First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD).

BACKGROUND: Treatment of frail patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) is controversial. This pilot phase II trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib when administered in first-line to frail patients with advanced CRC. METHODS: Frail patients without prior advanced colorectal cancer treatment were included in the study. Definition of frailty was defined per protocol based on dependency criteria, presence of chronic comorbid pathologies and/or geriatric features. MAIN OBJECTIVE: to assess progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of orally administered regorafenib 160 mg/day (3 weeks followed by 1 week rest). RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included in the study. Median age was 81 years (range 63-89). Frailty criteria: dependency was observed in 26 patients (55%), comorbidities in 27 (57%) and geriatric features in 18 (38%). PFS rate at 6 months was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30-60]. Median PFS was 5.6 months (95%CI 2.7-8.4). Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months (95%CI 7.8-24). Complete response, partial response and stable disease were observed in one, two and 21 patients respectively (objective response rate 6.4%; disease control rate 51%). Thirty-nine patients (83%) experienced grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs). The most common grade 3-4 AEs were hypertension (15 patients; 32%), asthenia (14; 30%), hypophosphatemia (6; 13%); diarrhea (4; 8%), hand-foot-skin reaction (4; 8%). There were two toxic deaths (4.2%) (grade 5 rectal bleeding and death not further specified). Dose reduction was required in 26 patients (55%) and dose-delays in 13 patients (28%). CONCLUSIONS: The study did not meet the pre-specified boundary of 55% PFS rate at 6 months. Toxicity observed (83% patients experienced grade 3 and 4 AEs) preclude its current use in clinical practice on this setting. Disease control rate and overall survival results are interesting and might warrant further investigation to identify those who benefit from this approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered at EudraCT ( 2013-000236-94 ). Date of trial registration: April 9th, 2013.

Adherence to capecitabine in preoperative treatment of stage II and III rectal cancer: do we need to worry?

BACKGROUND: Preoperative oral capecitabine plus radiotherapy has been progressively adopted in oncology units to provide more convenient care to patients with rectal cancer, but little is known about adherence to this therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective, multicentre observational study in six hospitals in metropolitan Barcelona (Spain), in patients with stage II and III rectal cancer. Assessment of adherence was based on the medical report in the clinical history, a patient questionnaire and a pill count in the pharmacy service upon finalization of treatment. Patients were considered adherent if they had taken 80%-110% of the prescribed treatment. We evaluated clinical variables, adverse effects, anxiety and depression (using the hospital anxiety depression scale [HADS]), and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-30). We analysed adherence-associated variables using a logistic regression model and concordance between adherence measures by means of the modified Kappa index. RESULTS: We included 119 participants. Adherence measures showed little concordance between the assessment methods used: adherence was 100% according to the clinical history, 83.2% according to self-report and 67.9% according to the pill count. In the multivariable analysis, the most relevant variable associated with non-adherence was anxiety prior to treatment (adjusted odds ratio [ORa] 6.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-32.7). We did not observe any relevant association between adherence and clinical variables and baseline quality of life parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to short-term oral neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer may be a clinical problem, and it should be acknowledged and systematically evaluated by clinicians during treatment. The limited concordance between different measures of adherence highlights the challenges in monitoring it and the need to use different approaches to assess its impact in clinical practice.

UGT1A and TYMS genetic variants predict toxicity and response of colorectal cancer patients treated with first-line irinotecan and fluorouracil combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of thymidylate synthase (TYMS) and UDP-glucoronosyltransferase 1A (UGT1A) germline polymorphisms on the outcome of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients treated with irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil (irinotecan/5FU) is still controversial. Our objective was to define a genetic-based algorithm to select patients to be treated with irinotecan/5FU. METHODS: Genotyping of TYMS (5'TRP and 3'UTR), UGT1A1(*)28, UGT1A9(*)22 and UGT1A7(*)3 was performed in 149 metastatic CRC patients treated with irinotecan/5FU as first-line chemotherapy enrolled in a randomised phase 3 study. Their association with response, toxicity and survival was investigated by univariate and multivariate statistical analysis. RESULTS: TYMS 3TRP/3TRP genotype was the only independent predictor of tumour response (OR=5.87, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.68-20.45; P=0.005). UGT1A1(*)28/(*)28 was predictive for haematologic toxicity (OR=6.27, 95% CI=1.09-36.12; P=0.04), specifically for neutropenia alone (OR=6.40, 95% CI=1.11-37.03; P=0.038) or together with diarrhoea (OR=18.87, 95% CI=2.14-166.67; P=0.008). UGT1A9(*)1/(*)1 was associated with non-haematologic toxicity (OR=2.70, 95% CI=1.07-6.82; P=0.035). Haplotype VII (all non-favourable alleles) was associated with non-haematologic toxicity (OR=2.11, 95% CI=1.12-3.98; P=0.02). CONCLUSION: TYMS and UGT1A polymorphisms influence on tumour response and toxicities derived from irinotecan/5FU treatment in CRC patients. A genetic-based algorithm to optimise treatment individualisation is proposed.