Disparities among Black and Hispanic colorectal cancer patients: Findings from the California Cancer Registry.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in California and second among Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) males. Data from the California Cancer Registry were utilized to investigate the differential impact on CRC outcomes from demographic and clinical characteristics among non-Hispanic white (NHW), non-Hispanic Black (NHB), U.S. born (USB), and non-U.S. born (NUSB) H/L patients diagnosed during 1995-2020. METHODS: We identified 248,238 NHW, 28,433 NHB, and 62,747 H/L cases (32,402 NUSB and 30,345 USB). Disparities across groups were evaluated through case frequencies, odds ratios (OR) from logistic regression, and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox regression models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: NHB patients showed a higher proportion of colon tumors (75.8%) than NHW (71.5%), whereas both NUSB (65.9%) and USB (66.9%) H/L cases had less (p < 0.001). In multivariate models, NUSB H/L cases were 15% more likely than NHW to have rectal cancer. Compared to NHW, NHB cases had the greatest proportion of Stage IV diagnoses (26.0%) and were more likely to die of CRC (multivariate HR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.10-1.15). Instead, NUSB H/L patients were less likely to die of CRC (multivariate HR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.85-0.89) whereas USB H/L did not differ from NHW. CONCLUSIONS: NHB and H/L cases have more adverse characteristics at diagnosis compared to NHW cases, with NHB cases being more likely to die from CRC. However, NUSB H/Ls cases showed better survival than NHW and US born H/L patients. These findings highlight the importance of considering nativity among H/L populations to understand cancer disparities.

Assessment of Capecitabine and Bevacizumab With or Without Atezolizumab for the Treatment of Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cotargeting vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 may produce anticancer activity in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The clinical benefit of atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy and bevacizumab remains unclear for the treatment of mCRC. Objectives: To assess whether the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with refractory mCRC and to perform exploratory analyses among patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) disease and liver metastasis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind phase 2 randomized clinical trial enrolled 133 patients between September 25, 2017, and June 28, 2018 (median duration of follow-up for PFS, 20.9 months), with data cutoff on May 4, 2020. The study was conducted at multiple centers through the Academic and Community Cancer Research United network. Adult patients with mCRC who experienced disease progression while receiving fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody therapy (if the patient had a RAS wild-type tumor) were included. Interventions: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive capecitabine (850 or 1000 mg/m2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) on day 1 plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg; investigational group) or placebo (placebo group) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was PFS; 110 events were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 with 80% power (1-sided α = .10). Secondary end points were objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and toxic effects. Results: Of 133 randomized patients, 128 individuals (median age, 58.0 years [IQR, 51.0-65.0 years]; 77 men [60.2%]) were assessed for efficacy (82 in the investigational group and 46 in the placebo group). Overall, 15 patients (11.7%) self-identified as African American or Black, 8 (6.3%) as Asian, 1 (0.8%) as Pacific Islander, 101 (78.9%) as White, 1 (0.8%) as multiple races (Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and White), and 2 (1.6%) as unknown race or unsure of race. Microsatellite-stable disease was present in 110 patients (69 in the investigational group and 41 in the placebo group). Median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.1-6.4 months) in the investigational group and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.2 months) in the placebo group (1-sided log-rank P = .07, a statistically significant result; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.09). Among patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair, the HR for PFS was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.99). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events in the investigational vs placebo groups were hypertension (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), diarrhea (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), and hand-foot syndrome (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]). One treatment-related death occurred in the investigational group. In the investigational group, the response rate was higher among patients without liver metastasis (3 of 13 individuals [23.1%]) vs with liver metastasis (4 of 69 individuals [5.8%]). The benefit of atezolizumab for PFS and OS was greater among patients without vs with liver metastasis (primary analysis of PFS: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.27-1.47] vs 0.77 [95% CI, 0.51-1.17]; OS: HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11-1.02] vs 1.14 [95% CI, 0.72-1.81]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy provided limited (ie, not clinically meaningful) clinical benefit. Patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair tumors and those without liver metastasis benefited more from dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 pathways. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02873195.

Racial differences in survival and response to therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A secondary analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance A151931).

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between self-identified race and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and response to therapy among patients enrolled in the randomized Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)/SWOG 80405 trial. METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer who were enrolled in the CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial were identified by race. On the basis of covariates (treatment arm, KRAS status, sex, age, and body mass index), each Black patient was exact matched with a White patient. The association between race and OS and PFS was examined using a marginal Cox proportional hazard model for matched pairs. The interaction between KRAS status and race was tested in the model. The association between race and response to therapy and adverse events were examined using a marginal logistic regression model. RESULTS: In total, 392 patients were matched and included in the final data set. No difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.16), PFS (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.78-1.20), or response to therapy (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.65-1.52) was observed between Black and White patients. Patients with KRAS mutant status (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.02-1.67), a performance statusscore of 1 (reference, a performance status of 0; HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18-1.88), or ≥3 metastatic sites (reference, 1 metastatic site; HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.22-2.28) experienced worse OS. Black patients experienced lower rates and risk of grade ≥3 fatigue (6.6% vs 13.3%; OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.91) but were equally likely to be treated with a dose reduction (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.72-1.65). CONCLUSIONS: No difference in OS, PFS, or response to therapy was observed between Black patients and White patients in an equal treatment setting of the CALGB/SWOG 80405 randomized controlled trial. LAY SUMMARY: Despite improvements in screening and treatment, studies have demonstrated worse outcomes in Black patients with colorectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in cancer-specific outcomes among Black and White patients receiving equivalent treatment on the CALGB/SWOG 80405 randomized clinical trial. In this study, there was no difference in overall survival, progression-free survival, or response to therapy between Black and White patients treated on a clinical trial. These findings suggest that access to care and differences in treatment may be responsible for racial disparities in colorectal cancer.

Phase I Assessment of Safety and Therapeutic Activity of BAY1436032 in Patients with IDH1-Mutant Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: BAY1436032, an inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1), was active against multiple IDH1-R132X solid tumors in preclinical models. This first-in-human study was designed to determine the safety and pharmacokinetics of BAY1436032, and to evaluate its potential pharmacodynamics and antitumor effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised of dose escalation and dose expansion cohorts. BAY1436032 tablets were orally administered twice daily on a continuous basis in subjects with mIDH1 solid tumors. RESULTS: In dose escalation, 29 subjects with various tumor types were administered BAY1436032 across five doses (150-1,500 mg twice daily). BAY1432032 exhibited a relatively short half-life. Most evaluable subjects experienced target inhibition as indicated by a median maximal reduction of plasma R-2-hydroxyglutarate levels of 76%. BAY1436032 was well tolerated and an MTD was not identified. A dose of 1,500 mg twice daily was selected for dose expansion, where 52 subjects were treated in cohorts representing four different tumor types [lower grade glioma (LGG), glioblastoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and a basket cohort of other tumor types]. The best clinical outcomes were in subjects with LGG (n = 35), with an objective response rate of 11% (one complete response and three partial responses) and stable disease in 43%. As of August 2020, four of these subjects were in treatment for >2 years and still ongoing. Objective responses were observed only in LGG. CONCLUSIONS: BAY1436032 was well tolerated and showed evidence of target inhibition and durable objective responses in a small subset of subjects with LGG.

A prospective study to validate the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) for epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRI)-induced dermatologic toxicities FACT-EGFRI 18 questionnaire: SWOG S1013.

BACKGROUND: Papulopustular rash is a common class effect of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRI) that can affect patients' health-related quality of life and cause disruptions to treatment. SWOG S1013 (NCT01416688) is a multi-center study designed to validate the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy EGFRI 18 (FACT-EGFRI 18) using 7-items from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 to assess EGFRI-induced skin-related toxicities and their impact on functional status. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of colorectal or lung cancer to receive EGFRI therapies for at least 6 weeks were enrolled. Patient self-assessments using the FACT-EGFRI 18 were completed prior to undergoing CTCAE assessment by trained clinicians at baseline, weekly × 6, and then monthly × 3. The psychometric properties of the FACT-EGFRI 14 (skin toxicity items only) and 18 (plus 2 nail and 2 hair items) were established based on criterion validity, known groups validity, internal consistency reliability, and responsiveness to change. RESULTS: Of the 146 registered patients, 124 were evaluable. High Cronbach's alpha (> 0.70) for both FACT-EGFRI 14 and FACT-EGFRI 18 scores across assessment times were observed. Although agreement (i.e. criterion validity) between individual and summary scales of the FACT-EGFRI 18 for assessing skin toxicity was good, agreement with the clinician-reported CTCAE was only fair. The minimal important difference was determined to be 3 points. The results also demonstrated responsiveness to symptom change. DISCUSSION: Based on the results of this multi-center validation study, the FACT-EGFRI 18 patient-reported outcome instrument provided data from the patient's perspective yielding unique information as well as complementing clinician-rated CTCAE grades, especially for the symptoms of pain, pruritus, and paronychia. CONCLUSIONS: Good to excellent psychometric properties for the FACT-EGFRI 18 were demonstrated, supporting further use of this patient-reported outcomes measure. Additional validation with a more diverse group of patients should be conducted.

Osteoporosis in colorectal cancer survivors: analysis of the linkage between SWOG trial enrollees and Medicare claims.

To explore the rates of osteoporosis (diagnosis and screening) and fractures in colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS), records of clinical trial enrollees was linked to Medicare. Female/male risk of fracture in CRCS is 74% higher than general population. Less than 30% of male and female CRCS receive osteoporosis screening. Osteoporosis is a significant morbidity in CRCS. INTRODUCTION: In the USA, the population of colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS) is on the rise. Calcium and vitamin D are the common thread between colorectal cancer and osteoporosis. We set to explore the patterns and prevalence of osteoporosis (OP) and osteoporotic fractures (OF) in CRCS who received fluorouracil-based therapy on SWOG trials. METHODS: Data for CRCS from three SWOG phase III treatment trials between 1994 and 2000 (N = 3775) were linked to Medicare claims (N = 1233). OP was identified using ICD9 and HCPCS codes; OF was defined using a more restricted set of codes. We compared patterns of OP, OF, and screening for OP by gender in CRCS. Given the gender disparities in the rates of OP and OF, we used data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) to assess the ratio of OF in females and males in general population. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of females and 15% of men CRCS had OP claims. Female CRCS were more likely than males to have OP (HR = 4.76 [3.77-6.01], p < 0.0001) and OF (HR = 2.64 [2.04-3.42], p < 0.0001). In the general population, the female to male ratio of OF was 1.67 as opposed to 2.90 in CRCS, indicating a significantly larger gender disparity of OF in CRCS (p < 0.001). Only 7% of men and 27% of women CRCS had OP screening. CONCLUSION: Despite a low rate of OP screening, the gender disparity of OF in CRCS is more pronounced than the general population. These findings provide an impetus for studying OP and OF in CRCS.

Conversations About Financial Issues in Routine Oncology Practices: A Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: To describe the frequency, content, dynamics, and patterns of cost conversations in academic medical oncology across tumor types. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed 529 audio recordings between May 3, 2012, to September 23, 2014, from a prospective three-site communication study in which patients at any stage of management for any solid tumor malignancy were seen in routine oncology appointments. Recordings were deidentified, transcribed, and flagged for any mention of cost. We coded encounters and used qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Financial issues were discussed in 151 (28%) of 529 recordings. Conversations lasted shorter than 2 minutes on average. Patients/caregivers raised a majority of discussions (106 of 151), and 40% of cost concerns raised by patients/caregivers were not verbally acknowledged by clinicians. Social service referrals were made only six times. Themes from content analysis were related to insurance eligibility/process, work insecurity, cost of drugs, cost used as tool to influence medical decision making, health care-specific costs, and basic needs. Financial concerns influenced oncology work processes via test or medication coverage denials, creating paperwork for clinicians, potentially influencing patient involvement in trials, and leading to medication self-rationing or similar behaviors. Typically, financial concerns were associated with negative emotions. CONCLUSION: Financial issues were raised in approximately one in four academic oncology visits. These brief conversations were usually initiated by patients/caregivers, went frequently unaddressed by clinicians, and seemed to influence medical decision making and work processes and contribute to distress. Themes identified shed light on the kinds of gaps that must be addressed to help patients with cancer cope with the rising cost of care.

Comparative effectiveness of screening strategies for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been successful in decreasing the incidence and mortality from CRC. Although new screening tests have become available, their relative impact on CRC outcomes remains unexplored. This study compares the outcomes of various screening strategies on CRC outcomes. METHODS: A Markov model representing the natural history of CRC was built and validated against empiric data from screening trials as well as the Microstimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN) model. Thirteen screening strategies based on colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography, as well as fecal immunochemical, occult blood, and stool DNA testing were compared with no screening. A simulated sample of the US general population ages 50 to 75 years with an average risk of CRC was followed for up to 35 years or until death. Effectiveness was measured by discounted life years gained and the number of CRCs prevented. Discounted costs and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. A discount rate of 3% was used in calculations. The study took a societal perspective. RESULTS: Colonoscopy emerged as the most effective screening strategy with the highest life years gained (0.022 life years) and CRCs prevented (n = 1068) and the lowest total costs ($2861). These values were 0.012 life years gained, 574 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $3164, respectively, for FOBT; and 0.011 life years gained, 647 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $4296, respectively, for DNA testing. Improved sensitivity or specificity of a screening test for CRC detection was not sufficient to close the outcomes gap compared with colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in CRC-detection performance is not sufficient to improve screening outcomes. Special attention must be directed to detecting precancerous adenomas. Cancer 2017;123:1516-1527. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Combined assessment of EGFR-related molecules to predict outcome of 1st-line cetuximab-containing chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Several studies have reported that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-related molecules may serve as predictors of cetuximab treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), such as EGFR gene copy number (GCN), expression of 2 ligands of EGFR, amphiregulin (AREG) and epiregulin (EREG), and EGFR CA simple sequence repeat 1 (CA-SSR1) polymorphism; however, these biomarkers still remain not useful in clinical practice since they have been evaluated using cohorts with patients treated in various settings of chemotherapy. We therefore analyzed associations of mRNA expression of AREG and EREG, EGFR GCN, and CA-SSR1 polymorphism [short (S;≤ 19) / long (L; ≥ 20)] with clinical outcomes in 77 Japanese patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type mCRC enrolled in phase II trials of FOLFOX (n = 28/57, UMIN000004197) or SOX (n = 49/67, UMIN000007022) plus cetuximab as first-line therapy. High AREG expression correlated with significantly better progression-free survival (median 11.6 vs. 66 months, HR 0.52, P = 0.037); moreover, it remained statistically significant in multivariate analysis (HR: 0.48, P = 0.027). S/S genotype of CA-SSR1 predicted severe skin toxicity (P = 0.040). Patients with both AREG-low and EGFR low-GCN had significantly shorter overall survival than the others (median 22.2 vs. 42.8 months, HR 2.34, P = 0.042). The multivariate analysis showed that molecular status with both AREG-low and EGFR low-GCN was a predictor of worse survival (P = 0.006). In conclusion, AREG mRNA expression and EGFR CA-SSR1 polymorphism predict survival and skin toxicity, respectively, of initial chemotherapy with cetuximab. Our results also suggest potential prognostic value of the combined assessment of AREG and EGFR GCN for first-line cetuximab treatment.

Assessment of infusional 5-fluorouracil schedule and dose intensity: a Southwest Oncology Group and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study.

BACKGROUND: Building on results from Southwest Oncology Group trial 8905, this trial was designed to compare low-dose continuous infusion (LDCI) of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) versus intermittent high-dose infusion (HDI) of 5-FU in disseminated colorectal cancer (CRC) for evidence of survival advantage based on dose intensity. A companion trial was funded to assess molecular parameters associated with fluoropyrimidine response or resistance and toxicity from these treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility included histologic diagnosis of disseminated CRC, measurable or evaluable disease, no previous therapy for metastatic disease, performance status of 0-2, and adequate renal, hepatic, cardiac, and hematologic function. Stratification factors were measurable versus evaluable disease, performance status of 0/1 versus 2, presence versus absence of adjuvant therapy, and presence versus absence of previous surgery and enrollment on the companion trial. Patients were randomized to receive (1) LDCI 5-FU 300 mg/m(2) per day for 28 days every 5 weeks or (2) HDI 5-FU 2,600 mg/m(2) for 24 hours each week. RESULTS: Between April 1995 and May 1999, 730 patients were accrued (LDCI arm, n = 360; HDI arm, n = 370). Of these, 708 eligible patients were assessable for survival and 690 for toxicity. Median survival for both groups was 13 months. Toxicity was mild; < 10% of patients in both arms had grade > 4 events. There were 8 study-related deaths (1%). Less than 10% of patients were enrolled in the companion trial. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing 5-FU dose intensity yields no survival advantage beyond that achieved with LDCI 5-FU. This study confirms the favorable toxicity profile of infusional 5-FU. Because no preferential benefit was observed for either infusion schedule, the more convenient weekly schedule should be considered for 5-FU-based combination regimens for disseminated CRC.