Fruquintinib versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (FRESCO-2): an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of effective systemic therapy options for patients with advanced, chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, a highly selective and potent oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs) 1, 2, and 3, in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: We conducted an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (FRESCO-2) at 124 hospitals and cancer centres across 14 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) with histologically or cytologically documented metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma who had received all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib, or both. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive fruquintinib (5 mg capsule) or matched placebo orally once daily on days 1-21 in 28-day cycles, plus best supportive care. Stratification factors were previous trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib, or both, RAS mutation status, and duration of metastatic disease. Patients, investigators, study site personnel, and sponsors, except for selected sponsor pharmacovigilance personnel, were masked to study group assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as the time from randomisation to death from any cause. A non-binding futility analysis was done when approximately one-third of the expected overall survival events had occurred. Final analysis occurred after 480 overall survival events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04322539, and EudraCT, 2020-000158-88, and is ongoing but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2020, and Dec 2, 2021, 934 patients were assessed for eligibility and 691 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive fruquintinib (n=461) or placebo (n=230). Patients had received a median of 4 lines (IQR 3-6) of previous systemic therapy for metastatic disease, and 502 (73%) of 691 patients had received more than 3 lines. Median overall survival was 7·4 months (95% CI 6·7-8·2) in the fruquintinib group versus 4·8 months (4·0-5·8) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·55-0·80; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 286 (63%) of 456 patients who received fruquintinib and 116 (50%) of 230 who received placebo; the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the fruquintinib group included hypertension (n=62 [14%]), asthenia (n=35 [8%]), and hand-foot syndrome (n=29 [6%]). There was one treatment-related death in each group (intestinal perforation in the fruquintinib group and cardiac arrest in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Fruquintinib treatment resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. These data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Ongoing analysis of the quality of life data will further establish the clinical benefit of fruquintinib in this patient population. FUNDING: HUTCHMED.

Effect of aflibercept plus FOLFIRI and potential efficacy biomarkers in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the POLAF trial.

BACKGROUND: Aflibercept is an antiangiogenic drug against metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) combined with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI); however, no antiangiogenic biomarker has yet been validated. We assessed aflibercept plus FOLFIRI, investigating the biomarker role of baseline vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE). METHODS: Phase II trial in oxaliplatin-treated mCRC patients who received aflibercept plus FOLFIRI. The reported 135 ng/mL ACE cut-off was used and ROC analysis was performed to assess the optimal VEGF-A cut-off for progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were also assessed. RESULTS: In total, 101 patients were followed for a median of 12 (6-17) months. The 1941 pg/mL VEGF-A was an optimal cut-off, with a longer median PFS when VEGF-A was <1941 versus ≥1941 pg/mL (9 versus 4 months). Patients with VEGF-A < 1941 pg/mL showed longer median OS (19 versus 8 months), TTP (9 versus 4 months) and TTF (8 versus 4 months), along with higher ORR (26% versus 9%) and DCR (81% versus 55%). No differences were identified according to ACE levels. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports aflibercept plus FOLFIRI benefits, suggesting VEGF-A as a potential biomarker to predict better outcomes.

Encorafenib, Binimetinib, and Cetuximab in BRAF V600E-Mutated Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with the BRAF V600E mutation have a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of 4 to 6 months after failure of initial therapy. Inhibition of BRAF alone has limited activity because of pathway reactivation through epidermal growth factor receptor signaling. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled 665 patients with BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer who had had disease progression after one or two previous regimens. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive encorafenib, binimetinib, and cetuximab (triplet-therapy group); encorafenib and cetuximab (doublet-therapy group); or the investigators' choice of either cetuximab and irinotecan or cetuximab and FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) (control group). The primary end points were overall survival and objective response rate in the triplet-therapy group as compared with the control group. A secondary end point was overall survival in the doublet-therapy group as compared with the control group. We report here the results of a prespecified interim analysis. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 9.0 months in the triplet-therapy group and 5.4 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.70; P<0.001). The confirmed response rate was 26% (95% CI, 18 to 35) in the triplet-therapy group and 2% (95% CI, 0 to 7) in the control group (P<0.001). The median overall survival in the doublet-therapy group was 8.4 months (hazard ratio for death vs. control, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.79; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 58% of patients in the triplet-therapy group, in 50% in the doublet-therapy group, and in 61% in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of encorafenib, cetuximab, and binimetinib resulted in significantly longer overall survival and a higher response rate than standard therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with the BRAF V600E mutation. (Funded by Array BioPharma and others; BEACON CRC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02928224; EudraCT number, 2015-005805-35.).

Genetic Profile and Functional Proteomics of Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Proposal for a Molecular Classification.

Anal squamous cell carcinoma is a rare tumor. Chemo-radiotherapy yields a 50% 3-year relapse-free survival rate in advanced anal cancer, so improved predictive markers and therapeutic options are needed. High-throughput proteomics and whole-exome sequencing were performed in 46 paraffin samples from anal squamous cell carcinoma patients. Hierarchical clustering was used to establish groups de novo Then, probabilistic graphical models were used to study the differences between groups of patients at the biological process level. A molecular classification into two groups of patients was established, one group with increased expression of proteins related to adhesion, T lymphocytes and glycolysis; and the other group with increased expression of proteins related to translation and ribosomes. The functional analysis by the probabilistic graphical model showed that these two groups presented differences in metabolism, mitochondria, translation, splicing and adhesion processes. Additionally, these groups showed different frequencies of genetic variants in some genes, such as ATM, SLFN11 and DST Finally, genetic and proteomic characteristics of these groups suggested the use of some possible targeted therapies, such as PARP inhibitors or immunotherapy.

The McCAVE Trial: Vanucizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 Versus Bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 in Patients with Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma (mCRC).

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab, a VEGF-A inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy, has proven to increase progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in multiple lines of therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The angiogenic factor angiopoetin-2 (Ang-2) is associated with poor prognosis in many cancers, including mCRC. Preclinical models demonstrate improved activity when inhibiting both VEGF-A and Ang-2, suggesting that the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 blocker vanucizumab (RO5520985 or RG-7221) may improve clinical outcomes. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus modified (m)FOLFOX-6 (folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin) versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6 for first-line mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients received mFOLFOX-6 and were randomized 1:1 to also receive vanucizumab 2,000 mg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every other week. Oxaliplatin was given for eight cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized (vanucizumab, n = 94; bevacizumab, n = 95). The number of PFS events was comparable (vanucizumab, n = 39; bevacizumab, n = 43). The hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.58; p = .98) in a stratified analysis based on number of metastatic sites and region. Objective response rate was 52.1% and 57.9% in the vanucizumab and bevacizumab arm, respectively. Baseline plasma Ang-2 levels were prognostic in both arms but not predictive for treatment effects on PFS of vanucizumab. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥3 was similar between treatment arms (83.9% vs. 82.1%); gastrointestinal perforations (10.8% vs. 8.4%) exceeded previously reported rates in this setting. Hypertension and peripheral edema were more frequent in the vanucizumab arm. CONCLUSION: Vanucizumab/mFOLFOX-6 did not improve PFS and was associated with increased rates of antiangiogenic toxicity compared with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6. Our results suggest that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in first-line mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This randomized phase II study demonstrates that additional angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) inhibition does not result in superior benefit over anti-VEGF-A blockade alone when each added to standard chemotherapy. Moreover, the performed pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that vanucizumab was bioavailable and affected its intended target, thereby strongly suggesting that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in the clinical setting of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer. As a result, the further clinical development of the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 inhibitor vanucizumab was discontinued.

A phase 2 randomised study of veliparib plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab versus placebo plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has low survival rates. We assessed if addition of veliparib, concurrent to FOLFIRI, improves survival in patients with previously untreated mCRC. METHODS: This study compared veliparib (200 mg BID for 7 days of each 14-day cycle) to placebo, each with FOLFIRI. Bevacizumab was allowed in both arms. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Patients were randomised to receive veliparib (n = 65) or placebo (n = 65) in combination with FOLFIRI. Median PFS was 12 vs 11 months (veliparib vs placebo) [HR = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.48)]. Median OS was 25 vs 27 months [HR = 1.26 (95% CI: 0.74, 2.16)]. Response rate was 57% vs 62%. Median DOR was 11 vs 9 months [HR = 0.73 (95% CI: 0.38, 1.40)]. AEs with significantly higher frequency (p < 0.05) in the veliparib group were anaemia (39% vs 19%, p = 0.019) and neutropenia (66% vs 37%, p = 0.001) for common AEs (≥20%); neutropenia (59% vs 22%, p < 0.001) for common Grade 3/4 AEs (≥5%); none in serious AEs. Haematopoietic cytopenias were more common with veliparib (79% vs 52%, p = 0.003). Fourteen percent of patients on veliparib and 15% on placebo discontinued treatment due to AEs. CONCLUSION: Veliparib added to FOLFIRI ± bevacizumab demonstrated similar efficacy as FOLFIRI ± bevacizumab in frontline mCRC patients. No unexpected safety concerns occurred.

Correction: A phase 2 randomised study of veliparib plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab versus placebo plus FOLFIRI±bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

The original version of this article contained an error in Figure 1a. The number of patients at risk listed in the Veliparib arm of Figure 1a should have read "65" instead of "35".An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Single-Agent Regorafenib in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients with Any RAS or BRAF Mutation Previously Treated with FOLFOXIRI plus Bevacizumab (PREVIUM Trial).

LESSONS LEARNED: RAS- or BRAF-mutated metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) progressing after first-line treatment have a poor prognosis.European and U.S. guidelines include the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib as a standard option for second-line therapy and beyond, based on the results of the randomized phase III CORRECT trial demonstrating improvement in survival.Although stopped prematurely for failing to accrue, the PREVIUM trial, the first prospective interventional study exploring regorafenib as second-line treatment for patients with mCRC bearing RAS or BRAF mutations, failed to demonstrate clinical activity in the population analyzed. BACKGROUND: Patients with RAS- or BRAF-mutated (mut) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) progressing on first-line bevacizumab plus 5-FU/irinotecan/oxaliplatin (FOLFOXIRI) have a poor prognosis. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in this population. METHODS: Regorafenib was administered daily for 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle until disease progression or other reason. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: KRAS, NRAS, or BRAF was mutated in mCRC samples in 60%, 20%, and 13% of patients, respectively. Median time from initial diagnosis of metastases to the start of regorafenib and treatment duration was 13.8 months and 7 weeks, respectively. Reasons for discontinuation included disease progression (80%), investigator decision (13%), and adverse events (AEs; 7%). Seven patients (47%) required dose reduction, mostly for asthenia (43%). The most common regorafenib-related grade 3 AEs were asthenia (33%), dysphonia (13%), and hypertension (13%) (Table 1). There were no grade 4 toxicities. No patient was progression-free at 6 months. Median PFS, time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS) were 2.2, 2.0, and 3.3 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although stopped prematurely for failing to accrue, in the population analyzed, regorafenib failed to demonstrate clinical activity in KRAS- or BRAF-mutated mCRC with progression following first-line with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab, although tolerability was acceptable. Our trial suggests that exploring regorafenib efficacy in an earlier line of therapy should not be undertaken without better population refinement.

Clinical utility of ABCB1 genotyping for preventing toxicity in treatment with irinotecan.

Preventing severe irinotecan-induced adverse reactions would allow us to offer better treatment and improve patients' quality of life. Transporters, metabolizing enzymes, and genes involved in the folate pathway have been associated with irinotecan-induced toxicity. We analyzed 12 polymorphisms in UGT1A1, ABCB1, ABCG2, ABCC4, ABCC5, and MTHFR in 158 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan and studied the association with grade >2 adverse reactions (CTCAE). Among the most frequent ADRs, the SNPs rs1128503, rs2032582, and rs1045642 in ABCB1 and rs1801133 in MTHFR were associated with hematological toxicity and overall toxicity. The SNP rs11568678 in ABCC4 was also associated with overall toxicity. After correction of P values using a false discovery rate, only ABCB1 variants remained statistically significant. Haplotype analysis in ABCB1 showed an 11.3-fold and 4.6-fold increased risk of hematological toxicity (95% CI, 1.459-88.622) and overall toxicity (95% CI, 2.283-9.386), respectively. Consequently, genotyping of the three SNPs in ABCB1 can predict overall toxicity and hematological toxicity with a diagnostic odds ratio of 4.40 and 9.94, respectively. Genotyping of ABCB1 variants can help to prevent severe adverse reactions to irinotecan-based treatments in colorectal cancer.

Panitumumab use in metastatic colorectal cancer and patterns of RAS testing: results from a Europe-wide physician survey and medical records review.

BACKGROUND: In Europe, treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with panitumumab requires prior confirmation of RAS wild-type mutation status. Two studies - a physician survey and a medical records review (MRR) - were conducted to evaluate the use of panitumumab and awareness among prescribing oncologists of the associated RAS testing requirements in clinical practice. METHODS: Both studies enrolled participants from nine European countries and were carried out in three consecutive rounds. Rounds 1 and 2 (2012-2013) examined KRAS (exon 2) testing only; the results have been published in full previously. Round 3 (2014-2015) examined full RAS testing (exons 2, 3, 4 of KRAS and NRAS) and was initiated following a change in prescribing guidelines, from requiring KRAS alone to requiring full RAS testing. For the physician survey, telephone interviews were conducted with oncologists who had prescribed panitumumab to patients with mCRC in the previous 6 months. For the MRR, oncologists were asked to provide anonymised clinical information, extracted from their patients' records. RESULTS: In Round 3, 152 oncologists and 131 patients' records were included in the physician survey and MRR, respectively. In Round 3 of the physician survey, 95.4% (n = 145) of participants correctly identified that panitumumab should only be prescribed in RAS wild-type mCRC compared with 99.0% (n = 298) of 301 participants in Rounds 1 and 2, responding to the same question about KRAS testing. In Round 3 of the MRR, 100% (n = 131) of patients included in the study had confirmed KRAS or RAS wild-type status prior to initiation of panitumumab compared with 97.7% (n = 299) of 306 patients in Rounds 1 and 2 (KRAS only). Of those patients in Round 3, 83.2% (n = 109) had been tested for RAS status and 16.8% (n = 22) had been tested for KRAS status only. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' adherence to prescribing guidelines has remained high over time in Europe, despite the change in indication for panitumumab treatment, from KRAS to RAS wild-type mCRC. Additionally, this study demonstrates the uptake of full RAS testing among the majority of oncologists and pathologists.

Identification of new SNPs associated with severe toxicity to capecitabine.

Predicting individual risk of chemotherapy-induced severe adverse reaction is a critical issue when selecting the best treatment for cancer patients. SNPs have been identified in genes involved in the pharmacodynamics of fluoropyrimidines, and guidelines even recommend genotyping some DPYD variants in order to estimate the risk of toxicity. However, the predictive value of this approach remains insufficient, thus limiting its clinical implementation. The aim of the present study was to identify new genetic variants by selecting a group of tag SNPs in genes associated with the pharmacodynamics of fluoropyrimidines (CDA, DPYD, ENOSF1, CES1, TYMS, SLC22A7, TYMP, and UMPS). For this purpose, 23 selected SNPs were genotyped on an OpenArray™ platform in a cohort of 301 colorectal cancer patients receiving capecitabine-based chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate statistical analysis by logistic regression revealed 10 SNPs associated with severe adverse reactions to capecitabine (P<0.05): rs1048977, rs12726436, and rs2072671 in CDA; rs12119882 in DPYD; rs2853741 in TYMS; rs699517 in TYMS/ENOSF1; rs2270860 and rs4149178 in SLC22A7; and rs2279199 and rs4678145 in UMPS. Except for rs2072671, no association had previously been reported between these SNPs and the risk of capecitabine-induced toxicity. The use of tag SNPs to find new polymorphisms related to adverse reactions to capecitabine was successful. These new variants could increase the predictive power of currently available tests and thus prevent severe adverse reactions to capecitabine.

Recommendations for SIR-Spheres Y-90 resin microspheres in chemotherapy-refractory/intolerant colorectal liver metastases.

A Spanish expert panel reviewed current evidence for the use of SIR-Spheres Y-90 resin microspheres in patients with chemotherapy refractory/intolerant unresectable colorectal liver metastases. Substantial evidence for its efficacy and safety is available from a randomized controlled study, retrospective comparative studies and several single arm studies. Clinical evidence data obtained from more than 1500 patients have led to the inclusion of selective internal radiation therapy in the 2016 ESMO Clinical Guidelines as third-line treatment. This publication results from an expert panel meeting, where published evidence and author's experiences were shared to position SIR-Spheres Y-90 resin microspheres in Spain for the treatment of chemotherapy refractory/intolerant unresectable colorectal liver metastases, and second, to define the patient subgroup that will benefit the most with this treatment.

Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis is an important therapeutic target in colorectal carcinoma. Ramucirumab is a human IgG-1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGF receptor 2. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI (leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) for metastatic colorectal cancer in patients with disease progression during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine. METHODS: Between Dec 14, 2010, and Aug 23, 2013, we enrolled patients into the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 RAISE trial. Eligible patients had disease progression during or within 6 months of the last dose of first-line therapy. Patients were randomised (1:1) via a centralised, interactive voice-response system to receive 8 mg/kg intravenous ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI or matching placebo plus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or death. Randomisation was stratified by region, KRAS mutation status, and time to disease progression after starting first-line treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01183780.ld FINDINGS: We enrolled 1072 patients (536 in each group). Median overall survival was 13·3 months (95% CI 12·4-14·5) for patients in the ramucirumab group versus 11·7 months (10·8-12·7) for the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·844 95% CI 0·730-0·976; log-rank p=0·0219). Survival benefit was consistent across subgroups of patients who received ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI. Grade 3 or worse adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (203 [38%] of 529 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 123 [23%] of 528 in the placebo group, with febrile neutropenia incidence of 18 [3%] vs 13 [2%]), hypertension (59 [11%] vs 15 [3%]), diarrhoea (57 [11%] vs 51 [10%]), and fatigue (61 [12%] vs 41 [8%]). INTERPRETATION: Ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo plus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. No unexpected adverse events were identified and toxic effects were manageable. FUNDING: Eli Lilly.

Capecitabine and irinotecan with bevacizumab 2-weekly for metastatic colorectal cancer: the phase II AVAXIRI study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal sequence of chemotherapeutic agents is not firmly established for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This phase II multi-centre study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of a standard capecitabine plus irinotecan (XELIRI) regimen with bevacizumab in previously untreated patients with mCRC. METHODS: Patients received intravenous irinotecan 175 mg/m(2) on day 1 and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) (800 mg/m(2) for patients >65 years of age) twice daily on days 2-8, followed by a 1-week rest, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg as an intravenous infusion on day 1 every 2 weeks. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were included in the intention-to-treat and safety populations. Progression-free survival at 9 months was 61%. The overall response and disease control rates were 51% and 84%, respectively. Median progression-free and overall survival times were 11.9 and 24.8 months, respectively. 48 patients (62%) had at least one grade 3/4 adverse event, the most common being asthenia, diarrhoea and neutropenia. Quality of life varied little over the study period with mean visual analogue scale general health scores ranging from 71 to 76 over cycles 1-11. CONCLUSION: Our study found irinotecan and capecitabine administered fortnightly with bevacizumab in patients with mCRC to be an effective and tolerable regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00875771. Trial registration date: 04/02/2009.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of lanreotide in combination with targeted therapies in patients with neuroendocrine tumours in clinical practice: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Based on the mechanism of action, combining somatostatin analogues (SSAs) with mTOR inhibitors or antiangiogenic agents may provide synergistic effects for the treatment of patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). Herein, we investigate the use of these treatment combinations in clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients with NETs treated with the SSA lanreotide and targeted therapies at 35 Spanish hospitals evaluated the efficacy and safety of lanreotide treatment combinations in clinical practice. The data of 159 treatment combinations with lanreotide in 133 patients was retrospectively collected. RESULTS: Of the 133 patients, with a median age of 59.4 (16-83) years, 70 (52.6%) patients were male, 64 (48.1%) had pancreatic NET, 23 (17.3%) had ECOG PS ≥ 2, 41 (30.8%) had functioning tumours, 63 (47.7%) underwent surgery of the primary tumour, 45 (33.8%) had received prior chemotherapy, and 115 (86.5%) had received prior SSAs. 115 patients received 1 lanreotide treatment combination and 18 patients received between 2 and 5 combinations. Lanreotide was mainly administered in combination with everolimus (73 combinations) or sunitinib (61 combinations). The probability of being progression-free was 78.5% (6 months), 68.6% (12 months) and 57.0% (18 months) for patients who only received everolimus plus lanreotide (n = 57) and 89.3% (6 months), 73.0% (12 months), and 67.4% (18 months) for patients who only received sunitinib and lanreotide (n = 50). In patients who only received everolimus plus lanreotide the median time-to-progression from the initiation of lanreotide combination treatment was 25.8 months (95% CI, 11.3, 40.3) and it had not yet been reached among the subgroup of patients only receiving sunitinib plus lanreotide. The safety profile of the combination treatment was comparable to that of the targeted agent alone. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of lanreotide and targeted therapies, mainly everolimus and sunitinib, is widely used in clinical practice without unexpected toxicities and suggests efficacy that should be explored in randomized prospective clinical trials.

The role of antiangiogenic agents in the treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer according to K-RAS status.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide. Recently, it has been found that about 40 % of patients with CRC have mutations in the K-RAS gene. Several clinical trials have showed that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who present tumour-promoting mutations in signalling pathways involving the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which includes activating K-RAS mutations, do not respond to anti-EGFR drugs such as panitumumab and cetuximab. Hence, K-RAS status is now considered an important negative predictive factor for response to anti-EGFR drugs. Moreover, K-RAS status seems to have also a prognostic role in CRC, but this fact is somewhat controversial. Activity of antiangiogenic agents seems not to be influenced by K-RAS gene status. Tumour angiogenesis has attracted interest in attempts to improve the management of mCRC. The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway is fundamental to the regulation of angiogenesis, and research has focused on developing agents that selectively target it. In this way, the anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy has provided important clinical benefits in terms of response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival to patients with mCRC. Efficacy data of bevacizumab in K-RAS wild-type patients seem to be comparable with the efficacy data observed with anti-EGFR therapies in a cross-trial comparison. Although there is a lack of prospective and randomized data in this setting, the combination of chemotherapy plus antiangiogenic agents could be considered as an effective alternative for the treatment of mCRC with independence of K-RAS gene status. Here, we review the available data we have in the literature of the use of antiangiogenic strategies in the treatment of mCRC nowadays.

Delphi consensus for the third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The optimal drug regimen and sequence are still unknown for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are candidates for third-line (3L) or subsequent treatment. The aim of this study is to know the opinion of experts on the most appropriate treatment options for mCRC in 3L and to clarify certain clinical decisions in Spain. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi method, a group of experts discussed the treatment in 3L of patients with mCRC and developed a questionnaire with 21 items divided into 5 sections. RESULTS: After 2 rounds, the 67 panelists consulted agreed on 17 items (81%). They considered that the main objective of 3L is to equally increase survival and improve patients' quality of life (QoL), but preferably the QoL. It was agreed that patients with mCRC in 3L prefer to receive active versus symptomatic treatment. Panelists considered trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) to be the best oral treatment available to them in 3L. In patients with MSI-H or dMMR and BRAF V600E, the panelists mostly prefer targeted treatments. Panelists agreed the use of a therapeutic sequence that not only increases outcomes but also allows patients to be treated later. Finally, it was agreed that FTD/TPI has a mechanism of action that allows it to be used in patients refractory to previous treatment with 5-fluorouracil. CONCLUSION: The experts agreed with most of the proposed items on 3L treatment of mCRC, prioritizing therapeutic options that increase survival and preserve QoL, while facilitating the possibility that patients can continue to be treated later.

Olaparib with or without bevacizumab versus bevacizumab plus a fluoropyrimidine as maintenance therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: The randomized phase 3 LYNK-003 study.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, open-label, phase III LYNK-003 study assessed the efficacy of first-line maintenance olaparib, alone or in combination with bevacizumab, versus bevacizumab plus a fluoropyrimidine in participants with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We present results of the prespecified interim futility analysis. METHODS: Eligible participants were ≥18 years of age with unresectable or mCRC that had not progressed after induction with first-line bevacizumab plus 5-fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin plus leucovorin (FOLFOX) or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX). Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to olaparib plus bevacizumab, olaparib alone, or bevacizumab plus a fluoropyrimidine (5-fluorouracil or capecitabine). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1 by central review. RESULTS: Between August 2020 and May 2022, 309 participants were assigned to olaparib plus bevacizumab (n = 104), olaparib (n = 107), or bevacizumab plus fluoropyrimidine (n = 98). At interim analysis, with a median follow-up of 7.6 months (range 0.1-19.7 months), the median PFS was 3.7 months (95% CI 2.8-5.3) with olaparib plus bevacizumab (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.02-2.27; P = 0.982) and 3.5 months (95% CI 2.0-3.7) with olaparib (HR 2.11; 95% CI 1.39-3.18; P = 0.999) versus 5.6 months (95% CI 3.8-5.9) with bevacizumab plus fluoropyrimidine. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 64 (62%), 52 (50%), and 57 (59%) participants, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: The LYNK-003 study was stopped prematurely as criteria for futility were met. Maintenance olaparib with or without bevacizumab did not demonstrate clinical efficacy compared with bevacizumab plus a fluoropyrimidine. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT04456699.

Nivolumab plus relatlimab in patients with previously treated microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: the phase II CheckMate 142 study.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors, including nivolumab, have demonstrated long-term survival benefit in previously treated patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). PD-1 and lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) are distinct immune checkpoints that are often co-expressed on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and contribute to tumor-mediated T-cell dysfunction. Relatlimab is a LAG-3 inhibitor that has demonstrated efficacy in combination with nivolumab in patients with melanoma. Here, we present the results from patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC treated with nivolumab plus relatlimab in the CheckMate 142 study. METHODS: In this open-label, phase II study, previously treated patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC received nivolumab 240 mg plus relatlimab 160 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: A total of 50 previously treated patients received nivolumab plus relatlimab. With median follow-up of 47.4 (range 43.9-49.2) months, investigator-assessed ORR was 50% (95% CI 36% to 65%) and disease control rate was 70% (95% CI 55% to 82%). The median time to response per investigator was 2.8 (range 1.3-33.1) months, and median duration of response was 42.7 (range 2.8-47.0+) months. The median progression-free survival per investigator was 27.5 (95% CI 5.3 to 43.7) months with a progression-free survival rate at 3 years of 38%, and median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 17.2 months to not estimable), with a 56% overall survival rate at 3 years. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were diarrhea (24%), asthenia (16%), and hypothyroidism (12%). Grade 3 or 4 TRAEs were reported in 14% of patients, and TRAEs of any grade leading to discontinuation were observed in 8% of patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus relatlimab provided durable clinical benefit and was well tolerated in previously treated patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02060188.