Neoadjuvant 5-FU or Capecitabine Plus Radiation With or Without Oxaliplatin in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project R-04 was designed to determine whether the oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine could be substituted for continuous infusion 5-FU in the curative setting of stage II/III rectal cancer during neoadjuvant radiation therapy and whether the addition of oxaliplatin could further enhance the activity of fluoropyrimidine-sensitized radiation. METHODS: Patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer undergoing preoperative radiation were randomly assigned to one of four chemotherapy regimens in a 2x2 design: CVI 5-FU or oral capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin. The primary endpoint was local-regional tumor control. Time-to-event endpoint distributions were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios were estimated from Cox proportional hazard models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Among 1608 randomized patients there were no statistically significant differences between regimens using 5-FU vs capecitabine in three-year local-regional tumor event rates (11.2% vs 11.8%), 5-year DFS (66.4% vs 67.7%), or 5-year OS (79.9% vs 80.8%); or for oxaliplatin vs no oxaliplatin for the three endpoints of local-regional events, DFS, and OS (11.2% vs 12.1%, 69.2% vs 64.2%, and 81.3% vs 79.0%). The addition of oxaliplatin was associated with statistically significantly more overall and grade 3-4 diarrhea (P < .0001). Three-year rates of local-regional recurrence among patients who underwent R0 resection ranged from 3.1 to 5.1% depending on the study arm. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous infusion 5-FU produced outcomes for local-regional control, DFS, and OS similar to those obtained with oral capecitabine combined with radiation. This study establishes capecitabine as a standard of care in the pre-operative rectal setting. Oxaliplatin did not improve the local-regional failure rate, DFS, or OS for any patient risk group but did add considerable toxicity.

Comparative effectiveness of sphincter-sparing surgery versus abdominoperineal resection in rectal cancer: patient-reported outcomes in National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project randomized trial R-04.

OBJECTIVE: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) R-04 was a randomized controlled trial of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with resectable stage II-III rectal cancer. We hypothesized that patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR) would have a poorer quality of life than those who underwent sphincter-sparing surgery (SSS). METHODS: To obtain patient-reported outcomes (PROs) we administered two symptom scales at baseline and 1 year postoperatively: the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) and the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer module for patients with Colorectal Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-CR38). Scoring was stratified by nonrandomly assigned definitive surgery (APR vs SSS). Analyses controlled for baseline scores and stratification factors: age, sex, stage, intended surgery, and randomly assigned chemoradiotherapy. RESULTS: Of 1,608 randomly assigned patients, 987 had data for planned analyses; 62% underwent SSS; 38% underwent APR. FACT-C total and subscale scores were not statistically different by surgery at 1 year. For the EORTC QLQ-CR38 functional scales, APR patients reported worse body image (70.3 vs 77.0, P = 0.0005) at 1 year than did SSS patients. Males undergoing APR reported worse sexual enjoyment (43.7 vs 54.7, P = 0.02) at 1 year than did those undergoing SSS. For the EORTC QLQ-CR38 symptom scale scores, APR patients reported worse micturition symptoms than the SSS group at 1 year (26.9 vs 21.5, P = 0.03). SSS patients reported worse gastrointestinal tract symptoms than did the APR patients (18.9 vs 15.2, P < 0.0001), as well as weight loss (10.1 vs 6.0, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms and functional problems were detected at 1 year by EORTC QLQ-CR38, reflecting different symptom profiles in patients who underwent APR than those who underwent SSS. Information from these PROs may be useful in counseling patients anticipating surgery for rectal cancer.

Capecitabine and oxaliplatin in the preoperative multimodality treatment of rectal cancer: surgical end points from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04.

PURPOSE: The optimal chemotherapy regimen administered concurrently with preoperative radiation therapy (RT) for patients with rectal cancer is unknown. National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04 compared four chemotherapy regimens administered concomitantly with RT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer who were undergoing preoperative RT (45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks plus a boost of 5.4 Gy to 10.8 Gy in three to six daily fractions) were randomly assigned to one of the following chemotherapy regimens: continuous intravenous infusional fluorouracil (CVI FU; 225 mg/m(2), 5 days per week), with or without intravenous oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) once per week for 5 weeks) or oral capecitabine (825 mg/m(2) twice per day, 5 days per week), with or without oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) once per week for 5 weeks). Before random assignment, the surgeon indicated whether the patient was eligible for sphincter-sparing surgery based on clinical staging. The surgical end points were complete pathologic response (pCR), sphincter-sparing surgery, and surgical downstaging (conversion to sphincter-sparing surgery). RESULTS: From September 2004 to August 2010, 1,608 patients were randomly assigned. No significant differences in the rates of pCR, sphincter-sparing surgery, or surgical downstaging were identified between the CVI FU and capecitabine regimens or between the two regimens with or without oxaliplatin. Patients treated with oxaliplatin experienced significantly more grade 3 or 4 diarrhea (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Administering capecitabine with preoperative RT achieved similar rates of pCR, sphincter-sparing surgery, and surgical downstaging compared with CVI FU. Adding oxaliplatin did not improve surgical outcomes but added significant toxicity. The definitive analysis of local tumor control, disease-free survival, and overall survival will be performed when the protocol-specified number of events has occurred.

Phase II study of temozolomide (TMZ) and everolimus (RAD001) therapy for metastatic melanoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group study, N0675.

OBJECTIVE: Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway is activated in malignant melanoma and in situ lesions as opposed to benign nevi. Inhibition of PI3K-Akt-mTOR signaling is implicated in sensitization of melanoma cells to alkylating agents (temozolomide [TMZ]) and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis. METHODS: We conducted a single-arm phase II multi-institution cooperative group study to assess the antitumor activity and safety profile of the combination of TMZ and the rapamycin derivative everolimus in patients with metastatic unresectable malignant melanoma. Patients received 10 mg/d of RAD001 for 5 of 7 days (ie, 50 mg/wk) and 200 mg/m/d of TMZ for 5 days each cycle. RESULTS: Of the first 39 eligible patients, 17 were PFS-9 successes, for a predetermined threshold of 18/39 patients for a positive trial. Overall, 21 of 48 patients were progression free at 9 weeks, for an event-free survival rate of 44% (95% confidence interval, 29%-59%). The median progression-free survival was 2.4 months and the median overall survival was 8.6 months. Four patients achieved a partial response; the median duration of response was 15.1 months. No complete remissions were observed. Treatment was in general well tolerated with only 1 patient discontinuing therapy due to toxicity (hyperlipidemia). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of TMZ and RAD001 was well tolerated but failed to meet/exceed our study threshold for promising clinical activity in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Use of a lidocaine patch in the management of postsurgical neuropathic pain in patients with cancer: a phase III double-blind crossover study (N01CB).

OBJECTIVE: Current therapies often have limited efficacy and untenable side effects when used to treat persistent incisional pain following cancer-related surgery. Lidocaine patches reduce neuropathic pain from herpes zoster but their benefits for persistent cancer-related postsurgical incisional pain remain unclear. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, two-period crossover trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight cancer patients with postsurgical incisional pain were randomly assigned to receive either lidocaine patches followed by placebo patches or the reverse. Each study period lasted 4 weeks. Patches were applied daily upon waking and left in place for a maximum of 18 h. The primary outcome measure, an 11-point pain intensity rating scale, was administered weekly. Secondary outcomes were administered weekly (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form(BPI-SF), Subject Global Impression of Change) and at the end of each study period (Short Form-Magill Pain Questionnaire, Linear Analogue Self Assessment Scale, Neuropathy Pain Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Profile of Mood States Short Form). RESULTS: Twenty-one patients completed the first period and 18 completed their crossover second phase. No significant intergroup differences were detected in pain intensity ratings. Few secondary end points were significantly different when subjects used the lidocaine versus placebo patches. BPI-SF interference scores were lower in patients using the lidocaine patch during the first study period, including several scores that achieved statistical significance, general activity (p = 0.02), work (p = 0.04), and relations with others (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Lidocaine patch use did not significantly reduce pain intensity ratings or the majority of related secondary end points in cancer patients with persistent incisional pain.

Southwest Oncology Group phase II trial (S0341) of erlotinib (OSI-774) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a performance status of 2.

PURPOSE: This phase II study (S0341) evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of single-agent erlotinib in unselected chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a performance status (PS) of 2. Exploratory analyses of a number of biomarkers relating to epidermal growth factor receptor pathway activation were also performed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or stage IV NSCLC with a PS of 2 and no prior chemotherapy or biologic treatment for NSCLC received erlotinib 150 mg daily. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients entered the study; 76 were assessable. One complete and 5 partial responses were noted for an overall response rate of 8% (95% CI 3%-16%). Stable disease (SD) was seen in 26 patients (34%) resulting in a disease control rate (DCR = CR/PR/SD) of 42%. Progression free and median survival were 2.1 months (95% CI 1.5-3.1) and 5 months (95% CI 3.6-7.2), respectively. One-year survival was 24% (95% CI 15%-34%). Although treatment was generally well tolerated, grade 3 to 4 toxicity was reported in 30 patients (40%), including fatigue (16%), rash (9%), diarrhea (7%), and anorexia (7%). There was one possible treatment related death (pneumonitis). CONCLUSIONS: In chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC and a PS of 2, single agent erlotinib resulted in an acceptable but significant level of treatment-related side effects. With an overall DCR of 42% and median survival of 5 months, results are comparable to those achieved with chemotherapy in this population. Development of an epidermal growth factor receptor-directed biomarker selection strategy may optimize use of erlotinib in PS 2 patients.