FOLFIRI Plus Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric or gastrooesphageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains limited. Ojectives: To determine the efficacy of 1 or 2 immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) in the treatment of advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST trial is a randomized, multicenter, noncomparative, phase 2 trial, conducted from August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, at 37 centers in France that included patients with advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma who had disease progression after platinum-based first-line chemotherapy. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive FOLFIRI plus durvalumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-L1]) (FD arm) or FOLFIRI plus durvalumab and tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 [CTLA-4]) (FDT arm). The efficacy analyses used a clinical cutoff date of January 9, 2023. Main outcome and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 4 months according to RECIST 1.1 criteria evaluated by investigators. Results: Overall, between August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, 96 patients were randomized (48 in each arm). The median age was 59.7 years, 28 patients (30.4%) were women and 49 (53.3%) had GEJ tumors. Four month PFS was 44.7% (90% CI, 32.3-57.7) and 55.6% (90% CI, 42.3-68.3) in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. The primary end point was not met. Median PFS was 3.8 and 5.4 months, objective response rates were 34.7% and 37.7%, and median overall survival was 13.2 and 9.5 months in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. Disease control beyond 1 year was 14.9% in the FD arm and 24.4% in the FDT arm. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 22 (47.8%) patients in each arm. A combined positive score (CPS) PD-L1 of 5 or higher was observed in 18 tumors (34.0%) and a tumor proportion score (TPS) PD-L1 of 1% or higher in 13 tumors (24.5%). Median PFS according to CPS PD-L1 was similar (3.6 months for PD-L1 CPS ≥5 vs 5.4 months for PD-L1 CPS <5) by contrast for TPS PD-L1 (6.0 months for PD-L1 TPS ≥1% vs 3.8 months for PD-L1 TPS <1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with FOLFIRI in second-line treatment for advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma showed an acceptable safety profile but antitumor activity only in a subgroup of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959293.

Biliary tract cancers: French national clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatments and follow-up (TNCD, SNFGE, FFCD, UNICANCER, GERCOR, SFCD, SFED, AFEF, SFRO, SFP, SFR, ACABi, ACHBPT).

INTRODUCTION: This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines of the management of biliary tract cancers (BTC) (intrahepatic, perihilar and distal cholangiocarcinomas, and gallbladder carcinomas) published in September 2023, available on the website of the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org). METHODS: This collaborative work was conducted under the auspices of French medical and surgical societies involved in the management of BTC. Recommendations were graded in three categories (A, B and C) according to the level of scientific evidence until August 2023. RESULTS: BTC diagnosis and staging is mainly based on enhanced computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and (endoscopic) ultrasound-guided biopsy. Treatment strategy depends on BTC subtype and disease stage. Surgery followed by adjuvant capecitabine is recommended for localised disease. No neoadjuvant treatment is validated to date. Cisplatin-gemcitabine chemotherapy combined to the anti-PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab is the first-line standard of care for advanced disease. Early systematic tumour molecular profiling is recommended to screen for actionable alterations (IDH1 mutations, FGFR2 rearrangements, HER2 amplification, BRAFV600E mutation, MSI/dMMR status, etc.) and guide subsequent lines of treatment. In the absence of actionable alterations, FOLFOX chemotherapy is the only second-line standard-of-care. No third-line chemotherapy standard is validated to date. CONCLUSION: These guidelines are intended to provide a personalised therapeutic strategy for daily clinical practice. Each individual BTC case should be discussed by a multidisciplinary team.

Debulking hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis: Analysis of risk factors for progression free survival.

BACKGROUND: The study explores the role of liver debulking surgery in cases of unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), challenging the traditional notion that surgery is not a valid option in such scenarios. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced but resectable disease who underwent surgery with a curative intent (Group I) and those with advanced incompletely resectable disease who underwent a "debulking" hepatectomy (Group II) were compared. RESULTS: There was no difference in the intra-operative and post-operative results between the two groups. The 3-year and 5-year OS rates were 69% and 47% for group 1 vs 64% and 35% for group 2 respectively (p = 0.14). The 3-year and 5-year PFS rates were 32% and 21% for group 1 vs 12% and 8% for group 2 respectively (p = 0.009). Independent predictors of PFS in the debulking group were bilobar metastases (HR = 2.70; p = 0.02); the presence of extrahepatic metastasis (HR = 2.65, p = 0.03) and the presence of more than 9 metastases (HR = 2.37; p = 0.04). Iterative liver surgery for CRLM was a significant protective factor (HR = 0.34, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: An aggressive palliative surgical approach may offer a survival benefit for selected patients with unresectable CRLM, without increasing the morbidity. The decision for surgery should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Time to recurrence and its relation to survival after recurrence in patients resected for stage III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is intuitively thought that early relapse is associated with poor survival after recurrence (SAR) in resected colon cancer (CC) patients, but this has never been formally studied. METHODS: We pooled data from stage III patients treated with oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in two phase III trials, to analyse time to recurrence (TTR) and its relationship with SAR. TTR and SAR were also studied according to molecular status (mismatch repair (MMR), RAS, and BRAFV600E). Early relapsing patients were defined as patients having a TTR event within 12 months after starting adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: 4548 stage III CC patients were included in the present analysis. Deficient MMR (dMMR) CC patients experienced fewer recurrences than proficient (p)MMR CC patients (18.8% versus 27.6%) but had a significantly shorter median TTR (mTTR; 0.74 versus 1.40 years, p < 0.0001). In pMMR patients, BRAF and RAS mutations were also associated with earlier mTTR as compared to double wild-type (WT) patients (0.99 versus 1.38 versus 1.54 years, respectively, p < 0.0001). Early recurrence occurred in 397 patients and was associated with a median SAR (2.2 versus 3.3 years, p = 0.0007). However, this association was mainly due to pMMR/RAS and BRAFV600E mutated tumours and was not confirmed in dMMR and pMMR/double WT subgroups. CONCLUSION: In resected stage III CC treated with standard oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy, TTR varies between dMMR, pMMR/RAS, or BRAFV600E mutated and pMMR/double WT tumours. In addition, early relapse is associated with poor survival, mainly due to patients resected for a pMMR/RAS or BRAFV600E mutated tumour.

The estimand framework had implications in time to patient-reported outcomes deterioration analyses in cancer clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: To apply the estimand framework in time to deterioration (TTD) analysis of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and identify the appropriate statistical methods to deal with intercurrent event (IEs) such as death. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data from phase II randomized trial were used. We estimated TTD using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 questionnaire with death as the IE, by applying Kaplan-Meier (K.M.) estimator and Cox proportional hazards (PH) model. The Fine-Gray approach was explored, accounting for death as a competing risk. The estimands targeted by the aforementioned methods were defined. RESULTS: We analyzed the data of 64 patients with available questionnaires at baseline. The most notable differences in TTD estimates were observed for deterioration in physical functioning: the hazard ratios were 0.44 [95% CI 0.22-0.90] and 0.62 [95% CI 0.36-1.07] by either ignoring death (31 events) or considering it as deterioration (58 events), respectively (Cox-PH model). When considering death as a competing event (Fine-Gray model), the sub-HRs was 0.51 [95% CI 0.26-1.01]. CONCLUSION: Depending on the proportion and distribution of deaths occurring before deterioration between arms, the Fine-Gray competing risks model should be considered rather than KM estimator and Cox PH model to reflect the patient's experience of the disease and treatment burden.

FOLFIRI Followed by FOLFOX6 or the Reverse Sequence in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized GERCOR Study.

PURPOSE: In metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil (FU) with leucovorin (LV) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone. This phase III study investigated two sequences: folinic acid, FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by folinic acid, FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6; arm A), and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were randomly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m2 or dl-LV 400 mg/m2 followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m2 and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m2 every 46 hours every 2 weeks, either with irinotecan 180 mg/m2 or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion on day 1. At progression, irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin (arm A), or oxaliplatin by irinotecan (arm B). RESULTS: Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI (P = .99). Median second progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B (P = .64). In first-line therapy, FOLFIRI achieved 56% response rate (RR) and 8.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54% RR and 8.0 months median PFS (P = .26). Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4% RR and 2.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15% RR and 4.2 months PFS. In first-line therapy, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis, nausea/vomiting, and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI, and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6. CONCLUSION: Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy. The toxicity profiles were different.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without nintedanib for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: Lessons from the GINECO double-blind randomized phase II CHIVA trial.

AIM: The oral anti-angiogenic therapy nintedanib prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) when combined with chemotherapy after primary surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. The randomized phase II CHIVA trial evaluated the impact of combining nintedanib with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed unresectable FIGO stage IIIC-IV epithelial ovarian cancer received 3-4 cycles of carboplatin plus paclitaxel every 3 weeks as NACT before interval debulking surgery (IDS), followed by 2-3 post-operative cycles. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either nintedanib 200 mg twice daily or placebo on days 2-21 every 3 weeks during NACT (omitting peri-operative cycles), and then as maintenance therapy for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was PFS. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and May 2015, 188 patients were randomized (124 to nintedanib, 64 to placebo). PFS was significantly inferior with nintedanib (median 14.4 versus 16.8 months with placebo; hazard ratio 1.50, p = 0.02). Overall survival (OS) was also inferior (median 37.7 versus 44.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio 1.54, p = 0.054). Nintedanib was associated with increased toxicity (grade 3/4 adverse events: 92% versus 69%, predominantly hematologic and gastrointestinal), lower response rate by RECIST (35% versus 56% before IDS), and lower IDS feasibility (58% versus 77%) versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Adding nintedanib to chemotherapy and in maintenance as part of NACT for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer cannot be recommended as it increases toxicity and compromises chemotherapy efficacy (IDS, PFS, OS). CLINICALTRIALS: govregistration: NCT01583322.

Prognosis and chemosensitivity of non-colorectal alimentary tract cancers with microsatellite instability.

BACKGROUND: Data on outcomes of microsatellite instable and/or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR/MSI) digestive non-colorectal tumors are limited. AIMS: To evaluate overall survival (OS) of patients with dMMR/MSI digestive non-colorectal tumor. METHODS: All consecutive patients with a dMMR/MSI digestive non-colorectal tumor were included in this French retrospective multicenter study. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen patients were included with a mean age of 63.6 years and 32.6% with a Lynch syndrome. Most tumors were oesophago-gastric (54.3%) or small bowel (32.8%) adenocarcinomas and at a localized stage at diagnosis (86.7%). In patients with localized tumors and R0 resection, median OS was 134.0 ± 64.2 months. Median disease-free survival (DFS) was 100.3 ± 65.7 months. Considering oesophago-gastric tumors, median DFS was improved when chemotherapy was added to surgery (not reached versus 22.8 ± 10.0 months, p = 0.03). In patients with advanced tumors treated by chemotherapy, median OS was 14.2 ± 1.9 months and median progression-free survival was 7.4 ± 1.6 months. CONCLUSION: dMMR/MSI digestive non-colorectal tumors are mostly diagnosed at a non-metastatic stage with a good prognosis. Advanced dMMR/MSI digestive non-colorectal tumors have a poor prognosis with standard chemotherapy.

Impact of mismatch repair deficiency on tumour regression grade after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in localized gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with mismatch repair (MMR) deficient (dMMR) localized gastric and oeso-gastric junction (OGJ) adenocarcinoma is subject of debate. Histological response assessment might help to better evaluate the impact of dMMR on response to NAC. METHODS: Patients with localized gastric/OGJ adenocarcinoma resected after NAC were retrospectively identified. MMR protein expression status was assessed by immunohistochemistry. The primary objective was the frequency of histological responders to NAC defined by tumour regression grade (TRG) using Mandard's (TRG1-2) and Becker's (TRG1) classifications, according to the MMR status. RESULTS: In total, 247 patients with 43 dMMR and 204 pMMR gastric/OGJ adenocarcinoma were identified. Among dMMR tumours, 18 (42%) arose from the OGJ. Histological response (Becker TRG1-2) was observed for 28% and 35% of dMMR and pMMR tumours, respectively (p = 0.35). Similar results were observed with Mandard classification. With a median follow-up of 37.5 months, median disease-free and overall survival were not reached for the dMMR group. CONCLUSION: Histological response after NAC in patients with localized dMMR gastric/OGJ adenocarcinoma is not statistically different to those with pMMR tumours. This study provides additional data for the discussion about avoiding NAC in patients with dMMR gastric/OGJ adenocarcinomas.

Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab and Adjuvant Nivolumab in Localized Deficient Mismatch Repair/Microsatellite Instability-High Gastric or Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma: The GERCOR NEONIPIGA Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: In patients with resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, surgery plus perioperative platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard of care. Perioperative chemotherapy remains debatable for gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H). PATIENTS AND METHODS: NEONIPIGA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04006262) phase II study evaluated neoadjuvant nivolumab 240 mg once every two weeks ×6 and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every six weeks ×2, followed by surgery and adjuvant nivolumab 480 mg once every four weeks (nine injections) in patients with locally advanced resectable dMMR/MSI-H, clinical (c) tumor (T)2-T4 node (N)x metastasis (M)0 gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. The primary end point was a pathological complete response (pCR) rate. RESULTS: Between October 2019 and June 2021, 32 patients with dMMR/MSI-H gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma were enrolled. The median age was 65.5 years (range, 40-80). Clinical stages were cT2-T3N0 (n = 9), cT2-T3N1 (n = 22), and cT3N1M1 (n = 1, wrongly included). With a median follow-up of 14.9 months (95% CI, 10.6 to 17.6), 32 patients received neoadjuvant immunotherapy (27 patients completed all cycles). Neoadjuvant therapy-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in six patients (19%). Twenty-nine patients underwent surgery; three did not have surgery and had complete endoscopic response with tumor-free biopsies and a normal computed tomography scan (two refused surgery and one had metastasis at inclusion). The rate of surgical morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification) was 55% (one postoperative death occurred). All 29 patients had an R0 resection, and 17 (58.6%; 90% CI, 41.8 to 74.1) had pCR (pathological T0N0). Becker tumor regression grades 1a, 1b, 2, and 3 were observed in 17 patients, three (including two pathological T0N1), two, and seven patients, respectively. Of the 29 patients with surgery, 23 received adjuvant nivolumab. At database lock, no patient had relapse and one died without relapse. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab and ipilimumab-based neoadjuvant therapy is feasible and associated with no unexpected toxicity and a high pCR rate in patients with dMMR/MSI-H resectable gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Impact of trough concentrations of regorafenib and its major metabolites M-2 and M-5 on overall survival of chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients: Results from a multicentre GERCOR TEXCAN phase II study.

PURPOSE: This prospective pharmacokinetic (PK) ancillary study of the TEXCAN phase II GERCOR trial of patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer and treated with regorafenib (REGO) investigated correlations between overall survival (OS) and concentrations (C) of REGO and its active metabolites, M-2 and M-5. METHODS: 55 patients received REGO 160 mg/day for 21 days of a 28-day cycle (NCT02699073). REGO, M-2, M-5 were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assay on day 15 of cycle 1 (C1) and 2 (C2). We studied the association between OS and Cmin of REGO, M-2 and M-5 at C1 and their accumulations between C1 and C2. RESULTS: Medians of C2/C1 M-2 and M-5 ratios were 0.82 (interquartile range 0.50-1.78) and 0.75 (interquartile range 0.41-1.93), respectively. Patients with C2/C1 M-2 ratio ≥ median had improved survival compared to those < median (12.6 versus 4.0 months, P = 0.023), corresponding to a 66% mortality risk reduction in multivariate analysis. The C2/C1 M-2 ratio correlated with C1 REGO+M-2+M-5 (Csum; P = 0.006). Restricted cubic spline analysis showed an increased OS benefit as the C2/C1 M-2 ratio raises and when C1 Csum ranged between 2.5 and 5.5 mg/L. Patients within the Csum range had a reduced incidence of serious adverse events and improved OS. CONCLUSIONS: We identified PK parameters associated with a survival benefit in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated by REGO. OS and safety were favourable when C1 REGO+M-2+M-5 Csum ranged between 2.5 and 5.5 mg/L. These results pave the way for individual REGO dose modification strategies based on PK monitoring. CLINICAL TRIAL REFERENCE: NCT02699073.

SOCRATE-PRODIGE 55 trial: A randomized phase II study to evaluate second-line ramucirumab alone or with paclitaxel in older patients with advanced gastric cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Patients ≥ 70 years old constitute 40% of patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). Ramucirumab plus Paclitaxel is a therapeutic option validated in the second-line treatment of advanced GC, but as older patients are at higher risk of severe toxicity, due to comorbidities and/or frailty, we aimed to evaluate second-line Ramucirumab alone or combined with Paclitaxel in terms of overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL) in patients ≥ 70 years-old with advanced GC. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-comparative, prospective phase II clinical trial, the main inclusion criteria are: patients ≥ 70 years old, with advanced GC having progressed after first-line chemotherapy or in the six months following the last administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, with WHO performance status <2. They are randomized to receive either ramucirumab alone (arm A) or ramucirumab plus Paclitaxel (arm B). The primary endpoint is 6-month OS and QoL evaluated with the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 questionnaire. The secondary endpoints include other parameters of QoL, time to definitive deterioration (TTDD) in QoL and TTDD in autonomy, treatment toxicities, other parameters of survival and disease control, identification of geriatric and nutritional prognostic scores and predictive factors of treatment safety and efficacy. OS of 60% is expected at 6 months (H0:40%). Using a Simon-minimax design, with one-sided α risk of 2% and 80% power for OS, and considering 5% lost to follow-up, it is necessary to randomize 56 patients in each arm. PERSPECTIVES: As older patients are at higher risk of chemotherapy toxicity, ramucirumab alone could be an interesting alternative to Paclitaxel plus ramucirumab, as a second-line therapy for patients ≥ 70 years old with advanced GC, and needs to be evaluated.

Prognostic role of infracentimetric colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: The number of lesions and the size of the largest (CRLMmax) have been widely investigated as prognostic factors in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). The aim of the present study was to assess whether, in patients undergoing curative liver resection, the presence of infracentimetric lesions could affect recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). METHODS: Patients who underwent a liver resection for CRLM between 2001 and 2019 were included. The size of CRLM was measured on the surgical specimen. The best cut-off of the smallest lesion (CRLMmin) associated with RFS was determined through the time-dependent ROC analysis. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was carried out. RESULTS: Overall, 227 patients were included. Median follow-up time was 50 months [IQR 26-84]. Recurrence occurred for 151 (66.5%) patients (liver recurrence in 67.5%, while exclusive extra-hepatic recurrence in 32.5%). The best cut-off for CRLMmin associated with RFS was 9 mm, with 12- and 24-month td-AUC 0.56 and 0.52 respectively. CRLMmin ≤ 9 mm was found to be an independent prognostic factor that impairs RFS at multivariate analysis (HR 1.534 (1.02-2.32), p = 0.042). In particular, CRLMmin ≤ 9 mm was correlated with impaired hepatic RFS (HR 1.860 (1.15-3.01), p = 0.011), but not extra-hepatic RFS. CONCLUSIONS: Infracentimetric metastases (≤ 9 mm) are an independent prognostic factor that impairs hepatic RFS. This result suggests the potential benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) also in selected patients with initially resectable lesions, in case of CRLM ≤ 9 mm on preoperative imaging.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of adjuvant gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer: combined analysis of the BCAT and PRODIGE-12 studies.

BACKGROUND: Although gemcitabine-based chemotherapy is the standard of care for advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs), adjuvant phase III studies (BCAT in Japan, PRODIGE 12 in France) failed to show benefit, possibly owing to fewer patients (n = 225 and n = 194) compared with the adjuvant capecitabine BILCAP trial (n = 447). We performed a combined analysis of both gemcitabine-based chemotherapy adjuvant studies. METHODS: We performed individual patient data meta-analysis of all patients included in BCAT and PRODIGE 12. BCAT study randomised patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma to single-agent gemcitabine or observation. PRODIGE 12 randomised patients with all BTC subtypes to gemcitabine-oxaliplatin combination or observation. Combined analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and a Cox regression model stratified on the trial. RESULTS: Two hundred and twelve versus 207 patients were randomised in the gemcitabine-based chemotherapy versus observation arms. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. The median follow-up was 5.5 years. After 258 relapse-free survival (RFS) events, there was no difference in RFS (log-rank p = 0.45; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.91 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.16]; p = 0.46). RFS rates at five years were 40.8% (95%CI: 33.9%-47.5%) for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy versus 36.6% (95%CI: 29.8%-43.4%) for observation. After 201 deaths, there was no difference in overall survival (OS) (log-rank p = 0.83; HR = 1.03 [95%CI: 0.78-1.35]; p = 0.85). OS rates at five years were 50.5% (95%CI: 43.1%-57.4%) for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy versus 49.3% (95%CI: 41.6%-56.5%) for observation. CONCLUSION: With 419 patients included, this analysis did not show significant improvement in RFS and no trend in improvement in OS. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy should not be used as an adjuvant treatment for BTC.

Regorafenib or Tamoxifen for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer with rising CA125 and no evidence of clinical or RECIST progression: A GINECO randomized phase II trial (REGOVAR).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib versus tamoxifen in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer biological recurrence, defined by CA-125 increase without radiological (RECIST criteria) or symptomatic evidence of progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 116 patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer presenting an isolated increase of CA-125 were planned to be randomized. Regorafenib was administered orally at 160 or 120 mg daily, 3 weeks on/1 week off or tamoxifen at 40 mg daily, until disease progression or development of unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was Progression-Free Survival, assessed by progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death (by any cause). Secondary endpoints included Overall Survival, Best Response and CA-125 response rate. RESULTS: 68 patients were randomized. Median age was 67 years (range: 30-87). Primary site of cancer was ovarian for most patients (92.6%). Tumors were predominantly serous / (89.7%), high grade (83.6%) and initial FIGO staging was III for 69.6% of the patients. Most (79.4%) patients were included after the first line of platinum-based treatment. After a median follow-up of 32 months, there was no difference of progression-free survival (PFS) between regorafenib and tamoxifen groups (p = 0.72), with median PFS of 5.6 months (CI 90%: 3.84-7.52) for the tamoxifen arm and 4.6 months (CI 90%: 3.65-7.33) for the regorafenib arm. There was also no difference in term of overall survival, best response or CA-125 response, delay to next therapy. Regorafenib presented a less favorable safety profile than tamoxifen, with grade 3/4 events occurring for 90.9% of the patients compared to 54.3% for tamoxifen. The most frequent were cutaneous, digestive, and biological events. Notably, hand-foot syndrome occurred in 36.4% of these patients. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib presented an unfavorable toxicity profile compared to tamoxifen, with no superior efficacy in this population of patients.

Prognostic Value and Relation with Adjuvant Treatment Duration of ctDNA in Stage III Colon Cancer: a Post Hoc Analysis of the PRODIGE-GERCOR IDEA-France Trial.

PURPOSE: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been suggested as a major prognostic factor in resected stage-III colon cancer. We analyzed ctDNA of patients randomized in the phase III IDEA-France trial. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: ctDNA was tested for WIF1 and NPY by droplet digital PCR with method developed and validated for colorectal cancer. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed via multivariable analysis in patients with ctDNA samples and in sub-groups according to treatment duration (3/6 months) and disease stage (high/low-risk stage III). RESULTS: Of 2,010 randomized patients, 1,345 had available ctDNA samples (1,017 collected both post-surgery and pre-chemotherapy). More Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 (78% versus 69%) and T4 and/or N2 (40% versus 36%) were observed in patients studied (n = 1017) versus not analyzed (n = 993). There were 877 ctDNA-negative (86.2%) and 140 ctDNA-positive (13.8%) patients; their baseline characteristics were similar. With a median follow-up of 6.6 years, the 3-year DFS rate was 66.39% for ctDNA-positive patients and 76.71% for ctDNA-negative patients (P = 0.015). ctDNA was confirmed as an independent prognostic marker for DFS (adjusted HR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.13-2.12, P = 0.006) and OS (HR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.12-2.43, P = 0.011). ctDNA was prognostic in patients treated for 3 months and with T4 and/or N2 tumors, but not in those treated for 6 months and with T1-3/N1 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: In this first ctDNA assessment of a large series of patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in phase III trial, post-surgery ctDNA was found in 13.8% of them and was confirmed as an independent prognostic marker.See related commentary by Bent and Kopetz, p. 5449.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination for patients with solid cancer: Review and point of view of a French oncology intergroup (GCO, TNCD, UNICANCER).

The impacts of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic on cancer care are multiple, entailing a high risk of death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with cancer treated by chemotherapy. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines represent an opportunity to decrease the rate of severe COVID-19 cases in patients with cancer and also to restore normal cancer care. Patients with cancer to be targeted for vaccination are difficult to define owing to the limited contribution of these patients in the phase III trials testing the different vaccines. It seems appropriate to vaccinate not only patients with cancer with ongoing treatment or with a treatment having been completed less than 3 years ago but also household and close contacts. High-risk patients with cancer who are candidates for priority access to vaccination are those treated by chemotherapy. The very high-priority population includes patients with curative treatment and palliative first- or second-line chemotherapy, as well as patients requiring surgery or radiotherapy involving a large volume of lung, lymph node and/or haematopoietic tissue. When possible, vaccination should be carried out before cancer treatment begins. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination can be performed during chemotherapy while avoiding periods of neutropenia and lymphopenia. For organisational reasons, vaccination should be performed in cancer care centres with messenger RNA vaccines (or non-replicating adenoviral vaccines in non-immunocompromised patients). Considering the current state of knowledge, the benefit-risk ratio strongly favours SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of all patients with cancer. To obtain more data concerning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, it is necessary to implement cohorts of vaccinated patients with cancer.

Monitoring levels of circulating cell-free DNA in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as a potential biomarker of responses to regorafenib treatment.

Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) contains circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), which can be obtained from serial liquid biopsies to enable tumor genome analysis throughout the course of treatment. We investigated cfDNA and mutant ctDNA as potential biomarkers to predict the best outcomes of regorafenib-treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. We analyzed longitudinally collected plasma cfDNA of 43 mCRC patients prospectively enrolled in the phase II TEXCAN trial by IntPlex qPCR. Qualitative (KRAS, NRAS, BRAFV600E mutations) and quantitative (total cfDNA concentration, mutant ctDNA concentration, mutant ctDNA fraction) parameters were correlated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). When examined as classes or continuous variables, the concentrations of total cfDNA, mutant ctDNA, and, partly, mutant ctDNA fraction prior to regorafenib treatment correlated with OS. Patients with baseline cfDNA > 26 ng·mL-1 had shorter OS than those with cfDNA value below this threshold (4.0 vs 6.9 months; log-rank P = 0.0366). Patients with baseline mutant ctDNA > 2 ng·mL-1 had shorter OS than those with mutant ctDNA below this threshold (log-rank P = 0.0154). We show that pretreatment cfDNA and mutant ctDNA levels may identify mCRC patients that may benefit from regorafenib treatment.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX and preoperative chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (UNICANCER-PRODIGE 23): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer with chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy controls local disease, but distant metastases remain common. We aimed to assess whether administering neoadjuvant chemotherapy before preoperative chemoradiotherapy could reduce the risk of distant recurrences. METHODS: We did a phase 3, open-label, multicentre, randomised trial at 35 hospitals in France. Eligible patients were adults aged 18-75 years and had newly diagnosed, biopsy-proven, rectal adenocarcinoma staged cT3 or cT4 M0, with a WHO performance status of 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group or standard-of-care group, using an independent web-based system by minimisation method stratified by centre, extramural extension of the tumour into perirectal fat according to MRI, tumour location, and stage. Investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy group received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 intravenously every 14 days for 6 cycles), chemoradiotherapy (50 Gy during 5 weeks and 800 mg/m2 concurrent oral capecitabine twice daily for 5 days per week), total mesorectal excision, and adjuvant chemotherapy (3 months of modified FOLFOX6 [intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 and leucovorin 400 mg/m2, followed by intravenous 400 mg/m2 fluorouracil bolus and then continuous infusion at a dose of 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h every 14 days for six cycles] or capecitabine [1250 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14 every 21 days]). The standard-of-care group received chemoradiotherapy, total mesorectal excision, and adjuvant chemotherapy (for 6 months). The primary endpoint was disease-free survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population at 3 years. Safety analyses were done on treated patients. This trial was registered with EudraCT (2011-004406-25) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01804790) and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between June 5, 2012, and June 26, 2017, 461 patients were randomly assigned to either the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group (n=231) or the standard-of-care group (n=230). At a median follow-up of 46·5 months (IQR 35·4-61·6), 3-year disease-free survival rates were 76% (95% CI 69-81) in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and 69% (62-74) in the standard-of-care group (stratified hazard ratio 0·69, 95% CI 0·49-0·97; p=0·034). During neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (38 [17%] of 225 patients) and diarrhoea (25 [11%] of 226). During chemoradiotherapy, the most common grade 3-4 adverse event was lymphopenia (59 [28%] of 212 in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group vs 67 [30%] of 226 patients in the standard-of-care group). During adjuvant chemotherapy, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were lymphopenia (18 [11%] of 161 in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group vs 42 [27%] of 155 in the standard-of-care group), neutropenia (nine [6%] of 161 vs 28 [18%] of 155), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (19 [12%] of 162 vs 32 [21%] of 155). Serious adverse events occurred in 63 (27%) of 231 participants in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and 50 (22%) of 230 patients in the standard-of-care group (p=0·167), during the whole treatment period. During adjuvant therapy, serious adverse events occurred in 18 (11%) of 163 participants in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and 36 (23%) of 158 patients in the standard-of-care group (p=0·0049). Treatment-related deaths occurred in one (<1%) of 226 patients in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group (sudden death) and two (1%) of 227 patients in the standard-of-care group (one sudden death and one myocardial infarction). INTERPRETATION: Intensification of chemotherapy using FOLFIRINOX before preoperative chemoradiotherapy significantly improved outcomes compared with preoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with cT3 or cT4 M0 rectal cancer. The significantly improved disease-free survival in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and the decreased neurotoxicity indicates that the perioperative approach is more efficient and better tolerated than adjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, the PRODIGE 23 results might change clinical practice. FUNDING: Institut National du Cancer, Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, and R&D Unicancer.

[Vaccination against COVID-19 in patients with solid cancer: Review and point of view from a French oncology inter-group (CGO, TNCD, UNICANCER)]. / Vaccination contre la COVID-19 des patients atteints de cancer solide : revue et préconisations d'un inter-groupe oncologique français (CGO, TNCD, UNICANCER).

The COVID-19 pandemic has a major impact at all stages of cancer treatment. Risk of death from COVID-19 in patients treated for a cancer is high. COVID-19 vaccines represent a major issue to decrease the rate of severe forms of the COVID-19 cases and to maintain a normal cancer care. It is difficult to define the target population for vaccination due to the limited data available and the lack of vaccine doses available. It appears theoretically important to vaccinate patients with active cancer treatment or treated since less than three years, as well as their family circle. In France, patients actually defined at "high risk" for priority access to vaccination are those with a cancer treated by chemotherapy. A panel of experts recently defined another "very high-priority" population, which includes patients with curative or palliative first or second-line chemotherapy, as well as patients requiring surgery or radiotherapy involving a large lung volume, lymph nodes and/or of hematopoietic tissue. Ideally, it is best to vaccinate before cancer treatment. Despite the lack of published data, COVID-19 vaccines can also be performed during chemotherapy by avoiding periods of bone marrow aplasia and if possible, to do it in cancer care centers. It is necessary to implement cohorts with immunological and clinical monitoring of vaccinated cancer patients. To conclude, considering the current state of knowledge, the benefit-risk ratio strongly favours COVID-19 vaccination of all cancer patients.