Management of Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumours: 10 Years' Experience at a Tertiary Referral Centre.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine tumours (NET) arising from the small bowel are clinically challenging and are often diagnosed at advanced stages. Disease control with surgery alone can be demanding. Multimodal treatment concepts integrating surgery and non-surgical modalities could be of benefit. METHOD: Retrospective review of consecutive adult patients with SB NET treated at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Data regarding clinicopathological characteristics, treatments, and disease trajectory were extracted and summarised. Overall and progression/recurrence-free survival were estimated at 5 and 10 years. RESULTS: 154 patients were identified, with a median age of 64 years (range 33-87); 135/154 (87.7%) had stage III/IV disease at diagnosis. Surgery was used in 125 individuals (81.2%), typically with either segmental small bowel resection (60.8%) or right hemicolectomy (33.6%) and mesenteric lymphadenectomy for the primary tumour. Systemic and/or liver-directed therapies were used in 126 (81.8%); 60 (47.6%) had more than one line of non-surgical treatment. Median follow-up was 67.2 months (range 3.1-310.4); overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 91.0% (95% CI: 84.9-94.7%) and 82.5% (95% CI: 72.9-88.9%), respectively. Imaging-based median progression-free survival was 42.7 months (95% CI: 24.7 to 72.4); 5-year progression-free survival was 63.4% (95% CI: 55.0-70.6%); 10-year progression-free survival was 18.7% (95% CI: 12.4-26.1). Nineteen patients (12.3%) reached 10 years follow-up without disease recurrence and therefore were considered cured. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with SB NET present in a metastasised stage. Multimodal treatment concepts may be associated with excellent clinical outcomes. Future work should explore optimal approaches to treatment sequencing and patient selection.

Optimal maintenance strategy following FOLFOX plus anti-EGFR induction therapy in patients with RAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer: An individual patient data pooled analysis of randomised clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Anti-EGFR antibodies plus doublet chemotherapy is the standard of care in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No phase-3 level of evidence is available to guide treatment de-escalation after anti-EGFR-based first-line. Several randomised clinical trials investigated de-intensification strategies with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) and/or anti-EGFR. METHODS: We performed an individual patient data pooled analysis of Valentino, Panama, MACRO-2, COIN-B trials including RAS wild-type mCRC patients who received first-line therapy with FOLFOX plus panitumumab or cetuximab followed by pre-specified maintenance strategy. Only patients who started maintenance according to the assigned arm were included. Patients were categorised by type of maintenance (i.e. 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR or 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the start of maintenance; toxicity was evaluated for the maintenance treatment period. RESULTS: A total of 518 patients were included in the pooled analysis. Overall, 123, 185 and 210 patients received maintenance with 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR, 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR, respectively. Median PFS was 5.6, 6.0 and 9.0 (P = 0.009) and OS was 25.7, 24.0 and 28.0 months (P = 0.134) in 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR and 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR arms, respectively. Monotherapy maintenance (either 5-FU/LV or anti-EGFR) was inferior to combination in terms of PFS (hazard ratios [HR] 1.26, P = 0.016) and non-significantly trending also in OS (HR 1.20, P = 0.111). An increase of overall any grade and grade ≥ 3 AEs and selected AEs was reported in combination compared to either 5-FU/LV or anti-EGFR arms. CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis including four randomised phase II supports the use of 5-FU/LV plus anti-EGFR as the preferred maintenance regimen. Data provide rational for a more individualised maintenance treatment approach based on tumour and patients features.

Zanidatamab for HER2-amplified, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (HERIZON-BTC-01): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2b study.

BACKGROUND: HER2 is overexpressed or amplified in a subset of biliary tract cancer. Zanidatamab, a bispecific antibody targeting two distinct HER2 epitopes, exhibited tolerability and preliminary anti-tumour activity in HER2-expressing or HER2 (also known as ERBB2)-amplified treatment-refractory biliary tract cancer. METHODS: HERIZON-BTC-01 is a global, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2b trial of zanidatamab in patients with HER2-amplified, unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer with disease progression on previous gemcitabine-based therapy, recruited at 32 clinical trial sites in nine countries in North America, South America, Asia, and Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with HER2-amplified biliary tract cancer confirmed by in-situ hybridisation per central testing, at least one measurable target lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were assigned into cohorts based on HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) score: cohort 1 (IHC 2+ or 3+; HER2-positive) and cohort 2 (IHC 0 or 1+). Patients received zanidatamab 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate in cohort 1 as assessed by independent central review. Anti-tumour activity and safety were assessed in all participants who received any dose of zanidatamab. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04466891, is ongoing, and is closed to recruitment. FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2020, and March 16, 2022, 87 patients were enrolled in HERIZON-BTC-01: 80 in cohort 1 (45 [56%] were female and 35 [44%] were male; 52 [65%] were Asian; median age was 64 years [IQR 58-70]) and seven in cohort 2 (five [71%] were male and two [29%] were female; five [71%] were Asian; median age was 62 years [IQR 58-77]). At the time of the data cutoff (Oct 10, 2022), 18 (21%) patients (17 in cohort 1 and one in cohort 2) were continuing to receive zanidatamab; 69 (79%) discontinued treatment (radiographic progression in 64 [74%] patients). The median duration of follow-up was 12·4 months (IQR 9·4-17·2). Confirmed objective responses by independent central review were observed in 33 patients in cohort 1 (41·3% [95% CI 30·4-52·8]). 16 (18%) patients had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events; the most common were diarrhoea (four [5%] patients) and decreased ejection fraction (three [3%] patients). There were no grade 4 treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Zanidatamab demonstrated meaningful clinical benefit with a manageable safety profile in patients with treatment-refractory, HER2-positive biliary tract cancer. These results support the potential of zanidatamab as a future treatment option in HER2-positive biliary tract cancer. FUNDING: Zymeworks, Jazz, and BeiGene.

European expert panel consensus on the clinical management of BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogenous disease caused by various genetic alterations. The BRAFV600E mutation occurs in approximately 8-12% of patients and is characterised by an aggressive clinical course and poor prognosis. Here we review the current knowledge on BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC and provide a series of consensus statements on its clinical management. The treatment landscape for BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC has changed greatly due to the emergence of molecular targeted therapies (including BRAF inhibitors) and immune checkpoint inhibitors. A scientific literature search identified available data on molecular testing, treatments, and clinical monitoring of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Consensus statements were discussed and developed by a European expert panel. This manuscript provides consensus management guidance for different clinical presentations of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC and makes recommendations regarding treatment sequencing choices. To guide appropriate clinical management and treatment decisions for mCRC patients, tumour tissue analysis for DNA mismatch repair/microsatellite status and, at a minimum, KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutational status is mandatory at the time of diagnosis. Finally, we discuss the rapidly evolving treatment landscape for BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC and define priorities for the development of novel therapeutic strategies that are needed to improve patient outcomes.

Adverse Events Associated with Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab in Patients with BRAFV600E-mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An in-depth Analysis of the BEACON CRC Study.

BACKGROUND: The BRAF inhibitor encorafenib in combination with cetuximab was recently approved for patients with BRAFV600E-mutated (BRAFV600Emut) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Approval was based on positive results from the phase 3 BEACON CRC study in BRAFV600Emut mCRC patients who had progressed after 1-2 previous regimens. This analysis provides a detailed examination of the adverse events (AEs) of interest (AEIs) with encorafenib+cetuximab in the BEACON study to aid gastrointestinal oncologists, given the limited experience with this combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: AEIs, including dermatological AEs, arthralgia/myalgia, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, fatigue/asthenia and nephrotoxicity, were examined in the doublet therapy group. Clinical characteristics associated with these AEs, AE grade, time to onset and time to resolution were also studied. RESULTS: Safety analysis included 216/220 patients randomized to doublet therapy. The most commonly occurring AEI was dermatological toxicity (75.5%), followed by arthralgia/myalgia (56.0%) and fatigue/asthenia (56.0%). Other than nephrotoxicity (7 patients; 5/7 with Grade 3 or 4), most AEs were Grade 1 or 2. Most AEs were more common in women than men (nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, dermatological AEs, and arthralgia/myalgia). Nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain and fatigue/asthenia were more common in patients aged ≥70 years. Most AEs developed early, within the first 1-2 months of treatment, and resolved within 1-2 weeks. In addition, survival outcomes were better in patients experiencing arthralgia/myalgia or dermatological toxicities. CONCLUSION: This analysis indicated that, except for rare cases of nephrotoxicity, encorafenib+cetuximab is well tolerated in most patients, with most AEIs being mild-to-moderate in severity, occurring early and resolving rapidly. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: the BEACON study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02928224; EudraCT, 2015-005805-35).

Immediate surgery compared with short-course neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine, FOLFIRINOX, or chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (ESPAC5): a four-arm, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have relatively low resection rates and poor survival despite the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to establish the feasibility and efficacy of three different types of short-course neoadjuvant therapy compared with immediate surgery. METHODS: ESPAC5 (formerly known as ESPAC-5f) was a multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial done in 16 pancreatic centres in two countries (UK and Germany). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, biopsy proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic head, and were staged as having a borderline resectable tumour by contrast-enhanced CT criteria following central review. Participants were randomly assigned by means of minimisation to one of four groups: immediate surgery; neoadjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, and oral capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice a day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for two cycles); neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, folinic acid given according to local practice, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus injection on days 1 and 15 followed by 2400 mg/m2 46 h intravenous infusion given on days 1 and 15, repeated every 2 weeks for four cycles); or neoadjuvant capecitabine-based chemoradiation (total dose 50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions over 5·5 weeks [1·8 Gy per fraction, Monday to Friday] with capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily [Monday to Friday] throughout radiotherapy). Patients underwent restaging contrast-enhanced CT at 4-6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgical exploration if the tumour was still at least borderline resectable. All patients who had their tumour resected received adjuvant therapy at the oncologist's discretion. Primary endpoints were recruitment rate and resection rate. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 89500674, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2014, and Dec 20, 2018, from 478 patients screened, 90 were randomly assigned to a group (33 to immediate surgery, 20 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 20 to FOLFIRINOX, and 17 to capecitabine-based chemoradiation); four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis (one in the capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy withdrew consent before starting therapy and three [two in the immediate surgery group and one in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group] were found to be ineligible after randomisation). 44 (80%) of 55 patients completed neoadjuvant therapy. The recruitment rate was 25·92 patients per year from 16 sites; 21 (68%) of 31 patients in the immediate surgery and 30 (55%) of 55 patients in the combined neoadjuvant therapy groups underwent resection (p=0·33). R0 resection was achieved in three (14%) of 21 patients in the immediate surgery group and seven (23%) of 30 in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined (p=0·49). Surgical complications were observed in 29 (43%) of 68 patients who underwent surgery; no patients died within 30 days. 46 (84%) of 55 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were available for restaging. Six (13%) of 46 had a partial response. Median follow-up time was 12·2 months (95% CI 12·0-12·4). 1-year overall survival was 39% (95% CI 24-61) for immediate surgery, 78% (60-100) for gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 84% (70-100) for FOLFIRINOX, and 60% (37-97) for capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (p=0·0028). 1-year disease-free survival from surgery was 33% (95% CI 19-58) for immediate surgery and 59% (46-74) for the combined neoadjuvant therapies (hazard ratio 0·53 [95% CI 0·28-0·98], p=0·016). Three patients reported local disease recurrence (two in the immediate surgery group and one in the FOLFIRINOX group). 78 (91%) patients were included in the safety set and assessed for toxicity events. 19 (24%) of 78 patients reported a grade 3 or worse adverse event (two [7%] of 28 patients in the immediate surgery group and 17 [34%] of 50 patients in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined), the most common of which were neutropenia, infection, and hyperglycaemia. INTERPRETATION: Recruitment was challenging. There was no significant difference in resection rates between patients who underwent immediate surgery and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Short-course (8 week) neoadjuvant therapy had a significant survival benefit compared with immediate surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with either gemcitabine plus capecitabine or FOLFIRINOX had the best survival compared with immediate surgery. These findings support the use of short-course neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

[Corrigendum] Resveratrol inhibits the invasion and metastasis of colon cancer through reversal of epithelial­mesenchymal transition via the AKT/GSK­3ß/Snail signaling pathway.

Subsequently to the publication of the above article, an interested reader drew to the authors' attention that the Nc­control and si­AKT1­control data panels featured in Fig. 4A for the SW480 Transwell assay experiments on p. 2788 appeared to contain overlapping data, such that the data, which were intended to show the results from experiments performed under different experimental conditions, may have been derived from the same original source. Furthermore, in Fig. 5 on p. 2789, there appeared to be some overlapping data comparing the AKT1 western blotting data with the p­AKT1 data, and the same data also appeared in Fig. 4D for the p­AKT1 data presented there. The authors have re­examined their original data, and have realized that these figures were assembled incorrectly; essentially, the si­AKT1­control data panel was selected incorrectly for Fig. 4A, and the authors were able to retrieve the original data for the western blots presented in Fig. 5. The corrected versions of Figs. 4 and 5 are shown on the next page. The authors confirm that these errors did not have any major impact on the conclusions reported in their paper, and are grateful to the Editor of Molecular Medicine Reports for allowing them this opportunity to publish a Corrigendum. Furthermore, the authors apologize to the readership for any inconvenience caused. [Molecular Medicine Reports 20: 2783­2795, 2019; DOI: 10.3892/mmr.2019.10528].

Is antibody-drug conjugate a rising star for clinical treatment of solid tumors? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) show significant advantages in cancer treatment due to their high selectivity and anti-tumor activity, but the efficacy and safety of the treatment of solid tumors are unknown. We searched research databases, major conference proceedings and trial registries for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Then, we selected qualified studies and extracted dates. Studies were assessed for quality, and a meta-analysis was conducted to quantify effects of ADCs on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs). The within-study heterogeneity was evaluated by subgroup and sensitivity analysis. Eleven RCTs with 4353 participants were included. ADCs had better PFS (HR: 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.56-0.82) and OS (HR: 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.61-0.92). ADCs resulted in lower risk of febrile neutropenia in blood system. Conversely, ADC therapy had not a prepotent on ORR (RR: 1.36, 95 % CI: 0.71-2.60).

Spend less to achieve more: Economic analysis of intermittent versus continuous cetuximab in KRAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the COIN-B clinical trial demonstrated that intermittent cetuximab (IC) was a safe alternative to continuous cetuximab (CC), with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, in first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab has been available for this indication in England since 2015, but treatment breaks beyond 6 weeks were prohibited, despite real-world evidence that therapy de-escalation maintains equivalent disease control, but with superior Quality-of-Life (QoL). We performed health economic analyses of IC versus CC and used this evidence to help underpin policy change and guide clinical practice through reduction in unnecessary treatment for mCRC patients. METHODS: Employing cost-minimization analysis, we conducted partitioned survival modelling (PSM) and Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) simulation to determine costs and quality-adjusted-life-years for IC versus CC. RESULTS: IC reduced costs by £â€¯35,763 (PSM; p < 0.001) or £â€¯30,189 (MCMC) per patient annually, while preserving treatment efficacy and enhancing QoL. Extrapolating to all mCRC patients eligible for cetuximab therapy would have generated cost savings of ~£â€¯1.2 billion over this cohort's lifetime. These data helped underpin a request to NHS England to remove treatment break restrictions in first-line mCRC therapy, which has been adopted as an interim treatment option policy in colorectal cancer during the Covid-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight substantial cost savings achievable by treatment de-escalation, while also reinforcing the importance of therapy breaks to potentially increase tumour responsiveness and reduce treatment toxicity. Our study also highlights how health economic evidence can influence health policy, championing reduced treatment intensity approaches without compromising patient outcomes, which is of particular relevance when addressing the reduced capacity and treatment backlogs experienced during the pandemic.

Establishing a colorectal cancer research database from routinely collected health data: the process and potential from a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer is a common cause of death and morbidity. A significant amount of data are routinely collected during patient treatment, but they are not generally available for research. The National Institute for Health Research Health Informatics Collaborative in the UK is developing infrastructure to enable routinely collected data to be used for collaborative, cross-centre research. This paper presents an overview of the process for collating colorectal cancer data and explores the potential of using this data source. METHODS: Clinical data were collected from three pilot Trusts, standardised and collated. Not all data were collected in a readily extractable format for research. Natural language processing (NLP) was used to extract relevant information from pseudonymised imaging and histopathology reports. Combining data from many sources allowed reconstruction of longitudinal histories for each patient that could be presented graphically. RESULTS: Three pilot Trusts submitted data, covering 12 903 patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer since 2012, with NLP implemented for 4150 patients. Timelines showing individual patient longitudinal history can be grouped into common treatment patterns, visually presenting clusters and outliers for analysis. Difficulties and gaps in data sources have been identified and addressed. DISCUSSION: Algorithms for analysing routinely collected data from a wide range of sites and sources have been developed and refined to provide a rich data set that will be used to better understand the natural history, treatment variation and optimal management of colorectal cancer. CONCLUSION: The data set has great potential to facilitate research into colorectal cancer.

Eruptive naevi associated with encorafenib for metastatic colorectal cancer: two cases.

Encorafenib is a BRAF inhibitor increasingly used as a second-line treatment for metastatic melanoma and colorectal cancer. BRAF inhibitors have been reported to be associated with new and changing melanocytic lesions, including eruptive naevi. We describe two cases of eruptive naevi secondary to encorafenib used for the treatment of BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer.

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.

Erratum: Jiedu Sangen Decoction Reverses Epithelial-to-mesenchymal Transition and Inhibits Invasion and Metastasis of Colon Cancer via AKT/GSK-3ß Signaling Pathway: Erratum.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.7150/jca.32873.].

Capecitabine Versus Active Monitoring in Stable or Responding Metastatic Colorectal Cancer After 16 Weeks of First-Line Therapy: Results of the Randomized FOCUS4-N Trial.

PURPOSE: Despite extensive randomized evidence supporting the use of treatment breaks in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), they are not universally offered to patients despite improvements in quality of life without detriment to overall survival (OS). FOCUS4-N was set up to explore the impact of oral maintenance therapy in patients who are responding to first-line therapy. METHODS: FOCUS4 was a molecularly stratified trial program that registered patients with newly diagnosed mCRC. The FOCUS4-N trial was offered to patients in whom a targeted subtrial was unavailable or biomarker tests failed. Patients were randomly assigned using a 1:1 ratio between maintenance capecitabine and active monitoring (AM). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary outcomes including OS toxicity and tolerability. RESULTS: Between March 2014 and March 2020, 254 patients were randomly assigned (127 to capecitabine and 127 to AM) across 88 UK sites. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was strong evidence of efficacy for PFS (hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.75; P < .0001), but no significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.27; P = .66) was observed. Compliance with treatment was good, and toxicity from capecitabine versus AM was as expected with grade ≥ 2 fatigue (25% v 12%), diarrhea (23% v 13%), and hand-foot syndrome (26% v 3%). Quality of life showed little difference between the groups. CONCLUSION: Despite strong evidence of disease control with maintenance therapy, OS remains unaffected and FOCUS4-N provides additional evidence to support the use of treatment breaks as safe management alternatives for patients who are stable or responding to first-line treatment for mCRC. Capecitabine without bevacizumab may be used to extend PFS in the interval after 16 weeks of first-line therapy.

Addition of ramucirumab or merestinib to standard first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers are aggressive, rare, gastrointestinal malignancies with a poor prognosis; approximately half of patients with these cancers survive for less than 1 year after diagnosis with advanced disease. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab or merestinib in addition to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study at 81 hospitals across 18 countries. We enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, non-resectable, recurrent, or metastatic biliary tract adenocarcinoma, who were treatment-naive, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, estimated life expectancy of 3 months or more, and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1) to receive either intravenous ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles) or oral merestinib 80 mg or placebo (once daily) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient or investigator request for discontinuation. All participants received intravenous cisplatin 25 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles), for a maximum of eight cycles. Randomisation was done by an interactive web response system using a permuted block method (blocks of six) and was stratified by primary tumour site, geographical region, and presence of metastatic disease. Participants, investigators, and the study funder were masked to treatment assignment within the intravenous and oral groups. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (in the intention-to-treat population). The safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02711553, and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2016, and Aug 8, 2017, 450 patients were assessed for eligibility and 309 (69%) were enrolled and randomly assigned to ramucirumab (n=106), merestinib (n=102), or pooled placebo (n=101); 306 received at least one dose of study treatment. The median follow-up time for progression-free survival at data cutoff (Feb 16, 2018) was 10·9 months (IQR 8·1-14·1). Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (80% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ramucirumab group, 7·0 months (6·2-7·1) in the merestinib group, and 6·6 months (5·6-6·8) in the pooled placebo group (ramucirumab vs placebo hazard ratio 1·12 [80% CI 0·90-1·40], two-sided stratified p=0·48; merestinib vs placebo 0·92 [0·73-1·15], two-sided stratified p=0·64). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (51 [49%] of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group; 48 [47%] of 102 in the merestinib group; and 33 [33%] of 100 in the pooled placebo group), thrombocytopenia (36 [35%]; 19 [19%]; and 17 [17%]), and anaemia (28 [27%]; 16 [16%]; and 19 [19%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 53 (51%) patients in the ramucirumab group, 56 (55%) in the merestinib group, and 48 (48%) in the pooled placebo group. Treatment-related deaths (deemed related by the investigator) occurred in one (1%) of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group (cardiac arrest) and two (2%) of 102 patients in the merestinib group (pulmonary embolism [n=1] and sepsis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Adding ramucirumab or merestinib to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine was well tolerated, with no new safety signals, but neither improved progression-free survival in patients with molecularly unselected, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. The role of these targeted inhibitors remains investigational, highlighting the need for further understanding of biliary tract malignancies and the contribution of molecular selection. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

The Screening and COnsensus Based on Practices and Evidence (SCOPE) Program-Results of a Survey on Daily Practice Patterns for Patients with mCRC.

The SCOPE project aimed to better understand practice patterns, identify drivers for treatment goals, and determine third- and fourth-line treatment choices for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The survey was developed by an expert panel of gastrointestinal oncologists. Questions concerned general practice patterns, and treatment decisions for three hypothetical patient case scenarios. Participants had to routinely manage patients with mCRC. We present results from 629 participants who provided input on patient treatment scenarios (data cutoff: 17/01/2020). Prolonging overall survival (OS; 51%) was the main aim in first line. In third line, quality of life (QOL) was the primary goal (34%). Forty-three percent also cited efficacy-focused goals; 18% and 13% noted prolonging OS and improving progression-free survival as main aims, respectively. For fit and active patients, 89% of respondents considered trifluridine-tipiracil an appropriate third-line treatment; regorafenib (31%) or clinical trial enrollment (29%) were the fourth-line options. For patients with comorbidities and limited caregiver support, trifluridine-tipiracil was the preferred third-line treatment (70%). For KRAS-mutated patients with comorbidities and adverse events who received prior oxaliplatin, 90% considered oxaliplatin rechallenge an unsuitable third-line treatment, mainly due to the risk of cumulative toxicity (75%). In the third/fourth-line settings, trifluridine-tipiracil followed by regorafenib was the most common option (54%); 17% chose regorafenib followed by trifluridine-tipiracil. Efficacy coupled with QOL are important goals in third-line treatment. Daily practice patterns reflect the guideline recommendations in third- and fourth-line settings, with a trend toward using trifluridine-tipiracil versus regorafenib in KRAS-wildtype and KRAS-mutant tumors.

Transcription factor POU4F2 promotes colorectal cancer cell migration and invasion through hedgehog-mediated epithelial-mesenchymal transition.

As a POU homeodomain transcription factor, POU4F2 has been implicated in regulating tumorigenic processes in various cancers. However, the role of POU4F2 in colorectal cancer (CRC) remains unclear. Here, we revealed that POU4F2 functions as a tumor promotor in CRC. Bioinformatics analysis in specimens from CRC patients and expression analysis in CRC cell lines showed that POU4F2 was upregulated at the mRNA and protein levels in CRC. Depletion of POU4F2 suppressed the metastatic phenotypes of CRC cells, including cell migration, invasion, and the expression of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers. Moreover, depletion of POU4F2 decreased the number of lung metastatic nodes in nude mice. Mechanistically, POU4F2 positively regulated the Hedgehog signaling pathway, as inferred from the downregulation of the expression of sonic Hedgehog homolog, patched 1, Smoothened, and GLI family zinc finger 1 in vitro and vivo following silencing of POU4F2. Furthermore, the SMO agonist SAG reversed the effects of POU4F2 knockdown in CRC. Functionally, POU4F2 contributed to the Hedgehog signaling-regulated activation of the EMT process and promotion of CRC cell migration and invasion. Collectively, these findings elucidated the role of POU4F2 as a tumor promotor in CRC through the regulation of Hedgehog signaling-mediated EMT and suggested that POU4F2 suppression might be a promising therapeutic target in inhibiting CRC metastasis.

Treatment breaks in first line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) may improve quality of life without compromising overall survival (OS). We aimed to use individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) from multiple randomised controlled trials evaluating intermittent strategies to inform clinical practice. We also aimed to validate whether thrombocytosis as a predictive biomarker identified patients with significantly reduced OS receiving a complete treatment break. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An IPDMA of intermittent strategy impact on survival was undertaken, including all relevant trials in which data were available. Intermittent strategies were classified into two groups: a planned stopping of all therapy ("treatment break strategy"; 6 trials; 2,907 patients) or to the same treatment omitting oxaliplatin ("maintenance strategy"; 3 trials; 1,271 patients). The primary analysis sample was of patients successfully completing induction therapy. Additionally, a pre-planned analysis of the predictive value of thrombocytosis on survival under a continuous versus an intermittent strategy was undertaken. RESULTS: All trials had comparable inclusion criteria. The overall IPDMA of intermittent therapy versus continuous therapy demonstrated no detriment in OS (HR = 1.03 [95% CI 0.93-1.14]), whether from complete break (HR 1.04 [95% CI 0.87-1.26]) or maintenance strategies (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.87-1.13]). Thrombocytosis was confirmed as a marker of poor prognosis in aCRC, but did not predict for OS detriment from treatment break strategies (interaction HR = 0.97 [95% CI 0.66-1.40] compared to continuous therapy). CONCLUSION: The highest levels of evidence from this IPDMA indicate no detriment in survival for patients receiving an intermittent therapy strategy, either for maintenance or complete break strategies. Although, thrombocytosis is confirmed as a marker of poor prognosis, it is not predictive of poor outcome for patients treated with intermittent therapy. An intermittent chemotherapy strategy can therefore be applied irrespective of baseline platelet count and does not result in inferior OS compared to continuous chemotherapy.

Resveratrol and Its Analogs: Potent Agents to Reverse Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition in Tumors.

Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), a complicated program through which polarized epithelial cells acquire motile mesothelial traits, is regulated by tumor microenvironment. EMT is involved in tumor progression, invasion and metastasis via reconstructing the cytoskeleton and degrading the tumor basement membrane. Accumulating evidence shows that resveratrol, as a non-flavonoid polyphenol, can reverse EMT and inhibit invasion and migration of human tumors via diverse mechanisms and signaling pathways. In the present review, we will summarize the detailed mechanisms and pathways by which resveratrol and its analogs (e.g. Triacetyl resveratrol, 3,5,4'-Trimethoxystilbene) might regulate the EMT process in cancer cells to better understand their potential as novel anti-tumor agents. Resveratrol can also reverse chemoresistance via EMT inhibition and improvement of the antiproliferative effects of conventional treatments. Therefore, resveratrol and its analogs have the potential to become novel adjunctive agents to inhibit cancer metastasis, which might be partly related to their blocking of the EMT process.