Prognostic and Predictive Value of Immunoscore in Stage III Colorectal Cancer: Pooled Analysis of Cases From the SCOT and IDEA-HORG Studies.

PURPOSE: Immunoscore (IS) is prognostic in stage III colorectal cancer (CRC) and may predict benefit of duration (6 v 3 months) of adjuvant infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy. We sought to determine IS prognostic and predictive value in stage-III CRC treated with adjuvant FOLFOX or oral capecitabine and infusional oxaliplatin (CAPOX) in the SCOT and IDEA-HORG trials. METHODS: Three thousand sixty-one cases had tumor samples, of which 2,643 (1,792 CAPOX) were eligible for IS testing. Predefined cutoffs (IS-Low and IS-High) were used to classify cases into two groups for analysis of disease-free survival (3-year DFS) and multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (mvHRs) by Cox regression. RESULTS: IS was determined in 2,608 (99.5%) eligible cases, with 877 (33.7%) samples classified as IS-Low. IS-Low tumors were more commonly high-risk (T4 and/or N2; 52.9% IS-Low v 42.2% IS-High; P < .001) and in younger patients (P = .024). Patients with IS-Low tumors had significantly shorter DFS in the CAPOX, FOLFOX, and combined cohorts (mvHR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.28 to 1.82]; mvHR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.22 to 2.04]; and mvHR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.34 to 1.79], respectively; P < .001 all comparisons), regardless of sex, BMI, clinical risk group, tumor location, treatment duration, or chemotherapy regimen. IS prognostic value was greater in younger (≤65 years) than older (>65 years) patients in the CAPOX cohort (mvHR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.50 to 2.46] v 1.28 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.63], PINTERACTION = .026), and in DNA mismatch repair proficient than deficient mismatch repair disease (mvHR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.41 to 2.00] v 0.67 [95% CI, 0.30 to 1.49], PINTERACTION = .03), although these exploratory analyses were uncorrected for multiple testing. Adding IS to a model containing all clinical variables significantly improved prediction of DFS (likelihood ratio test, P < .001) regardless of MMR status. CONCLUSION: IS is prognostic in stage III CRC treated with FOLFOX or CAPOX, including within clinically relevant tumor subgroups. Possible variation in IS prognostic value by age and MMR status, and prediction of benefit from extended adjuvant therapy merit validation.

JAK/STAT3 represents a therapeutic target for colorectal cancer patients with stromal-rich tumors.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogenous malignancy underpinned by dysregulation of cellular signaling pathways. Previous literature has implicated aberrant JAK/STAT3 signal transduction in the development and progression of solid tumors. In this study we investigate the effectiveness of inhibiting JAK/STAT3 in diverse CRC models, establish in which contexts high pathway expression is prognostic and perform in depth analysis underlying phenotypes. In this study we investigated the use of JAK inhibitors for anti-cancer activity in CRC cell lines, mouse model organoids and patient-derived organoids. Immunohistochemical staining of the TransSCOT clinical trial cohort, and 2 independent large retrospective CRC patient cohorts was performed to assess the prognostic value of JAK/STAT3 expression. We performed mutational profiling, bulk RNASeq and NanoString GeoMx® spatial transcriptomics to unravel the underlying biology of aberrant signaling. Inhibition of signal transduction with JAK1/2 but not JAK2/3 inhibitors reduced cell viability in CRC cell lines, mouse, and patient derived organoids (PDOs). In PDOs, reduced Ki67 expression was observed post-treatment. A highly significant association between high JAK/STAT3 expression within tumor cells and reduced cancer-specific survival in patients with high stromal invasion (TSPhigh) was identified across 3 independent CRC patient cohorts, including the TrasnSCOT clinical trial cohort. Patients with high phosphorylated STAT3 (pSTAT3) within the TSPhigh group had higher influx of CD66b + cells and higher tumoral expression of PDL1. Bulk RNAseq of full section tumors showed enrichment of NFκB signaling and hypoxia in these cases. Spatial deconvolution through GeoMx® demonstrated higher expression of checkpoint and hypoxia-associated genes in the tumor (pan-cytokeratin positive) regions, and reduced lymphocyte receptor signaling in the TME (pan-cytokeratin- and αSMA-) and αSMA (pan-cytokeratin- and αSMA +) areas. Non-classical fibroblast signatures were detected across αSMA + regions in cases with high pSTAT3. Therefore, in this study we have shown that inhibition of JAK/STAT3 represents a promising therapeutic strategy for patients with stromal-rich CRC tumors. High expression of JAK/STAT3 proteins within both tumor and stromal cells predicts poor outcomes in CRC, and aberrant signaling is associated with distinct spatially-dependant differential gene expression.

Multiplex analysis of intratumoural immune infiltrate and prognosis in patients with stage II-III colorectal cancer from the SCOT and QUASAR 2 trials: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tumour-infiltrating CD8+ cytotoxic T cells confer favourable prognosis in colorectal cancer. The added prognostic value of other infiltrating immune cells is unclear and so we sought to investigate their prognostic value in two large clinical trial cohorts. METHODS: We used multiplex immunofluorescent staining of tissue microarrays to assess the densities of CD8+, CD20+, FoxP3+, and CD68+ cells in the intraepithelial and intrastromal compartments from tumour samples of patients with stage II-III colorectal cancer from the SCOT trial (ISRCTN59757862), which examined 3 months versus 6 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, and from the QUASAR 2 trial (ISRCTN45133151), which compared adjuvant capecitabine with or without bevacizumab. Both trials included patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Immune marker predictors were analysed by multiple regression, and the prognostic and predictive values of markers for colorectal cancer recurrence-free interval by Cox regression were assessed using the SCOT cohort for discovery and QUASAR 2 cohort for validation. FINDINGS: After exclusion of cases without tissue microarrays and with technical failures, and following quality control, we included 2340 cases from the SCOT trial and 1069 from the QUASAR 2 trial in our analysis. Univariable analysis of associations with recurrence-free interval in cases from the SCOT trial showed a strong prognostic value of intraepithelial CD8 (CD8IE) as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR] for 75th vs 25th percentile [75vs25] 0·73 [95% CI 0·68-0·79], p=2·5 × 10-16), and of intrastromal FoxP3 (FoxP3IS; 0·71 [0·64-0·78], p=1·5 × 10-13) but not as strongly in the epithelium (FoxP3IE; 0·89 [0·84-0·96], p=1·5 × 10-4). Associations of other markers with recurrence-free interval were moderate. CD8IE and FoxP3IS retained independent prognostic value in bivariable and multivariable analysis, and, compared with either marker alone, a composite marker including both markers (CD8IE-FoxP3IS) was superior when assessed as a continuous variable (adjusted [a]HR75 vs 25 0·70 [95% CI 0·63-0·78], p=5·1 × 10-11) and when categorised into low, intermediate, and high density groups using previously published cutpoints (aHR for intermediate vs high 1·68 [95% CI 1·29-2·20], p=1·3 × 10-4; low vs high 2·58 [1·91-3·49], p=7·9 × 10-10), with performance similar to the gold-standard Immunoscore. The prognostic value of CD8IE-FoxP3IS was confirmed in cases from the QUASAR 2 trial, both as a continuous variable (aHR75 vs 25 0·84 [95% CI 0·73-0·96], p=0·012) and as a categorical variable for low versus high density (aHR 1·80 [95% CI 1·17-2·75], p=0·0071) but not for intermediate versus high (1·30 [0·89-1·88], p=0·17). INTERPRETATION: Combined evaluation of CD8IE and FoxP3IS could help to refine risk stratification in colorectal cancer. Investigation of FoxP3IS cells as an immunotherapy target in colorectal cancer might be merited. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Cancer Research UK, Swedish Cancer Society, Roche, and Promedica Foundation.

Accounting for intensity variation in image analysis of large-scale multiplexed clinical trial datasets.

Multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) imaging can provide comprehensive quantitative and spatial information for multiple immune markers for tumour immunoprofiling. However, application at scale to clinical trial samples sourced from multiple institutions is challenging due to pre-analytical heterogeneity. This study reports an analytical approach to the largest multi-parameter immunoprofiling study of clinical trial samples to date. We analysed 12,592 tissue microarray (TMA) spots from 3,545 colorectal cancers sourced from more than 240 institutions in two clinical trials (QUASAR 2 and SCOT) stained for CD4, CD8, CD20, CD68, FoxP3, pan-cytokeratin, and DAPI by mIF. TMA slides were multi-spectrally imaged and analysed by cell-based and pixel-based marker analysis. We developed an adaptive thresholding method to account for inter- and intra-slide intensity variation in TMA analysis. Applying this method effectively ameliorated inter- and intra-slide intensity variation improving the image analysis results compared with methods using a single global threshold. Correlation of CD8 data derived by our mIF analysis approach with single-plex chromogenic immunohistochemistry CD8 data derived from subsequent sections indicates the validity of our method (Spearman's rank correlation coefficients ρ between 0.63 and 0.66, p ≪ 0.01) as compared with the current gold standard analysis approach. Evaluation of correlation between cell-based and pixel-based analysis results confirms equivalency (ρ > 0.8, p ≪ 0.01, except for CD20 in the epithelial region) of both analytical approaches. These data suggest that our adaptive thresholding approach can enable analysis of mIF-stained clinical trial TMA datasets by digital pathology at scale for precision immunoprofiling.

Association of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Antibody Vaccine Response With Infection Severity in Patients With Cancer: A National COVID Cancer Cross-sectional Evaluation.

Importance: Accurate identification of patient groups with the lowest level of protection following COVID-19 vaccination is important to better target resources and interventions for the most vulnerable populations. It is not known whether SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing has clinical utility for high-risk groups, such as people with cancer. Objective: To evaluate whether spike protein antibody vaccine response (COV-S) following COVID-19 vaccination is associated with the risk of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection or hospitalization among patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a population-based cross-sectional study of patients with cancer from the UK as part of the National COVID Cancer Antibody Survey. Adults with a known or reported cancer diagnosis who had completed their primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination schedule were included. This analysis ran from September 1, 2021, to March 4, 2022, a period covering the expansion of the UK's third-dose vaccination booster program. Interventions: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 COV-S antibody test (Elecsys; Roche). Main Outcomes and Measures: Odds of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection and COVID-19 hospitalization. Results: The evaluation comprised 4249 antibody test results from 3555 patients with cancer and 294 230 test results from 225 272 individuals in the noncancer population. The overall cohort of 228 827 individuals (patients with cancer and the noncancer population) comprised 298 479 antibody tests. The median age of the cohort was in the age band of 40 and 49 years and included 182 741 test results (61.22%) from women and 115 737 (38.78%) from men. There were 279 721 tests (93.72%) taken by individuals identifying as White or White British. Patients with cancer were more likely to have undetectable anti-S antibody responses than the general population (199 of 4249 test results [4.68%] vs 376 of 294 230 [0.13%]; P < .001). Patients with leukemia or lymphoma had the lowest antibody titers. In the cancer cohort, following multivariable correction, patients who had an undetectable antibody response were at much greater risk for SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection (odds ratio [OR], 3.05; 95% CI, 1.96-4.72; P < .001) and SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalization (OR, 6.48; 95% CI, 3.31-12.67; P < .001) than individuals who had a positive antibody response. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that COV-S antibody testing allows the identification of patients with cancer who have the lowest level of antibody-derived protection from COVID-19. This study supports larger evaluations of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to patients with cancer should be prioritized to minimize impact on cancer treatments and maximize quality of life for individuals with cancer during the ongoing pandemic.

COVID-19: Third dose booster vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough coronavirus infection, hospitalisations and death in patients with cancer: A population-based study.

PURPOSE: People living with cancer and haematological malignancies are at an increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Coronavirus third dose vaccine boosters are proposed to boost waning immune responses in immunocompromised individuals and increase coronavirus protection; however, their effectiveness has not yet been systematically evaluated. METHODS: This study is a population-scale real-world evaluation of the United Kingdom's third dose vaccine booster programme for cancer patients from 8th December 2020 to 7th December 2021. The cancer cohort comprises individuals from Public Health England's national cancer dataset, excluding individuals less than 18 years. A test-negative case-control design was used to assess the third dose booster vaccine effectiveness. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to compare risk in the cancer cohort relative to the general population. RESULTS: The cancer cohort comprised of 2,258,553 tests from 361,098 individuals. Third dose boosters were evaluated by reference to 87,039,743 polymerase chain reaction coronavirus tests. Vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections, symptomatic infections, coronavirus hospitalisation and death in cancer patients were 59.1%, 62.8%, 80.5% and 94.5%, respectively. Lower vaccine effectiveness was associated with a cancer diagnosis within 12 months, lymphoma, recent systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) or radiotherapy. Patients with lymphoma had low levels of protection from symptomatic disease. In spite of third dose boosters, following multivariable adjustment, individuals with cancer remain at an increased risk of coronavirus hospitalisation and death compared to the population control (OR 3.38, 3.01, respectively. p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Third dose boosters are effective for most individuals with cancer, increasing protection from coronavirus. However, their effectiveness is heterogenous and lower than the general population. Many patients with cancer will remain at the increased risk of coronavirus infections even after 3 doses. In the case of patients with lymphoma, there is a particularly strong disparity of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infection and severe disease. Breakthrough infections will disrupt cancer care and treatment with potentially adverse consequences on survival outcomes. The data support the role of vaccine boosters in preventing severe disease, and further pharmacological intervention to prevent transmission and aid viral clearance to limit the disruption of cancer care as the delivery of care continues to evolve during the coronavirus pandemic.

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 breakthrough infections in patients with cancer (UKCCEP): a population-based test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: People with cancer are at increased risk of hospitalisation and death following infection with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we aimed to conduct one of the first evaluations of vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with cancer at a population level. METHODS: In this population-based test-negative case-control study of the UK Coronavirus Cancer Evaluation Project (UKCCEP), we extracted data from the UKCCEP registry on all SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results (from the Second Generation Surveillance System), vaccination records (from the National Immunisation Management Service), patient demographics, and cancer records from England, UK, from Dec 8, 2020, to Oct 15, 2021. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with cancer in the UKCCEP registry were identified via Public Health England's Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset between Jan 1, 2018, and April 30, 2021, and comprised the cancer cohort. We constructed a control population cohort from adults with PCR tests in the UKCCEP registry who were not contained within the Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset. The coprimary endpoints were overall vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections after the second dose (positive PCR COVID-19 test) and vaccine effectiveness against breakthrough infections at 3-6 months after the second dose in the cancer cohort and control population. FINDINGS: The cancer cohort comprised 377 194 individuals, of whom 42 882 had breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections. The control population consisted of 28 010 955 individuals, of whom 5 748 708 had SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 69·8% (95% CI 69·8-69·9) in the control population and 65·5% (65·1-65·9) in the cancer cohort. Vaccine effectiveness at 3-6 months was lower in the cancer cohort (47·0%, 46·3-47·6) than in the control population (61·4%, 61·4-61·5). INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 vaccination is effective for individuals with cancer, conferring varying levels of protection against breakthrough infections. However, vaccine effectiveness is lower in patients with cancer than in the general population. COVID-19 vaccination for patients with cancer should be used in conjunction with non-pharmacological strategies and community-based antiviral treatment programmes to reduce the risk that COVID-19 poses to patients with cancer. FUNDING: University of Oxford, University of Southampton, University of Birmingham, Department of Health and Social Care, and Blood Cancer UK.

Long-Term Outcomes and Exploratory Analyses of the Randomized Phase III BILCAP Study.

PURPOSE: The BILCAP study described a modest benefit for capecitabine as adjuvant therapy for curatively resected biliary tract cancer (BTC), and capecitabine has become the standard of care. We present the long-term data and novel exploratory subgroup analyses. METHODS: This randomized, controlled, multicenter, phase III study recruited patients age 18 years or older with histologically confirmed cholangiocarcinoma or muscle-invasive gallbladder cancer after resection with curative intent and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of < 2. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral capecitabine (1,250 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle, for eight cycles) or observation. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). This study is registered with EudraCT 2005-003318-13. RESULTS: Between March 15, 2006, and December 4, 2014, 447 patients were enrolled; 223 patients with BTC resected with curative intent were randomly assigned to the capecitabine group and 224 to the observation group. At the data cutoff of January 21, 2021, the median follow-up for all patients was 106 months (95% CI, 98 to 108). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median OS was 49.6 months (95% CI, 35.1 to 59.1) in the capecitabine group compared with 36.1 months (95% CI, 29.7 to 44.2) in the observation group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.06). In a protocol-specified sensitivity analysis, adjusting for minimization factors, nodal status, grade, and sex, the OS hazard ratio was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.94). We further describe the prognostic impact of R status, grade, nodal status, and sex. CONCLUSION: This long-term analysis supports the previous analysis, suggesting that capecitabine can improve OS in patients with resected BTC when used as adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery and should be considered as the standard of care.

Patients' Preferences for 3 Months vs 6 Months of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer.

Background: SCOT was an international, randomized phase 3 trial of 3 months vs 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and a fluoropyrimidine in patients with colorectal cancer. We sought patients' preferences for 3 months vs 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy in the SCOT trial. Methods: SCOT participants from Australia and New Zealand completed a validated questionnaire (at 3 and 18 months) to elicit the minimum survival benefits judged necessary to make an extra 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile, based on their experience. Standardized hypothetical scenarios used the following baseline survivals (with 3 months of chemotherapy): life expectancies (LE) of 5 years and 15 years and 5-year survival rates (5YS) of 65% and 85%. Results: Of the 160 participants, 82 were assigned 3 months adjuvant chemotherapy, and 78 were assigned 6 months. Adjuvant chemotherapy was FOLFOX in 121 (75.6%) and XELOX in 39 (24.4%). Preferences varied substantially and did not differ according to treatment group. The median survival benefits judged necessary to make the extra 3 months of chemotherapy worthwhile were an extra 3 years beyond a LE of 5 years; 3 years beyond a LE of 15 years; 15% beyond a 5YS of 65%; and 5% beyond a 5YS of 85%. Preferences were similar at 3 months and 18 months. Preferences were not predicted by participants' baseline characteristics. Conclusion: Preferences varied substantially, and the benefits many required to warrant an extra 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy were larger than the benefits of an extra 3 months of chemotherapy calculated in the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) meta-analysis.

Three Versus Six Months of Adjuvant Doublet Chemotherapy for Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Multi-Country Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Short Course Oncology Treatment (SCOT) trial demonstrated non-inferiority, less toxicity, and cost-effectiveness from a UK perspective of 3 versus 6 months of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of shorter treatment and the budget impact of implementing trial findings from the perspectives of all countries recruited to SCOT: Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual cost-utility analyses were performed from the perspective of each country. Resource, quality of life, and survival estimates from the SCOT trial (N = 6065) were used. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and subgroup analyses were undertaken. Using undiscounted costs from these cost-utility analyses, the impact on country-specific healthcare budgets of implementing the SCOT trial findings was calculated over a 5-year period. The currency used was US dollars (US$), and 2019 was the base year. One-way and scenario sensitivity analysis addressed uncertainty within the budget impact analysis. RESULTS: Three months of treatment were cost saving and cost-effective compared to 6 months from the perspective of all countries. The incremental net monetary benefit per patient ranged from US$8972 (Spain) to US$13,884 (Denmark). The healthcare budget impact over 5 years for the base-case scenario ranged from US$3.6 million (New Zealand) to US$61.4 million (UK) and totaled over US$150 million across all countries. CONCLUSION: This study has widened the transferability of results from the SCOT trial, showing that shorter treatment is cost-effective from a multi-country perspective. The vast savings from implementation could fully justify the investment in conducting the SCOT trial.

Second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy versus active symptom control for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-06): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine the benefit derived from second-line FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. METHODS: The ABC-06 clinical trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial done in 20 sites with expertise in managing biliary tract cancer across the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically or cytologically verified locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma) with documented radiological disease progression to first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally to active symptom control (ASC) and FOLFOX or ASC alone. FOLFOX chemotherapy was administered intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, L-folinic acid 175 mg [or folinic acid 350 mg], fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 [bolus], and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 as a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion). Randomisation was done following a minimisation algorithm using platinum sensitivity, serum albumin concentration, and stage as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is complete and the final results are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01926236, and EudraCT, 2013-001812-30. FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2014, and Jan 4, 2018, 162 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ASC plus FOLFOX (n=81) or ASC alone (n=81). Median follow-up was 21·7 months (IQR 17·2-30·8). Overall survival was significantly longer in the ASC plus FOLFOX group than in the ASC alone group, with a median overall survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 5·4-7·6) in the ASC plus FOLFOX group versus 5·3 months (4·1-5·8) in the ASC alone group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·031). The overall survival rate in the ASC alone group was 35·5% (95% CI 25·2-46·0) at 6 months and 11·4% (5·6-19·5) at 12 months, compared with 50·6% (39·3-60·9) at 6 months and 25·9% (17·0-35·8) at 12 months in the ASC plus FOLFOX group. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported in 42 (52%) of 81 patients in the ASC alone group and 56 (69%) of 81 patients in the ASC plus FOLFOX group, including three chemotherapy-related deaths (one each due to infection, acute kidney injury, and febrile neutropenia). The most frequently reported grade 3-5 FOLFOX-related adverse events were neutropenia (ten [12%] patients), fatigue or lethargy (nine [11%] patients), and infection (eight [10%] patients). INTERPRETATION: The addition of FOLFOX to ASC improved median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression on cisplatin and gemcitabine, with a clinically meaningful increase in 6-month and 12-month overall survival rates. To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective, randomised study providing reliable, high-quality evidence to allow an informed discussion with patients of the potential benefits and risks from second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. Based on these findings, FOLFOX should become standard-of-care chemotherapy in second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer and the reference regimen for further clinical trials. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, StandUpToCancer, AMMF (The UK Cholangiocarcinoma Charity), and The Christie Charity, with additional funding from The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation and the Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award for translational research.

The Glasgow Microenvironment Score associates with prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy response in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Glasgow Microenvironment Score (GMS) combines peritumoural inflammation and tumour stroma percentage to assess interactions between tumour and microenvironment. This was previously demonstrated to associate with colorectal cancer (CRC) prognosis, and now requires validation and assessment of interactions with adjuvant therapy. METHODS: Two cohorts were utilised; 862 TNM I-III CRC validation cohort, and 2912 TNM II-III CRC adjuvant chemotherapy cohort (TransSCOT). Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). Exploratory endpoint was adjuvant chemotherapy interaction. RESULTS: GMS independently associated with DFS (p = 0.001) and RFS (p < 0.001). GMS significantly stratified RFS for both low risk (GMS 0 v GMS 2: HR 3.24 95% CI 1.85-5.68, p < 0.001) and high-risk disease (GMS 0 v GMS 2: HR 2.18 95% CI 1.39-3.41, p = 0.001). In TransSCOT, chemotherapy type (pinteraction = 0.013), but not duration (p = 0.64) was dependent on GMS. Furthermore, GMS 0 significantly associated with improved DFS in patients receiving FOLFOX compared with CAPOX (HR 2.23 95% CI 1.19-4.16, p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the GMS as a prognostic tool for patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer, independent of TNM, with the ability to stratify both low- and high-risk disease. Furthermore, GMS 0 could be employed to identify a subset of patients that benefit from FOLFOX over CAPOX.

Outcomes and survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for cancer of the esophagus: Inverse propensity score weighted analysis.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer is increasingly common and carries a poor prognosis. The optimal treatment modality for locally advanced cancer is unknown, with current guidance recommending either neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by surgery. There is a lack of adequately powered trials comparing CT against CRT. We retrospectively compared CT versus CRT using a propensity score weighting approach. METHODS: Demographic, disease, treatment and outcome data were retrieved from a local database for patients who received neoadjuvant CT or CRT followed by surgery. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance groups using a propensity score-weighting approach. Groups were assessed for differences in postoperative outcomes and survival. Kaplan-Meier and non-parametric tests were used to compare survival and outcome data as appropriate. RESULTS: Data for 284 patients were retrieved. Following IPTW groups were well matched. No significant differences were seen for postoperative complications (CT 64.9% vs. CRT 63.3%, p = 0.807), including major complications (24.0% vs. 23.6%, p = 0.943) and anastomotic leak (7.8% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.526). Significantly higher rates of clinical regression and complete pathological response were seen following CRT (p = 0.002 for both). Rates of R0 resection were higher with CRT, CT 79.1% vs. CRT 93.1%, p = 0.006. There was no difference between groups for overall or disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the significant improvements in local tumour response seen after neoadjuvant CRT compared to CT may not translate to different survival outcomes. However, it must be stressed that adequately powered prospective trials are still lacking.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer: state of the art and future perspectives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article will review the results of recent studies, which have investigated the duration of adjuvant chemotherapy and also suggest, which aspects of adjuvant treatment need investigation in future studies. RECENT FINDINGS: The IDEA collaboration investigated whether the duration of adjuvant chemotherapy with an oxaliplatin doublet could be reduced from 6 to 3 months. Although this study did not demonstrate noninferiority for 3 months treatment, it did show noninferiority for patients receiving 3 months CAPOX chemotherapy and for those patients with low-risk stage III disease receiving 3 months' treatment. There was also significantly less toxicity seen with 3 months' treatment. Recent studies have shown that detectable ctDNA postoperatively can predict those patients most likely to relapse and so benefit from adjuvant treatment. SUMMARY: It has been shown that for patients receiving adjuvant CAPOX chemotherapy, or those receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for low-risk stage III colon 3 months' chemotherapy gives similar outcomes to 6 months' treatment with significantly less toxicity.

Histological phenotypic subtypes predict recurrence risk and response to adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colorectal cancer.

Histological 'phenotypic subtypes' that classify patients into four groups (immune, canonical, latent and stromal) have previously been demonstrated to stratify survival in a stage I-III colorectal cancer (CRC) pilot cohort. However, clinical utility has not yet been validated. Therefore, this study assessed prognostic value of these subtypes in additional patient cohorts along with associations with risk of recurrence and response to chemotherapy. Two independent stage I-III CRC patient cohorts (internal and external cohort) were utilised to investigate phenotypic subtypes. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) and the secondary endpoint was recurrence risk (RR). Stage II-III patients, from the SCOT adjuvant chemotherapy trial, were utilised to further validate prognostic value and for exploratory analysis assessing associations with adjuvant chemotherapy. In an 893-patient internal cohort, phenotypic subtype independently associated with DFS (p = 0.025) and this was attenuated in stage III patients (p = 0.020). Phenotypic subtype also independently associated with RR (p < 0.001) in these patients. In a 146-patient external cohort, phenotypic subtype independently stratified patients by DFS (p = 0.028), validating their prognostic value. In 1343 SCOT trial patients, the effect of treatment type significantly depended on phenotypic subtype (pinteraction = 0.011). Phenotypic subtype independently associated with DFS in stage III patients receiving FOLFOX (p = 0.028). Furthermore, the immune subtype significantly associated with better response to FOLFOX compared to CAPOX adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III patients (p = 0.013). In conclusion, histological phenotypic subtypes are an effective prognostic classification in patients with stage III CRC that associates with risk of recurrence and response to FOLFOX adjuvant chemotherapy.

Capecitabine compared with observation in resected biliary tract cancer (BILCAP): a randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in multidisciplinary management, patients with biliary tract cancer have a poor outcome. Only 20% of patients are eligible for surgical resection with curative intent, with 5-year overall survival of less than 10% for all patients. To our knowledge, no studies have described a benefit of adjuvant therapy. We aimed to determine whether adjuvant capecitabine improved overall survival compared with observation following surgery for biliary tract cancer. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study was done across 44 specialist hepatopancreatobiliary centres in the UK. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed cholangiocarcinoma or muscle-invasive gallbladder cancer who had undergone a macroscopically complete resection (which includes liver resection, pancreatic resection, or, less commonly, both) with curative intent, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of less than 2. Patients who had not completely recovered from previous surgery or who had previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy for biliary tract cancer were also excluded. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle, for eight cycles) or observation commencing within 16 weeks of surgery. Treatment was not masked, and allocation concealment was achieved with a computerised minimisation algorithm that stratified patients by surgical centre, site of disease, resection status, and performance status. The primary outcome was overall survival. As prespecified, analyses were done by intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2005-003318-13. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2006, and Dec 4, 2014, 447 patients were enrolled; 223 patients with biliary tract cancer resected with curative intent were randomly assigned to the capecitabine group and 224 to the observation group. The data cutoff for this analysis was March 6, 2017. The median follow-up for all patients was 60 months (IQR 37-60). In the intention-to-treat analysis, median overall survival was 51·1 months (95% CI 34·6-59·1) in the capecitabine group compared with 36·4 months (29·7-44·5) in the observation group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·63-1·04; p=0·097). In a protocol-specified sensitivity analysis, adjusting for minimisation factors and nodal status, grade, and gender, the overall survival HR was 0·71 (95% CI 0·55-0·92; p=0·010). In the prespecified per-protocol analysis (210 patients in the capecitabine group and 220 in the observation group), median overall survival was 53 months (95% CI 40 to not reached) in the capecitabine group and 36 months (30-44) in the observation group (adjusted HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·58-0·97; p=0·028). In the intention-to-treat analysis, median recurrence-free survival was 24·4 months (95% CI 18·6-35·9) in the capecitabine group and 17·5 months (12·0-23·8) in the observation group. In the per-protocol analysis, median recurrence-free survival was 25·9 months (95% CI 19·8-46·3) in the capecitabine group and 17·4 months (12·0-23·7) in the observation group. Adverse events were measured in the capecitabine group only, and of the 213 patients who received at least one cycle, 94 (44%) had at least one grade 3 toxicity, the most frequent of which were hand-foot syndrome in 43 (20%) patients, diarrhoea in 16 (8%) patients, and fatigue in 16 (8%) patients. One (<1%) patient had grade 4 cardiac ischaemia or infarction. Serious adverse events were observed in 47 (21%) of 223 patients in the capecitabine group and 22 (10%) of 224 patients in the observation group. No deaths were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Although this study did not meet its primary endpoint of improving overall survival in the intention-to-treat population, the prespecified sensitivity and per-protocol analyses suggest that capecitabine can improve overall survival in patients with resected biliary tract cancer when used as adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery and could be considered as standard of care. Furthermore, the safety profile is manageable, supporting the use of capecitabine in this setting. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and Roche.

Patterns of progression, treatment of progressive disease and post-progression survival in the New EPOC study.

BACKGROUND: The addition of cetuximab (CTX) to perioperative chemotherapy (CT) for operable colorectal liver metastases resulted in a shorter progression-free survival. Details of disease progression are described to further inform the primary study outcome. METHODS: A total of 257 KRAS wild-type patients were randomised to CT alone or CT with CTX. Data regarding sites and treatment of progressive disease were obtained for the 109 (CT n=48, CT and CTX n=61) patients with progressive disease at the cut-off date for analysis of November 2012. RESULTS: The liver was the most frequent site of progression (CT 67% (32/48); CT and CTX 66% (40/61)). A higher proportion of patients in the CT and group had multiple sites of progressive disease (CT 8%, 4/48; CT and CTX 23%, 14/61 P=0.04). Further treatment for progressive disease is known for 84 patients of whom 69 received further CT, most frequently irinotecan based. Twenty-two patients, 11 in each arm, received CTX as a further line agent. CONCLUSIONS: Both the distribution of progressive disease and further treatment are as expected for such a cohort. The pattern of disease progression seen is consistent with failure of systemic micrometastatic disease control rather than failure of local disease control following liver surgery.

Quality of life, long-term survivors and long-term outcome from the ABC-02 study.

BACKGROUND: The ABC-02 (Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer) study established cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) as the standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (BTC). We examine quality of life (QoL), describe the long-term survivors and provide a long-term outcome. METHODS: A total of 410 BTC patients were randomised to receive either CisGem or gemcitabine alone (Gem); 324 patients consented to complete EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-PAN26 QoL questionnaires; 268 (83%) patients returned at least one QoL questionnaire (134 in each arm). Long-term survivors were defined as those surviving over 2 years and we performed a final analysis of the primary outcome; overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Most QoL scales showed a trend favouring the combined CisGem arm, including functional and symptomatic scales, although the differences were not statistically significant. Forty-five (11%)) patients survived at least 2 years (34 received CisGem and 11 Gem) and 21 (5%) 3 years or more (14 received CisGem and 7 Gem). After a median follow-up of 9.2 months and 398 deaths, the median OS was 11.7 months for CisGem and 8.1 months for Gem (hazard ratio (HR)=0.65, 95% CI: 0.53-0.79, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The survival advantage of CisGem compared to Gem was not associated with an improvement or deterioration of QoL. Long-term survivors were more likely to have received CisGem and the long-term OS is identical to that previously described.

A randomised, open-label phase II trial of afatinib versus cetuximab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This randomised phase II trial aimed to compare efficacy of the irreversible ErbB family blocker, afatinib, with cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma (mCRC) with progression following oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based regimens. Efficacy in patients with KRAS mutations was also evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with KRAS wild-type tumours were randomised 2:1 to afatinib (40 mg/day, increasing to 50 mg/day if minimal toxicity) or cetuximab weekly (400 mg/m2 loading dose, then 250 mg/m2/week) according to number of previous chemotherapy lines. All patients with KRAS-mutated tumours received afatinib. Primary end-points were objective response (OR) for the wild-type group and disease control for the KRAS-mutated group. Secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (n=50) received afatinib (n=36) or cetuximab (n=14). Unconfirmed and confirmed ORs were 3% and 0% for afatinib versus 20% and 13% for cetuximab (odds ratio: 0.122 [P=0.0735] and <0.001, respectively). Median PFS was 46.0 and 144.5 days for afatinib and cetuximab, respectively. Median OS was 355 days with afatinib but not reached for cetuximab. In the KRAS-mutated group (n=41), five (12%) patients achieved confirmed disease control (stable disease; P=0.6394 [comparison versus 10%]); no ORs were reported. Median PFS and OS were 41.0 and 173days, respectively. Most frequent treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea and rash across groups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of afatinib was inferior to cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC. In patients with KRAS-mutated tumours, disease control was modest with afatinib. Afatinib had a manageable safety profile.