Innovative Approach to Isolate and Characterize Glioblastoma Circulating Tumor Cells and Correlation with Tumor Mutational Status.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are one of the most important causes of tumor recurrence and distant metastases. Glioblastoma (GBM) has been considered restricted to the brain for many years. Nevertheless, in the past years, several pieces of evidence indicate that hematogenous dissemination is a reality, and this is also in the caseof GBM. Our aim was to optimize CTCs' detection in GBM and define the genetic background of single CTCs compared to the primary GBM tumor and its recurrence to demonstrate that CTCs are indeed derived from the parental tumor. We collected blood samples from a recurrent IDH wt GBM patient. We genotyped the parental recurrent tumor tissue and the respective primary GBM tissue. CTCs were analyzed using the DEPArray system. CTCs Copy Number Alterations (CNAs) and sequencing analyses were performed to compare CTCs' genetic background with the same patient's primary and recurrent GBM tissues. We identified 210 common mutations in the primary and recurrent tumors. Among these, three somatic high-frequency mutations (in PRKCB, TBX1, and COG5 genes) were selected to investigate their presence in CTCs. Almost all sorted CTCs (9/13) had at least one of the mutations tested. The presence of TERT promoter mutations was also investigated and C228T variation was found in parental tumors and CTCs (C228T heterozygous and homozygous, respectively). We were able to isolate and genotype CTCs from a patient with GBM. We found common mutations but also exclusive molecular characteristics.

CEA increase as a marker of disease progression after first-line induction therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. A pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies.

BACKGROUND: In mCRC, CEA is used to monitor response to systemic therapy together with imaging. After the end of induction, no major improvement in tumour shrinkage is expected, and the availability of a marker able to predict progressive disease (PD) versus no-PD might allow avoiding CT scans. METHODS: We pooled data from patients with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL included in TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies with the aim of identifying a threshold for percent increase of CEA from nadir able to predict PD after the end of the induction therapy. RESULTS: In total, 1178 paired CEA and radiological assessments from 434 patients were included. According to the optimal cut-off determined by ROC, a CEA increase of at least 120% from nadir differentiated between PD and no-PD with a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 78%, excluding PD in the 92% of radiological assessments and allowing to avoid the 67% of CT scans. However, CEA cut-off of 120% was not able to detect radiological PD in 26% of cases. In order to mitigate this issue, a different clinically relevant threshold was evaluated based on the best sensitivity cut-off. Therefore, using any CEA increase from nadir as a threshold, the sensitivity grew to 93% and only in the 7% of cases the radiological PD was not detected. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL, CEA values can accurately predict PD versus no-PD after the end of the first-line induction therapy.

Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab and reintroduction after progression versus mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRIBE2): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The triplet FOLFOXIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab showed improved outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, compared with FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab. However, the actual benefit of the upfront exposure to the three cytotoxic drugs compared with a preplanned sequential strategy of doublets was not clear, and neither was the feasibility or efficacy of therapies after disease progression. We aimed to compare a preplanned strategy of upfront FOLFOXIRI followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression versus a sequence of mFOLFOX6 (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI doublets, in combination with bevacizumab. METHODS: TRIBE2 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised study of patients aged 18-75 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2, with unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, recruited from 58 Italian oncology units. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour location, and previous adjuvant chemotherapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm was used to randomly assign patients (1:1) via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two different treatment strategies. In the control group, patients received first-line mFOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 of intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously over 30 min) followed by FOLFIRI (180 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 120 min concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab after disease progression. In the experimental group, patients received FOLFOXIRI (165 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 60 min; 85 mg/m2 intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 3200 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression. Combination treatments were repeated every 14 days for up to eight cycles followed by fluorouracil and leucovorin (at the same dose administered at the last induction cycle) plus bevacizumab maintenance until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. Patients and investigators were not masked. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival 2, defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression on any treatment given after first disease progression, or death, analysed by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. Study recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02339116. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2015, and May 15, 2017, 679 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (340 in the control group and 339 in the experimental group). At data cut-off (July 30, 2019) median follow-up was 35·9 months (IQR 30·1-41·4). Median progression-free survival 2 was 19·2 months (95% CI 17·3-21·4) in the experimental group and 16·4 months (15·1-17·5) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·63-0·88; p=0·0005). During the first-line treatment, the most frequent of all-cause grade 3-4 events were diarrhoea (57 [17%] vs 18 [5%]), neutropenia (168 [50%] vs 71 [21%]), and arterial hypertension (25 [7%] vs 35 [10%]) in the experimental group compared with the control group. Serious adverse events occurred in 84 (25%) patients in the experimental group and in 56 (17%) patients in the control group. Eight treatment-related deaths were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions, two intestinal perforations, two sepsis, one myocardial infarction, and one bleeding) and four in the control group (two occlusions, one perforation, and one pulmonary embolism). After first disease progression, no substantial differences in the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported between the control and experimental groups, with the exception of neurotoxicity, which was only reported in the experimental group (six [5%] of 132 patients). Serious adverse events after disease progression occurred in 20 (15%) patients in the experimental group and 25 (12%) in the control group. Three treatment-related deaths after first disease progression were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions and one sepsis) and four in the control group (one intestinal occlusion, one intestinal perforation, one cerebrovascular event, and one sepsis). INTERPRETATION: Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression seems to be a preferable therapeutic strategy to sequential administration of chemotherapy doublets, in combination with bevacizumab, for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer selected according to the study criteria. FUNDING: The GONO Cooperative Group, the ARCO Foundation, and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Primary Tumor Resection in Synchronous Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Upfront Chemotherapy plus Bevacizumab: A Pooled Analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 Studies.

BACKGROUND: The decision to resect or not the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a complex and challenging issue for oncologists, especially when an antiangiogenic-based therapy is planned. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the phase III TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies that compared upfront FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab to FOLFIRI or FOLFOX + bevacizumab, respectively, were included. We assessed the association of primary tumor resection (PTR) with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of grade > 2 adverse events (AEs), and serious gastrointestinal and surgical AEs in the overall population and according to the treatment arm. RESULTS: Of the 999 patients included, 513 (51%) underwent PTR at baseline. Longer PFS and OS were observed in resected patients compared to those with unresected primary tumors: 11.2 vs. 10.0 months (p < 0.001) and 26.6 vs. 22.5 (p < 0.001), respectively. In multivariate models, PTR was confirmed as an independent prognostic factor for better PFS (p = 0.032) and OS (p = 0.018). Patients with PTR experienced a higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea (p = 0.055) and lower incidence of anemia (p = 0.053), perforation (p = 0.015), and serious gastrointestinal and surgical AEs (p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were noted in incidence of bleeding (p = 0.39). The benefit of FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab in terms of PFS (p for interaction: 0.46), OS (p for interaction: 0.80), ORR (p for interaction: 0.36), and incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs was independent of PTR. CONCLUSIONS: PTR at baseline was independently associated with good prognosis in synchronous mCRC patients and with lower incidence of serious gastrointestinal and surgical AEs during upfront chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. The benefit and toxicity profile of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab was independent of PTR.

Adverse events during first-line treatments for mCRC: The Toxicity over Time (ToxT) analysis of three randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, the assessment of safety is traditionally focused on the overall rate of high-grade and serious adverse events (AEs). A new approach to AEs evaluation, taking into account chronic low-grade AEs, single patient's perspective, and time-related information, such as ToxT analysis, should be considered especially for less intense but potentially long-lasting treatments, such as maintenance strategies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We applied ToxT (Toxicity over Time) evaluation to a large cohort of mCRC patients enroled in randomised TRIBE, TRIBE2, and VALENTINO studies, in order to longitudinally describe AEs throughout the whole treatment duration and to compare AEs evolution over cycles between induction and maintenance strategies, providing numerical and graphical results overall and per single patient. After 4-6 months of combination therapy, 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) + bevacizumab or panitumumab was recommended in all studies except for the 50% of patients in the VALENTINO trial who received panitumumab alone. RESULTS: Out of 1400 patients included, 42% received FOLFOXIRI (5-FU/LV, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan)/bevacizumab, 18% FOLFIRI/bevacizumab, 24% FOLFOX/bevacizumab, 16% FOLFOX/panitumumab. Mean grade of general and haematological AEs was higher in the first cycles, then progressively decreasing after the end of induction (p < 0.001), and always remaining at the highest levels with FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab (p < 0.001). Neurotoxicity became more frequent over the cycles with late high-grade episodes (p < 0.001), while the incidence but not the grade of hand-and-foot syndrome gradually increased (p = 0.91). Anti-VEGF-related AEs were more severe in the first cycles, then setting over at low levels (p = 0.03), while anti-EGFR-related AEs still affected patients during maintenance. CONCLUSIONS: Most of chemotherapy-related AEs (except for HFS and neuropathy) reach the highest level in the first cycles, then decrease, probably due to their active clinical management. Transition to maintenance allows relief from most AEs, especially with bevacizumab-based regimens, while anti-EGFR-related AEs may persist.

Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in older adjuvant early breast cancer patients: cardiac safety analysis and final results of the COLTONE study.

AIMS: To explore the cardiac safety of adjuvant Non-Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (NPL-DOX) plus Cyclophosphamide (CTX) followed by weekly Paclitaxel, in elderly women (≥ 65 years) with high-risk breast cancer. Previously, we described no symptomatic cardiac events within the first 12 months from starting treatment. We now reported the updated results after a median follow-up 76 months. METHODS: The cardiac activity was evaluated with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) echocardiograms assessments, before starting chemotherapy and every 6 months, until 30 months from baseline, then yearly for at least 5 years. RESULTS: Forty-seven women were recruited by two Units of Medical Oncology (Ethics Committee authorization CESM-AOUP, 3203/2011; EudraCT identification number: 2010-024067-41, for Pisa and Pontedera Hospitals). An episode of grade 3 CHF (NCI-CTCAE, version 3.0) occurred after 18 months the beginning of chemotherapy. The echocardiograms assessments were performed comparing the LVEF values of each patient evaluated at fixed period of time, compared to baseline. We observed a slight changed in terms of mean values at 48, 60, 72 and 84 months. At these time points, a statistically significant reduction of - 3.2%, - 4.6%, - 6.4% and - 7.1%, respectively, was observed. However, LVEF remained above 50% without translation in any relevant clinical signs. No other cardiac significant episodes were reported. To this analysis, in 13 patients (28%) occurred disease relapse and,  of them, 11 (23%) died due to metastatic disease. Eight patients died of cancer-unrelated causes. CONCLUSIONS: The combination including NPL-DOX in elderly patients revealed low rate of cardiac toxic effects. Comparative trials are encouraged.

Prognostic and Predictive Role of Body Mass Index (BMI) in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): A Pooled Analisys of Tribe and Tribe-2 Studies by GONO.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with an increased risk of development and recurrence of colorectal cancer. The role of obesity in metastatic colorectal cancer patients (pts) is still unclear, especially in those treated with triplet plus bevacizumab (bev). The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive role of BMI in metastatic colorectal cancer pts treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bev or FOLFIRI/FOLFOX plus bev in the TRIBE and TRIBE-2 trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1160 pts enrolled in TRIBE and TRIBE-2 trials were included. Baseline height and weight were used to assign pts to one of the following BMI categories: underweight (group A = BMI <18.5 kg/m2; 52 pts), normal (group B = BMI 18.5-29.9 kg/m2; 952 pts) and obese (group C > 30 kg/m2; 156 pts). RESULTS: In our population, no differences in terms of PFS (P = .43) or OS (P = .99) resulted between 3 groups. No interaction effect between treatment arm and BMI was evident in terms of PFS (Group A HR: 0.65 [95%CI: 0.36-1.16]; Group B HR: 0.77 [95%CI: 0.67-0.88]; Group C HR: 0.67 [95%CI: 0.48-0.93]; P for interaction = .75) or OS (Group A HR: 0.57 [95%CI: 0.29-1.12]; Group B HR: 0.85 [95%CI: 0.73-0.99];Group C HR: 0.69 [95%CI: 0.48-1.01] P for interaction = .36). No statistically significant difference in terms of dose reductions due to toxicities were found according to BMI in the overall population (P = .48) and in pts treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bev (P = .57). CONCLUSION: BMI was neither prognostic or predictive for PFS and OS in our population. Our analyses showed that the advantage of FOLFOXIRI plus bev versus FOLFIRI/FOLFOX plus bev was independent from BMI.

A pharmacogenetic interaction analysis of bevacizumab with paclitaxel in advanced breast cancer patients.

To investigate pharmacogenetic interactions among VEGF-A, VEGFR-2, IL-8, HIF-1α, EPAS-1, and TSP-1 SNPs and their role on progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients treated with bevacizumab plus first-line paclitaxel or with paclitaxel alone. Analyses were performed on germline DNA, and SNPs were investigated by real-time PCR technique. The multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) methodology was applied to investigate the interaction between SNPs. The present study was an explorative, ambidirectional cohort study: 307 patients from 11 Oncology Units were evaluated retrospectively from 2009 to 2016, then followed prospectively (NCT01935102). Two hundred and fifteen patients were treated with paclitaxel and bevacizumab, whereas 92 patients with paclitaxel alone. In the bevacizumab plus paclitaxel group, the MDR software provided two pharmacogenetic interaction profiles consisting of the combination between specific VEGF-A rs833061 and VEGFR-2 rs1870377 genotypes. Median PFS for favorable genetic profile was 16.8 vs. the 10.6 months of unfavorable genetic profile (p = 0.0011). Cox proportional hazards model showed an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.5-0.9; p = 0.004). Median OS for the favorable genetic profile was 39.6 vs. 28 months of unfavorable genetic profile (p = 0.0103). Cox proportional hazards model revealed an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.5-1.01; p = 0.058). In the 92 patients treated with paclitaxel alone, the results showed no effect of the favorable genetic profile, as compared to the unfavorable genetic profile, either on the PFS (p = 0.509) and on the OS (p = 0.732). The pharmacogenetic statistical interaction between VEGF-A rs833061 and VEGFR-2 rs1870377 genotypes may identify a population of bevacizumab-treated patients with a better PFS.

Bevacizumab with FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and folinate) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and folinate) regimen has been shown to be better than FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, folinate, and irinotecan) in a phase 3 trial in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Results of various studies have shown that the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy increases treatment efficacy. We therefore assessed the safety and activity of the combination of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with colorectal cancer. METHODS: In a phase 2 study, patients (aged 18-75 years) with colorectal cancer, which was judged to be unresectable for metastatic disease, were given the combination of intravenous bevacizumab (5 mg/kg on day 1) and intravenous FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan 165 mg/m(2) on day 1, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1, folinate 200 mg/m(2) on day 1, and fluorouracil 3200 mg/m(2) for 48 h continuous infusion starting on day 1 and repeated every 2 weeks) as first-line treatment in seven centres in Italy. Induction treatment (FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab) was administered for a maximum of 6 months, followed by maintenance treatment with bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1, repeated every 2 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) at 10 months from study entry in the intention-to-treat population. This study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01163396. FINDINGS: From July 2, 2007, to April 1, 2008, 57 patients were enrolled; all patients were assessed for safety and efficacy. Median follow-up time was 28.8 months (95% CI 24.9-32.5). PFS at 10 months was 74% (95% CI 62-85). Main grade 3 or 4 adverse events during induction treatment were neutropenia (n=28 [49%], including one case of febrile neutropenia), diarrhoea (n=8 [14%]), stomatitis (n=2 [4%]), neurotoxicity (n=1 [2%]), deep-vein thrombosis (n=4 [7%]), and hypertension (n=6 [11%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Six serious adverse events occurred during the induction treatment: febrile neutropenia (n=1 [2%]), grade 3 diarrhoea with dehydration (n=2 [4%]), grade 4 stomatitis (n=1 [2%]), grade 4 hypertension (n=1 [2%]), and fluorouracil-related cardiac ischaemia (n=1 [2%]). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events noted in the 37 patients who received maintenance treatment were hypertension (n=5 [14%]) and neurotoxicity (n=3 [8%]). One case of acute myocardial infarction due to coronary thrombosis was noted during the maintenance treatment. INTERPRETATION: Bevacizumab can be safely used with FOLFOXIRI without causing unforeseen adverse events. Treatment achieved promising results in terms of PFS. A phase 3 study for the comparison of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab is in progress. FUNDING: Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest, ARCO Foundation, and Roche.

Rationale and Study Design of the PARERE Trial: Randomized phase II Study of Panitumumab Re-Treatment Followed by Regorafenib Versus the Reverse Sequence in RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Chemo-Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: A recent phase II randomized Japanese study reported better survival with regorafenib followed at progression by cetuximab ± irinotecan compared with the reverse standard sequence in chemo-refractory and anti-EGFR-naïve, RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC patients. Nowadays the use of anti-EGFR antibodies is more frequently anticipated to the first-line of therapy especially in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wt tumours. However, retrospective analyses and phase II single-arm trials showed promising activity of re-using anti-EGFRs in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who previously achieved benefit from a first-line anti-EGFR-based treatment. Post-hoc analyses of these trials revealed that the detection of RAS mutations in circulating tumour DNA (ct-DNA) at the time of re-treatment may be useful to identify resistant patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PARERE (NCT04787341) is a prospective, open label, multicentre phase II study in which 214 RAS/BRAF wt chemo-refractory mCRC patients with previous benefit from first-line anti-EGFR-based treatment and RAS/BRAF wt ct-DNA in the liquid biopsy collected at the time of inclusion will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive panitumumab followed after progression by regorafenib versus the reverse sequence. Primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are 1st-progression free-survival (PFS), 2nd-PFS, time to failure strategy, objective response rate, and safety. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of this study is to validate the role of anti-EGFR retreatment and its proper placement in the therapeutic route of mCRC patients selected according to the analysis of ct-DNA in liquid biopsy. Results are expected at the end of 2023.

Oligometastatic colorectal cancer: prognosis, role of locoregional treatments and impact of first-line chemotherapy-a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies by Gruppo Oncologico del Nord Ovest.

BACKGROUND: Oligometastatic disease (OMD) identifies tumours with limited metastatic spread. OMD definition is not univocal and no data from clinical trials are available about the prognostic effect of OMD in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the impact of locoregional treatments (LRTs) and the effect of chemotherapy intensification in these patients. The role of tumour burden (TB) in driving therapeutic choices is also debated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of phase III TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies comparing FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab (bev) to doublets (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI)/bev. Patients were grouped in OMD versus non-OMD based on the European Society for Medical Oncology definition. Among patients with OMD, those with OMD/low TB were compared with all the others. RESULTS: Of 1187 patients enrolled, 1096 were classified as OMD (N = 312 [28%]) or non-OMD (N = 784 [72%]). Among patients with OMD, 126 (40%) were OMD/low TB. OMD was associated with longer progression-free survival (14.0 versus 10.1 months; p < 0.01) and overall survival (38.2 versus 22.0 months; p < 0.01). These results were confirmed in multivariable models. The benefit provided by FOLFOXIRI/bev compared with doublets/bev did not differ in accordance with OMD and TB (p for interaction >0.05). Patients with OMD underwent LRTs more frequently (p < 0.01) and those with OMD/low TB had higher chance to undergo LRTs after the first progression (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: OMD is a positive prognostic factor in mCRC. The benefit from the upfront treatment intensification is independent of the metastatic spread extent and TB. LRTs should be highly considered in these patients, mainly during the first-line therapy but also at later stages of treatment history in selected cases.

Long-term outcome of initially unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) followed by radical surgery of metastases.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The GONO-FOLFOXIRI regimen improved the rate of R0 secondary resection of metastases in initially unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of resected patients and the impact of FOLFOXIRI on perioperative morbidities, mortality, and chemotherapy induced hepatotoxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 196 patients with initially unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer were treated with FOLFOXIRI in 2 phase II and 1 phase III trial. This regimen was associated with an elevated response rate (70.4%) and 37 patients (19%) could undergo a secondary R0 surgery on metastases. This study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Database at http://www.anzctr.org.au/Statistics.aspx and has ID number ACTRN12608000615381. RESULTS: Main characteristics of the 37 radically resected patients were: median age 64 years (45-73), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG) PS > or = 1 in 30%, synchronous metastases in 65%, multiple sites of disease in 22%, and metastases confined to the liver in 68%. Preoperative FOLFOXIRI was administered for a median of 5.5 months. There was no perioperative mortality and all morbidities (27% of patients) resolved without sequelae. After a median follow up of 67 months, 5-year and 8-year survival are 42% and 33% respectively. At 5 years, 29% of patients are free of disease. The analysis of treatment-induced liver injury showed neither G3 vascular toxicity nor G4 steatosis, and steato-hepatitis in only 5% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The GONO-FOLFOXIRI regimen allow an R0 surgery in approximately 1 out of 5 unselected patients with initially unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, and the long-term survival of resected patients is considerable. Neoadjuvant FOLFOXIRI for 3-6 months is safe and not associated with severe liver injury.

Irinotecan in combination with thalidomide in patients with advanced solid tumors: a clinical study with pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic evaluation.

PURPOSE: Recent clinical studies have demonstrated a reduction of irinotecan (CPT-11) gastrointestinal toxicities when the CPT-11 is administered in combination with thalidomide in patients with diagnosis of colorectal cancer. The main purpose of this study was to investigate possible interactions between CPT-11 pharmacokinetics and thalidomide to explain the previously described gastrointestinal toxicity reduction. METHODS: In our clinical trial, advanced cancer patients were treated with CPT-11 on a dose of 350 mg/m2 at day 1 every 3 weeks. Only at the first cycle, CPT-11 was administered in association with thalidomide on a dose of 400 mg/day given from day 1 to day 14. From the second cycle, the treatment was continued with irinotecan alone at the same dose. Pharmacokinetics analysis of irinotecan and its metabolites, SN-38 and SN-38-glucuronide, were performed at the first and second cycle. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients entered the study. The pharmacokinetic analysis were performed on 16 patients. Pharmacokinetic data suggested a decreased metabolism of irinotecan into SN-38 and SN-38-glucuronide when it was administered with thalidomide. Indeed, area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) of SN-38 was significantly lower at the first cycle than the second cycle (0.99+/-0.45 hxmicrog/ml vs 1.34+/-0.65, respectively, P=0.027) whereas AUC of irinotecan and SN-38-glucuronide were higher at first cycle than second cycle (34.53+/-11.38 hxmicrog/ml vs. 28.42+/-12.23 hxmicrog/ml, P=0.064 and 2.39+/-1.21 h(microg/ml vs. 1.86+/-1.11 hxmicrog/ml, P=0.018, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates a significant decreased metabolism of CPT-11 into the active metabolite SN-38 when CPT-11 is administered in association with thalidomide. These observations strongly suggest an interaction of thalidomide with CPT-11 metabolism and, at least in part, it might explain the previously described improvement in tolerability.

Biweekly chemotherapy with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, infusional Fluorouracil, and leucovorin: a pilot study in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility, recommended doses, plasma pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of a biweekly chemotherapy regimen with oxaliplatin (L-OHP), irinotecan (CPT-11), infusional fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin (LV) in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received CPT-11 followed by L-OHP and LV 200 mg/m(2) and followed by 5-FU 3,800 mg/m(2) as a 48-hour infusion, repeated every 2 weeks. In the first part of the study, an escalation of CPT-11 dose and/or a decrease of the L-OHP dose were planned. Once the recommended doses of CPT-11 and L-OHP were determined, all subsequent patients were treated at the recommended doses. RESULTS: Forty-two patients entered the study. CPT-11 175 mg/m(2) and L-OHP 100 mg/m(2) in combination with LV 200 mg/m(2) and 5-FU 3,800 mg/m(2) could be administered with acceptable toxicities; 39 patients were treated at these dose levels. The pharmacokinetics parameters of the agents used and their metabolites did not seem to be influenced by the concomitant use of the other drugs. The most relevant toxicities were diarrhea and neutropenia, with 14% of patients experiencing one episode of febrile neutropenia. In five patients (11.9%) a complete and in 25 (59.5%) a partial response was demonstrated, for an objective response rate of 71.4% (95% confidence interval, 47% to 83%). In 11 patients (26%), a surgical resection of residual disease could be performed. Median progression-free and overall survival times were 10.4 and 26.5 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: This biweekly regimen is feasible and has acceptable and manageable toxicities and no apparent relevant pharmacokinetics interactions. This combination is associated with a promising antitumor activity, time to progression, and survival. A phase III randomized trial in Italy planned by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest has just started.

A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of irinotecan given as a 7-day continuous infusion in metastatic colorectal cancer patients pretreated with 5-fluorouracil or raltitrexed.

PURPOSE: The purpose is to determine the plasma pharmacokinetics, the maximum-tolerable dose and to preliminary evaluate the antitumor activity of irinotecan administered as a 7-day continuous infusion every 21 days in metastatic colorectal cancer patients pretreated with 5-fluorouracil or raltitrexed. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A total of 13 patients entered the study. Three received irinotecan at 20 mg/m(2)/day (dose level I), 6 at 25 mg/m(2)/day (dose level II), and 4 at 22.5 mg/m(2)/day (dose level III). In 8 patients, plasma levels of irinotecan and its metabolites SN-38 and SN-38 glucuronide (SN-38glu) were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography and main pharmacokinetic parameters, including steady-state concentration, area under the time-concentration curve, and clearance, were calculated and normalized to the dose level of 22.5 mg/m(2)/day. RESULTS: Dose-limiting toxicity was grade 3-4 diarrhea, which occurred in 4 of 6 patients at dose level II and in 2 of 4 patients at dose level III. Therefore, we defined 22.5 mg/m(2)/day the maximum-tolerable dose and 20.0 mg/m(2)/day the recommended dose for Phase II studies. Hematological toxicity was rare. The pharmacokinetic data provided evidence that continuous infusion increased the metabolism of irinotecan to SN-38 with respect to standard 30/90-min administration. Indeed, the steady-state concentration of irinotecan, SN-38, and SN-38glu were 42.7 +/- 25.2, 14.9 +/- 1.9, and 31.7 +/- 3.5 nmol/liter, respectively, and the area under the time-concentration curves of irinotecan, SN-38, and SN-38glu were 6.94 +/- 0.41, 1.92 +/- 0.30, and 4.23 +/- 0.52 hx micro mol/liter, respectively. Twelve patients were evaluable for activity, and we observed 3 (25%) partial responses, 2 (17%) minor responses, and 4 (33%) disease stabilizations. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of irinotecan as a 7-day continuous infusion every 21 days is feasible with diarrhea being the dose-limiting toxicity; recommended dose for Phase II studies is 20.0 mg/m(2)/day. The comparison of the present data with those obtained after a standard 30-90 min. i.v. infusion of irinotecan demonstrates that continuous infusion improves the transformation of irinotecan to SN-38 and also results in increased glucuronidation of the active metabolite. Antitumor activity in pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients is encouraging.

MicroRNA signature in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether microRNAs are predictive of sensitivity to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: A total of 183 mCRC cases from 2 independent cohorts (cohort 1: 74 cases; validation cohort: 109 cases) treated with cetuximab or panitumumab were included in the study. MiRNA arrays were analyzed using Agilent's miRNA platform. RESULTS: The study identified the cluster Let-7c/miR-99a/miR-125b as a signature associated with an outcome different from that of anti-EGFR therapies. In the first cohort, patients with high-intensity signatures had a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) (6.1 vs. 2.3 mo; P = .02) and longer overall survival (OS) ( 29.8 vs. 7.0 mo, P = .08) than patients with low-intensity signatures. In the validation cohort, patients with high signature had significantly longer PFS and OS than individuals with low-intensity signatures (PFS 7.8 vs. 4.3 mo, P = .02; OS 12.8 vs. 7.5 mo, P = .02). In the KRAS wild-type population (n = 120), high-intensity signature patients had a significantly longer PFS (7.8 vs. 4.6 mo, P = .016) and longer OS (16.1 vs. 10.9 mo, P = .09) than low-signature individuals, with no difference in KRAS mutated patients. CONCLUSION: The MiR-99a/Let-7c/miR-125b signature may improve the selection of patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC as good candidates for anti-EGFR therapy.

Outcome of second-line treatment after first-line chemotherapy with the GONO FOLFOXIRI regimen.

PURPOSE: FOLFOXIRI demonstrated higher efficacy compared to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated the outcome of second-line treatments among 196 patients treated with first-line FOLFOXIRI in three consecutive trials conducted by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred seventy-two of 196 patients so far progressed and 136 (79%) received second-line therapies: 32 (24%) were rechallenged with FOLFOXIRI, 52 (38%) were treated with irinotecan- or oxaliplatin-based doublets, and 52 (38%) received fluoropyrimidine plus mytomicin C or single-agent chemotherapy. Only 10 patients received bevacizumab (3) or cetuximab (7) with chemotherapy. Activity and efficacy data were collected and subgroup analyses were performed according to the regimen administered. RESULTS: Overall response rate (RR) was 23%; median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5.9 and 13.2 months, respectively. At an exploratory subgroup analysis, retreatment with FOLFOXIRI was associated with longer PFS (8.2 versus 6.3 months; P = .003, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61) and OS (19.3 versus 14.0 months; P = .02, HR = 0.57) compared with doublets; single-agent chemotherapy or fluoropyrimidine plus mytomicin C was significantly lower in terms of RR (8%), PFS (3.0 months), and OS (8.7 months) compared with FOLFOXIRI or doublets. CONCLUSIONS: First-line FOLFOXIRI does not impair the efficacy of second-line treatments. In some patients rechallenge with FOLFOXIRI may represent a valid option, although potential imbalances in prognostic factors due to better patient selection should be considered.

Cetuximab plus irinotecan after irinotecan failure in elderly metastatic colorectal cancer patients: clinical outcome according to KRAS and BRAF mutational status.

BACKGROUND: Scarce data are available about safety and efficacy of cetuximab in elderly metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 54 irinotecan-refractory mCRC patients aged≥70 years treated with cetuximab plus irinotecan and evaluated clinical outcome according to KRAS and BRAF mutational status. RESULTS: Median age was 73 years (70-82). Main grade 3-4 toxicities were skin rash (15%), diarrhea (19%) and neutropenia (13%). Irinotecan dose reduction was necessary in 39% of patients. Fifty-two (96%) patients were analysed for KRAS and BRAF status. The 29 KRAS wild-type patients achieved better RR (31% vs 4%; p=0.030) and median PFS (4.21 months vs 3.95 months; p=0.034; HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.27-0.95) when compared with KRAS mutated ones. RR (41% vs 3%; p=0.001) and mPFS (4.57 months vs 3.78 months, p=0.001; HR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.19-0.66) were significantly higher among the 22 KRAS and BRAF wild-type patients compared to the 30 KRAS or BRAF mutated ones. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab plus irinotecan has a favourable safety profile in elderly mCRC patients, but a reduced dose of irinotecan should be considered. Such a combination can be a useful option for elderly KRAS and BRAF wild-type patients.