Efficacy of Prophylactic Low-Molecular Weight Heparin for Ambulatory Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Outcomes From the CONKO-004 Trial.

PURPOSE: Advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), in addition to its high mortality, accounts for the highest rates of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). Enoxaparin, a low-molecular weight heparin, is effective in prevention and treatment of VTEs. Some small studies have indicated that this benefit might extend to patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically proven APC were randomly assigned to ambulant first-line chemotherapy and prophylactic use of enoxaparin or chemotherapy alone to investigate the probable reduction in symptomatic VTEs and the impact on survival. RESULTS: A total of 312 patients were recruited as one of the protocol end points was reached. Within the first 3 months, the numbers of symptomatic VTEs were as follows: 15 of 152 patients in the observation group and two of 160 patients in the enoxaparin group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.52; χ(2) P = .001). The numbers of major bleeding events were as follows: five of 152 patients in the observation arm and seven of 160 patients in the enoxaparin arm (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.35 to 3.72; χ(2) P = 1.0). Overall cumulative incidence rates of symptomatic VTEs were 15.1% (observation) and 6.4% (enoxaparin; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.83; P = .01). Progression-free (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.32; P = .64) and overall survival (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.38; P = .44) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the high efficacy and feasibility of primary pharmacologic prevention of symptomatic VTEs in outpatients with APC. Treatment efficacy was not affected by simultaneous treatment with enoxaparin in this trial setting.

Chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine versus fluorouracil for locally advanced rectal cancer: a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy is regarded as a standard perioperative treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer. We investigated the efficacy and safety of substituting fluorouracil with the oral prodrug capecitabine. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial began in March, 2002, as an adjuvant trial comparing capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy with fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy, in patients aged 18 years or older with pathological stage II-III locally advanced rectal cancer from 35 German institutions. Patients in the capecitabine group were scheduled to receive two cycles of capecitabine (2500 mg/m(2) days 1-14, repeated day 22), followed by chemoradiotherapy (50·4 Gy plus capecitabine 1650 mg/m(2) days 1-38), then three cycles of capecitabine. Patients in the fluorouracil group received two cycles of bolus fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2) days 1-5, repeated day 29), followed by chemoradiotherapy (50·4 Gy plus infusional fluorouracil 225 mg/m(2) daily), then two cycles of bolus fluorouracil. The protocol was amended in March, 2005, to allow a neoadjuvant cohort in which patients in the capecitabine group received chemoradiotherapy (50·4 Gy plus capecitabine 1650 mg/m(2) daily) followed by radical surgery and five cycles of capecitabine (2500 mg/m(2) per day for 14 days) and patients in the fluorouracil group received chemoradiotherapy (50·4 Gy plus infusional fluorouracil 1000 mg/m(2) days 1-5 and 29-33) followed by radical surgery and four cycles of bolus fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2) for 5 days). Patients were randomly assigned to treatment group in a 1:1 ratio using permuted blocks, with stratification by centre and tumour stage. The primary endpoint was overall survival; analyses were done based on all patients with post-randomisation data. Non-inferiority of capecitabine in terms of 5-year overall survival was tested with a 12·5% margin. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01500993. FINDINGS: Between March, 2002, and December, 2007, 401 patients were randomly allocated; 392 patients were evaluable (197 in the capecitabine group, 195 in the fluorouracil group), with a median follow-up of 52 months (IQR 41-72). 5-year overall survival in the capecitabine group was non-inferior to that in the fluorouracil group (76% [95% CI 67-82] vs 67% [58-74]; p=0·0004; post-hoc test for superiority p=0·05). 3-year disease-free survival was 75% (95% CI 68-81) in the capecitabine group and 67% (59-73) in the fluorouracil group (p=0·07). Similar numbers of patients had local recurrences in each group (12 [6%] in the capecitabine group vs 14 [7%] in the fluorouracil group, p=0·67), but fewer patients developed distant metastases in the capecitabine group (37 [19%] vs 54 [28%]; p=0·04). Diarrhoea was the most common adverse event in both groups (any grade: 104 [53%] patients in the capecitabine group vs 85 [44%] in the fluorouracil group; grade 3-4: 17 [9%] vs four [2%]). Patients in the capecitabine group had more hand-foot skin reactions (62 [31%] any grade, four [2%] grade 3-4 vs three [2%] any grade, no grade 3-4), fatigue (55 [28%] any grade, no grade 3-4 vs 29 [15%], two [1%] grade 3-4), and proctitis (31 [16%] any grade, one [<1%] grade 3-4 vs ten [5%], one [<1%] grade 3-4) than did those in the fluorouracil group, whereas leucopenia was more frequent with fluorouracil than with capecitabine (68 [35%] any grade, 16 [8%] grade 3-4 vs 50 [25%] any grade, three [2%] grade 3-4). INTERPRETATION: Capecitabine could replace fluorouracil in adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimens for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. FUNDING: Roche Pharma AG (Grenzach-Wyhlen, Germany).