Geriatric analysis from PRODIGE 20 randomized phase II trial evaluating bevacizumab + chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in older patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Older patients have frailty characteristics that impair the transposition of treatment results found in younger patients. Predictive factors are needed to help with treatment choices for older patients. The PRODIGE 20 study is a randomized phase II study that evaluated chemotherapy associated with bevacizumab (BEV) or not (CT) in patients aged 75 years or older. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients underwent a geriatric assessment at randomization and at each evaluation. The predictive value of geriatric and oncologic factors was determined for the primary composite end-point assessing safety and efficacy of treatment (BEV or CT) simultaneously and also progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 102 patients were randomized (51 BEV and 51 CT; median age 80 years [range 75-91]). On multivariate analysis, baseline normal independent activity of daily living (IADL) score and no previous cardiovascular disease predicted the primary end-point. High (versus low) baseline Köhne score predicted short PFS and baseline Spitzer quality of life (QoL) score <8, albumin level ≤35 g/L, CA19.9 >2 LN levels above normal and high baseline Köhne score predicted short OS. Survival without deteriorated QoL and autonomy was similar with BEV and CT. On subgroup analyses, the benefit of bevacizumab seemed to be maintained in patients with baseline impaired IADL or nutritional status. CONCLUSION: Normal IADL score was associated with a good efficacy and safety of both BEV and CT. Köhne criteria may be relevant prognostic factors in older patients. Adding bevacizumab to chemotherapy does not impair patient autonomy or QoL.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery with and without cetuximab in patients with resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized, open-label, phase III trial (SAKK 75/08).

Background: This open-label, phase III trial compared chemoradiation followed by surgery with or without neoadjuvant and adjuvant cetuximab in patients with resectable esophageal carcinoma. Patients and methods: Patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to two cycles of chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, cisplatin 75 mg/m2) followed by chemoradiation (45 Gy, docetaxel 20 mg/m2 and cisplatin 25 mg/m2, weekly for 5 weeks) and surgery, with or without neoadjuvant cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly and adjuvant cetuximab 500 mg/m2 fortnightly for 3 months. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In total, 300 patients (median age, 61 years; 88% male; 63% adenocarcinoma; 85% cT3/4a, 90% cN+) were assigned to cetuximab (n = 149) or control (n = 151). The R0-resection rate was 95% for cetuximab versus 97% for control. Postoperative treatment-related mortality was 6% in both arms. Median PFS was 2.9 years [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0 to not reached] with cetuximab and 2.0 years (95% CI, 1.5-2.8) with control [hazard ratio (HR), 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58-1.07; P = 0.13]. Median overall survival (OS) time was 5.1 years (95% CI, 3.7 to not reached) versus 3.0 years (95% CI, 2.2-4.2) for cetuximab and control, respectively (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52-1.01; P = 0.055). Time to loco-regional failure after R0-resection was significantly longer for cetuximab (HR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31-0.90; P = 0.017); time to distant failure did not differ between arms (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.64-1.59, P = 0.97). Cetuximab did not increase adverse events in neoadjuvant or postoperative settings. Conclusion: Adding cetuximab to multimodal therapy significantly improved loco-regional control, and led to clinically relevant, but not-significant improvements in PFS and OS in resectable esophageal carcinoma. Clinical trial information: NCT01107639.

Bevacizumab+chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in elderly patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial-PRODIGE 20 study results.

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer frequently occurs in elderly patients. Bevacizumab in combination with front line chemotherapy (CT) is a standard treatment but some concern raised about tolerance of bevacizumab for these patients. The purpose of PRODIGE 20 was to evaluate tolerance and efficacy of bevacizumab according to specific end points in this population. Patients and methods: Patients aged 75 years and over were randomly assigned to bevacizumab + CT (BEV) versus CT. LV5FU2, FOLFOX and FOLFIRI regimen were prescribed according to investigator's choice. The composite co-primary end point, assessed 4 months after randomization, was based on efficacy (tumor control and absence of decrease of the Spitzer QoL index) and safety (absence of severe cardiovascular toxicities and unexpected hospitalization). For each arm, the treatment will be consider as inefficient if 20% or less of the patients met the efficacy criteria and not safe if 40% or less met the safety criteria. Results: About 102 patients were randomized (51 BEV and 51 CT), median age was 80 years (range 75-91). Primary end point was met for efficacy in 50% and 58% and for safety in 61% and 71% of patients in BEV and CT, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 9.7 months in BEV and 7.8 months in CT. Median overall survival was 21.7 months in BEV and 19.8 months in CT. The 36-month overall survival rate was 27% in BEV and 10.1% in CT. Severe toxicities grade 3/4 were mainly non-hematologic toxicities (80.4% in BEV, 63.3% in CT). Conclusion: Bevacizumab combined with CT was safe and efficient. Both arms met the primary safety and efficacy criteria.

Late toxicities and clinical outcome at 5 years of the ACCORD 12/0405-PRODIGE 02 trial comparing two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimens for intermediate-risk rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Outcome of intermediate risk rectal cancer may be improved by the addition of oxaliplatin during 5-fluoruracil concomitant neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The purpose of this study is to analyze the main clinical results of the ACCORD12 trial (NCT00227747) in rectal cancer after 5 years of follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria were as follows: rectal adenocarcinoma accessible to digital examination staged T3-T4 Nx M0 (or T2 Nx distal anterior rectum). Two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimens were randomized: CAP45 (RT 45 Gy + capecitabine) and CAPOX50 (RT 50 Gy + capecitabine and oxaliplatin). Main end point was sterilization of the operative specimen. Acute and late toxicities were prospectively analyzed with dedicated questionnaires. RESULTS: Between November 2005 and July 2008, 598 patients were included in the trial. After a median follow-up of 60.2 months, there was no difference between treatment arms in multivariate analysis either for disease-free survival or overall survival (OS) [P = 0.9, hazard ratio (HR)=1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.76-1.36 and P = 0.3, HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66-1.15, respectively]. There was also no difference of local control in univariate analysis (P = 0.7, HR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.51-1.66). Late toxicities were acceptable with 1.6% G3 anal incontinence, and <1% G3 diarrhea, G3 rectal bleeding, G3 stenosis, G3-4 pain, G3 urinary incontinence, G3 urinary retention and G3 skeletal toxicity. There was a slight increase of erectile dysfunction over time with a 63% rate of erectile dysfunction at 5 years. There was no significant statistical difference for these toxicities between treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: The CAPOX50 regimen did not improve local control, disease-free survival and overall survival in the ACCORD12 trial. Late toxicities did not differ between treatment arms.

Health-related quality of life results from the PRODIGE 5/ACCORD 17 randomised trial of FOLFOX versus fluorouracil-cisplatin regimen in oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: A recent prospective randomised trial did not reveal significant differences in median progression-free survival between two chemoradiotherapy (CRT) regimens for inoperable non-metastatic oesophageal cancer patients. This secondary analysis aimed to describe the impact of CRT on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), physical functioning, dysphagia, fatigue and pain and to evaluate whether baseline HRQOL domains can predict overall survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 267 patients were randomly assigned to receive with 50 Gy of radiotherapy in 25 fractions six cycles of FOLFOX or four cycles of fluorouracil and cisplatin on day 1. HRQOL was prospectively assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire version 3.0 with the oesophageal cancer module (QLQ-OES18). RESULTS: Both groups showed high baseline compliance. Subsequently, compliance reduced to 41% at the 6-month follow-up. Baseline HRQOL scores showed no statistical differences between treatment arms. During treatment, both groups exhibited lower physical and social functioning and increased fatigue and dyspnoea, although dysphagia moderately improved in the fluorouracil-cisplatin arm only (p = 0.047). During follow-up, HRQOL scores revealed no significant differences between chemotherapy regimens. Linear mixed model exhibited a treatment-by-time interaction effect for dysphagia (p = 0.017) with a greater decrease in dysphagia in the fluorouracil-cisplatin group. Time until definitive deterioration analysis showed no significant differences in global HRQOL, functional or main symptom domains. However, time until definitive deterioration was significantly longer for the fluorouracil and cisplatin arm compared with FOLFOX for appetite loss (p = 0.002), QLQ-OES-18 pain (p = 0.008), trouble swallowing saliva (p = 0.011) and trouble talking (p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Analyses of HRQOL scores revealed no statistically significant differences between patients with inoperable non-metastatic oesophageal cancer treated by FOLFOX versus those treated with a fluorouracil-cisplatin regimen as part of definitive CRT.

Patterns of recurrence in early-stage oesophageal cancer after chemoradiotherapy and surgery compared with surgery alone.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of disease recurrence in patients with oesophageal cancer following treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery (nCRTS) or surgery alone are poorly reported. An understanding of patterns of disease recurrence is important for subsequent treatment planning. METHODS: An analysis was undertaken of patterns of disease recurrence from a phase III multicentre randomized trial (FFCD9901) comparing nCRTS with surgery alone in patients with stage I and II oesophageal cancer. RESULTS: Some 170 patients undergoing surgical resection were included in the study. R0 resection rates were similar in the two groups: 94 per cent following nCRTS versus 92 per cent after surgery alone (P = 0·749). After a median follow-up of 94·2 months, recurrent disease was found in 39·4 per cent of the overall cohort (31 per cent after nCRTS versus 47 per cent following surgery alone; P = 0·030). Locoregional recurrence was diagnosed in 41 patients (17 versus 30 per cent respectively; P = 0·047) and distant metastatic recurrence in 47 (23 versus 31 per cent respectively; P = 0·244). Metastatic recurrence was more frequent in patients with adenocarcinoma than in those with squamous cell cancer (40 versus 23·1 per cent respectively; P = 0·032). ypT0 N0 category was associated with prolonged time to mixed locoregional and metastatic recurrence (P = 0·009), and time to locoregional (P = 0·044) and metastatic (P = 0·055) recurrence. In multivariable analysis, node-positive disease predicted both locoregional (P = 0·001) and metastatic (P < 0·001) recurrence. CONCLUSION: Locoregional disease control following nCRTS indicated a local field effect not related solely to completeness of resection. pN+ disease was strongly predictive of time to locoregional and metastatic disease recurrence.

Randomized phase III trial in elderly patients comparing LV5FU2 with or without irinotecan for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (FFCD 2001-02).

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) frequently occurs in elderly patients. However, data from a geriatric tailored randomized trial about tolerance to and the efficacy of doublet chemotherapy (CT) with irinotecan in the elderly are lacking. The benefit of first-line CT intensification remains an issue in elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Elderly patients (75+) with previously untreated mCRC were randomly assigned in a 2 × 2 factorial design (four arms) to receive 5-FU (5-fluorouracil)-based CT, either alone (FU: LV5FU2 or simplified LV5FU2) or in combination with irinotecan [IRI: LV5FU2-irinotecan or simplified LV5FU2-irinotecan (FOLFIRI)]. The CLASSIC arm was defined as LV5FU2 or LV5FU2-irinotecan and the SIMPLIFIED arm as simplified LV5FU2 or FOLFIRI. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), safety and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: From June 2003 to May 2010, 71 patients were randomly assigned to LV5FU2, 71 to simplified LV5FU2, 70 to LV5FU2-irinotecan and 70 to FOLFIRI. The median age was 80 years (range 75-92 years). No significant difference was observed for the median PFS: FU 5.2 months versus IRI 7.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.84 (0.66-1.07), P = 0.15 and CLASSIC 6.5 months versus SIMPLIFIED 6.0 months, HR = 0.85 (0.67-1.09), P = 0.19. The ORR was superior in IRI (P = 0.0003): FU 21.1% versus IRI 41.7% and in CLASSIC (P = 0.04): CLASSIC 37.1% versus SIMPLIFIED 25.6%. Median OS was 14.2 months in FU versus 13.3 months in IRI, HR = 0.96 (0.75-1.24) and 15.2 months in CLASSIC versus 11.4 months in SIMPLIFIED, HR = 0.71 (0.55-0.92). More patients presented grade 3-4 toxicities in IRI (52.2% versus 76.3%). CONCLUSION: In this elderly population, adding irinotecan to an infusional 5-FU-based CT did not significantly increase either PFS or OS. Classic LV5FU2 was associated with an improved OS compared with simplified LV5FU2. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00303771.

Idarubicin-loaded beads for chemoembolisation of hepatocellular carcinoma: results of the IDASPHERE phase I trial.

BACKGROUND: A phase I dose-escalation trial of transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) with idarubicin-loaded beads was performed in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). AIM: To estimate the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and to assess safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics and quality of life. METHODS: Patients received a single TACE session with injection of 2 mL drug-eluting beads (DEBs; DC Bead 300-500 µm) loaded with idarubicin. The idarubicin dose was escalated according to a modified continuous reassessment method. MTD was defined as the dose level closest to that causing dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in 20% of patients. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled, including nine patients at 5 mg, six patients at 10 mg, and six patients at 15 mg. One patient at each dose level experienced DLT (acute myocardial infarction, hyperbilirubinaemia and elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST) at 5-, 10- and 15-mg, respectively). The calculated MTD of idarubicin was 10 mg. The most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events were pain, elevated AST, elevated γ-glutamyltranspeptidase and thrombocytopenia. At 2 months, the objective response rate was 52% (complete response, 28%, and partial response, 24%) by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. The median time to progression was 12.1 months (95% CI 7.4 months--not reached); the median overall survival was 24.5 months (95% CI 14.7 months--not reached). Pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated the ability of DEBs to release idarubicin slowly. CONCLUSIONS: Using drug-eluting beads, the maximum-tolerated dose of idarubicin was 10 mg per TACE session. Encouraging responses and median time to progression were observed. Further clinical investigations are warranted (NCT01040559).

Impact of primary tumour resection on survival of patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous metastases treated by chemotherapy: results from the multicenter, randomised trial Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive 9601.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of primary tumour resection on overall survival (OS) of patients diagnosed with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC). DESIGN: Among the 294 patients with non-resectable colorectal metastases enrolled in the Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) 9601 phase III trial, which compared different first-line single-agent chemotherapy regimens, 216 patients (73%) presented with synchronous metastases at study entry and constituted the present study population. Potential baseline prognostic variables including prior primary tumour resection were assessed by univariate and multivariate Cox analyses. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS curves were compared with the logrank test. RESULTS: Among the 216 patients with stage IV CRC (median follow-up, 33 months), 156 patients (72%) had undergone resection of their primary tumour prior to study entry. The resection and non-resection groups did not differ for baseline characteristics except for primary tumour location (rectum, 14% versus 35%; p=0.0006). In multivariate analysis, resection of the primary was the strongest independent prognostic factor for PFS (hazard ratio (HR), 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-0.8; p=0.0002) and OS (HR, 0.4; CI, 0.3-0.6; p<0.0001). Both median PFS (5.1 [4.6-5.6] versus 2.9 [2.2-4.1] months; p=0.001) and OS (16.3 [13.7-19.2] versus 9.6 [7.4-12.5]; p<0.0001) were significantly higher in the resection group. These differences in patient survival were maintained after exclusion of patients with rectal primary (n=43). CONCLUSION: Resection of the primary tumour may be associated with longer PFS and OS in patients with stage IV CRC starting first-line, single-agent chemotherapy.

[Locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer: Induction chemoradiotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone: Definitive results of the 2000-2001 FFCD/SFRO phase III trial]. / Cancer du pancréas localement évolué non resécable : chimioradiothérapie d'induction suivie de chimiothérapie par gemcitabine contre chimiothérapie exclusive par gemcitabine : résultats définitifs de l'étude de phase III 2000-2001de la FFCD et de la SFRO.

PURPOSE: To compare chemoradiation with systemic chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and nineteen patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer, with World Health Organization performance status of zero to two were randomly assigned to either the induction chemoradiation group (60 Gy, 2 Gy/fraction; concomitant 5-fluoro-uracil infusion, 300 mg/m(2) per day, days 1-5 for 6 weeks; cisplatin, 20 mg/m(2) per day, days 1-5 during weeks 1 and 5) or the induction gemcitabine group (GEM: 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks). Maintenance gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly, 3/4 weeks) was given in both arms until disease progression or toxicity. RESULTS: Overall survival was shorter in the chemoradiation than in the gemcitabine arm (median survival 8.6 [99% confidence interval 7.1-11.4] and 13 months [8,9,9-18], p=0.03). One-year survival was, respectively, 32 and 53%. These results were confirmed in a per-protocol analysis for patients who received 75% or more of the planned dose of radiotherapy. More overall grades 3-4 toxic effects were recorded in the chemoradiation arm, both during induction (36 versus 22%) and maintenance (32 versus 18%). CONCLUSION: This intensive induction schedule of chemoradiation was more toxic and less effective than gemcitabine alone.

Surrogate end points for overall survival and local control in neoadjuvant rectal cancer trials: statistical evaluation based on the FFCD 9203 trial.

BACKGROUND: In resectable rectal cancer trials, pathological parameters are early preoperative treatment efficacy measures. Their validation as surrogate end points for long-term clinical outcomes would allow to reduce trial duration. The aim was to evaluate potential surrogates for overall survival (OS) and local control (LC) in preoperative T3/T4 rectal cancer trials. Candidate variables included ypT and ypN stages, T downstaging, tumor regression grade (TRG), and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) 9203 trial, 742 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive preoperative radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy. Surrogacy was evaluated using Prentice criteria and the proportion of treatment effect (PTE) explained by each potential surrogate. RESULTS: None of the candidate surrogates fulfilled all Prentice criteria. Data analyses did not provide interpretable PTE measures for OS. Regarding LC, the highest PTE was reached by TRG, which explained 12% of the effect on local recurrence. This proportion may not exceed 41% [95% confidence interval (CI) -1% to 41%]. PTE explained by the CRM status was associated with a wide uncertainty (95% CI -81% to 105%), which does not exclude a potentially high degree of surrogacy. CONCLUSION: In the FFCD 9203 trial, pathological parameters were not surrogate for OS or LC.

[Validation of surrogate endpoints in digestive oncology]. / Critères de substitution: méthodes de validation et état des lieux en cancérologie digestive.

In oncology, overall survival is often referred to as the gold standard for the evaluation of a novel therapy in phase III clinical trials. The use of an earlier endpoint (intermediate endpoint) would allow to reduce the duration, the number of patients and/or the cost of the studies. Before being used as primary endpoint, it has to be validated as surrogate for overall survival. Two main statistical methods have been developed. The first evaluates the proportion of treatment effect on overall survival that can be attributable to the effect on the surrogate endpoint. The second, the meta-analytic approach, estimates the correlation between the treatment effect on the surrogate and its effect on overall survival, based on the results of previous completed trials. It allows, for a future trial, the prediction of the expected effect on overall survival according to the observed effect on the surrogate. To date, in digestive oncology, only progression-free survival for the treatment of advanced colon cancers and disease-free survival in the adjuvant setting have been validated as surrogate endpoints for overall survival.

A phase III randomised trial of LV5FU2 + irinotecan versus LV5FU2 alone in adjuvant high-risk colon cancer (FNCLCC Accord02/FFCD9802).

BACKGROUND: This multicenter adjuvant phase III trial evaluated the addition of irinotecan to LV5FU2 in colon cancer patients at high risk of relapse. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 400 patients with histologically proven primary colon cancer with postoperative N1 detected by occlusion/perforation or N2 were randomised to: A-LV5FU2 [leucovorin 200 mg/m(2), 2-h infusion, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m(2) bolus, 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion, days 1 and 2] or B-LV5FU2 + IRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) 90-min infusion day 1 + LV5FU2) fortnightly for 12 cycles. Primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 63 months. Significantly more T4 tumours and 15 or more positive lymph nodes were observed in arm B. 5-FU relative dose intensity (RDI) was >0.80 for 94% and 77% in arms A and B, respectively (P < 0.001). Irinotecan RDI was >0.80 for 70% patients. There were more grades 3 and 4 neutropenia in arm B (4% versus 28%, P < 0.001). The 3-year DFS was 60% [95% confidence interval (CI) 53% to 66%] and 51% (95% CI 44% to 58) in arms A and B, respectively. No difference was observed [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.12, 95% CI 0.85-1.47, P = 0.42] even when adjusted for prognostic factors (adjusted HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.74-1.31, P = 0.92). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 67% (95% CI 59% to 73%) and 61% (95% CI 53% to 67%) in arms A and B, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant LV5FU2 + IRI compared with LV5FU2 alone in patients at high risk of relapse showed no improvement in DFS and OS.

[Postoperative follow-up in patients with colorectal cancers who have undergone curative resection: intensive or conventional follow-up?]. / Surveillance des cancers coliques opérés à visée curative: faut-il revoir les recommandations de la conférence de consensus?

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common human malignancies. Surgical resection remains the primary treatment but cancer recurrences (locoregional or distant) are associated with a poor prognosis. Follow-up is of particular importance in the three-years after surgery and various strategies have been purposed in the surveillance of patients after curative resection for colorectal cancer. The objective is to diagnose a recurrence at the earliest possible stage, enabling a second curative treatment. Optimal strategy for follow-up remains controversial. Results from randomized trials comparing low intensity programs and intensive programs of colorectal cancer surveillance are insufficient to recommend a follow-up strategy. To update recommendations for surveillance of colorectal cancer, larger prospective randomized studies are required.

Phase III trial comparing intensive induction chemoradiotherapy (60 Gy, infusional 5-FU and intermittent cisplatin) followed by maintenance gemcitabine with gemcitabine alone for locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. Definitive results of the 2000-01 FFCD/SFRO study.

BACKGROUND: The role of chemoradiation with systemic chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and nineteen patients with LAPC, World Health Organization performance status of zero to two were randomly assigned to either the induction CHRT group (60 Gy, 2 Gy/fraction; concomitant 5-fluorouracil infusion, 300 mg/m(2)/day, days 1-5 for 6 weeks; cisplatin, 20 mg/m(2)/day, days 1-5 during weeks 1 and 5) or the induction gemcitabine group (GEM: 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks). Maintenance gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly, 3/4 weeks) was given in both arms until disease progression or toxicity. RESULTS: Overall survival was shorter in the CHRT than in GEM arm [median survival 8.6 (99% confidence interval 7.1-11.4) and 13 months (8.7-18.1), P = 0.03]. One-year survival was, respectively, 32% and 53%. These results were confirmed in a per-protocol analysis for patients who received 75% or more of the planned dose of radiotherapy. More overall grades 3-4 toxic effects were recorded in the CHRT arm, both during induction (36 versus 22%) and maintenance (32 versus 18%). CONCLUSION: This intensive induction schedule of CHRT was more toxic and less effective than gemcitabine alone.

[Resectable adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction care: which perioperative treatment?]. / Prise en charge des adénocarcinomes de la jonction oesogastrique résécables : quel traitement périopératoire ?

Adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction has an ominous prognosis. Until now, oesophageal adenocarcima care was close to the squamous cell cancer one whereas adenocarcinoma of the cardia was mixed with gastric cancers. Results from randomised studies mixed them without making distinctions. Nevertheless, context, natural history and clinical outcome differ. Five-year survival rate is around 40 %, all stages included. Results from several phase-III studies or meta-analysis allowed to define three therapeutic strategies applicable to adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and the oesophagogastric junction. In Europe, in the case of a resectable tumour, preoperative chemotherapy became a standard treatment since results from the Magic trial. In the United States, post-operative radiochemotherapy according to the "Macdonald" scheme is used in case of a resected tumour with a R0 surgery. Actually, modern techniques of irradiation could reduce the rate of gastro-intestinal toxicities. The survival benefit from preoperative radiochemotherapy is still very controversial with high rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality. We have performed a review of the literature with a methodological analysis of data with a high level of evidence in order to advise perioperative treatment guidelines for patients with a resectable adenocarcinoma of the lower oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction. Results from pre- or postoperative strategies and the role of radiotherapy will need to be analysed in the future through a randomised study.

Endoscopic ultrasonography is an independent predictive factor of prognosis in locally advanced esophageal cancer. Results from the randomized FFCD 9102 study from the Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive.

BACKGROUND: No multivariate study has assessed the independent prognostic role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in esophageal cancer, even when considering computed tomography (CT). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of EUS in esophageal cancer before exclusive or preoperative radiochemotherapy. METHODS: From 1993 to 1999, the FFCD 9102 study enrolled 444 patients who had cancer of the thoracic esophagus, stages T3-4, N0-1 and M0 on CT. The patients received two sessions of chemotherapy in addition to radiotherapy. The 259 patients with objective response and no contraindications for further treatment were randomized to undergo surgery or to continue with radiochemotherapy. EUS was performed in 174 patients enrolled in the trial (mean age: 59 years). Tumor characteristics and lymph node status were prospectively recorded. A Cox statistical model was used to identify any predictive prognostic factors among the clinical, EUS and CT data. RESULTS: In the multivariate analysis, three factors were associated with a poor prognosis: inability to ingest solid food (OR: 1.98; P=0.0008); more than three neoplastic subdiaphragmatic lymph nodes (LN) on EUS (OR: 2.41; P<0.0045) and age>65 (OR: 1.53; P<0.056). Their prognostic value persisted after adjustment for type of treatment given. Two- and five- year survival rates were 21.5 and 10.5%, respectively, in the presence of three neoplastic subdiaphragmatic LN, and 43 and 30%, respectively, in all other cases. CONCLUSION: Degree of dysphagia, age and presence of neoplastic subdiaphragmatic LN on EUS were independently predictive of the prognosis for locally advanced esophageal cancer. EUS results should be taken into account in future trials.