A randomised phase II trial and feasibility study of palliative chemotherapy in frail or elderly patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer (321GO).

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients are commonly under-represented in cancer clinical trials. The 321GO was undertaken in preparation for a definitive phase three trial assessing different chemotherapy regimens in a frail and/or elderly population with advanced gastroesophageal (GO) cancer. METHODS: Patients with advanced GO cancer considered unfit for conventional dose chemotherapy were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to: epirubicin, oxaliplatin and capecitabine (EOX); oxaliplatin and capecitabine (OX); and capecitabine alone (X) (all 80% of full dose and unblinded). The primary end point was patient recruitment over an 18-month period. A registration study recorded treatment choice for all patients with advanced GO cancer at trial centres. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients were considered for palliative chemotherapy for GO cancer over the 18-month period: 115 received full dose treatment, 89 less than standard treatment or entered 321GO and 111 no treatment. Within 321GO, 55 patients were randomly assigned (19 to OX and X; 17 to EOX). Progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 4.4 months and by arm 5.4, 5.6 and 3.0 months for EOX, OX and X, respectively. The number of patients with a good overall treatment utility (OTU), a novel patient-centred endpoint, at 12 weeks was 3 (18%), 6 (32%) and 1 (6%) for EOX, OX and X, respectively. At 6 weeks, 22 patients (41%) had experienced a non-haematologic toxicity ⩾grade 3, most commonly lethargy or diarrhoea. The OTU was prognostic for overall survival in patients alive at week 12 (logrank test P=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to recruit elderly and/or frail patients with advanced GO cancer to a randomised clinical trial. The OX is the preferred regimen for further study. Overall treatment utility shows promise as a comparator between treatment regimens for feasibility and randomised trials in the elderly and/or frail GO cancer population.

The prevalence and outcomes of frailty in older cancer patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a state of vulnerability to poor resolution of homeostasis following a stressor event, such as chemotherapy or cancer surgery. Better knowledge of the epidemiology of frailty could help drive a global cancer care strategy for older people. The aim of this review was to establish the prevalence and outcomes of frailty and pre-frailty in older cancer patients. METHODS: Observational studies that reported data on the prevalence and/or outcomes of frailty in older cancer patients with any stage of solid or haematological malignancy were considered. We searched Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Allied and Complementary medicine, Psychinfo and ProQuest (1 January 1996 to 30 June 2013). The primary outcomes were prevalence of frailty, treatment-related side-effects, unplanned hospitalization and mortality. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa checklist. RESULTS: Data from 20 studies evaluating 2916 participants are included. The median reported prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty was 42% (range 6%-86%) and 43% (range 13%-79%), respectively. A median of 32% (range 11%-78%) of patients were classified as fit. Frailty was independently associated with increased all-cause mortality [adjusted 5-year hazard ratio (HR) 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36-2.57]. There was evidence of increased risk of postoperative mortality for both frailty (adjusted 30-day HR 2.67, 95% CI 1.08-6.62) and pre-frailty (adjusted HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.20-4.52). Treatment complications were more frequent in those with frailty, including intolerance to cancer treatment (adjusted odds ratio 4.86, 95% CI 2.19-10.78) and postoperative complications (adjusted 30-day HR 3.19, 95% CI 1.68-6.04). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of older cancer patients have pre-frailty or frailty and these patients are at increased risk of chemotherapy intolerance, postoperative complications and mortality. The findings of this review support routine assessment of frailty in older cancer patients to guide treatment decisions, and the development of multidisciplinary geriatric oncology services.

A feasibility study testing four hypotheses with phase II outcomes in advanced colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS3): a model for randomised controlled trials in the era of personalised medicine?

BACKGROUND: Molecular characteristics of cancer vary between individuals. In future, most trials will require assessment of biomarkers to allocate patients into enriched populations in which targeted therapies are more likely to be effective. The MRC FOCUS3 trial is a feasibility study to assess key elements in the planning of such studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced colorectal cancer were registered from 24 centres between February 2010 and April 2011. With their consent, patients' tumour samples were analysed for KRAS/BRAF oncogene mutation status and topoisomerase 1 (topo-1) immunohistochemistry. Patients were then classified into one of four molecular strata; within each strata patients were randomised to one of two hypothesis-driven experimental therapies or a common control arm (FOLFIRI chemotherapy). A 4-stage suite of patient information sheets (PISs) was developed to avoid patient overload. RESULTS: A total of 332 patients were registered, 244 randomised. Among randomised patients, biomarker results were provided within 10 working days (w.d.) in 71%, 15 w.d. in 91% and 20 w.d. in 99%. DNA mutation analysis was 100% concordant between two laboratories. Over 90% of participants reported excellent understanding of all aspects of the trial. In this randomised phase II setting, omission of irinotecan in the low topo-1 group was associated with increased response rate and addition of cetuximab in the KRAS, BRAF wild-type cohort was associated with longer progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patient samples can be collected and analysed within workable time frames and with reproducible mutation results. Complex multi-arm designs are acceptable to patients with good PIS. Randomisation within each cohort provides outcome data that can inform clinical practice.

Oxaliplatin/capecitabine vs oxaliplatin/infusional 5-FU in advanced colorectal cancer: the MRC COIN trial.

BACKGROUND: COIN compared first-line continuous chemotherapy with the same chemotherapy given intermittently or with cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). METHODS: Choice between oxaliplatin/capecitabine (OxCap) and oxaliplatin/leucovorin (LV)/infusional 5-FU (OxFU) was by physician and patient choice and switching regimen was allowed. We compared OxCap with OxFU and OxCap+cetuximab with OxFU+cetuximab retrospectively in patients and examined efficacy, toxicity profiles and the effect of mild renal impairment. RESULTS: In total, 64% of 2397 patients received OxCap(± cetuximab). Overall survival, progression free survival and overall response rate were similar between OxCap and OxFU but rate of radical surgeries was higher for OxFU. Progression free survival was longer for OxFU+cetuximab compared with OxCap+cetuximab but other efficacy measures were similar. Oxaliplatin/LV/infusional 5-FU (± cetuximab) was associated with more mucositis and infection whereas OxCap(± cetuximab) caused more gastrointestinal toxicities and palmar-plantar erythema. In total, 118 patients switched regimen, mainly due to toxicity; only 16% came off their second regimen due to intolerance. Patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) 50-80 ml min(-1) on OxCap(± cetuximab) or OxFU+cetuximab had more dose modifications than those with better renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, OxFU and OxCap are equally effective in treating aCRC. However, the toxicity profiles differ and switching from one regimen to the other for poor tolerance is a reasonable option. Patients with CrCl 50-80 ml min(-1) on both regimens require close toxicity monitoring.

Designing phase II trials in cancer: a systematic review and guidance.

BACKGROUND: Literature reviews of cancer trials have highlighted the need for better understanding of phase II statistical designs. Understanding the key elements associated with phase II design and knowledge of available statistical designs is necessary to enable appropriate phase II trial design. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify phase II trial designs applicable to oncology trials. The results of the review were used to create a library of currently available designs, and to develop a structured approach to phase II trial design outlining key points for consideration. RESULTS: A total of 122 papers describing new or adapted phase II trial designs were obtained. These were categorised into nine levels, reflecting the practicalities of implementation, and form a library of phase II designs. Key design elements were identified by data extraction. Along with detailed description of the key elements and the library of designs, a structured thought process was developed to form a guidance document for choice of phase II oncology trial design. CONCLUSION: The guidance offers researchers a structured and systematic approach to identifying phase II trial designs, highlighting key issues to be considered by both clinicians and statisticians and encouraging an interactive approach to more informed trial design.

What can the molecular pathologist offer for optimal decision making?

As a consequence of new innovative therapies and therapeutic combinations, the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer is becoming increasingly complex. Validated molecular biomarkers could contribute to patient management, but until recently, none has been routinely used. With the recognition that activating mutations of the KRAS oncogene can predict resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents, the clinical value of biomarkers in advanced colorectal cancer has been brought to the fore. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers that reflect the molecular and therapeutic complexities of advanced colorectal cancer may provide valuable information regarding likely clinical outcome and therapeutic response and thus may improve patient management and therapeutic agent selection. Such biomarkers are discussed herein.

Randomized phase II trial of infusional fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide versus infusional fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cisplatin in patients with advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We previously developed an inpatient regimen that consisted of infusional fluorouracil (5-FU), epirubicin, and cisplatin (ECisF), with a response rate of 86% in advanced breast cancer. The current phase II 2:1 randomized study investigated whether cyclophosphamide can be substituted for cisplatin (ECycloF) to reduce toxicity and allow the regimen to be administered on an outpatient basis without loss of efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-six women (median age, 49 years; range, 28 to 73) with breast cancer (59 metastatic, 37 locally advanced) received continuous infusional 5-FU (200 mg/m2/d via Hickman line) and six cycles of epirubicin (60 mg/m2 every 21 days) with either cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 every 21 days (38 metastatic, 24 locally advanced) or cisplatin 60 mg/m2 every 21 days (21 metastatic, 13 locally advanced). There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between these groups. RESULTS: ECycloF was better tolerated than ECisF in terms of lethargy (P = .005), stomatitis (P = .008), plantar palmar erythema (P = .02), constipation (P < .001), thrombosis (P = .0014), and nausea and vomiting (P = .05). Although there was a trend toward more anemia and leukopenia with ECisF (P =. 1), there was no significant difference in the rates of infection. Efficacy was comparable in terms of overall response (69% v 68%), complete response (CR; 13% v 15%), and median progression-free survival (9 v 8 months). CONCLUSION: ECycloF is an outpatient regimen with a lower incidence of severe nonhematologic toxicity than inpatient ECisF; it has comparable efficacy and is considerably more economical.

Randomized trial assessing the addition of interferon alpha-2a to fluorouracil and leucovorin in advanced colorectal cancer. Colorectal Cancer Working Party of the United Kingdom Medical Research Council.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of interferon alpha-2a (IFN alpha) on the efficacy and toxicity of fluorouracil (FUra) and leucovorin (LV) in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred sixty chemotherapy-naive patients were randomized to FUra/LV alone or FUra/LV plus IFN alpha. All patients received: LV 200 mg/m2 intravenous (IV) infusion over 2 hours, then FUra 400 mg/m2 i.v. bolus plus 400 mg/m2 i.v. infusion over 22 hours, all repeated on day 2. Treatment was every 2 weeks for up to 12 cycles. Patients randomized to IFN alpha received 6 x 10(6) IU subcutaneously every 48 hours throughout. Objective response (OR) and toxicity were assessed conventionally; in addition, palliative benefit and adverse effects were assessed using quality-of-life (QoL) questionnaires. RESULTS: There were no differences in OR rate, progression-free survival, or overall survival. OR rates in assessable patients were as follows: FUra/LV alone (n = 104), complete or partial response (OR) = 27%, no change (NC) = 34%; FUra/LV/IFN alpha (n = 101), OR = 28%, NC = 30%. Median survival was 10 months in both arms. Dose-limiting FUra toxicities were not significantly increased by co-administration of IFN alpha, and the delivered FUra dose-intensity was not significantly reduced. However, QoL was adversely affected: patients on IFN alpha were less likely to report improvement in pretreatment physical and psychologic symptoms, and more likely to report new or worsening symptoms. CONCLUSION: IFN alpha, at a dose that impaired QoL, did not improve the efficacy of FUra/LV. The power of this trial is sufficient to exclude with 95% confidence a benefit of 15% in OR or 10 weeks in median survival. Accordingly, we cannot recommend the use of IFN alpha as a clinical modulator of FUra/LV in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.

Intravenous irinotecan plus oral ciclosporin.

We previously reported a phase I study of intravenous irinotecan plus oral ciclosporin, in which dose-limiting diarrhoea was not observed, supporting the hypothesis that pharmacokinetic modulation of irinotecan by ciclosporin may improve its therapeutic index. We now report results of a further 34 patients treated at the recommended dose. A low rate of diarrhoea of grade 3 or above (3%) was again seen, with useful anti-tumour activity. The regimen is to be formally evaluated as part of a future phase III trial.

A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study in vivo of human HT29 tumours using 19F and 31P magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

19F-MRS (magnetic resonance spectroscopy) was used to study the pharmacokinetics of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in human (HT29) tumour xenografts, with and without pretreatment of the mice using either thymidine (40 min) or interferon-alpha (2 and 24 h). A 200 mg/kg i.p. bolus dose of 5-FU was eliminated from control tumours with a t1/2 of 25.4 +/- 2 min (mean +/- SEM, n = 11), while both thymidine (500 mg/kg) and interferon (50,000 IU/mouse) significantly increased t1/2 to 36.5 +/- 6.1 (n = 5) and 48.1 +/- 13.6 min (n = 4), respectively (P = 0.04, Gabriel's ANOVA). Thymidine increased 5-FU anabolism to cytotoxic 5-fluoronucleotides, and decreased the amount of tumour catabolites; the latter probably recirculated from liver since isolated HT29 cells did not catabolize 5-FU. These in vivo observations were confirmed by 19F-MRS quantification of tumour extracts. Interferon did not significantly affect 5-FU metabolism in the tumour or liver, nor the 5-FU t1/2 in liver. Treatment of tumours with 5-FU or interferon had no effect on tumour growth, whereas the combination strongly inhibited growth. 31P-MRS of HT29 tumours showed that 2 and 24 h after i.p. injections of interferon there was a significant increase in the pHint of 0.3 +/- 0.04 units (P = 0.002), while pHext and the tumour NTP/Pi ratio were unchanged. The large increase in the negative pH gradient (-delta pH) across the tumour plasma membrane caused by interferon suggest the delta pH may be a factor in tumour retention of 5-FU, as recently shown in isolated tumour cells.

Attitudes and practice in the management of metastatic colorectal cancer in Britain. Colorectal Cancer Working Party of the UK Medical Research Council.

Evidence-based medicine is widely held to be the essential basis of modern therapeutics. The principle of adopting into clinical practice those treatments proved to be of value in randomized trials, or in the systematic review of several trials, in encouraging a welcome proliferation of clinical research and meta-analysis. However, many things affect clinical practice; quantifiable therapeutic benefit is only one of them. Furthermore, in many situations, clear evidence of the best treatment is not available. When discussing ideas for a new trial in advanced colorectal cancer that was launched in 1996, the MRC Colorectal Cancer Working Party carried out a survey of the attitudes and practice of surgeons and oncologists who were treating this condition. This revealed substantial diversity of practice amongst experts in the treatment of this common disease, and prompted us to review the factors that affect clinical practice and to discuss the implications.

Factors predicting outcome for advanced gastroesophageal cancer in elderly patients receiving palliative chemotherapy.

AIMS: Most patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer are elderly, but current standard regimens have emerged from trials predominantly involving patients with a median age <65 years. The aim of this study was to assess the factors influencing survival outcome for an elderly gastroesophageal cancer non-trial population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the case notes of all patients in our centre over the age of 65 years who received palliative chemotherapy for gastroesophageal cancer over a period of 3.5 years. Patients were classified as having received standard, non-standard combination or single-agent chemotherapy. After an initial univariate analysis, a multivariate analysis of the most significant prognostic factors was carried out. RESULTS: In total, 120 patients were suitable for analysis. The median overall survival for patients receiving standard chemotherapy was 8.1 months, non-standard combination 8.3 months and single-agent fluoropyrimidines 3.9 months. Poor prognosis was predicted by two independent factors: poor performance status (hazard ratio 2.402; 95% confidence interval 1.53-3.77, P<0.001) and the presence of cancer symptoms (hazard ratio 2.235; 95% confidence interval 1.32-3.79, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: An assessment of the performance status and the level of symptoms is vital in this vulnerable group of patients. Prospective randomised trials to assess the benefit of chemotherapy in elderly patients with gastroesophageal cancer are required.

A feasibility, pharmacokinetic and frequency-escalation trial of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in high risk gastrointestinal tract cancer.

AIMS: To assess the feasibility, pharmacokinetics and maximum tolerable frequency (MTF) of intraperitoneal (IP) 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FU/LV) added, as a regional boost, to intravenous chemotherapy after resection of gastrointestinal cancer. METHODS: Fifty-three patients were recruited following gastrointestinal cancer resection (43 colon; 10 stomach/small bowel) with serosal involvement. Peritoneal ports were implanted and IP fluid distribution evaluated ultrasonically. Twelve patients were studied for pharmacokinetics; 44 (41 evaluable) for MTF. Treatment was weekly intravenous bolus FU/LV for 6 months; to this was added IP FU/LV (400/20 mg/m(2) in 1500 ml 4% icodextrin) with increasing frequency from 4 weekly to 1 weekly in four successive cohorts. RESULTS: Peritoneal fluid distribution was excellent. Intraperitoneal FU exposure (AUC) after IP treatment was >1000-fold plasma AUC after IP treatment (regional pharmacokinetic advantage), and >100-fold plasma AUC after intravenous treatment (regional therapeutic advantage). IP therapy was well tolerated if given every 4, 3 or 2 weeks, but not weekly: 11/13, 7/8, 10/13 and 0/7 patients respectively completed treatment without IP modification in these cohorts. Problems with peritoneal access occurred in 20% of patients. CONCLUSION: Adding fortnightly IP FU/LV to a standard intravenous regimen is safe, tolerable and provides high peritoneal FU exposure. More reliable peritoneal access is needed to improve the feasibility of this otherwise promising therapeutic approach.

The clinical and economic benefits of capecitabine and tegafur with uracil in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Two oral fluoropyrimidine therapies have been introduced for metastatic colorectal cancer. One is a 5-fluorouracil pro-drug, capecitabine; the other is a combination of tegafur and uracil administered together with leucovorin. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these oral therapies against standard intravenous 5-fluorouracil regimens. A systematic literature review was conducted to assess the clinical effectiveness of the therapies and costs were calculated from the UK National Health Service perspective for drug acquisition, drug administration, and the treatment of adverse events. A cost-minimisation analysis was used; this assumes that the treatments are of equal efficacy, although direct randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparisons of the oral therapies with infusional 5-fluorouracil schedules were not available. The cost-minimisation analysis showed that treatment costs for a 12-week course of capecitabine (Pounds 2132) and tegafur with uracil (Pounds 3385) were lower than costs for the intravenous Mayo regimen (Pounds 3593) and infusional regimens on the de Gramont (Pounds 6255) and Modified de Gramont (Pounds 3485) schedules over the same treatment period. Oral therapies result in lower costs to the health service than intravenous therapies. Further research is needed to determine the relative clinical effectiveness of oral therapies vs infusional regimens.