Assessment of Duration and Effects of 3 vs 6 Months of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in High-Risk Stage II Colorectal Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis of the TOSCA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The addition of oxaliplatin to the standard 6-month fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colorectal cancer has been reported to reduce the risk of relapse although it does not increase survival. The Three or Six Colon Adjuvant (TOSCA) trial compared 3 months with 6 months of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer. The utility remains unknown. Objective: To assess the noninferiority and toxic effects of 3 vs 6 months of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) adjunct chemotherapy among patients with high-risk stage II resected colorectal cancer enrolled in the TOSCA trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: The TOSCA study was a noninferiority phase 3 randomized clinical trial conducted from June 2007 to March 2013 in 130 Italian centers. Included patients had resected colorectal cancer located 12 cm from the anal verge by endoscopy or above the peritoneal reflection at surgery. In this preplanned study assessing the per-protocol population, 5-year relapse-free survival was evaluated in 1254 patients with high-risk stage II resected colorectal cancer who had received adjuvant FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin). Interventions: Patients were originally randomized (1:1) in the TOSCA trial to receive 3 months (experimental group) or 6 months (control) of standard doses of FOLFOX or CAPOX at the discretion of the treating physician. Main Outcome and Measures: A hazard ratio of at least 1.2 between the 3-month and 6-month chemotherapy groups was set to reject the null hypothesis of noninferiority. Results: Overall, 1254 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.4 [9.8] years; 565 women [45.1%]) with clinical high-risk stage II resected colorectal cancer were analyzed at a median follow-up of 62 months (interquartile range, 53-71) months. Of them, 301 patients (24.0%) had pT4N0M0 tumors, and the remaining 953 patients (76.0%) had high-risk pT3N0M0 tumors; 776 patients (61.9%) received FOLFOX and 478 (38.1%) received CAPOX. The 5-year relapse-free survival was 82.2% for the 3-month arm and 88.2% for the 6-month arm, with an estimated hazard ratio of 1.41 (95% CI, 1.05-1.89; P = .86 for noninferiority). For CAPOX, the 5-year relapse-free survival was similar in the 2 arms (difference, 0.76% favoring the 6-month arm; 95% CI, -6.28% to 7.80%), whereas for FOLFOX, the difference was pronounced: 8.56% in favor of the longer-duration arm (95% CI, 3.45%-13.67%). Nevertheless, the test for an interaction between duration and regimen was not statistically significant. Neurotoxicity was approximately 5 times lower in the shorter duration arm than in the longer duration arm. Conclusions and Relevance: In the 3-month arm, the treatment was significantly less toxic than in the 6-month arm. Noninferiority was not shown for 5-year relapse-free survival. However, a possible regimen effect was observed, suggesting that either 3 months of CAPOX or 6 months of FOLFOX therapy can be used whenever an oxaliplatin doublet is indicated for treatment of patients with stage II colorectal cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0064660.

Hypercoagulation screening as an innovative tool for risk assessment, early diagnosis and prognosis in cancer: the HYPERCAN study.

The HYPERCAN is a prospective observational Italian multicentre study started in 2012, structured in two main projects (i.e. Projects A and B) that involve both healthy subjects and cancer patients. The HYPERCAN study aims to assess whether the occurrence of a hypercoagulable state may be predictive of cancer diagnosis in healthy individuals, or may be predictive of disease recurrence, clinical progression and thrombosis in cancer patients. Project A involves two different large cohorts of subjects: The first cohort (Project A-1) consists of 10,000 healthy volunteer blood donors to be enrolled and prospectively follow-up for cancer occurrence, while the second cohort (Project A-2) consists of 25,000 people already enrolled in the framework of the general population-based Moli-Sani study. Project B involves 4,000 adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of four different cancer types (both limited/resected or metastatic diseases), i.e. non-small cell-lung, gastric, colorectal, and breast cancer, to be enrolled and followed up for 5years or death. Blood samples from all enrolled subjects are collected at baseline and then at different time intervals according to specific time schedules set up for either normal subjects, or patients with limited cancers, or patients with metastatic cancers. Samples will be analysed for a panel of hemostatic proteins, clotting activation biomarkers, thrombin generation, procoagulant microparticles, and thrombophilic polymorphisms. As of November 2015, 6,189 healthy blood donors have been enrolled in project A-1 and 2,532 cancer patients in project B. Clinical follow-up and biological assays are ongoing. The HYPERCAN study wants to explore in different subset of individuals, affected and non-affected by malignant disease, the relationship between coagulation and cancer. The prospective design and the involvement of a large number of individuals will definitively clarify whether alterations in circulating thrombotic markers may be predictive of cancer diagnosis in an otherwise healthy subject and/or may be prognostic of cancer outcome, or of disease progression/relapse in cancer-affected individuals. Finally, the proposed screening with relatively simple and non-high-cost laboratory tests and the use of easy-obtainable peripheral blood samples add a very relevant translational value to this study.

Assessment of a HER2 scoring system for colorectal cancer: results from a validation study.

We sought to develop criteria for ERBB2-positivity (HER2) in colorectal cancer to ensure accurate identification of ERBB2-amplified metastatic colorectal cancer patients suitable for enrollment in a phase II trial of ERBB2-targeted therapy (HERACLES trial). A two-step approach was used. In step 1, a consensus panel of pathologists adapted existing protocols for use in colorectal cancer to test ERBB2 expression and amplification. Collegial revision of an archival test cohort of colorectal cancer samples led to specific recommendations for adapting current breast and gastric cancer criteria for scoring ERBB2 in colorectal cancer. In step 2, from September 2012 to January 2015, colorectal-specific ERBB2 testing protocols and ERBB2 scoring criteria were used to centrally screen for ERBB2-positive KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients to be enrolled in the HERACLES trial (clinical validation cohort). In both archival test (N=256) and clinical validation (N=830) cohorts, a clinically sizeable 5% fraction of KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients was found to be ERBB2-positive according to the colorectal cancer-specific ERBB2 scoring criteria. ERBB2-positive tumors showed ERBB2 immunostaining consisting of intense membranous ERBB2 protein expression, corresponding to homogenous ERBB2 amplification, in >50% of cells. None of the immunohistochemistry 0 or 1+ cases was amplified. Concordance between SISH and FISH was 100%. In conclusion, we propose specific criteria for defining ERBB2-positivity in colorectal cancer (HERACLES Diagnostic Criteria). In a phase II trial of trastuzumab and lapatinib in a cetuximab-resistant population, HERACLES Diagnostic Criteria shaped the selection of patients and defined ERBB2 as a predictive marker for response to ERBB2-targeted therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials).

BACKGROUND: Using potential surrogate end-points for overall survival (OS) such as Disease-Free- (DFS) or Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is increasingly common in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, end-points are too often imprecisely defined which largely contributes to a lack of homogeneity across trials, hampering comparison between them. The aim of the DATECAN (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)-Pancreas project is to provide guidelines for standardised definition of time-to-event end-points in RCTs for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Time-to-event end-points currently used were identified from a literature review of pancreatic RCT trials (2006-2009). Academic research groups were contacted for participation in order to select clinicians and methodologists to participate in the pilot and scoring groups (>30 experts). A consensus was built after 2 rounds of the modified Delphi formal consensus approach with the Rand scoring methodology (range: 1-9). RESULTS: For pancreatic cancer, 14 time to event end-points and 25 distinct event types applied to two settings (detectable disease and/or no detectable disease) were considered relevant and included in the questionnaire sent to 52 selected experts. Thirty experts answered both scoring rounds. A total of 204 events distributed over the 14 end-points were scored. After the first round, consensus was reached for 25 items; after the second consensus was reached for 156 items; and after the face-to-face meeting for 203 items. CONCLUSION: The formal consensus approach reached the elaboration of guidelines for standardised definitions of time-to-event end-points allowing cross-comparison of RCTs in pancreatic cancer.

Association of socioeconomic status with Breslow thickness and disease-free and overall survival in stage I-II primary cutaneous melanoma.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of socioeconomic status (SES) on Breslow thickness, disease-free survival, and overall survival in patients with stage I-II primary cutaneous melanoma (PCM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study consists of all consecutive patients who were diagnosed as having PCM and were treated and followed up at our hospital between November 1, 1998, and July 31, 2009. Pathologic and sociodemographic characteristics of the patients were obtained. We categorized SES into 3 levels: low (manual employees and skilled/unskilled workers, including farmers, with primary education level), middle (nonmanual employees and clerks with middle education level), and high (professionals, executives, administrators, and entrepreneurs with tertiary education). RESULTS: A total of 1443 consecutive patients were evaluated. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, sex (female vs male: odds ratio [OR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.75), SES (high vs middle: OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.96-1.69; high vs low: OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.26-2.38), age (<60 vs ≥60 years: OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.03-1.78), and family context (single vs living with relatives: OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.97-1.94) were the strongest correlates of Breslow thickness. Compared with high SES, the risk of melanoma-related death, adjusted for age and sex, was 7 times higher (hazard ratio, 7.44; 95% CI, 3.27-16.93) and almost 2 times higher (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.04-3.39) in patients with low SES living alone or living with relatives, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients with PCM, low SES is associated with thicker melanoma and a poorer clinical outcome.

Capecitabine versus bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (folinic acid) as adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with Dukes' C colon cancer : economic evaluation in an Italian NHS setting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In the recent X-ACT (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon cancer Therapy) trial, oral capecitabine (Xeloda) demonstrated superior efficacy and an improved safety profile compared with infused fluorouracil + leucovorin (folinic acid) [FU+LV] in patients with Dukes' C colorectal cancer. We used the X-ACT results to determine the cost effectiveness of capecitabine compared with FU+LV from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: Medical resource use data were collected throughout the treatment period. Unit costs for drug administration, hospitalization, emergency room visits and concomitant medications were obtained using Italian published sources. A health-state transition model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-month (QALM) gains in the intent-to-treat population (1004 and 983 patients in the capecitabine and FU+LV arms, respectively). Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.5%. Costs were calculated in euros (2005 values). RESULTS: Administration of capecitabine required fewer clinic visits per patient than FU+LV (7.35 vs 28.0, respectively). Mean acquisition costs per patient for capecitabine were higher than for FU+LV (euro 2533 vs euro 231, respectively), but this difference was offset by the difference in mean chemotherapy administration costs per patient for FU+LV (euro 4338, compared with euro 152 for capecitabine). Mean total hospital days and medication costs for treatment-related adverse events were higher for FU+LV than for capecitabine (euro 352 vs euro 78, respectively). The cost of emergency room visits for the treatment of adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups. With respect to the lifetime horizon, compared with FU+LV, capecitabine is projected to increase QALMs by a mean 6.5 months, with overall cost savings of euro 2234 over the treatment period. These findings show that capecitabine is an economically dominant treatment in this setting. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant capecitabine for patients with Dukes' C colon cancer has the same activity in terms of outcome when compared with FU+LV but is a lower cost option from the economic perspective of the Italian NHS.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in elderly cancer patients: an experience in an outpatient population.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Cancer is an age-related disease, and the increase in life expectancy will lead to a progressive increase of cancer cases in the elderly (> or =70 years of age). We have created a group called GONG (Gruppo Oncologico Geriatrico) to apply cancer geriatric assessment in elderly cancer patients, in order to select which of them are eligible for oncological treatment or supportive care only. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We applied this model to evaluate 153 patients from March 2004 to August 2005. Our model included three categories of patients: frail (at least one of the following items: Activities of Daily Living scale <80, > or =3 comorbidities unrelated to the tumor according to the Charlson Index, performance status < or =60/> or =3 according respectively to Karnofsky and the ECOG scale, > or =1 geriatric syndrome); borderline (patients with multiple comorbidities not affecting performance status or ability in daily activities); non-frail. RESULTS: Applying the aforementioned criteria, we found 30 borderline, 14 frail and 109 non-frail patients. Statistical analysis showed a significant difference in mortality between frail and non-frail patients (P <0.05), whereas there was no difference between borderline and non-frail patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our model was thus able to identify patients at higher risk of death. These results confirm the importance of cancer geriatric assessment also for the clinical evaluation of oncological patients. Additional randomized studies with a larger number of patients, also in an adjuvant setting, should be performed to confirm the effectiveness of this approach.

Edmonton symptom assessment scale: Italian validation in two palliative care settings.

In the palliative care setting, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) was developed for use in daily symptom assessment of palliative care patients. ESAS considers the presence and severity of nine symptoms common in cancer patients: pain, tiredness, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, well-being and shortness of breath plus an optional tenth symptom, which can be added by the patient. The aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of ESAS and to evaluate an easy quality of life monitoring system that uses a patient's self-rating symptom assessment in two different palliative care settings: in-patients and home patients. Eighty-three in-patients and 158 home care patients were enrolled. In the latter group, the Italian validated version of the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS) was also administered at the admission of the patients. The two groups of patients have similar median survival, demographic and clinical characteristics, symptom prevalence and overall distress score at baseline. ESAS shows a good concurrent validity with respect to SDS. The correlation between the physical items of ESAS and SDS was shown to be higher than the correlation between the psychological items. The association of ESAS scores and performance status (PS) showed a trend: the higher the symptom score was, the worse was the PS level. Test-retest evaluation, applied in the in-patient group, showed good agreement for depression, well-being and overall distress and a moderate agreement for all the other items. In conclusion, ESAS can be considered a valid, reliable and feasible instrument for physical symptom assessment in routine "palliative care" clinical practice with a potentially different responsiveness in different situations or care settings.

Cost of insurance policies for investigator-initiated cancer clinical trials in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials with non-profit promoters are frequently performed in oncology and represent a highly valuable source of information. METHODS: To describe the costs of insurance policies and their determinants, data were collected from 12 Italian non-profit promoters of cancer trials. The cost of policies was expressed as per-patient premium. RESULTS: Sixty-two quotations issued by only two companies were collected, relative to 44 trials proposed for quotation between December 1998 and February 2003. Only the date of quotation was significantly associated with the cost (P = 0.0003) of quotations by Company A for policies with a deductible, with cost increasing over time. Date of quotation (P = 0.0002), sample size (P = 0.008) and number of study arms (P = 0.02) were independently associated with the cost of no-deductible policies quoted by Company A. Only the number of study arms was significantly associated with cost (P = 0.0001) in no-deductible policies quoted by Company B. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient competition among companies for insurance of cancer trials with non-profit promoters. Many variables that affect the trial risk profile from a clinical perspective are not associated with insurance cost. Date of quotation is among the strongest determinants of the cost, which has sharply increased over time. This trend may become a serious problem for non-profit promoters of cancer clinical trials.