjusting for clinicopathologic features and standard molecular markers. mZNF331 was observed in 267/385 (69.4%) evaluable cases. Histopathologic features were largely similar between patients with mZNF331 compared to unmethylated ZNF331 (unmZNFF31). There was no significant difference in disease-free or overall survival between patients with mZNF331 versus unmZNF331 colon cancers, even when adjusting for clinicopathologic features and molecular marker status. Similarly, there was no difference in disease-free or overall survival across treatment arms when stratified by ZNF331 methylation status. While ZNF331 promoter hypermethylation is frequently observed in CRC, our current study of a small subset of patients with stage III colon cancer suggests limited applicability as a prognostic marker. Larger studies may provide more insight and clarity into the applicability of mZNF331 as a prognostic and predictive marker.

Oncologic Outcomes of Salvage Abdominoperineal Resection for Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Initially Managed with Chemoradiation.

Background: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been advocated for persistent or recurrent disease after failure of chemoradiation (CRT) for anal squamous cell cancer (SCC). Treatment with salvage APR can potentially achieve a cure. This study aimed to analyze oncological outcomes for salvage APR in a recent time period at a comprehensive cancer center. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent APR for biopsy-proven persistent or recurrent anal SCC between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2020 was performed. Patients with stage IV disease at the time of initial diagnosis and patients with missing data were excluded. Univariate analysis was used with a chi-square test for categorical variables, and non-parametric tests were used for continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to evaluate disease-specific (DSS), post-APR local recurrence-free (RFS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: A total of 96 patients were included in the analysis: 39 (41%) with persistent disease and 57 (59%) with recurrent SCC after chemoradiation had been completed. The median follow-up was 22 months (IQR 11-47). Forty-nine patients (51%) underwent extended APR and/or pelvic exenteration. Eight (8%) patients developed local recurrence, 30 (31%) developed local and distant recurrences, and 16 (17%) developed distant recurrences alone. The 3-year DSS, post-APR local recurrence-free survival, and disease-free survival were 53.8% (95% CI 43.5-66.5%), 54.5% (95% CI 44.4-66.8%), and 26.8% (95% CI 18.6-38.7%), respectively. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, positive microscopic margin (OR 10.0, 95% CI 2.16-46.12, p = 0.003), positive nodes in the surgical specimen (OR 9.19, 95% CI 1.99-42.52, p = 0.005), and lymphovascular invasion (OR 2.61 95% CI 1.05-6.51, p = 0.04) were associated with recurrence of disease. Gender, indication for APR (recurrent vs. persistent disease), HIV status, extent of surgery, or type of reconstruction did not influence survival outcomes. Twenty patients had targeted tumor-sequencing data available. Nine patients had PIK3CA mutations, seven of whom experienced a recurrence. Conclusions: Salvage APR for anal SCC after failed CRT was associated with poor disease-specific survival and low recurrence-free survival. Anal SCC patients undergoing salvage APR should be counseled that microscopic positive margins, positive lymph nodes, or the presence of lymphovascular invasion in the APR specimen are prognosticators for disease relapse. Our results accentuate the necessity for additional treatment strategies for the ongoing treatment challenge of persistent or recurrent anal SCC after failed CRT.

Immune checkpoint blockade induced sarcoid-like reaction mimicking progression of disease in a patient with microsatellite instable colorectal cancer: case report and review of the literature.

Background: Oncologists are prescribing checkpoint inhibitors with greater frequency, and an awareness of and ability to recognize immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is a key part of the safe administration of these drugs. Case Description: Herein, we report the case of a 26-year-old male diagnosed with de novo metastatic right-sided colon cancer to the liver, with tumor immunohistochemistry demonstrating loss of MSH2 and MSH6, and a pathogenic mutation in MSH2 identified on germline testing, consistent with Lynch Syndrome. The patient received first-line treatment with pembrolizumab. Following 7 months of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), new pulmonary findings on routine imaging were felt to be concerning for disease progression, despite ongoing excellent clinical status, disease control in the liver, and stable tumor markers. An endobronchial biopsy of one of the mediastinal lymph nodes demonstrated granulomatous inflammation consistent histologically with sarcoidosis, and a diagnosis of sarcoid-like reaction (SLR) secondary to immunotherapy was established. Pembrolizumab was discontinued, and the patient continued active monitoring off of active therapy, with durable cancer control. After 8 months of watchful waiting, new hepatic lesions and increasing abdomino-pelvic lymphadenopathy were identified on imaging, concerning for progression of disease. Inguinal lymph node biopsy demonstrated findings consistent with ongoing SLR. The patient remains with durable cancer control, now 24 months since receipt of ICB. In addition, he remains asymptomatic of the SLR. Conclusions: This case highlights the propensity of SLRs to imitate progression of disease, and the importance of awareness of this adverse effect, to prompt appropriate investigation and management.

Long-Term Results of Organ Preservation in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy: The Randomized Phase II OPRA Trial.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.To assess long-term risk of local tumor regrowth, we report updated organ preservation rate and oncologic outcomes of the OPRA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02008656). Patients with stage II/III rectal cancer were randomly assigned to receive induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (INCT-CRT) or chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy (CRT-CNCT). Patients who achieved a complete or near-complete response after finishing treatment were offered watch-and-wait (WW). Total mesorectal excision (TME) was recommended for those who achieved an incomplete response. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary end point was TME-free survival. In total, 324 patients were randomly assigned (INCT-CRT, n = 158; CRT-CNCT, n = 166). Median follow-up was 5.1 years. The 5-year DFS rates were 71% (95% CI, 64 to 79) and 69% (95% CI, 62 to 77) for INCT-CRT and CRT-CNCT, respectively (P = .68). TME-free survival was 39% (95% CI, 32 to 48) in the INCT-CRT group and 54% (95% CI, 46 to 62) in the CRT-CNCT group (P = .012). Of 81 patients with regrowth, 94% occurred within 2 years and 99% occurred within 3 years. DFS was similar for patients who underwent TME after restaging (64% [95% CI, 53 to 78]) and patients in WW who underwent TME after regrowth (64% [95% CI, 53 to 78]; P = .94). Updated analysis continues to show long-term organ preservation in half of the patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy. In patients who enter WW, most cases of tumor regrowth occur in the first 2 years.

Compliance and Toxicity of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the OPRA Trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) may achieve organ preservation without a compromise to oncologic outcomes. However, reports on patient compliance with TNT and with treatment-related toxicities are limited. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The OPRA trial assessed organ preservation rates and oncologic outcomes in patients with clinical stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma randomized to induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (INCT-CRT) or chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy (CRT-CNCT). Systemic chemotherapy consisted of 8 cycles (16 weeks) of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or 5 cycles (15 weeks) of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPEOX). Patients received >4500 cGy of radiation with sensitizing capecitabine or fluorouracil. In this report, we compare compliance and treatment-related toxicity in patients receiving INCT-CRT versus CRT-CNCT. Additionally, we evaluate the association of compliance to chemotherapy, compliance to chemoradiation, and toxicity with organ preservation and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Of the 324 patients randomized, fewer patients started chemoradiation in the INCT-CRT group compared with the CRT-CNCT group (93% vs 98%, P = .03), and fewer patients started systemic chemotherapy in the CRT-CNCT group compared with the INCT-CRT group (94% vs 99%, P = .04). Order of TNT did not affect the ability to complete all intended cycles of FOLFOX (86% INCT-CRT vs 83% CRT-CNCT, P = .60) or CAPEOX (74% INCT-CRT vs 77% CRT-CNCT, P = .80). A total of 97% of INCT and 98% of CRT-CNCT patients received >4500 cGy radiation (P = .93). Sixty-four patients (41%) treated with INCT-CRT and 57 CRT-CNCT patients (34%) experienced a grade 3+ adverse event (P = .30). Compliance and toxicity were not associated with organ preservation or DFS. CONCLUSIONS: We identified only minor differences in treatment compliance between patients treated with INCT-CRT and CRT-CNCT. No difference in adverse events was observed between groups. Treatment compliance and toxicity did not correlate with organ preservation rates or DFS.

Neoplasia risk in patients with Lynch syndrome treated with immune checkpoint blockade.

Metastatic and localized mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors are exquisitely sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). The ability of ICB to prevent dMMR malignant or pre-malignant neoplasia development in patients with Lynch syndrome (LS) is unknown. Of 172 cancer-affected patients with LS who had received ≥1 ICB cycles, 21 (12%) developed subsequent malignancies after ICB exposure, 91% (29/32) of which were dMMR, with median time to development of 21 months (interquartile range, 6-38). Twenty-four of 61 (39%) ICB-treated patients who subsequently underwent surveillance colonoscopy had premalignant polyps. Within matched pre-ICB and post-ICB follow-up periods, the overall rate of tumor development was unchanged; however, on subgroup analysis, a decreased incidence of post-ICB visceral tumors was observed. These data suggest that ICB treatment of LS-associated tumors does not eliminate risk of new neoplasia development, and LS-specific surveillance strategies should continue. These data have implications for immunopreventative strategies and provide insight into the immunobiology of dMMR tumors.

NCI Rectal-Anal Task Force consensus recommendations for design of clinical trials in rectal cancer.

The optimal management of locally advanced rectal cancer is rapidly evolving. The National Cancer Institute Rectal-Anal Task Force convened an expert panel to develop consensus on the design of future clinical trials of patients with rectal cancer. A series of 82 questions and subquestions, which addressed radiation and neoadjuvant therapy, patient perceptions, rectal cancer populations of special interest, and unique design elements, were subject to iterative review using a Delphi analytical approach to define areas of consensus and those in which consensus is not established. The task force achieved consensus on several areas, including the following: 1) the use of total neoadjuvant therapy with long-course radiation therapy either before or after chemotherapy, as well as short-course radiation therapy followed by chemotherapy, as the control arm of clinical trials; 2) the need for greater emphasis on patient involvement in treatment choices within the context of trial design; 3) efforts to identify those patients likely, or unlikely, to benefit from nonoperative management or minimally invasive surgery; 4) investigation of the utility of circulating tumor DNA measurements for tailoring treatment and surveillance; and 5) the need for identification of appropriate end points and recognition of challenges of data management for patients who enter nonoperative management trial arms. Substantial agreement was reached on priorities affecting the design of future clinical trials in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Evaluation of Intratumoral Response Heterogeneity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Its Impact on Patient Overall Survival: Findings from 10,551 Patients in the ARCAD Database.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. RESULTS: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

Bevacizumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.