Regorafenib or Tamoxifen for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer with rising CA125 and no evidence of clinical or RECIST progression: A GINECO randomized phase II trial (REGOVAR).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib versus tamoxifen in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer biological recurrence, defined by CA-125 increase without radiological (RECIST criteria) or symptomatic evidence of progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 116 patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer presenting an isolated increase of CA-125 were planned to be randomized. Regorafenib was administered orally at 160 or 120 mg daily, 3 weeks on/1 week off or tamoxifen at 40 mg daily, until disease progression or development of unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was Progression-Free Survival, assessed by progression according to RECIST 1.1 or death (by any cause). Secondary endpoints included Overall Survival, Best Response and CA-125 response rate. RESULTS: 68 patients were randomized. Median age was 67 years (range: 30-87). Primary site of cancer was ovarian for most patients (92.6%). Tumors were predominantly serous / (89.7%), high grade (83.6%) and initial FIGO staging was III for 69.6% of the patients. Most (79.4%) patients were included after the first line of platinum-based treatment. After a median follow-up of 32 months, there was no difference of progression-free survival (PFS) between regorafenib and tamoxifen groups (p = 0.72), with median PFS of 5.6 months (CI 90%: 3.84-7.52) for the tamoxifen arm and 4.6 months (CI 90%: 3.65-7.33) for the regorafenib arm. There was also no difference in term of overall survival, best response or CA-125 response, delay to next therapy. Regorafenib presented a less favorable safety profile than tamoxifen, with grade 3/4 events occurring for 90.9% of the patients compared to 54.3% for tamoxifen. The most frequent were cutaneous, digestive, and biological events. Notably, hand-foot syndrome occurred in 36.4% of these patients. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib presented an unfavorable toxicity profile compared to tamoxifen, with no superior efficacy in this population of patients.

Safety and efficacy of single-agent bevacizumab-containing therapy in elderly patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer: Subgroup analysis of the randomised phase III AURELIA trial.

BACKGROUND: The AURELIA trial demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with bevacizumab added to chemotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). METHODS: Patients with PROC were randomised to receive investigator-selected single-agent chemotherapy alone or with bevacizumab. Post-hoc exploratory analyses assessed efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes according to age <65 versus ≥65years. RESULTS: In the 133 patients (37%) aged ≥65years, baseline hypertension was more frequent and ascites was less common than in patients <65years. The magnitude of PFS benefit from bevacizumab was similar in patients ≥65 versus <65years (hazard ratio 0.44 [95% CI, 0.31-0.64] versus 0.49 [95% CI, 0.37-0.64], respectively, treatment-age interaction p=0.58), with similar improvements in response rates. Grade≥3 hypertension was more common with bevacizumab than chemotherapy alone in both subgroups, and more common in older than younger patients irrespective of treatment. However, there was no excess of other adverse events of specific interest for bevacizumab, including venous thromboembolic events, in older patients. More patients receiving bevacizumab in the younger but not the older subgroup showed improved gastrointestinal/abdominal symptoms. CONCLUSION: In exploratory analyses, PFS and response rate improvement with bevacizumab were consistent in older and younger patients. Grade≥3 hypertension was more common in elderly bevacizumab-treated patients; careful monitoring is recommended. Overall, bevacizumab-containing therapy was well tolerated in a selected population aged ≥65years, suggesting a favourable benefit:risk profile. However, geriatric assessments are needed to improve selection of elderly patients potentially gaining symptom and quality of life improvements from bevacizumab-containing therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT00976911.

Maintenance Therapy With Cetuximab After FOLFIRI Plus Cetuximab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The optimal maintenance strategy after induction chemotherapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains to be debated. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with single-agent cetuximab after FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) plus cetuximab induction therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: The TIME (Treatment After Irinotecan-Based Frontline Therapy: Maintenance With Erbitux]) (PRODIGE 28 [Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive]-UCGI 27 [UniCancer GastroIntestinal Group]) phase 2 noncomparative, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 15, 2014, to November 23, 2018, among 139 patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC. The cutoff date for analysis was July 21, 2022. Interventions: After first-line induction therapy with 8 cycles of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, patients without disease progression were randomized (1:1) to biweekly maintenance with cetuximab or observation. On disease progression, the same induction regimen was recommended for 16 weeks followed by further maintenance with cetuximab or observation until disease progression under the full induction regimen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 6-month progression-free rate from randomization. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. An exploratory biomolecular analysis, using next-generation sequencing, investigated the putative prognostic value of the tumor mutation profile. Results: Of 214 patients enrolled (141 men [65.9%]; median age, 67 years [range, 23-85 years]), 139 were randomized to receive cetuximab (n = 67; 45 men [67.2%]; median age, 64 years [range, 34-85 years]) or to be observed (n = 72; 50 men [69.4%]; median age, 68 years [23-85 years]). The 6-month progression-free rate was 38.8% ([26 of 67] 95% CI, 27.1%-51.5%) in the cetuximab group and 5.6% ([4 of 72] 95% CI, 1.5%-13.6%) in the observation group. At a median follow-up of 40.5 months (95% CI, 33.6-47.5 months), median progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.7-7.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.7 months) in the observation group. Median overall survival (OS) was 24.8 months (95% CI, 18.7-30.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 19.7 months (95% CI, 13.3-24.4 months) in the observation group. In an exploratory multivariate analysis, any tumor-activating mutation in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway genes was associated with shorter PFS from randomization regardless of treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.01-2.62]; P = .04). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 treatment-related toxic effect in the cetuximab group during maintenance therapy was rash (8 of 67 [11.9%]). Conclusion and Relevance: The randomized clinical trial did not meet its primary end point but suggests clinically meaningful PFS and OS benefits associated with cetuximab maintenance therapy. However, maintenance cetuximab or treatment breaks after first-line combination FOLFIRI-cetuximab therapy seems inappropriate for patients with MAPK-mutated independently of the side of primary tumor. A more complete assessment of MAPK pathway mutations warrants further investigation to the refine treatment strategy for patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02404935.

Postoperative circulating tumor DNA detection is associated with the risk of recurrence in patients resected for a stage II colorectal cancer.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is reported to be promising in localized colorectal cancer (CRC). The present study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the impact of ctDNA in patients with a resected stage II CRC from the PROGIGE 13 trial with available paired tumor and blood samples. A group of recurrent patients were matched one-to-one with nonrecurrent patients according to sex, tumor location, treatment sequence, and blood collection timing. CtDNA was analyzed by digital PCR according to NGS of tumors. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed based on ctDNA, and the risks of recurrence and death were determined. A total of 134 patients were included, with 67 patients in each group. At least one alteration was identified in 115/134 tumors. Postoperative ctDNA was detected in 10/111 (9.0%) informative samples and was detected more frequently in the recurrent group (16.7% versus 1.8%; p = 0.02). The median DFS of ctDNA+ versus ctDNA- patients was 16.8 versus 54 months (p = 0.002), respectively, and the median OS was 51.3 versus 69.5 months (p = 0.03), respectively. CtDNA was associated with recurrence (ORa = 11.13, p = 0.03) and death (HRa = 3.15, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the presence of postoperative ctDNA is associated with both recurrence and survival in stage II CRC.

Hemoglobin levels and quality of life in patients with symptomatic chemotherapy-induced anemia: the eAQUA study.

PURPOSE: To assess hemoglobin (Hb) outcomes and fatigue-related quality-of-life (QoL) (electronic assessment) in patients with solid tumors and symptomatic chemotherapy-induced anemia receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy and darbepoetin alfa (DA) or another erythropoiesis-stimulating agent according to European indication. METHODS: eAQUA was a Phase IV prospective observational study. The primary outcome (assessed in the primary analysis set [PAS]: patients receiving one or more DA dose who had baseline and week 9 assessments for Hb and QoL) was the proportion of patients receiving DA having both Hb increases ≥1 g/dL and improved QoL between baseline and week 9. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) subscale scores were anchored to fatigue visual analog scale scores to determine the minimally important difference for improved QoL. Overall data/data over time are reported for the full analysis set (patients receiving one or more erythropoiesis-stimulating agent dose, n=1,158); week 9 data (ie, data relating to the primary and secondary outcomes) are reported for the PAS (n=510). Baseline and safety data are included for both the full analysis set and PAS. RESULTS: In the PAS, 69% of patients had stage IV disease and 96% were fatigued. The minimally important difference in FACT-F change score for QoL improvement was 3.5. From baseline to week 9, 32% (95% confidence interval: 28%-36%) of patients had both improved QoL and an Hb increase ≥1 g/dL; proportions were similar across the most common tumor types. At week 9, 49% and 58% of patients had improved QoL or Hb increases ≥1 g/dL, respectively; 70% and 76% had QoL or Hb improvements between baseline and study end, respectively. In the PAS, 16% of patients required transfusions and 32% required iron supplementation. Few patients (<1%) reported adverse drug reactions. CONCLUSION: In this study, patients with solid tumors receiving DA per European indication for symptomatic chemotherapy-induced anemia had clinically meaningful improvements in Hb and QoL.

Transfusions and patient burden in chemotherapy-induced anaemia in France.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the patient burden in terms of the time spent on outpatient red blood cell (RBC) transfusions indicated for chemotherapy induced-anaemia (CIA) in patients with cancer in France. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients with cancer receiving an outpatient RBC transfusion was conducted at seven treatment centres in France. Total treatment time for one transfusion visit per patient was measured as the elapsed time between pre- and post-transfusion vital sign assessment, including time from transfusion start to stop. Elapsed time from haemoglobin (Hb) level testing to transfusion start and from blood draw for compatibility testing to transfusion start were recorded. In addition, estimated travel time and distance to the transfusion centre, and clinical and demographic information were collected. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients [63.1% men; mean age 66.2 years, standard deviation (SD) 11.9] were enrolled in the study (1 August 2010-31 October 2010). The four most frequent diagnoses were lung cancer (31.1%), urological cancer (15.5%), gynecological cancer (14.6%) and gastrointestinal/colorectal cancer (14.6%). Mean elapsed time between prevital and postvital sign assessment was 4.0 h [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9-6.1], including a mean of 3.4 h (95% CI 2.5-4.2) for the transfusion itself. Hb level testing (mean pre-transfusion Hb level 8.0 g/dl, SD 0.8) and blood draw for compatibility testing were completed in a mean of 28.8 h (95% CI 1.3-56.2) and 9.4 h (95% CI 0-21.4) prior to transfusion respectively. Patients' one-way mean travel time to the transfusion centre was 32.9 min (95% CI 28.5-37.4) and mean distance travelled was 25.4 km (95% CI 11.6-39.3). CONCLUSION: In France, CIA treatment with RBC transfusion is a time-consuming activity for patients that includes multiple trips to a medical facility, blood testing and the transfusion procedure itself. This burden is important to consider in the context of optimizing proactive monitoring and planning for supportive oncology care.