Trusting relationships between patients with non-curative cancer and healthcare professionals create ethical obstacles for informed consent in clinical trials: a grounded theory study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trial participation for patients with non-curative cancer is unlikely to present personal clinical benefit, which raises the bar for informed consent. Previous work demonstrates that decisions by patients in this setting are made within a 'trusting relationship' with healthcare professionals. The current study aimed to further illuminate the nuances of this relationship from both the patients' and healthcare professionals' perspectives. METHODS: Face-to-face interviews using a grounded theory approach were conducted at a regional Cancer Centre in the United Kingdom. Interviews were performed with 34 participants (patients with non-curative cancer, number (n) = 16; healthcare professionals involved in the consent process, n = 18). Data analysis was performed after each interview using open, selective, and theoretical coding. RESULTS: The 'Trusting relationship' with healthcare professionals underpinned patient motivation to participate, with many patients 'feeling lucky' and articulating an unrealistic hope that a clinical trial could provide a cure. Patients adopted the attitude of 'What the doctor thinks is best' and placed significant trust in healthcare professionals, focusing on mainly positive aspects of the information provided. Healthcare professionals recognised that trial information was not received neutrally by patients, with some expressing concerns that patients would consent to 'please' them. This raises the question: Within the trusting relationship between patients and healthcare professionals, 'Is it possible to provide balanced information?'. The theoretical model identified in this study is central to understanding how the trusting professional-patient relationship influences the decision-making process. CONCLUSION: The significant trust placed on healthcare professionals by patients presented an obstacle to delivering balanced trial information, with patients sometimes participating to please the 'experts'. In this high-stakes scenario, it may be pertinent to consider strategies, such as separation of the clinician-researcher roles and enabling patients to articulate their care priorities and preferences within the informed consent process. Further research is needed to expand on these ethical conundrums and ensure patient choice and autonomy in trial participation are prioritised, particularly when the patient's life is limited.

Thromboxane biosynthesis in cancer patients and its inhibition by aspirin: a sub-study of the Add-Aspirin trial.

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical models demonstrate that platelet activation is involved in the spread of malignancy. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing whether aspirin, which inhibits platelet activation, can prevent or delay metastases. METHODS: Urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2 (U-TXM), a biomarker of in vivo platelet activation, was measured after radical cancer therapy and correlated with patient demographics, tumour type, recent treatment, and aspirin use (100 mg, 300 mg or placebo daily) using multivariable linear regression models with log-transformed values. RESULTS: In total, 716 patients (breast 260, colorectal 192, gastro-oesophageal 53, prostate 211) median age 61 years, 50% male were studied. Baseline median U-TXM were breast 782; colorectal 1060; gastro-oesophageal 1675 and prostate 826 pg/mg creatinine; higher than healthy individuals (~500 pg/mg creatinine). Higher levels were associated with raised body mass index, inflammatory markers, and in the colorectal and gastro-oesophageal participants compared to breast participants (P < 0.001) independent of other baseline characteristics. Aspirin 100 mg daily decreased U-TXM similarly across all tumour types (median reductions: 77-82%). Aspirin 300 mg daily provided no additional suppression of U-TXM compared with 100 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Persistently increased thromboxane biosynthesis was detected after radical cancer therapy, particularly in colorectal and gastro-oesophageal patients. Thromboxane biosynthesis should be explored further as a biomarker of active malignancy and may identify patients likely to benefit from aspirin.

A first-in-human Phase I dose-escalation trial of the novel therapeutic peptide, ALM201, demonstrates a favourable safety profile in unselected patients with ovarian cancer and other advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of a novel anti-angiogenic peptide. METHODS: We used an open-label, multicentre, dose-escalation Phase I trial design in patients with solid tumours. ALM201 was administered subcutaneously once daily for 5 days every week in unselected patients with solid tumours. RESULTS: Twenty (8 male, 12 female) patients with various solid tumours were treated (18 evaluable for toxicity) over eight planned dose levels (10-300 mg). ALM201 was well-tolerated at all dose levels without CTCAE grade 4 toxicities. Adverse events were predominantly grades 1-2, most commonly, localised injection-site reactions (44.4%), vomiting (11%), fatigue (16.7%), arthralgia (5.6%) and headache (11%). Thrombosis occurred in two patients at the 100 mg and 10 mg dose levels. The MTD was not reached, and a recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) based on feasibility was declared. Plasma exposure increased with dose (less than dose-proportional at the two highest dose levels). No peptide accumulation was evident. The median treatment duration was 11.1 (range 3-18) weeks. Four of 18 evaluable patients (22%) had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Doses up to 300 mg of ALM201 subcutaneously are feasible and well-tolerated. Further investigation of this agent in selected tumour types/settings would benefit from patient-selection biomarkers.

Experiences of running a stratified medicine adaptive platform trial: Challenges and lessons learned from 10 years of the FOCUS4 trial in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Complex innovative design trials are becoming increasingly common and offer potential for improving patient outcomes in a faster time frame. FOCUS4 was the first molecularly stratified trial in metastatic colorectal cancer and it remains one of the first umbrella trial designs to be launched globally. Here, we aim to describe lessons learned from delivery of the trial over the last 10 years. METHODS: FOCUS4 was a Phase II/III molecularly stratified umbrella trial testing the safety and efficacy of targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer. It used adaptive statistical methodology to decide which sub-trial should close early, and new therapies were added as protocol amendments. Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer were registered, and central laboratory testing was used to stratify their tumour into molecular subtypes. Following 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding disease were eligible for randomisation into either a molecularly stratified sub-trial (FOCUS4-B, C or D) or non-stratified FOCUS4-N. The primary outcome for all studies was progression-free survival comparing the intervention with active monitoring/placebo. At the close of the trial, feedback was elicited from all investigators through surveys and interviews and consolidated into a series of recommendations and lessons learned for the delivery of similar future trials. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and October 2020, 1434 patients were registered from 88 UK hospitals. Of the 20 drug combinations that were explored for inclusion in the platform trial, three molecularly targeted sub-trials were activated: FOCUS4-D (February 2014-March 2016) evaluated AZD8931 in the BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wildtype subgroup; FOCUS4-B (February 2016-July 2018) evaluated aspirin in the PIK3CA mutant subgroup and FOCUS4-C (June 2017-October 2020) evaluated adavosertib in the RAS+TP53 double mutant subgroup. FOCUS4-N was active throughout and evaluated capecitabine monotherapy versus a treatment break. A total of 361 (25%) registered patients were randomised into a sub-trial. Feedback on the experiences of delivery of FOCUS4 could be grouped into three main areas of challenge: funding/infrastructure, biomarker testing procedures and trial design efficiencies within which 20 recommendations are summarised. CONCLUSION: Adaptive stratified medicine platform studies are feasible in common cancers but present challenges. Our stakeholder feedback has helped to inform how these trial designs can succeed and answer multiple questions efficiently, providing resource is adequate.

Dataset for Pathology Reporting of Colorectal Cancer: Recommendations From the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study to describe a new international dataset for pathology reporting of colorectal cancer surgical specimens, produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). BACKGROUND: Quality of pathology reporting and mutual understanding between colorectal surgeon, pathologist and oncologist are vital to patient management. Some pathology parameters are prone to variable interpretation, resulting in differing positions adopted by existing national datasets. METHODS: The ICCR, a global alliance of major pathology institutions with links to international cancer organizations, has developed and ratified a rigorous and efficient process for the development of evidence-based, structured datasets for pathology reporting of common cancers. Here we describe the production of a dataset for colorectal cancer resection specimens by a multidisciplinary panel of internationally recognized experts. RESULTS: The agreed dataset comprises eighteen core (essential) and seven non-core (recommended) elements identified from a review of current evidence. Areas of contention are addressed, some highly relevant to surgical practice, with the aim of standardizing multidisciplinary discussion. The summation of all core elements is considered to be the minimum reporting standard for individual cases. Commentary is provided, explaining each element's clinical relevance, definitions to be applied where appropriate for the agreed list of value options and the rationale for considering the element as core or non-core. CONCLUSIONS: This first internationally agreed dataset for colorectal cancer pathology reporting promotes standardization of pathology reporting and enhanced clinicopathological communication. Widespread adoption will facilitate international comparisons, multinational clinical trials and help to improve the management of colorectal cancer globally.

Inhibition of WEE1 Is Effective in TP53- and RAS-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Trial (FOCUS4-C) Comparing Adavosertib (AZD1775) With Active Monitoring.

PURPOSE: Outcomes in RAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remain poor and patients have limited therapeutic options. Adavosertib is the first small-molecule inhibitor of WEE1 kinase. We hypothesized that aberrations in DNA replication seen in mCRC with both RAS and TP53 mutations would sensitize tumors to WEE1 inhibition. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed mCRC were registered into FOCUS4 and tested for TP53 and RAS mutations. Those with both mutations who were stable or responding after 16 weeks of chemotherapy were randomly assigned 2:1 between adavosertib and active monitoring (AM). Adavosertib (250 mg or 300 mg) was taken orally once on days 1-5 and days 8-12 of a 3-week cycle. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), with a target hazard ratio (HR) of 0.5 and 80% power with a one-sided 0.025 significance level. RESULTS: FOCUS4-C was conducted between April 2017 and Mar 2020 during which time 718 patients were registered; 247 (34%) were RAS/TP53-mutant. Sixty-nine patients were randomly assigned from 25 UK hospitals (adavosertib = 44; AM = 25). Adavosertib was associated with a PFS improvement over AM (median 3.61 v 1.87 months; HR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.68; P = .0022). Overall survival (OS) was not improved with adavosertib versus AM (median 14.0 v 12.8 months; HR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.94; P = .93). In prespecified subgroup analysis, adavosertib activity was greater in left-sided tumors (HR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.51), versus right-sided (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.56; interaction P = .043). Adavosertib was well-tolerated; grade 3 toxicities were diarrhea (9%), nausea (5%), and neutropenia (7%). CONCLUSION: In this phase II randomized trial, adavosertib improved PFS compared with AM and demonstrates potential as a well-tolerated therapy for RAS/TP53-mutant mCRC. Further testing is required in this sizable population of unmet need.

Capecitabine Versus Active Monitoring in Stable or Responding Metastatic Colorectal Cancer After 16 Weeks of First-Line Therapy: Results of the Randomized FOCUS4-N Trial.

PURPOSE: Despite extensive randomized evidence supporting the use of treatment breaks in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), they are not universally offered to patients despite improvements in quality of life without detriment to overall survival (OS). FOCUS4-N was set up to explore the impact of oral maintenance therapy in patients who are responding to first-line therapy. METHODS: FOCUS4 was a molecularly stratified trial program that registered patients with newly diagnosed mCRC. The FOCUS4-N trial was offered to patients in whom a targeted subtrial was unavailable or biomarker tests failed. Patients were randomly assigned using a 1:1 ratio between maintenance capecitabine and active monitoring (AM). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary outcomes including OS toxicity and tolerability. RESULTS: Between March 2014 and March 2020, 254 patients were randomly assigned (127 to capecitabine and 127 to AM) across 88 UK sites. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was strong evidence of efficacy for PFS (hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.75; P < .0001), but no significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.27; P = .66) was observed. Compliance with treatment was good, and toxicity from capecitabine versus AM was as expected with grade ≥ 2 fatigue (25% v 12%), diarrhea (23% v 13%), and hand-foot syndrome (26% v 3%). Quality of life showed little difference between the groups. CONCLUSION: Despite strong evidence of disease control with maintenance therapy, OS remains unaffected and FOCUS4-N provides additional evidence to support the use of treatment breaks as safe management alternatives for patients who are stable or responding to first-line treatment for mCRC. Capecitabine without bevacizumab may be used to extend PFS in the interval after 16 weeks of first-line therapy.

Orthogonal MET analysis in a population-representative stage II-III colon cancer cohort: prognostic and potential therapeutic implications.

Clinical trials for MET inhibitors have demonstrated limited success for their use in colon cancer (CC). However, clinical efficacy may be obscured by a lack of standardisation in MET assessment for patient stratification. In this study, we aimed to determine the molecular context in which MET is deregulated in CC using a series of genomic and proteomic tests to define MET expression and identify patient subgroups that should be considered in future studies with MET-targeted agents. To this aim, orthogonal expression analysis of MET was conducted in a population-representative cohort of stage II/III CC patients (n = 240) diagnosed in Northern Ireland from 2004 to 2008. Targeted sequencing was used to determine the relative incidence of MET R970C and MET T992I mutations within the cohort. MET amplification was assessed using dual-colour dual-hapten brightfield in situ hybridisation (DDISH). Expression of transcribed MET and c-MET protein within the cohort was assessed using digital image analysis on MET RNA in situ hybridisation (ISH) and c-MET immunohistochemistry (IHC) stained slides. We found that less than 2% of the stage II/III CC patient population assessed demonstrated a genetic MET aberration. Determination of a high MET RNA-ISH/low c-MET IHC protein subgroup was found to be associated with poor 5-year cancer-specific outcomes compared to patients with concordant MET RNA-ISH and c-MET IHC protein expression (HR 2.12 [95%CI: 1.27-3.68]). The MET RNA-ISH/c-MET IHC protein biomarker paradigm identified in this study demonstrates that subtyping of MET expression may be required to identify MET-addicted malignancies in CC patients who will truly benefit from MET inhibition.

ZEBRA: A Multicenter Phase II Study of Pembrolizumab in Patients with Advanced Small-Bowel Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Small-bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is rare, and no standard of care exists for metastatic disease beyond first-line FOLFOX/CAPOX. SBA has higher rates of microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and T-lymphocyte infiltration than other gastrointestinal cancers. We hypothesize that pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, will induce antitumor response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously treated advanced SBA received pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. every 3 weeks until disease progression (PD), toxicity, or 35 doses maximum. Primary endpoint was confirmed overall response rate (ORR) with secondary progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity assessment endpoints. Outcomes were stratified by tumor location, microsatellite stability (MSS) or instability (MSI-H), and PD-L1 level. RESULTS: Forty patients were treated for a median duration of four cycles (range, 1-35). All patients are off study treatment due to PD (75%), death (10%), 35 cycles completed (8%), refusal (3%), and adverse effects (AEs, 5%). Three confirmed partial responses [PRs; 8%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2-20] did not meet predefined success criteria of ORR 30%. Median OS (7.1 months; 95% CI, 5.1-17.1) and median PFS (2.8 months; 95% CI, 2.7-4.2) were similar across primary tumor sites. One confirmed PR (3%) was seen in patients with low MSS/MSI tumors and correlated with high tumor mutation burden (TMB). Fifty percent of patients with MSI-H tumors achieved PR and remain alive without progression. Twenty-five patients (63%) had grade ≥3 AEs and 11 patients (28%) had grade 4/5 AEs. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest study of SBA to date, pembrolizumab did not induce the hypothesized response rate; however, we did identify responses in key biomarker-selected cohorts.

Targeting nucleotide metabolism enhances the efficacy of anthracyclines and anti-metabolites in triple-negative breast cancer.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) remains the most lethal breast cancer subtype with poor response rates to the current chemotherapies and a lack of additional effective treatment options. We have identified deoxyuridine 5'-triphosphate nucleotidohydrolase (dUTPase) as a critical gatekeeper that protects tumour DNA from the genotoxic misincorporation of uracil during treatment with standard chemotherapeutic agents commonly used in the FEC regimen. dUTPase catalyses the hydrolytic dephosphorylation of deoxyuridine triphosphate (dUTP) to deoxyuridine monophosphate (dUMP), providing dUMP for thymidylate synthase as part of the thymidylate biosynthesis pathway and maintaining low intracellular dUTP concentrations. This is crucial as DNA polymerase cannot distinguish between dUTP and deoxythymidylate triphosphate (dTTP), leading to dUTP misincorporation into DNA. Targeting dUTPase and inducing uracil misincorporation during the repair of DNA damage induced by fluoropyrimidines or anthracyclines represents an effective strategy to induce cell lethality. dUTPase inhibition significantly sensitised TNBC cell lines to fluoropyrimidines and anthracyclines through imbalanced nucleotide pools and increased DNA damage leading to decreased proliferation and increased cell death. These results suggest that repair of treatment-mediated DNA damage requires dUTPase to prevent uracil misincorporation and that inhibition of dUTPase is a promising strategy to enhance the efficacy of TNBC chemotherapy.

Nothing to lose: a grounded theory study of patients' and healthcare professionals' perspectives of being involved in the consent process for oncology trials with non-curative intent.

BACKGROUND: Clinical cancer research trials may offer little or no direct clinical benefit to participants where a cure is no longer possible. As such, the decision-making and consent process for patient participation is often challenging. AIM: To gain understanding of how patients make decisions regarding clinical trial participation, from the perspective of both the patient and healthcare professionals involved. METHODS: In-depth, face to face interviews using a grounded theory approach. This study was conducted in a regional Cancer Centre in the United Kingdom. Of the 36 interviews, 16 were conducted with patients with cancer that had non-curative intent and 18 with healthcare professionals involved in the consent process. RESULTS: 'Nothing to lose' was identified as the core category that underpinned all other data within the study. This highlighted the desperation articulated by participants, who asserted trial participation was the 'only hope in the room'. The decision regarding participation was taken within a 'trusting relationship' that was important to both patients and professionals. Both were united in their 'fight against cancer'. These two categories are critical in understanding the decision-making/consent process and are supported by other themes presented in the theoretical model. CONCLUSION: This study presents an important insight into the complex and ethically contentious situation of consent in clinical trials that have non-curative intent. It confirms that patients with limited options trust their doctor and frequently hold unrealistic hopes for personal benefit. It highlights a need for further research to develop a more robust and context appropriate consent process.

Early switch from intravenous to oral antibiotic therapy in patients with cancer who have low-risk neutropenic sepsis (the EASI-SWITCH trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenic sepsis remains a common treatment complication for patients receiving systemic anti-cancer treatment. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence have not recommended switching from empirical intravenous antibiotics to oral antibiotics within 48 h for patients assessed as low risk for septic complications because of uncertainty about whether this would achieve comparable outcomes to using intravenous antibiotics for longer. The UK National Institute for Health Research funded the EASI-SWITCH trial to tackle this uncertainty. METHODS: The trial is a pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority trial that aims to establish the clinical and cost-effectiveness of early switching from intravenous to oral antibiotics in cancer patients with low-risk neutropenic sepsis. Patients ≥ 16 years, receiving systemic anti-cancer treatment (acute leukaemics/stem cell transplants excluded), with a temperature of > 38 °C, neutrophil count ≤ 1.0 × 109/L, MASCC (Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer) score ≥ 21 and receiving IV piperacillin/tazobactam or meropenem for less than 24 h are eligible to participate. Patients are randomised 1:1 either (i) to switch to oral ciprofloxacin and co-amoxiclav within 12-24 h of commencing intravenous antibiotics, completing at least 5 days total antibiotics (intervention), or (ii) to continue intravenous antibiotics for at least 48 h, with ongoing antibiotics being continued at the physician's discretion (control). Patients are discharged home when their physician deems it appropriate. The primary outcome measure is a composite of treatment failures as assessed at day 14. The criteria for treatment failure include fever persistence or recurrence 72 h after starting intravenous antibiotics, escalation from protocolised antibiotics, hospital readmission related to infection/antibiotics, critical care support or death. Based on a 15% treatment failure rate in the control group and a 15% non-inferiority margin, the recruitment target is 230 patients. DISCUSSION: If the trial demonstrates non-inferiority of early switching to oral antibiotics, with potential benefits for patient quality of life and resource savings, this finding will have significant implications for the routine clinical management of those with low-risk neutropenic sepsis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 84288963. Registered on the 1 July 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN84288963. EudraCT: 2015-002830-35.

A first-in-human phase I study to determine the maximum tolerated dose of the oral Src/ABL inhibitor AZD0424.

BACKGROUND: Src is involved in cancer invasion and metastasis. AZD0424, an oral inhibitor of Src and ABL1, has shown evidence of anti-tumour activity in pre-clinical studies. METHODS: A phase Ia, dose escalation study was performed to assess the safety of continuous oral dosing with AZD0424 in advanced solid tumours. Secondary objectives included investigation of AZD0424 pharmacokinetics, effect on Src activity using markers of bone turnover, and anti-tumour activity. RESULTS: 41 patients were treated; 34 received AZD0424 once-daily at doses ranging from 5 mg to 150 mg, and 7 received 40 mg bi-daily 41.5% of patients experienced at least one AZD0424-related adverse event that was Grade 3-5 in severity, with patients treated at doses above 60 mg per day experiencing multiple treatment-related toxicities. The most commonly observed AZD0424-related adverse events were nausea, fatigue, anorexia and alopecia. Cmax and AUC increased linearly with dose and the mean±standard deviation t1/2 was 8.4±2.8 h. Clear evidence of Src target inhibition was seen at doses ⩾20 mg per day. No responses were observed and 7 patients (17.1%) achieved stable disease lasting 6 weeks or more. CONCLUSIONS: AZD0424 displayed no evidence of efficacy as monotherapy despite a clear pharmacodynamic effect. Further evaluation of AZD0424 monotherapy in patients with solid tumours is not recommended.

Critical research gaps and recommendations to inform research prioritisation for more effective prevention and improved outcomes in colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) leads to significant morbidity/mortality worldwide. Defining critical research gaps (RG), their prioritisation and resolution, could improve patient outcomes. DESIGN: RG analysis was conducted by a multidisciplinary panel of patients, clinicians and researchers (n=71). Eight working groups (WG) were constituted: discovery science; risk; prevention; early diagnosis and screening; pathology; curative treatment; stage IV disease; and living with and beyond CRC. A series of discussions led to development of draft papers by each WG, which were evaluated by a 20-strong patient panel. A final list of RGs and research recommendations (RR) was endorsed by all participants. RESULTS: Fifteen critical RGs are summarised below: RG1: Lack of realistic models that recapitulate tumour/tumour micro/macroenvironment; RG2: Insufficient evidence on precise contributions of genetic/environmental/lifestyle factors to CRC risk; RG3: Pressing need for prevention trials; RG4: Lack of integration of different prevention approaches; RG5: Lack of optimal strategies for CRC screening; RG6: Lack of effective triage systems for invasive investigations; RG7: Imprecise pathological assessment of CRC; RG8: Lack of qualified personnel in genomics, data sciences and digital pathology; RG9: Inadequate assessment/communication of risk, benefit and uncertainty of treatment choices; RG10: Need for novel technologies/interventions to improve curative outcomes; RG11: Lack of approaches that recognise molecular interplay between metastasising tumours and their microenvironment; RG12: Lack of reliable biomarkers to guide stage IV treatment; RG13: Need to increase understanding of health related quality of life (HRQOL) and promote residual symptom resolution; RG14: Lack of coordination of CRC research/funding; RG15: Lack of effective communication between relevant stakeholders. CONCLUSION: Prioritising research activity and funding could have a significant impact on reducing CRC disease burden over the next 5 years.

Natural killer-like signature observed post therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer is a determinant of pathological response and improved survival.

Around 12-15% of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergo a pathologically complete response (tumor regression grade 4) to long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy; the remainder exhibit a spectrum of tumor regression (tumor regression grade 1-3). Understanding therapy-related transcriptional alterations may enable better prediction of response as measured by progression-free and overall survival, in addition to aiding the development of improved strategies based on the underlying biology of the disease. To this end, we performed high-throughput gene expression profiling in 40 pairs of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded rectal cancer biopsies and matched resections following long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy (discovery cohort). Differential gene expression analysis was performed contrasting tumor regression grades in resections. Enumeration of the tumor microenvironment cell population was undertaken using in silico analysis of the transcriptional data, and real-time PCR validation of NCR1 undertaken. Immunohistochemistry and survival analysis was used to measure CD56+ cell populations in an independent cohort (n=150). Gene expression traits observed following long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy in the discovery cohort suggested an increased abundance of natural killer cells in tumors that displayed a clinical response to CRT in a tumor regression grade-dependent manner. CD56+ natural killer-cell populations were measured by immunohistochemistry and found to be significantly higher in tumor regression grade 3 patients compared with tumor regression grade 1-2 in the validation cohort. Furthermore, it was observed that patients positive for CD56 cells after therapy had a better overall survival (HR=0.282, 95% CI=0.109-0.729, χ2=7.854, P=0.005). In conclusion, we have identified a novel post-therapeutic natural killer-like transcription signature in patients responding to long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore, patients with a higher abundance of CD56-positive natural killer cells post long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy had better overall survival. Therefore, harnessing a natural killer-like response after therapy may improve outcomes for locally advanced rectal cancer patients. Finally, we hypothesize that future assessment of this natural killer-like response in on-treatment biopsy material may inform clinical decision-making for treatment duration.

Molecular profiling of signet ring cell colorectal cancer provides a strong rationale for genomic targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies.

BACKGROUND: Signet ring cell colorectal cancer (SRCCa) has a bleak prognosis. Employing molecular pathology techniques we investigated the potential of precision medicine in this disease. METHODS: Using test (n=26) and validation (n=18) cohorts, analysis of mutations, DNA methylation and transcriptome was carried out. Microsatellite instability (MSI) status was established and immunohistochemistry (IHC) was used to test for adaptive immunity (CD3) and the immune checkpoint PDL1. RESULTS: DNA methylation data split the cohorts into hypermethylated (n=18, 41%) and hypomethylated groups (n=26, 59%). The hypermethylated group predominant in the proximal colon was enriched for CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), BRAF V600E mutation and MSI (P<0.001). These cases also had a high CD3+ immune infiltrate (P<0.001) and expressed PDL1 (P=0.03 in intra-tumoural lymphoid cells). The hypomethylated group predominant in the distal colon did not show any characteristic molecular features. We also detected a common targetable KIT mutation (c.1621A>C) across both groups. No statistically significant difference in outcome was observed between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that SRCCa phenotype comprises two distinct genotypes. The MSI+/CIMP+/BRAF V600E+/CD3+/PDL1+ hypermethylated genotype is an ideal candidate for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. In addition, one fourth of SRCCa cases can potentially be targeted by KIT inhibitors.

A population-level investigation of cancer clinical trials participation in a UK region.

The aim of this study was to document cancer trial participation since establishment of the Northern Ireland Cancer Trials Network and investigate population and disease factors associated with trial participation. An independent cohort of over 51 000 cancer patients from the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry covering the same population (2007-2012) was linked to a database of 1316 interventional cancer trial participants in a UK region. The primary outcome measure was participation in an intervention clinical trial. Patients were followed up until 31 March 2013. Kaplan-Meier tests and Cox proportional hazard models using person days at risk to allow for death were used to investigate factors associated with trial participation. Multivariate analysis assessed the impact of age, cancer type and stage, distance from the cancer centre (radiotherapy), marital status, deprivation quintile and rurality. Participation was analysed separately for children (<15 years) and young individuals (15-24 years). Trial recruitment increased three-fold with establishment of a network. Participation was the highest for children at 21%, but relatively low at 2.05% for adults, although higher for haematological malignancies (4.5%). Lower likelihood of trial participation in adults was associated with female sex, older age, distance from regional Cancer Centre and stage 1 disease. The introduction of a regional Cancer Trials Network was associated with increased participation; however, trial participation remains relatively low at the population level especially among elderly patients. Linkage of clinical trials and cancer registry database provide an easy mechanism to monitor trial representativeness at the population level.

A phase I study of intravenous and oral rucaparib in combination with chemotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity of intravenous and oral rucaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Initially, patients received escalating doses of intravenous rucaparib combined with carboplatin, carboplatin/paclitaxel, cisplatin/pemetrexed, or epirubicin/cyclophosphamide. Subsequently, the study was amended to focus on oral rucaparib (once daily, days 1-14) combined with carboplatin (day 1) in 21-day cycles. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed in cycle 1 and safety in all cycles. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were enrolled (22 breast, 15 ovarian/peritoneal, and 48 other primary cancers), with a median of three prior therapies (range, 1-7). Neutropenia (27.1%) and thrombocytopenia (18.8%) were the most common grade ⩾3 toxicities across combinations and were DLTs with the oral rucaparib/carboplatin combination. Maximum tolerated dose for the combination was 240 mg per day oral rucaparib and carboplatin area under the curve 5 mg ml-1 min-1. Oral rucaparib demonstrated dose-proportional kinetics, a long half-life (≈17 h), and good bioavailability (36%). Pharmacokinetics were unchanged by carboplatin coadministration. The rucaparib/carboplatin combination had radiologic antitumour activity, primarily in BRCA1- or BRCA2-mutated breast and ovarian/peritoneal cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Oral rucaparib can be safely combined with a clinically relevant dose of carboplatin in patients with advanced solid tumours (Trial registration ID: NCT01009190).

A phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the oral mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitor, WX-554, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

PURPOSE: We performed a multi-centre phase I study to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of the orally available small molecule mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) 1/2 inhibitor, WX-554, and to determine the optimal biological dose for subsequent trials. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with treatment-refractory, advanced solid tumours, with adequate performance status and organ function were recruited to a dose-escalation study in a standard 3 + 3 design. The starting dose was 25 mg orally once weekly with toxicity, PK and PD guided dose-escalation with potential to explore alternative schedules. RESULTS: Forty-one patients with advanced solid tumours refractory to standard therapies and with adequate organ function were recruited in eight cohorts up to doses of 150 mg once weekly and 75 mg twice weekly. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during the study, and a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not established. The highest dose cohorts demonstrated sustained inhibition of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) phosphorylation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells following ex-vivo phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate stimulation. There was a decrease of 70 ± 26% in mean phosphorylated (p)ERK in C1 day 8 tumour biopsies when compared with pre-treatment tumour levels in the 75 mg twice a week cohort. Prolonged stable disease (>6 months) was seen in two patients, one with cervical cancer and one with ampullary carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: WX-554 was well tolerated, and an optimal biological dose was established for further investigation in either a once or twice weekly regimens. The recommended phase 2 dose is 75 mg twice weekly.