FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as compared with gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 342 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 (on a scale of 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater severity of illness) to receive FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg per square meter of body-surface area; irinotecan, 180 mg per square meter; leucovorin, 400 mg per square meter; and fluorouracil, 400 mg per square meter given as a bolus followed by 2400 mg per square meter given as a 46-hour continuous infusion, every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter weekly for 7 of 8 weeks and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. Six months of chemotherapy were recommended in both groups in patients who had a response. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the FOLFIRINOX group as compared with 6.8 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.73; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 6.4 months in the FOLFIRINOX group and 3.3 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.59; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 31.6% in the FOLFIRINOX group versus 9.4% in the gemcitabine group (P<0.001). More adverse events were noted in the FOLFIRINOX group; 5.4% of patients in this group had febrile neutropenia. At 6 months, 31% of the patients in the FOLFIRINOX group had a definitive degradation of the quality of life versus 66% in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.70; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX was associated with a survival advantage and had increased toxicity. FOLFIRINOX is an option for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and good performance status. (Funded by the French government and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00112658.).

Induction chemotherapy and dose intensification of the radiation boost in locally advanced anal canal carcinoma: final analysis of the randomized UNICANCER ACCORD 03 trial.

PURPOSE: Concomitant radiochemotherapy (RCT) is the standard for locally advanced anal canal carcinoma (LAACC). Questions regarding the role of induction chemotherapy (ICT) and a higher radiation dose in LAACC are pending. Our trial was designed to determine whether dose escalation of the radiation boost or two cycles of ICT before concomitant RCT lead to an improvement in colostomy-free survival (CFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with tumors ≥ 40 mm, or < 40 mm and N1-3M0 were randomly assigned to one of four treatment arms: (A) two ICT cycles (fluorouracil 800 mg/m(2)/d intravenous [IV] infusion, days 1 through 4 and 29 to 32; and cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) IV, on days 1 and 29), RCT (45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks, fluorouracil and cisplatin during weeks 1 and 5), and standard-dose boost (SD; 15 Gy); (B) two ICT cycles, RCT, and high-dose boost (HD; 20-25 Gy); (C): RCT and SD boost (reference arm); and (D) RCT and HD boost. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-three of 307 patients achieved full treatment. With a median follow-up period of 50 months, the 5-year CFS rates were 69.6%, 82.4%, 77.1%, and 72.7% in arms A, B, C, and D, respectively. Considering the 2 × 2 factorial analysis, the 5-year CFS was 76.5% versus 75.0% (P = .37) in groups A and B versus C and D, respectively (ICT effect), and 73.7% versus 77.8% in groups A and C versus B and D, respectively (RT-dose effect; P = .067). CONCLUSION: Using CFS as our main end point, we did not find an advantage for either ICT or HD radiation boost in LAACC. Nevertheless, the results of the most treatment-intense arm B should prompt the design of further intensification studies.

Comparison of two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimens for locally advanced rectal cancer: results of the phase III trial ACCORD 12/0405-Prodige 2.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is considered a standard approach for T3-4 M0 rectal cancer. In this situation, we compared neoadjuvant radiotherapy plus capecitabine with dose-intensified radiotherapy plus capecitabine and oxaliplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive 5 weeks of treatment with radiotherapy 45 Gy/25 fractions with concurrent capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily 5 days per week (Cap 45) or radiotherapy 50 Gy/25 fractions with capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily 5 days per week and oxaliplatin 50 mg/m(2) once weekly (Capox 50). The primary end point was complete sterilization of the operative specimen (ypCR). RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive Cap 45 (n = 299) or Capox 50 (n = 299). More preoperative grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred in the Capox 50 group (25 v 1%; P < .001). Surgery was performed in 98% of patients in both groups. There were no differences between groups in the rate of conservative surgery (75%) or postoperative deaths at 60 days (0.3%). The ypCR rate was 13.9% with Cap 45 and 19.2% with Capox 50 (P = .09). When ypCR was combined with yp few residual cells, the rate was respectively 28.9% with Cap 45 and 39.4% with Capox 50 (P = .008). The rate of positive circumferential rectal margins (between 0 and 2 mm) was 19.3% with Cap 45 and 9.9% with Capox 50 (P = .02). CONCLUSION: The benefit of oxaliplatin was not demonstrated and this drug should not be used with concurrent irradiation. Cap 50 merits investigation for T3-4 rectal cancers.