The road to tailored adjuvant chemotherapy for all four non-pancreatic periampullary cancers: An international multimethod cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite differences in tumour behaviour and characteristics between duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), the intestinal (AmpIT) and pancreatobiliary (AmpPB) subtype of ampullary adenocarcinoma and distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) on these cancers, as well as the optimal ACT regimen, has not been comprehensively assessed. This study aims to assess the influence of tailored ACT on DAC, dCCA, AmpIT, and AmpPB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinoma were identified and collected from 36 tertiary centres between 2010 - 2021. Per non-pancreatic periampullary tumour type, the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy and the main relevant regimens of adjuvant chemotherapy were compared. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The study included a total of 2866 patients with DAC (n = 330), AmpIT (n = 765), AmpPB (n = 819), and dCCA (n = 952). Among them, 1329 received ACT, and 1537 did not. ACT was associated with significant improvement in OS for AmpPB (P = 0.004) and dCCA (P < 0.001). Moreover, for patients with dCCA, capecitabine mono ACT provided the greatest OS benefit compared to gemcitabine (P = 0.004) and gemcitabine - cisplatin (P = 0.001). For patients with AmpPB, no superior ACT regime was found (P > 0.226). ACT was not associated with improved OS for DAC and AmpIT (P = 0.113 and P = 0.445, respectively). DISCUSSION: Patients with resected AmpPB and dCCA appear to benefit from ACT. While the optimal ACT for AmpPB remains undetermined, it appears that dCCA shows the most favourable response to capecitabine monotherapy. Tailored adjuvant treatments are essential for enhancing prognosis across all four non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinomas.

Differences in Lymph Node Metastases Patterns Among Non-pancreatic Periampullary Cancers and Histologic Subtypes: An International Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy is defined for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and adopted for patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC), ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), or duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC). This study aimed to compare the patterns of lymph node metastases among the different NPPCs in a large series and in a systematic review to guide the discussion on surgical lymphadenectomy and pathology assessment. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for NPPC with at least one lymph node metastasis (2010-2021) from 24 centers in nine countries. The primary outcome was identification of lymph node stations affected in case of a lymph node metastasis per NPPC. A separate systematic review included studies on lymph node metastases patterns of AAC, dCCA, and DAC. RESULTS: The study included 2367 patients, of whom 1535 had AAC, 616 had dCCA, and 216 had DAC. More patients with pancreatobiliary type AAC had one or more lymph node metastasis (67.2% vs 44.8%; P < 0.001) compared with intestinal-type, but no differences in metastasis pattern were observed. Stations 13 and 17 were most frequently involved (95%, 94%, and 90%). Whereas dCCA metastasized more frequently to station 12 (13.0% vs 6.4% and 7.0%, P = 0.005), DAC metastasized more frequently to stations 6 (5.0% vs 0% and 2.7%; P < 0.001) and 14 (17.0% vs 8.4% and 11.7%, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to comprehensively demonstrate the differences and similarities in lymph node metastases spread among NPPCs, to identify the existing research gaps, and to underscore the importance of standardized lymphadenectomy and pathologic assessment for AAC, dCCA, and DAC.

The Five Periampullary Cancers, not Just Different Siblings but Different Families: An International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer arising in the periampullary region can be anatomically classified in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), and ampullary carcinoma. Based on histopathology, ampullary carcinoma is currently subdivided in intestinal (AmpIT), pancreatobiliary (AmpPB), and mixed subtypes. Despite close anatomical resemblance, it is unclear how ampullary subtypes relate to the remaining periampullary cancers in tumor characteristics and behavior. METHODS: This international cohort study included patients after curative intent resection for periampullary cancer retrieved from 44 centers (from Europe, United States, Asia, Australia, and Canada) between 2010 and 2021. Preoperative CA19-9, pathology outcomes and 8-year overall survival were compared between DAC, AmpIT, AmpPB, dCCA, and PDAC. RESULTS: Overall, 3809 patients were analyzed, including 348 DAC, 774 AmpIT, 848 AmpPB, 1,036 dCCA, and 803 PDAC. The highest 8-year overall survival was found in patients with AmpIT and DAC (49.8% and 47.9%), followed by AmpPB (34.9%, P < 0.001), dCCA (26.4%, P = 0.020), and finally PDAC (12.9%, P < 0.001). A better survival was correlated with lower CA19-9 levels but not with tumor size, as DAC lesions showed the largest size. CONCLUSIONS: Despite close anatomic relations of the five periampullary cancers, this study revealed differences in preoperative blood markers, pathology, and long-term survival. More tumor characteristics are shared between DAC and AmpIT and between AmpPB and dCCA than between the two ampullary subtypes. Instead of using collective definitions for "periampullary cancers" or anatomical classification, this study emphasizes the importance of individual evaluation of each histopathological subtype with the ampullary subtypes as individual entities in future studies.

Different Chemotherapy Regimens and Pathologic Complete Response in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis of Phase 3 Trials.

Background and Objectives: Currently, the standard treatment for non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) consists of a systemic neoadjuvant (or perioperative) anthracycline plus taxane-based chemotherapy, delivered either sequentially or concomitantly. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative efficacy of different neoadjuvant treatments for TNBC in terms of pathologic complete response (pCR). Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from database inception to 1 November 2023. Randomized clinical trials were used that enrolled adults with stage I-III TNBC and provided data on pCR defined as residual ypT0/TisN0M0. Between-group comparisons were estimated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). The primary outcome was the pCR rate. Results: 1129 citations were screened, and 12 randomized clinical trials were included. In Bayesian comparisons, all regimens, except anthracycline/taxanes plus gemcitabine or capecitabine, resulted in a higher pCR than the standard regimen in both direct and indirect comparisons. In particular, immunotherapy-based regimens resulted in more than double the pCR compared to historical regimens (RR = 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.9) and ranked as being the optimal regimen with a probability of 97%. Disease-free survival was better for immune checkpoint inhibitor-based chemotherapy (HR = 0.36, 95% 1.21-2.09) than for historical regimens. Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirmed that incorporating immunotherapy with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy is the best option to guarantee remarkable pathologic downstaging and improve clinical outcomes.

Trop-2 and Nectin-4 immunohistochemical expression in metastatic colorectal cancer: searching for the right population for drugs' development.

BACKGROUND: Trop-2 and Nectin-4 are transmembrane proteins overexpressed in many tumours and targets of antibody-drug conjugates (ADC). In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the role of Trop-2 and Nectin-4 has been poorly investigated. METHODS: Tumour samples of patients randomised in the phase III TRIBE2 were assessed for Trop-2 and Nectin-4 expression. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-six tumours were assessed for Trop-2 expression. 90 (23%), 115 (30%) and 181 (47%) were Trop-2 high, medium and low, respectively. Patients with low Trop-2 tumours achieved longer PFS (12 versus 9.9 months, p = 0.047) and OS (27.3 versus 21.3 months, p = 0.015) than those with high/medium Trop-2 tumours. These findings were confirmed in multivariate analysis (p = 0.022 and p = 0.023, respectively). A greater OS benefit from treatment intensification with FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab was observed in patients with high/medium Trop-2 tumours (p-for-interaction = 0.041). Two hundred fifty-one tumours were assessed for Nectin-4 expression. Fourteen (5%), 67 (27%) and 170 (68%) were high, medium and low, respectively. No prognostic impact was observed based on Nectin-4 expression and no interaction effect was reported between Nectin-4 expression groups and treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC, expression levels of Trop-2 and Nectin-4 are heterogeneous, suggesting a target-driven development of anti-Trop2 and anti-Nectin-4 ADCs. Medium/high Trop-2 expression is associated with worse prognosis and higher benefit from chemotherapy intensification.

Dignity and time perspective: A pilot explorative study in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the possible correlation between emotional distress linked to dignity and dysfunctional temporal orientations in the oncological context. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory study between December 2020 and February 2021, referring to a sample of 107 patients in active treatment for solid tumors belonging to the Oncology Department of the Fondazione Poliambulanza (Brescia, Italy). We administered two self-report questionnaires: the Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI-IT) (Italian version, Grassi L, Costantini A, Caruso R, et al. (2017) Dignity and psychosocial-related variables in advanced and nonadvanced cancer patients by using the patient dignity inventory-Italian version. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 53(2), 279-287), as a measure of perceived level of dignity, and the Italian version of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory scale (ZTPI) (Zimbardo PG and Boyd JN (2009) Il paradosso del tempo. La nuova psicologia del tempo che cambierà la tua vita. Milano: Mondadori), as a measure of the experiential dimensions of time, such as past, present, and future. RESULTS: From the PDI-IT emerged that our sample reported high levels of physical and psychological distress. Furthermore, we founded higher distress in patients under 55 years (p = 0.04) and lower distress in retired patients (p = 0.01). The ZTPI showed in our patients prevailing orientations to the past-positive (39.3%) and the future (37.4%). We noticed a gender difference: men were mainly oriented to the future while women to the past-positive. Moreover, married subjects reported a prevalent orientation to past-positive and the future. Finally, data analysis found moderate positive correlation between the "Negative Past" dimension of ZTPI and high levels of physical (r = 0.203, p = 0.03) and psychological distress (r = 236, p = 0.01). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: In our experience in oncology, dignity and time perspective play a central role as indicators of the quality of care. Our study shows the importance of a treatment path that integrates the constructs of Dignity and Time Perspective to favor a better psychological adaptation.

Early onset metastatic colorectal cancer in patients receiving panitumumab-based upfront strategy: Overall and sex-specific outcomes in the Valentino trial.

Anti-EGFRs plus doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Early-onset (EO) mCRC has an increasing incidence and its prognostic/predictive role and management is debatable. We performed a post hoc analysis of Valentino study, that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after FOLFOX/panitumumab induction. We assessed the safety and efficacy outcomes in patients stratified for age (<50/≥50 years old). We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL). In 229 patients enrolled, 35 (15%) had EO mCRC, with a higher rate of female sex (P = .020) and lower rate of primary tumor resection (P = .001). Median PFS and OS were 10.9 vs 10.8 months (P = .593) and 28.1 vs 27.5 months (P = .865) in patients <50 and ≥50 years old, respectively, with no significant impact of maintenance arm. ORR and disease control rate were 74% vs 65% (P = .337) and 97% vs 81% (P = .013) in patients <50 or ≥50 years old. In younger patients, a trend for increased chemotherapy-related AEs (peculiarly anemia) was shown, while significantly decreased EGFR-related hypomagnesemia and increased skin rash were reported. No significant differences in treatment intensity or QoL were observed. In patients with EO mCRC and RAS wild-type status, we found no differences in terms of survival outcomes based on age when selecting maintenance strategies. Management of treatment-related AEs should consider the differential toxicity profile of age and sex.

Cancer and Covid-19: A preliminary study on the trauma aspects of coronavirus in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Because of Covid 19, it has become necessary to revise the treatment of cancer patients ("how" and "when"). That has had important psychological repercussions. The purpose of this study is the evaluation of the impact of Covid19 in terms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression and the potential association with coping strategies. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory study with 106 patients undergoing treatment, using following questionnaires: Screening Questionnaire for Disaster Mental Health and Mini-Mental Adjustment to Cancer. RESULTS: Only 25.5% of our sample showed symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and 6.6% revealed a probable presence of depression. In addition, it came up a significant correlation between SQD_P and the coping styles "Hopelessness" (r = 0.41 p < 0.001) and "Anxious Preoccupation" (r = 0.45, p < 0.001). A strong correlation also emerged between non-Covid 19 patients and PTSD (r = 0.29, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary data did not reveal a prevalence of PTSD, but the persistence of the health emergency requires to focus future research on protective and risk factors related to PTSD and psychological distress in cancer patients, in order to reduce the mental health burden of Covid19.

CEA increase as a marker of disease progression after first-line induction therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. A pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies.

BACKGROUND: In mCRC, CEA is used to monitor response to systemic therapy together with imaging. After the end of induction, no major improvement in tumour shrinkage is expected, and the availability of a marker able to predict progressive disease (PD) versus no-PD might allow avoiding CT scans. METHODS: We pooled data from patients with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL included in TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies with the aim of identifying a threshold for percent increase of CEA from nadir able to predict PD after the end of the induction therapy. RESULTS: In total, 1178 paired CEA and radiological assessments from 434 patients were included. According to the optimal cut-off determined by ROC, a CEA increase of at least 120% from nadir differentiated between PD and no-PD with a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 78%, excluding PD in the 92% of radiological assessments and allowing to avoid the 67% of CT scans. However, CEA cut-off of 120% was not able to detect radiological PD in 26% of cases. In order to mitigate this issue, a different clinically relevant threshold was evaluated based on the best sensitivity cut-off. Therefore, using any CEA increase from nadir as a threshold, the sensitivity grew to 93% and only in the 7% of cases the radiological PD was not detected. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL, CEA values can accurately predict PD versus no-PD after the end of the first-line induction therapy.

Treatments after progression to first-line FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies by GONO.

BACKGROUND: FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab (bev) is a first-line regimen of proven activity and efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer. The upfront exposure to three cytotoxics raises concerns about the efficacy of treatments after progression. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of treatments after progression to upfront FOLFOXIRI/bev in patients enrolled in two randomised Phase 3 studies (TRIBE and TRIBE2) that compared FOLFOXIRI/bev to doublets (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI)/bev. Response rate, progression-free survival (2nd PFS) and overall survival (2nd OS) during treatments after progression were assessed. The RECIST response in first line and the oxaliplatin and irinotecan-free interval (OIFI) were investigated as potential predictors of benefit from FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction. RESULTS: Longer 2nd PFS was reported in patients receiving FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction compared to doublets ± bev or other treatments (6.1 versus 4.4 and 3.9 months, respectively, P = 0.013), and seems limited to patients achieving a response during first line (6.9 versus 4.2 and 4.7 months, respectively, P = 0.005) and an OIFI ≥ 4 months (7.2 versus 6.5 and 4.6 months, respectively, P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: First-line FOLFOXIRI/bev does not impair the administration of effective second-line therapies. First-line response and longer OIFI seem associated with improved response and 2nd PFS from FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction, without impacting 2nd OS.

Antibiotics and steroids, the double enemies of anticancer immunotherapy: a review of the literature.

The advent of immunotherapy in onco-haematology has represented a kind of revolution that has been able to modify the prognosis of numerous tumours that until recently would have been rapidly lethal. While much is known about the mechanism of action of these drugs, relatively little is known about the factors that represent potential predictors of response and toxicity. Among these factors, the simultaneous administration of antibiotics and/or steroids seems to have a negative impact. Furthermore, several retrospective studies have highlighted the strong link between cancer and gut microbiota, regardless of the tumour site, and how microbiota, playing a key role in the prevention of systemic inflammation at various levels and in the intestinal homeostasis, can be negatively influenced by the dysbiosis caused by antibiotic therapy administered during or in the weeks immediately preceding the start of immunotherapy. Moreover, we assume that the concurrent administration of steroids, which is often necessary in cancer patients, likely results in a deleterious effect on the therapeutic outcomes of immunotherapy. In this review, we will try to clarify the evidence on the possible detrimental effects of antibiotics and steroids, which are currently considered the double enemies of anticancer immunotherapy.

Trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic gastroesophageal junction cancer: a subgroup analysis from the phase 3 TAGS study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC) have poor survival outcomes, and GEJC-specific data from trials evaluating agents in gastric cancers (GCs) as a whole are lacking. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) was approved for previously treated metastatic GC or GEJC (mGC/mGEJC) based on results of the phase 3 TAGS trial. Subgroup analyses by primary tumor type (GC or GEJC) in TAGS are reported here. METHODS: Pa tients with mGC/mGEJC treated with ≥ 2 prior chemotherapy regimens were randomized (2:1) to receive FTD/TPI or placebo, plus best supportive care. A pre-planned sub-analysis was performed to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes by primary tumor type (GEJC or GC). RESULTS: Of 507 randomized patients, 145 (29%) had GEJC and 360 (71%) had GC as the primary disease site. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between the GEJC and GC subgroups, except that more patients in the GEJC subgroup had received ≥ 3 prior regimens (72 vs. 59% in the GC subgroup). Survival benefit with FTD/TPI was observed in both subgroups. The overall survival hazard ratio for FTD/TPI vs placebo was 0.75 (95% CI 0.50-1.11) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.52-0.87) in the GEJC and GC subgroups, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events of any cause were reported in 75 (77%) and 192 (81%) FTD/TPI-treated patients in the GEJC and GC subgroups, respectively. No new safety concerns were noted with FTD/TPI. CONCLUSION: As in patients with GC, FTD/TPI showed an efficacy benefit in patients with GEJC in the TAGS trial, along with demonstrating a manageable safety profile.

Appropriateness of trifluridine/tipiracil in the clinical practice of third-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Aim: To help to remove misperception of an appropriate position of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Materials & methods: The RAND Corporation/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used by a panel of Italian experts to develop recommendations concerning daily practice with FTD/TPI. Forty-three clinical scenarios were discussed in two rounds and the resulting statements were rated as appropriate, uncertain or inappropriate, according to the median score. Results: Several topics were dealt with, covering the profile of eligible patients, therapeutic options beyond the second line, the practice of treatment with FTD/TPI, evaluation and efficacy and toxicity, as well as costs and compliance. Conclusion: FTD/TPI is an important therapeutic resource in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer that combines manageability and safety.

Lay abstract To remove misperception of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. An established Method for evaluating appropriateness of new drugs was used. Forty-three clinical scenarios were discussed in two rounds and the resulting statements were rated as appropriate, uncertain or inappropriate, according to the median score. Several topics were dealt with, covering the profile of eligible patients, therapeutic options beyond the second line, efficacy and toxicity, as well as compliance. FTD/TPI is an important therapeutic resource in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer that combines manageability and safety.

Italian results of the PRECONNECT study: safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer.

The international PRECONNECT Phase IIIb study demonstrated safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil in the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Post-hoc analyses in a national context are important because of the differences in disease management across countries. Post-hoc safety and efficacy analyses in the PRECONNECT Italian patient subset were conducted. Patients' quality of life was assessed from baseline to end of treatment. In Italy, 161 patients were enrolled. The median age was 64 years, with a performance status of 0-1. The most common hematological drug-related adverse events ≥grade 3 were neutropenia (41.0%) and anemia (13.7%). The median progression-free survival was reached at 3.0 months, with a disease control rate of 28.6%. The Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 score improved in 25.4% of the patients. Safety, efficacy and quality of life results confirmed trifluridine/tipiracil as a feasible and favorable treatment option for metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Lay abstract PRECONNECT is an international study demonstrating the efficacy and tolerability of the drug combination trifluridine/tipiracil in adult patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated in everyday clinical practice. For this publication, the authors conducted an analysis performed on the 161 Italian patients enrolled in this study. These kinds of analyses are important because of the differences that may arise across different countries. The most common contraindications were not dangerous to health. Furthermore, 3 months from beginning the medication, half of the patients did not show a worsening of the disease and quality of life during treatment was maintained. Clinical trial registration: NCT03306394 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Systemic doxycycline for pre-emptive treatment of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first-line panitumumab-based therapy: a post hoc analysis of the Valentino study.

INTRODUCTION: The combination of anti-EGFRs and doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The prophylactic or reactive treatment with tetracyclines for EGFR inhibitor-induced skin toxicity is currently clinical practice, though non-conclusive results are available. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Valentino study that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after the first-line induction, aimed at assessing the safety and efficacy of the administration of a pre-emptive doxycycline prophylaxis for anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity. We assessed the rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs), treatment intensity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 226 patients, out of the 229 enrolled in the Valentino study, were eligible for the analysis. Overall, 143 (63%) and 83 (37%) patients received or not the antibiotic prophylaxis for skin toxicity. Any grade and G3/4 panitumumab-related AEs were reported in 89% versus 92% (p = 0.650) and 27% versus 27% (p = 1.000) patients who received or not the pre-emptive prophylaxis, respectively. Any grade and G3/4 skin rash occurred in 81% versus 90% (p = 0.085) and 27% versus 25% (p = 0.876) patients receiving or not the prophylaxis, respectively. No significant differences in terms of treatment duration, treatment delays or dose reductions, PFS, and OS were observed in the two sub-populations. CONCLUSION: The adequate management of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity is fundamental to optimize the outcome of mCRC patients, balancing the survival benefit with patients' quality of life, especially in the first-line setting.

Red blood cell transfusions and the survival in patients with cancer undergoing curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Allogenic red blood cell transfusions exert a potential detrimental effect on the survival when delivered to cancer patients undergoing surgery with curative intent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between perioperative allogenic red blood cell transfusions and risk of death as well as relapse after surgery for localized solid tumors. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2019 for studies reporting the outcome of patients receiving transfusions during radical surgery for non-metastatic cancer. Risk of death and relapse were pooled to provide an adjusted hazard ratio with a 95% confidence interval [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval {CI})]. Mortality and relapse associated with perioperative transfusion due to cancer surgery were evaluated among participants (n = 123 studies). Overall, RBC transfusions were associated with an increased risk of death [HR = 1.50 (95% CI 1.42-1.57), p < 0.01] and relapse [HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.26-1.46), p < 0.01]. The survival was reduced even in cancer at early stages [HR = 1.45 (1.36-1.55), p < 0.01]. In cancer patients undergoing surgery, red blood cell transfusions reduced the survival and increased the risk of relapse. Transfusions based on patients' blood management policy should be performed by applying a more restrictive policy, and the planned preoperative administration of iron, if necessary, should be pursued.

Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab and reintroduction after progression versus mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRIBE2): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The triplet FOLFOXIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab showed improved outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, compared with FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab. However, the actual benefit of the upfront exposure to the three cytotoxic drugs compared with a preplanned sequential strategy of doublets was not clear, and neither was the feasibility or efficacy of therapies after disease progression. We aimed to compare a preplanned strategy of upfront FOLFOXIRI followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression versus a sequence of mFOLFOX6 (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI doublets, in combination with bevacizumab. METHODS: TRIBE2 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised study of patients aged 18-75 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2, with unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, recruited from 58 Italian oncology units. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour location, and previous adjuvant chemotherapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm was used to randomly assign patients (1:1) via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two different treatment strategies. In the control group, patients received first-line mFOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 of intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously over 30 min) followed by FOLFIRI (180 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 120 min concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab after disease progression. In the experimental group, patients received FOLFOXIRI (165 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 60 min; 85 mg/m2 intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 3200 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression. Combination treatments were repeated every 14 days for up to eight cycles followed by fluorouracil and leucovorin (at the same dose administered at the last induction cycle) plus bevacizumab maintenance until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. Patients and investigators were not masked. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival 2, defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression on any treatment given after first disease progression, or death, analysed by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. Study recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02339116. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2015, and May 15, 2017, 679 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (340 in the control group and 339 in the experimental group). At data cut-off (July 30, 2019) median follow-up was 35·9 months (IQR 30·1-41·4). Median progression-free survival 2 was 19·2 months (95% CI 17·3-21·4) in the experimental group and 16·4 months (15·1-17·5) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·63-0·88; p=0·0005). During the first-line treatment, the most frequent of all-cause grade 3-4 events were diarrhoea (57 [17%] vs 18 [5%]), neutropenia (168 [50%] vs 71 [21%]), and arterial hypertension (25 [7%] vs 35 [10%]) in the experimental group compared with the control group. Serious adverse events occurred in 84 (25%) patients in the experimental group and in 56 (17%) patients in the control group. Eight treatment-related deaths were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions, two intestinal perforations, two sepsis, one myocardial infarction, and one bleeding) and four in the control group (two occlusions, one perforation, and one pulmonary embolism). After first disease progression, no substantial differences in the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported between the control and experimental groups, with the exception of neurotoxicity, which was only reported in the experimental group (six [5%] of 132 patients). Serious adverse events after disease progression occurred in 20 (15%) patients in the experimental group and 25 (12%) in the control group. Three treatment-related deaths after first disease progression were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions and one sepsis) and four in the control group (one intestinal occlusion, one intestinal perforation, one cerebrovascular event, and one sepsis). INTERPRETATION: Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression seems to be a preferable therapeutic strategy to sequential administration of chemotherapy doublets, in combination with bevacizumab, for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer selected according to the study criteria. FUNDING: The GONO Cooperative Group, the ARCO Foundation, and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

The Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value is a new prognostic biomarker in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a pooled-analysis of the Valentino and TRIBE first-line trials.

BACKGROUND: Immune-inflammatory biomarkers (IIBs) showed a prognostic relevance in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC). We aimed at evaluating the prognostic power of a new comprehensive biomarker, the Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value (PIV), in patients with mCRC receiving first-line therapy. METHODS: In the present pooled-analysis, we included patients enrolled in the Valentino and TRIBE trials. PIV was calculated as: (neutrophil count × platelet count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count. A cut-off was determined using the maximally selected rank statistics method. Generalised boosted regression (GBR), the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox hazards regression models were used for survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 438 patients were included. Overall, 208 patients (47%) had a low-baseline PIV and 230 (53%) had a high-baseline PIV. Patients with high PIV experienced a worse PFS (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.36-2.03, P < 0.001) and worse OS (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.57-2.57; P < 0.001) compared to patients with low PIV. PIV outperformed the other IIBs in the GBR model and in the multivariable models. CONCLUSION: PIV is a strong predictor of survival outcomes with better performance than other well-known IIBs in patients with mCRC treated with first-line therapy. PIV should be prospectively validated to better stratify mCRC patients undergoing first-line therapy.

Phase II study on first-line treatment of NIVolumab in combination with folfoxiri/bevacizumab in patients with Advanced COloRectal cancer RAS or BRAF mutated - NIVACOR trial (GOIRC-03-2018).

BACKGROUND: FOLFOXIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab has shown to be one of the therapeutic regimens in first line with the highest activity in patients (pts.) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) unselected for biomolecular alterations. Generally, tumors co-opt the programmed death-1/ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) signaling pathway as one key mechanism to evade immune surveillance. As today, anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies are FDA approved only for DNA mismatch repair deficient/microsatellite instability-high (MMRd/MSI-H), which represent only about 5% among all mCRC. Nowadays, there are no data demonstrating anti PD-1 activity in proficient and stable disease (MMRp/MSS). A different target in mCRC is also the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A (VEGF-A), which acts on endothelial cells to stimulate angiogenesis. VEGF-A inhibition with bevacizumab has shown to increase the immune cell infiltration, providing a solid rationale for combining VEGF targeted agents with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Based on these evidences, we explore the combination of triplet chemotherapy (FOLFOXIRI) with bevacizumab and nivolumab in pts. with mCRC RAS/BRAF mutant regardless of microsatellite status. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, open-label, multicentric phase II trial where pts. with mCRC RAS/BRAF mutated, in first line will receive nivolumab in combination with FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab every 2 weeks for 8 cycles followed by maintenance with bevacizumab plus nivolumab every 2 weeks. Bevacizumab will be administered intravenously at dose of 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks and nivolumab intravenously as a flat dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint is the overall response rate (ORR). This study hypothesis is that the treatment is able to improve the ORR from 66 to 80%. Secondary endpoints include OS, safety, time to progression, duration of response. Collateral translational studies evaluate the i) tumor mutational burden, and ii) genetic alterations by circulating free DNA (cfDNA) obtained from plasma samples. The trial is open to enrollment, 9 of planned 70 pts. have been enrolled. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NIVACOR is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04072198 , August 28, 2019.

A systematic review of salvage therapies in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Established that the only approved agents in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) are trifluoridine/tipiracil and regorafenib, we conducted a systematic review of all the published phase 2-3 trials, with the scope to evaluate the benefit of any later-line regimens in refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: Phase 2-3 studies that enrolled patients with stage IV disease receiving salvage therapies for refractory CRC were identified using electronic databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library). Clinical outcomes were pooled using a point estimates for the weighted values of median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (ORR), stable disease rate (SD), and 6-month and 1-year OS. RESULTS: Overall, 7556 patients were included from 67 studies (n = 70 arms). Overall, the pooled ORR and SD were 15.4% (95% CI 13-18%) and 36.9% (95% CI 33.5-40.6%). Median PFS, 6-month and 1-year OS, and median OS were 3.2 (95% CI 2.9-3.3) months, 65.4% (95% CI 61.9-68.8%), 36% (95% CI 32.3-39.9%) and 8.8 (95% CI 8.3-9.2) months. Overall survival was different in the monochemotherapy, polychemotherapy, chemotherapy + targeted therapy, and targeted therapy alone arms (7.6, 9.5, 10.3, and 7.9 months, respectively, P for difference = 0.01). Median PFS were respectively 2.3, 3.9, 3.8, and 2.6, respectively (P for difference < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, combination therapy (polychemotherapy with or without targeted agents) is associated with a higher control of disease and better outcome than approved agents. Treatment, if possible, should be personalized according to the patients' conditions, physician preference and molecular profile of disease.