Custom scoring based on ecological topology of gut microbiota associated with cancer immunotherapy outcome.

The gut microbiota influences the clinical responses of cancer patients to immunecheckpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, there is no consensus definition of detrimental dysbiosis. Based on metagenomics (MG) sequencing of 245 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient feces, we constructed species-level co-abundance networks that were clustered into species-interacting groups (SIGs) correlating with overall survival. Thirty-seven and forty-five MG species (MGSs) were associated with resistance (SIG1) and response (SIG2) to ICIs, respectively. When combined with the quantification of Akkermansia species, this procedure allowed a person-based calculation of a topological score (TOPOSCORE) that was validated in an additional 254 NSCLC patients and in 216 genitourinary cancer patients. Finally, this TOPOSCORE was translated into a 21-bacterial probe set-based qPCR scoring that was validated in a prospective cohort of NSCLC patients as well as in colorectal and melanoma patients. This approach could represent a dynamic diagnosis tool for intestinal dysbiosis to guide personalized microbiota-centered interventions.

The prognostic value of radiomic features in liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer patients from the TRIBE2 study.

Aims: Evaluating the prognostic role of radiomic features in liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line therapy at baseline and best response among patients undergoing resection. Patients & methods: Among patients enrolled in TRIBE2 (NCT02339116), the association of clinical and radiomic data, extracted by SOPHiA-DDM™ with progression-free and overall survival (OS) in the overall population and with disease-free survival/postresection OS in those undergoing resection was investigated. Results: Among 98 patients, radiomic parameters improved the prediction accuracy of our model for OS (area under the curve: 0.83; sensitivity: 0.85; specificity: 0.73; accuracy: 0.78), but not progression-free survival. Of 46 resected patients, small-distance high gray-level emphasis was associated with shorter disease-free survival and high gray-level zone emphasis/higher kurtosis with shorter postresection OS. Conclusion: Radiomic features should be implemented as tools of outcome prediction for liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer.

Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AtezoTRIBE): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have not shown clinical benefit to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) or microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours in previous studies. Both an active combination chemotherapy (FOLFOXIRI; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) and bevacizumab seem able to increase the immunogenicity of pMMR or MSS tumours. We aimed to provide preliminary evidence of benefit from the addition of the anti-PD-L1 agent atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: AtezoTRIBE was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study of patients (aged 18-70 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status of 0-2 and aged 71-75 years with an ECOG performance status of 0) with histologically confirmed, unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer and adequate organ function, who were recruited from 22 oncology centres in Italy. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour site, and previous adjuvant therapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm randomly assigned (1:2) patients via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two groups: the control group received first-line FOLFOXIRI (intravenous 165 mg/m2 irinotecan, 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m2 leucovorin, and 3200 mg/m2 fluorouracil as a 48 h infusion) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously), and the atezolizumab group received the same regimen plus atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously). Combination treatments were administered up to eight 14-day cycles followed by maintenance with fluorouracil and leucovorin plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab, according to randomisation group, until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed by the intention-to-treat principle. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The study recruitment is completed. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03721653. FINDINGS: Between Nov 30, 2018, and Feb 26, 2020, 218 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (73 in the control group and 145 in the atezolizumab group). At the data cutoff (Aug 1, 2021), median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 17·3-23·9). Median progression-free survival was 13·1 months (80% CI 12·5-13·8) in the atezolizumab group and 11·5 months (10·0-12·6) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·69 [80% CI 0·56-0·85]; p=0·012; adjusted HR 0·70 [80% CI 0·57-0·87]; log-rank test p=0·018). The most frequent all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (59 [42%] of 142 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 26 [36%] of 72 patients in the control group), diarrhoea (21 [15%] vs nine [13%]), and febrile neutropenia (14 [10%] vs seven [10%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 39 (27%) patients in the atezolizumab group and in 19 (26%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths (due to acute myocardial infarction and bronchopulmonary haemorrhage) were reported in the atezolizumab group; none were reported in the control group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is safe and improved progression-free survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: GONO Foundation, ARCO Foundation, F Hoffmann-La Roche, and Roche.

KDR genetic predictor of toxicities induced by sorafenib and regorafenib.

No biomarkers are available to predict toxicities induced by VEGFR TKIs. This study aimed to identify markers of toxicities induced by these drugs using a discovery-validation approach. The discovery set included 140 sorafenib-treated cancer patients (TARGET study) genotyped for SNPs in 56 genes. The most significant SNPs associated with grade ≥2 hypertension, diarrhea, dermatologic toxicities, and composite toxicity (any one of the toxicities) were tested for association with grade ≥2 toxicity in a validation set of 201 sorafenib-treated patients (Alliance/CALGB 80802). The validated SNP was tested for association with grade ≥2 toxicity in 107 (LCCC 1029) and 82 (Italian cohort) regorafenib-treated patients. SNP-toxicity associations were evaluated using logistic regression, and a meta-analysis between the studies was performed by inverse variance. Variant rs4864950 in KDR increased the risk of grade ≥2 composite toxicity in TARGET, Alliance/CALGB 80802, and the Italian cohort (meta-analysis p = 6.79 × 10-4, OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.34-3.01). We identified a predictor of toxicities induced by VEGFR TKIs. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00073307 (TARGET), NCT01015833 (Alliance/CALGB 80802), and NCT01298570 (LCCC 1029).

Plasma levels of VEGF-A and VCAM-1 as predictors of drug-induced hypertension in patients treated with VEGF pathway inhibitors.

AIMS: Hypertension is a common toxicity induced by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway inhibitors. There are no validated markers of hypertension induced by these drugs. METHODS: We previously discovered that cancer patients with lower plasma levels of angiopoietin-2, VCAM-1 and VEGF-A are at high risk of developing severe hypertension when treated with bevacizumab. This study aimed to validate the predictive value of these markers in pretreatment plasma samples of an additional cohort of 101 colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib. The levels of angiopoietin-2, VCAM-1 and VEGF-A were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The association between proteins and grade ≥2 regorafenib-induced hypertension was performed by calculating the odds ratio (OR) from logistic regression. Using the optimal cut-point of each protein, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for hypertension were estimated. RESULTS: Lower levels of VCAM-1 (P = .015, OR = 3.11, 95% CI 1.27-8.08) and VEGF-A (P = .007, OR = 3.47, 95% CI 1.40-8.75) were associated with a higher risk of hypertension. Levels of angiopoietin-2 were not associated with hypertension. The multivariable model indicates an independent effect of VCAM-1 (P = .018, OR = 3.18, 95% CI 1.25-8.68) and VEGF-A (P = .008, OR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.44-10.21). The presence of low levels of both VCAM-1 and VEGF-A had an OR of 9.46 (95% CI 3.08-33.26, P = 1.70 × 10-4 ) for the risk of hypertension (sensitivity of 41.4%, specificity of 93.1%, PPV of 70.6% and NPV of 79.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the value of VCAM-1 and VEGF-A levels in predicting hypertension induced by regorafenib, another VEGF pathway inhibitor.

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.

FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab or FOLFOX-Panitumumab in Patients with Left-Sided RAS/BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Doublets plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFRs) are the preferred upfront option for patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is superior to doublets plus bevacizumab independently from primary tumor sidedness and RAS/BRAF status. No randomized comparison between FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab versus doublets plus anti-EGFRs is available in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with first-line FOLFOX-panitumumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in five randomized trials: Valentino, TRIBE, TRIBE2, STEAM, and CHARTA. A propensity score-based analysis was performed to compare FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab with FOLFOX-panitumumab. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients received FOLFOX-panitumumab and 132 received FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 13.3 and 33.1 months in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group compared with 11.4 and 30.3 months in the FOLFOX-panitumumab group (propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for PFS, 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-1.04; p = .11; propensity score-adjusted HR for OS, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.59-1.08; p = .14). No significant differences in overall response rate and disease control rate were observed. A statistically nonsignificant difference in favor of FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab was observed for OS after secondary resection of metastases. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group, with specific regard to grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (48% vs. 26%, adjusted p = .001). CONCLUSION: Although randomized comparison is lacking, both FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab and FOLFOX-panitumumab are valuable treatment options in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A propensity score-based analysis of five trials was performed to compare FOLFOX-panitumumab versus FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No significant differences were observed, but FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab achieved numerically superior survival outcomes versus FOLFOX-panitumumab. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group. These observations suggest that although doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFRs remains the preferred treatment in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC, FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is a valuable option able to provide similar, if not better, outcomes at the price of a moderate increase in toxicity and may be adopted based on patients' preference and potential impact on quality of life.

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.

The Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value is a new prognostic biomarker in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a pooled-analysis of the Valentino and TRIBE first-line trials.

BACKGROUND: Immune-inflammatory biomarkers (IIBs) showed a prognostic relevance in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC). We aimed at evaluating the prognostic power of a new comprehensive biomarker, the Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value (PIV), in patients with mCRC receiving first-line therapy. METHODS: In the present pooled-analysis, we included patients enrolled in the Valentino and TRIBE trials. PIV was calculated as: (neutrophil count × platelet count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count. A cut-off was determined using the maximally selected rank statistics method. Generalised boosted regression (GBR), the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox hazards regression models were used for survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 438 patients were included. Overall, 208 patients (47%) had a low-baseline PIV and 230 (53%) had a high-baseline PIV. Patients with high PIV experienced a worse PFS (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.36-2.03, P < 0.001) and worse OS (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.57-2.57; P < 0.001) compared to patients with low PIV. PIV outperformed the other IIBs in the GBR model and in the multivariable models. CONCLUSION: PIV is a strong predictor of survival outcomes with better performance than other well-known IIBs in patients with mCRC treated with first-line therapy. PIV should be prospectively validated to better stratify mCRC patients undergoing first-line therapy.

AtezoTRIBE: a randomised phase II study of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab alone or in combination with atezolizumab as initial therapy for patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) reported remarkable achievements in several solid tumours. However, in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) promising results are limited to patients with deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-high) tumours due to their immune-enriched microenvironment. Combining cytotoxic agents and bevacizumab in mCRC with proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite stability (pMMR/MSS) could make ICIs efficacious by increasing the exposure of neoantigens, especially with highly active chemotherapy regimens, inducing immunogenic cell death, increasing the tumoral infiltration of CD8+ T-cells and reducing tumour-associated myeloid-derived suppressor cells. VEGF-blockade also plays an immunomodulatory role by inhibiting the expansion of T regulatory lymphocytes. Consistently with this rationale, a phase Ib study combined the anti-PDL-1 atezolizumab with FOLFOX/bevacizumab as first-line treatment of mCRC, irrespective of microsatellite status, and reported interesting activity and efficacy results, without safety concerns. Phase III trials led to identify FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as an upfront therapeutic option in selected mCRC patients. Drawing from these considerations, the combination of atezolizumab with an intensified upfront treatment (FOLFOXIRI) and bevacizumab could be worthy of investigation. METHODS: AtezoTRIBE is a prospective, open label, phase II, comparative trial in which initially unresectable and previously untreated mCRC patients, irrespective of microsatellite status, are randomized in a 1:2 ratio to receive up to 8 cycles of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab alone or in combination with atezolizumab, followed by maintenance with bevacizumab plus 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin with or without atezolizumab according to treatment arm until disease progression. The primary endpoint is PFS. Assuming a median PFS of 12 months for standard arm, 201 patients should be randomized in a 1:2 ratio to detect a hazard ratio of 0.66 in favour of the experimental arm. A safety run-in phase including the first 6 patients enrolled in the FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab/atezolizumab arm was planned, and no unexpected adverse events or severe toxicities were highlighted by the Safety Monitoring Committee. DISCUSSION: The AtezoTRIBE study aims at assessing whether the addition of atezolizumab to an intensified chemotherapy plus bevacizumab might be an efficacious upfront strategy for the treatment of mCRC, irrespective of the microsatellite status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: AtezoTRIBE is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03721653 ), October 26th, 2018 and at EUDRACT (2017-000977-35), Februray 28th, 2017.

Early modifications of circulating microRNAs levels in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib.

Biomarkers able to improve the cost/benefit ratio are urgently needed for metastatic colorectal cancer patients that are eligible to receive regorafenib. Here, we measured plasma levels of ten circulating microRNAs (c-miRNAs) and we investigated their early changes during treatment, as well as possible correlation with clinical outcome. Ten literature-selected c-miRNAs were quantified by qRT-PCR on plasma samples collected at baseline (d1) and after 15 days of treatment (d15). C-miRNAs showing significant changes were further analyzed to establish correlations with outcome. A decision tree-based approach was employed to define a c-miRNA signature able to predict the outcome. Results achieved in an exploratory cohort were tested in a validation group. In the exploratory cohort (n = 34), the levels of c-miR-21 (p = 0.06), c-miR-141 (p = 0.04), and c-miR-601 (p = 0.01) increased at d15 compared with d1. A c-miRNA signature involving c-miR-21, c-miR-221, and c-miR-760 predicted response to treatment (p < 0.0001) and was significantly associated to PFS (HR = 10.68; 95% CI 3.2-35.65; p < 0.0001). In the validation cohort (n = 36), the increase in c-miR-21 (p = 0.02) and c-miR-601 (p = 0.02) levels at d15 was confirmed, but the associations with outcome were not. Our data indicate that early changes of c-miRNA levels might be influenced by regorafenib treatment. However, further studies are needed to establish the predictive power of such modifications.

Differential histopathologic parameters in colorectal cancer liver metastases resected after triplets plus bevacizumab or cetuximab: a pooled analysis of five prospective trials.

BACKGROUND: Many factors, including histopathologic parameters, seem to influence the prognosis of patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM), although their relative weight is unclear. Histopathologic growth patterns (HGPs) of CRCLM may affect sensitivity to antiangiogenics. We aimed at evaluating differences in histopathologic parameters of response according to the use of bevacizumab or cetuximab as first-line targeted agents, and at exploring the prognostic and predictive role of HGPs. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive histopathologic characterisation of CRCLM from 159 patients who underwent secondary resection, after receiving triplets FOLFOXIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) or COI (capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab (N = 103) vs cetuximab (N = 56) in five first-line no-profit clinical trials. RESULTS: Both major histopathologic response (tumour regression grade TRG1-2, 32 vs 14%, p = 0.013) and infarct-like necrosis (80 vs 64%, p = 0.035) were significantly higher in the bevacizumab than in the cetuximab group. Achieving major response positively affected relapse-free survival (RFS) (p = 0.012) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.045), also in multivariable models (RFS, p = 0.008; OS, p = 0.033). In the desmoplastic HGP (N = 28), a higher percentage of major response was reported (57 vs 17% in pushing and 22% in replacement HGP, p < 0.001) and an unsignificant advantage from cetuximab vs bevacizumab was evident in RFS (p = 0.116). In the pushing HGP (N = 66), a significant benefit from bevacizumab vs cetuximab (p = 0.017) was observed. No difference was described in the replacement HGP (N = 65, p = 0.615). CONCLUSIONS: The histopathologic response is the only independent determinant of survival in patients resected after triplets plus a biologic. When associated with triplet chemotherapy, bevacizumab induces a higher histopathologic response rate than cetuximab. The assessment of HGPs should be further explored as a predictor of benefit from available targeted agents.

Pharmacokinetic analysis of metronomic capecitabine in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

The aim of the present study was to assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) of metronomic capecitabine and its metabolites in a population of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Thirty-four patients (M/F, 22/12) with a diagnosis of mCRC received capecitabine 800 mg p.o. twice a day and cyclophosphamide 50 mg/day p.o. Blood samples were collected at baseline, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 3 h and 5 h at day 1 after capecitabine administration. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites were measured by high performance liquid chromatography and the main PK parameters were calculated. Maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) of capecitabine (11.51 ± 9.73 µg/ml) occurred at 0.5 h, whereas the Cmax of 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine (5'-DFCR; 2.45 ± 2.93 µg/ml), 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine (5'-DFUR; 6.43 ± 8.2 µg/ml), and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU; 0.24 ± 0.16 µg/ml) were found at 1 h, 1.5 h and 1 h, respectively. Capecitabine, 5'-DFCR, 5'-DFUR and 5-FU AUCs at day 1 were 21.30 ± 10.78, 5.2 ± 4.6, 19.59 ± 3.83 and 0.66 ± 0.77 hxµg/ml, respectively. In conclusion, low doses of capecitabine were rapidly absorbed and extensively metabolized, achieving measurable plasma concentrations in a heavily pretreated population of patients.

Serum LDH predicts benefit from bevacizumab beyond progression in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Different antiangiogenics are currently indicated in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), following a first-line bevacizumab-containing treatment. The magnitude of benefit is limited, but no predictors of benefit have been identified. METHODS: A total of 184 mCRC patients progressing to a first-line bevacizumab-containing treatment were randomised in the BEBYP study to continue or not the antiangiogenic in combination with a second-line chemotherapy. A subgroup analysis according to baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels was carried out. RESULTS: A significant interaction effect between LDH levels and treatment was found in terms of progression-free survival (PFS; P=0.002). Although patients with low LDH levels achieved significant PFS benefit from the continuation of bevacizumab (HR: 0.39 (95% CI: 0.23-0.65)), patients with high levels did not (HR: 1.10 (95% CI: 0.74-1.64)). Consistent results were reported in overall survival (OS; P=0.075). CONCLUSIONS: As preclinical evidence suggests that serum LDH may be a marker of tumour angiogenesis activation, low levels may indicate that bevacizumab is still efficacious in inhibiting angiogenesis. Validation of present results in subgroup analyses of other randomised trials of second-line angiogenesis inhibitors is warranted.

TRIBE-2: a phase III, randomized, open-label, strategy trial in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients by the GONO group.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is a standard first-line treatment for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Different chemotherapy backbones may be chosen, including one to three drugs, based on patients' general conditions and comorbidities, treatments' objectives, and disease characteristics. TRIBE trial demonstrated a significant advantage in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival for FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. Based on recent evidence, the de-intensification of the upfront regimen after 4-6 months of treatment is nowadays regarded as a valuable option. Moreover, the prolonged inhibition of angiogenesis, and in particular the continuation of bevacizumab beyond the evidence of disease progression, is an efficacious strategy in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. METHODS/DESIGN: TRIBE-2 is a prospective, open-label, multicentric phase III randomized trial in which unresectable and previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients are randomized to receive first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab after disease progression or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab followed by the re-introduction of the same regimen after disease progression. The primary endpoint is to compare the efficacy of the two proposed treatment strategies in terms of Progression Free Survival 2. DISCUSSION: The TRIBE-2 study aims at answering the question whether the upfront use of FOLFOXIRI improves the clinical outcome of metastatic colorectal cancer patients, when compared with the pre-planned, sequential use of oxaliplatin-based and irinotecan-based doublets. Both proposed treatment strategies are designed to exploit the effectiveness of the prolonged inhibition of angiogenesis, alternating short (up to 4 months) induction periods and less intensive maintenance phases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: TRIBE2 is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02339116 . January 12, 2015. TRIBE-2 is registered at EUDRACT 2014-004436-19, October 10, 2014.

Location of Primary Tumor and Benefit From Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients With RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Right- and left-sided colorectal cancers (CRCs) differ in clinical and molecular characteristics. Some retrospective analyses suggested that patients with right-sided tumors derive less benefit from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies; however, molecular selection in those studies was not extensive. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic CRC (mCRC) who were treated with single-agent anti-EGFRs or with cetuximab-irinotecan (if refractory to previous irinotecan) were included in the study. Differences in outcome between patients with right- and left-sided tumors were investigated. RESULTS: Of 75 patients, 14 and 61 had right- and left-sided tumors, respectively. None of the right-sided tumors responded according to RECIST, compared with 24 left-sided tumors (overall response rate: 0% vs. 41%; p = .0032), and only 2 patients with right-sided tumors (15%) versus 47 patients with left-sided tumors (80%) achieved disease control (p < .0001). The median duration of progression-free survival was 2.3 and 6.6 months in patients with right-sided and left-sided tumors, respectively (hazard ratio: 3.97; 95% confidence interval: 2.09-7.53; p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with right-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC seemed to derive no benefit from single-agent anti-EGFRs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Right- and left-sided colorectal tumors have peculiar epidemiological and clinicopathological characteristics, distinct gene expression profiles and genetic alterations, and different prognoses. This study assessed the potential predictive impact of primary tumor site with regard to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody treatment in patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. The results demonstrated the lack of activity of anti-EGFRs in RAS and BRAF wild-type, right-sided tumors, thus suggesting a potential role for primary tumor location in driving treatment choices.

Role of NRAS mutations as prognostic and predictive markers in metastatic colorectal cancer.

NRAS mutations occur in 3-5% of colorectal cancer. Differently from KRAS and BRAF mutations, the role of NRAS mutations as prognostic and predictive markers in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been investigated to a lesser extent. A retrospective series suggested the role of NRAS mutations as predictors of resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) in chemo-refractory patients with mCRC. In our study, KRAS codons 12, 13, 61 and BRAF codon 600 mutational status were evaluated in mCRCs referred to our Institution from 2009 to 2012. NRAS codons 12, 13 and 61 mutational status was analyzed in KRAS/BRAF wt patients. We collected pathological and clinical features in the overall population and outcome data in a subset of NRAS mutated chemo-refractory patients treated with anti-EGFR MoAbs in advanced lines. NRAS was mutated in 47/786 (6%) mCRCs. NRAS and KRAS mutated tumors did not show significant differences in terms of clinical and pathological characteristics, except for a lower prevalence of mucinous histology (p = 0.012) and lung metastases (p = 0.012) among NRAS mutated tumors. In the uni- and multivariate model, NRAS mutations were associated with shorter overall survival (OS) compared to all wt patients (median OS 25.6 vs 42.7 months; univ: HR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.39-3.86, p = 0.0013; multiv: HR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.1.3-2.72, p = 0.013). None of the chemo-refractory NRAS mutated patients evaluable for response to anti-EGFRs achieved response. In conclusion, NRAS mutations have a relevant incidence in patients with mCRC and showed an association with specific clinical and pathological features. NRAS mutations affect mCRC patients' prognosis and predict lack of response to anti-EGFRs.

Single-Agent Panitumumab in Frail Elderly Patients With Advanced RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Colorectal Cancer: Challenging Drug Label to Light Up New Hope.

BACKGROUND: No prospective trials have specifically addressed the efficacy and safety of panitumumab in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of single agent panitumumab in "frail" elderly patients diagnosed with metastatic RAS and BRAF wild-type CRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty elderly patients (aged ≥ 75 years) with metastatic RAS-BRAF wild-type CRC received off-label prescriptions of single-agent panitumumab at seven Italian institutions. Treatment was administered as first line in patients with absolute contraindication to any chemotherapy or as second-line treatment after failure of a fluoropyrimidine-based treatment, in the presence of contraindication to irinotecan. The outcome measures included objective response rate (ORR), as well as progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: The median PFS and OS were 6.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.9-8 months) and 14.3 months (95% CI: 10.9-17.7 months), respectively. ORR was 32.5%, and DCR was 72.5%. Dose reductions related to adverse events (AEs) were reported in 9 (23%) patients, but no permanent treatment discontinuation caused by was reported. The most frequent grade 3 AE was skin rash, with an incidence of 20%. CONCLUSION: Panitumumab is effective and well-tolerated in frail elderly patients with RAS-BRAF wild-type metastatic CRC and deemed unfit for chemotherapy. A randomized study is needed to confirm these data. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Treatment of elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer represents a difficult challenge in clinical practice. A significant proportion of frail elderly patients do not receive treatment, reflecting ongoing uncertainty of clinical benefit and toxicity of chemotherapy. Unfit condition in this cohort of patients further limits antineoplastic prescription and consequently patient survival. RAS and BRAF wild-type status could help select an elderly and unfit population that could benefit from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor single agent therapy. In the present study, single-agent off-label panitumumab was effective and well-tolerated as first-line treatment in frail elderly patients deemed unfit for chemotherapy for metastatic RAS and BRAF wild-type colorectal cancer.

Mapping the landscape of immunonutrition and cancer research: a comprehensive bibliometric analysis on behalf of NutriOnc Research Group.

The ongoing global health challenge of cancer is driving the pursuit of innovative avenues for prevention, treatment, and enhanced outcomes. The convergence of nutrition and immune modulation, known as immunonutrition, is ready to act as a catalyst for transformative change in cancer research and therapy. Our study employs a bibliometric analysis to uncover the evolving trends within immunonutrition and cancer research across the past 25 years. Bibliometric data, including authors, journals, affiliations, and countries, were analyzed using the Bibliometrix R package. Clustering algorithms were applied to keywords to identify thematic areas and their evolution. A total of 489 documents were analyzed, showing an annual growth rate of 8.7%, with a collaboration index of 5.41, highlighting comprehensive multidisciplinary involvement within this landscape. Core authors demonstrated sustained productivity, while occasional authors indicated widespread interest. The Medical University of Warsaw led in institutional contributions. Country-wise, Italy, France, and the USA emerged as forerunners in fostering research productivity. Key journals like 'Clinical Nutrition' served as beacons, emphasizing the multidimensional nature of this topic. The analysis highlighted growing research output and several collaborations, indicating the importance of immunoenriched nutrition in cancer treatment. The interplay of core authors and diversified engagement harmoniously accentuates the cross-disciplinary nature of this burgeoning field. International collaboration facilitated knowledge exchange. Prominent documents shaped the field, emphasizing the significance of nutritional interventions. Thematic clusters revealed varied focuses, including pharmaconutrients, surgical approaches, inflammation, and specific cancers. The expanding research output suggests further development, particularly in exploring immunoenriched nutrition's impact on cancer types and patient populations. The multidisciplinary nature and international collaborations enhance the field's progress. Gaps in research underscore the need for original studies and personalized approaches. This study guides future research, informing evidence-based nutritional interventions and advancing cancer care practices.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence on Tumor Boards: Perspectives from Surgeons, Medical Oncologists and Radiation Oncologists.

The integration of multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) is fundamental in delivering state-of-the-art cancer treatment, facilitating collaborative diagnosis and management by a diverse team of specialists. Despite the clear benefits in personalized patient care and improved outcomes, the increasing burden on MTBs due to rising cancer incidence and financial constraints necessitates innovative solutions. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) in the medical field offers a promising avenue to support clinical decision-making. This review explores the perspectives of clinicians dedicated to the care of cancer patients-surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists-on the application of AI within MTBs. Additionally, it examines the role of AI across various clinical specialties involved in cancer diagnosis and treatment. By analyzing both the potential and the challenges, this study underscores how AI can enhance multidisciplinary discussions and optimize treatment plans. The findings highlight the transformative role that AI may play in refining oncology care and sustaining the efficacy of MTBs amidst growing clinical demands.