Fruquintinib versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (FRESCO-2): an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of effective systemic therapy options for patients with advanced, chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, a highly selective and potent oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs) 1, 2, and 3, in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: We conducted an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (FRESCO-2) at 124 hospitals and cancer centres across 14 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) with histologically or cytologically documented metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma who had received all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib, or both. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive fruquintinib (5 mg capsule) or matched placebo orally once daily on days 1-21 in 28-day cycles, plus best supportive care. Stratification factors were previous trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib, or both, RAS mutation status, and duration of metastatic disease. Patients, investigators, study site personnel, and sponsors, except for selected sponsor pharmacovigilance personnel, were masked to study group assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as the time from randomisation to death from any cause. A non-binding futility analysis was done when approximately one-third of the expected overall survival events had occurred. Final analysis occurred after 480 overall survival events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04322539, and EudraCT, 2020-000158-88, and is ongoing but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 12, 2020, and Dec 2, 2021, 934 patients were assessed for eligibility and 691 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive fruquintinib (n=461) or placebo (n=230). Patients had received a median of 4 lines (IQR 3-6) of previous systemic therapy for metastatic disease, and 502 (73%) of 691 patients had received more than 3 lines. Median overall survival was 7·4 months (95% CI 6·7-8·2) in the fruquintinib group versus 4·8 months (4·0-5·8) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·55-0·80; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 286 (63%) of 456 patients who received fruquintinib and 116 (50%) of 230 who received placebo; the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the fruquintinib group included hypertension (n=62 [14%]), asthenia (n=35 [8%]), and hand-foot syndrome (n=29 [6%]). There was one treatment-related death in each group (intestinal perforation in the fruquintinib group and cardiac arrest in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Fruquintinib treatment resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. These data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Ongoing analysis of the quality of life data will further establish the clinical benefit of fruquintinib in this patient population. FUNDING: HUTCHMED.

Validation of POD24 as a robust early clinical end point of poor survival in FL from 5225 patients on 13 clinical trials.

Observational studies and stand-alone trials indicate that patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) who experience disease progression within 24 months of front-line chemoimmunotherapy (POD24), have poor outcomes. We performed a pooled analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials of patients with FL in the pre- and postrituximab eras to identify clinical factors that predict POD24. Logistic regression models evaluated the association between clinical factors and POD24. Cox regression evaluated the association between POD24 as a time-dependent factor and subsequent overall survival (OS). A landmark analysis evaluated the association of POD24 with OS for the subset of patients who were alive at 24 months after trial registration. Patients without progression at 24 months at baseline had favorable performance status (PS), limited-stage (I/II) disease, low-risk FL International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) score, normal baseline hemoglobin, and normal baseline ß2 microglobulin (B2M) level. In a multivariable logistic regression model, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.30), PS ≥2 (OR, 1.63), B2M (≥3 mg/L; OR, 1.43), and high-risk FLIPI score (3-5; OR, 3.14) were associated with increased risk of progression before 24 months. In the time-dependent Cox model and the 24-month landmark analysis, POD24 was associated with poor subsequent OS (hazard ratio, 4.85 and 3.06, respectively). This is the largest pooled analysis of clinical trials data validating POD24 as a robust indicator of poor FL survival and identified clinical predictors of early death and progression that can aid in building comprehensive prognostic models incorporating clinical and molecular predictors of POD24.

Dietary fat in relation to all-cause mortality and cancer progression and death among people with metastatic colorectal cancer: Data from CALGB 80405 (Alliance)/SWOG 80405.

Data on diet and survival among people with metastatic colorectal cancer are limited. We examined dietary fat in relation to all-cause mortality and cancer progression or death among 1149 people in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) 80405 trial who completed a food frequency questionnaire at initiation of treatment for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer. We examined saturated, monounsaturated, total and specific types (n-3, long-chain n-3 and n-6) of polyunsaturated fat, animal and vegetable fats. We hypothesized higher vegetable fat intake would be associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality and cancer progression. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Over median follow-up of 6.1 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.3, 7.2 y), we observed 974 deaths and 1077 events of progression or death. Participants had a median age of 59 y; 41% were female and 86% identified as White. Moderate or higher vegetable fat was associated with lower risk of mortality and cancer progression or death (HRs comparing second, third and fourth to first quartile for all-cause mortality: 0.74 [0.62, 0.90]; 0.75 [0.61, 0.91]; 0.79 [0.63, 1.00]; P trend: .12; for cancer progression or death: 0.74 [0.62, 0.89]; 0.78 [0.64, 0.95]; 0.71 [0.57, 0.88]; P trend: .01). No other fat type was associated with all-cause mortality and cancer progression or death. Moderate or higher vegetable fat intake may be associated with lower risk of cancer progression or death among people with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Circulating Tumor DNA as a Predictive Biomarker for Clinical Outcomes With Margetuximab and Pembrolizumab in Pretreated HER2-Positive Gastric/ Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: To assess the ability of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-based testing to identify patients with HER2 (encoded by ERBB2)-positive gastric/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) who progressed on or after trastuzumab-containing treatments were treated with combination therapy of anti-HER2 and anti-PD-1 agents. METHODS: ctDNA analysis was performed retrospectively using plasma samples collected at study entry from 86 patients participating in the phase 1/2 CP-MGAH22-05 study (NCT02689284). RESULTS: Objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in evaluable ERBB2 amplification-positive vs - negative patients based on ctDNA analysis at study entry (37% vs 6%, respectively; P = .00094). ORR was 23% across all patients who were evaluable for response. ERBB2 amplification was detected at study entry in 57% of patients (all HER2 positive at diagnosis), and detection was higher (88%) when HER2 status was determined by immunohistochemistry fewer than 6 months before study entry. ctDNA was detected in 98% (84/86) of patients tested at study entry. Codetected ERBB2-activating mutations were not associated with response. CONCLUSIONS: Current ERBB2 status may be more effective than archival status at predicting clinical benefit from margetuximab plus pembrolizumab therapy. ctDNA testing for ERBB2 status prior to treatment will spare patients from repeat tissue biopsies, which may be reserved for reflex testing when ctDNA is not detected.

A Pilot Study of Omalizumab to Treat Oxaliplatin-Induced Hypersensitivity Reaction.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) are immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated and prevent maximum benefit from this drug. This study was designed to determine whether oxaliplatin HSRs could be prevented or reduced with omalizumab (Xolair), an anti-IgE antibody. PATIENTS/METHODS: This was a single-arm prospective pilot study. Patients receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for gastrointestinal cancers who were experiencing grade 1/2 HSRs were eligible. Patients received omalizumab 300 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks, alternating with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Nine patients enrolled. The primary end point was reduction of repeat HSR over the next 2 cycles. The sample size of 12 patients would achieve 79% power to detect a decrease from HSR rate of 70% (the null hypothesis) to 35% using a 1-sided binomial test. The study would be considered positive if fewer than 6 HSR events over 2 cycles occurred on omalizumab. RESULTS: Nine patients received 58 cycles of omalizumab. The mean number of treatments was 6 (range, 1-12). Eight of 9 patients (88%) completed 2 or more cycles and 7 (78%) completed 4 or more cycles; the overall rate of HSR was 12%. Five of 7 evaluable patients had stable disease, including 1 with near partial response. CONCLUSIONS: Omalizumab reduces or abrogates oxaliplatin HSRs and allows months of additional therapy with apparent clinical benefit.

A phase 1b expansion study of TAS-102 with oxaliplatin for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102, a novel antimetabolite, is approved for treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study sought to determine whether the addition of TAS-102 to oxaliplatin (TAS-OX) was safe and effective in metastatic CRC previously treated with oxaliplatin. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm phase 1b study enrolled patients with metastatic CRC previously treated with 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin. In dose escalation, TAS-102 was given at 3 dose levels: 25, 30, and 35 mg/m2 twice daily on day 1 to day 5 with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint of dose escalation was the recommended dose for expansion, and in dose expansion, the primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1). RESULTS: Forty-one patients were treated with TAS-OX. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the 11 patients treated in escalation. The recommended dose for expansion was 35 mg/m2 TAS-102 twice daily on day 1 to day 5 in combination with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 in 14-day cycles. In the intention-to-treat population, the ORR was 2.4% (95% CI, 0%-12.9%) with 1 of 41 patients having a partial response, although 12 (29%) had tumor shrinkage. The median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 2.4-4.8 months) and median overall survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.7-10 months). CONCLUSIONS: TAS-OX is safe with no unexpected toxicities at standard doses of each agent. The combination did not result in a clinically meaningful ORR, although progression-free survival and overall survival were encouraging in this heavily pretreated population. LAY SUMMARY: For metastatic colorectal cancer, the treatment combination of TAS-102 and oxaliplatin was found to be well-tolerated and revealed no unexpected side effects. Twelve of 41 patients had reductions in the size of their tumor, and the study treatment delayed the time to tumor growth as opposed to what would be expected.

Effect of Celecoxib vs Placebo Added to Standard Adjuvant Therapy on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: The CALGB/SWOG 80702 (Alliance) Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Aspirin and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal polyps and cancer in observational and randomized studies. The effect of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, as treatment for nonmetastatic colon cancer is unknown. Objective: To determine if the addition of celecoxib to adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) improves disease-free survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/Southwest Oncology Group 80702 was a 2 × 2 factorial design, phase 3 trial conducted at 654 community and academic centers throughout the United States and Canada. A total of 2526 patients with stage III colon cancer were enrolled between June 2010 and November 2015 and were followed up through August 10, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive adjuvant FOLFOX (every 2 weeks) for 3 vs 6 months with or without 3 years of celecoxib (400 mg orally daily; n = 1263) vs placebo (n = 1261). This report focuses on the results of the celecoxib randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease-free survival, measured from the time of randomization until documented recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points included overall survival, adverse events, and cardiovascular-specific events. Results: Of the 2526 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 61.0 years [11 years]; 1134 women [44.9%]), 2524 were included in the primary analysis. Adherence with protocol treatment, defined as receiving celecoxib or placebo for more than 2.75 years or continuing treatment until recurrence, death, or unacceptable adverse events, was 70.8% for patients treated with celecoxib and 69.9% for patients treated with placebo. A total of 337 patients randomized to celecoxib and 363 to placebo experienced disease recurrence or died, and with 6 years' median follow-up, the 3-year disease-free survival was 76.3% for celecoxib-treated patients vs 73.4% for placebo-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR] for disease recurrence or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76-1.03; P = .12). The effect of celecoxib treatment on disease-free survival did not vary significantly according to assigned duration of adjuvant chemotherapy (P for interaction = .61). Five-year overall survival was 84.3% for celecoxib vs 81.6% for placebo (HR for death, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P = .13). Hypertension (any grade) occurred while treated with FOLFOX in 14.6% of patients in the celecoxib group vs 10.9% of patients in the placebo group, and a grade 2 or higher increase in creatinine levels occurred after completion of FOLFOX in 1.7% vs 0.5% of patients, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with stage III colon cancer, the addition of celecoxib for 3 years, compared with placebo, to standard adjuvant chemotherapy did not significantly improve disease-free survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01150045.

Margetuximab plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated, HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CP-MGAH22-05): a single-arm, phase 1b-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Margetuximab, a novel, investigational, Fc-engineered, anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody, is designed to more effectively potentiate innate immunity than trastuzumab. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of margetuximab plus pembrolizumab (an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody) in previously treated patients with HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: CP-MGAH22-05 was a single-arm, open-label, phase 1b-2 dose-escalation and cohort expansion study done at 11 academic centres in the USA and Canada and 15 centres in southeast Asia (Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore) that enrolled men and women aged 18 years or older with histologically proven, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic, HER2-positive, PD-L1-unselected gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, who had progressed after at least one previous line of therapy with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in the locally advanced unresectable or metastatic setting. In the dose-escalation phase, nine patients were treated: three received margetuximab 10 mg/kg intravenously plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks and six received the recommended phase 2 dose of margetuximab 15 mg/kg plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. An additional 86 patients were enrolled in the phase 2 cohort expansion and received the recommended phase 2 dose. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, assessed in the safety population (patients who received at least one dose of either margetuximab or pembrolizumab) and the objective response rate as assessed by the investigator according to both Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, in the response-evaluable population (patients with measurable disease at baseline and who received the recommended phase 2 dose of margetuximab and pembrolizumab). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02689284. Recruitment for the trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11, 2016, and Oct 2, 2018, 95 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 10·7-23·1). The combination therapy showed acceptable safety and tolerability; there were no dose-limiting toxicities in the dose-escalation phase. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (four [4%]) and infusion-related reactions (three [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in nine (9%) patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Objective responses were observed in 17 (18·48%; 95% CI 11·15-27·93) of 92 evaluable patients. INTERPRETATION: These findings serve as proof of concept of synergistic antitumour activity with the combination of an Fc-optimised anti-HER2 agent (margetuximab) along with anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade (pembrolizumab). FUNDING: MacroGenics.

Surgical Outcome Results From SWOG S1505: A Randomized Clinical Trial of mFOLFIRINOX Versus Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel for Perioperative Treatment of Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) and the impact on surgical outcomes remains unclear. METHODS: S1505 (NCT02562716) was a randomized phase II study of perioperative chemotherapy with mFOLFIRINOX (Arm 1) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Arm 2). Measured parameters included resection rate, margin positivity, pathologic response, and toxicity. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, 147 patients were randomized. Of these, 44 (30%) were deemed ineligible (43 by central review). Of the 103 eligible patients, 77 (76%) completed preoperative therapy and underwent surgery; reasons patients did not undergo surgery included toxicity related to preoperative therapy (n = 9), progression (n = 9), or other (n = 7). Of the 77, 73 (95%) underwent successful resection; 21 (29%) required vascular reconstruction, 62 (85%) had negative (R0) margins, and 24 (33%) had a complete or major pathologic response to therapy. The grade 3-5 postoperative complication rate was 16%. Of the 73 patients completing surgery, 57 (78%) started and 46 (63%) completed postoperative therapy. This study represents the first prospective trial evaluating modern systemic therapy delivered in a neoadjuvant/perioperative format for resectable PDA. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated: (1) Based on the high percentage of enrolled, but ineligible patients, it is clear that adherence to strict definitions of resectable PDA is challenging; (2) Patients can tolerate modern systemic therapy and undergo successful surgical resection without prohibitive perioperative complications; (3) Completion of adjuvant therapy in the perioperative format is difficult; (4) Major pathologic response rate of 33% is encouraging.

Next-Generation Sequencing Testing in GI Cancer: A Patient's "Right"? Or Wrong?

In this issue of ONCOLOGY, the interview with Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab, MD, raises some interesting questions on next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing. In this interview, he says that NGS testing should be done at diagnosis for all patients with GI cancer, and this is no longer a privilege but a patient's right. Although I agree with the basic premise that NGS will give us the greatest amount of information in a single test, I think this statement needs a little more consideration.

Docetaxel, Oxaliplatin, and 5-Fluorouracil (DOF) in Metastatic and Unresectable Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: A Phase II Study with Long-Term Follow-Up.

LESSONS LEARNED: Adding docetaxel to the modified FOLFOX7 backbone (DOF) is a feasible three-drug combination therapy for advanced gastric cancer with high activity, providing evidence that leucovorin is not necessary in this setting.The DOF regimen represents an alternative to the FLOT (5-FU 2,600 mg/m2 as 24-hour infusion with leucovorin 200 mg/m2, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, and docetaxel 50 mg/m2) regimen that can be considered in select patients with advanced gastric cancer and is a potential choice in the curative setting. BACKGROUND: The combination of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) demonstrates high response rates in advanced gastric cancer, albeit with increased toxicity. Given the efficacy of platinum-taxane-fluoropyrimidine regimens, this phase II study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and 5-FU (DOF) for the treatment of metastatic or unresectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Patients with metastatic or unresectable gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma with no prior therapy for metastatic disease received docetaxel 50 mg/m2 on day 1, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on day 1, and 5-FU 2,400 mg/m2 continuous intravenous infusion over 46 hours; cycles were repeated every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled. Assessment of treatment response and toxicity was feasible in 41 and 43 patients, respectively. ORR was 73.2% (68.3% partial response; 4.9% complete response). Therapy was discontinued for progressive disease in 53%, toxicity in 26%, and death on treatment in 16%. Two patients underwent surgical resection. Thirty-three patients (76.7%) received at least seven cycles (7-34). Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 31 patients (72.1%), including neutropenia (23.3%), neurologic (20.9%), and diarrhea (14.0%). Median overall survival was 10.3 months. CONCLUSION: DOF demonstrates a high response rate, expected safety profile, and prolonged survival and remains an option for select patients with unresectable or metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Phase II Randomized Trial of Sequential or Concurrent FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab Versus FOLFOX-Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (STEAM).

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) typically entails a biologic such as bevacizumab (BEV) with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI). STEAM (NCT01765582) assessed the efficacy of BEV plus FOLFOX/FOLFIRI (FOLFOXIRI), administered concurrently (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV) or sequentially (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, FOLFOX-BEV alternating with FOLFIRI-BEV), versus FOLFOX-BEV for mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC (n = 280) were randomized 1:1:1 to cFOLFOXIRI-BEV, sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, or FOLFOX-BEV and treated with 4-6-month induction followed by maintenance. Coprimary objectives were overall response rate (ORR; first-line cFOLFOXIRI-BEV vs. FOLFOX-BEV) and progression-free survival (PFS; pooled first-line cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV vs. FOLFOX-BEV). Secondary/exploratory objectives included overall survival (OS), liver resection rates, biomarker analyses, and safety. RESULTS: ORR was 72.0%, 72.8%, and 62.1% and median PFS was 11.9, 11.4, and 9.5 months with cFOLFOXIRI-BEV, sFOLFOXIRI-BEV, and FOLFOX-BEV, respectively. OS was similar between arms. ORR between cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and FOLFOX-BEV did not significantly differ (p = .132); thus, the primary ORR endpoint was not met. cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV numerically improved ORR and PFS, regardless of RAS status. Median PFS was higher with pooled concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV versus FOLFOX-BEV (11.7 vs. 9.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.7; 90% confidence interval, 0.5-0.9; p < .01). Liver resection rates were 17.2% (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV), 9.8% (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV), and 8.4% (FOLFOX-BEV). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were observed in 91.2% (cFOLFOXIRI-BEV), 86.7% (sFOLFOXIRI-BEV), and 85.6% (FOLFOX-BEV) of patients, with no increase in serious chemotherapy-associated TEAEs. CONCLUSION: cFOLFOXIRI-BEV and sFOLFOXIRI-BEV were well tolerated with numerically improved ORR, PFS, and liver resection rates versus FOLFOX-BEV, supporting triplet chemotherapy plus BEV as a first-line treatment option for mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The combination of first-line FOLFIRI with FOLFOX and bevacizumab (concurrent FOLFOXIRI-BEV) improves clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relative to FOLFIRI-BEV or FOLFOX-BEV, but it is thought to be associated with increased toxicity. Alternating treatment of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI (sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV) could improve tolerability. In the phase II STEAM trial, which is the largest study of FOLFOXIRI-BEV in patients in the U.S., it was found that both concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-BEV are active and well tolerated in patients with previously untreated mCRC, supporting the use of these regimens as potential first-line treatment options for this population.

Phase II study of DFP-10917, a deoxycytidine analog, given by 14-day continuous intravenous infusion for chemotherapy-refractory advanced colorectal cancer.

Background DFP-10917 is a cytotoxic deoxycytidine analogue that causes DNA fragmentation, G2/M-phase arrest, and apoptosis. This agent has been shown to have antitumor activity against colorectal cancer (CRC) in preclinical studies and to be tolerable in patients. The purpose of our phase II trial was to evaluate the safety, efficacy and pharmacogenomics of DFP-10917 as well as DNA damage studies in patients with advanced CRC refractory to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Methods In this single-arm, Simon two-stage, phase II trial, patients with chemotherapy-refractory advanced CRC received 2.0 mg/m2/day DFP-10917 via 14-day continuous infusion. Enrollment criteria included age ≥ 18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status of 0 or 1, and adequate organ function. The primary endpoint was 3-month progression-free survival, defined as the proportion of patients who did not have progressive disease or death within 3 months of starting therapy. All patients who received any amount of DFP-10917 were included in the safety analysis. DNA damage study was assessed by comet assay. Results Of 28 patients initially enrolled, 26 received DFP-10917. Three patients (12%) were progression free at 3 months. The median progression-free survival was 1.3 months (95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.6 months). There were no complete or partial responses. Most patients (n = 20, 77%) had progressive disease, and only six (23%) had stable disease at any time. The trial was terminated according to the pre-planned stopping rule. The most frequent (≥5%) medication-related grade 3 or higher adverse events were neutropenia (n = 10, 38%), fatigue (n = 4, 15%), anemia (n = 3, 12%), and leukopenia (n = 3, 12%). DNA strand-breaks were detected after infusion (medians of % tail intensity were 2.89 and 12.64 on day 1 and day 15, respectively, p < 0.001, sign test). Conclusion Overall, single-agent DFP-10917 did not show meaningful antitumor activity in chemotherapy-refractory advanced CRC. The safety profile of DFP-10917 was tolerable and similar to that observed in earlier clinical studies.

Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma provide recommendations for the management of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal or perianal region. Primary treatment of anal cancer usually includes chemoradiation, although certain lesions can be treated with margin-negative local excision alone. Disease surveillance is recommended for all patients with anal carcinoma because additional curative-intent treatment is possible. A multidisciplinary approach including physicians from gastroenterology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and radiology is essential for optimal patient care.

Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Rectal Cancer address diagnosis, staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, disease surveillance, and survivorship in patients with rectal cancer. This portion of the guidelines focuses on the management of localized disease, which involves careful patient selection for curative-intent treatment options that sequence multimodality therapy usually comprised of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical resection.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colon Cancer, Version 2.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer provide recommendations regarding diagnosis, pathologic staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, surveillance, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, and survivorship. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Colon Cancer Panel discussions for the 2018 update of the guidelines regarding risk stratification and adjuvant treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer, and treatment of BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic colorectal cancer with regimens containing vemurafenib.

Colon Cancer, Version 1.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This portion of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer focuses on the use of systemic therapy in metastatic disease. Considerations for treatment selection among 32 different monotherapies and combination regimens in up to 7 lines of therapy have included treatment history, extent of disease, goals of treatment, the efficacy and toxicity profiles of the regimens, KRAS/NRAS mutational status, and patient comorbidities and preferences. Location of the primary tumor, the BRAF mutation status, and tumor microsatellite stability should also be considered in treatment decisions.

Effect of First-Line Chemotherapy Combined With Cetuximab or Bevacizumab on Overall Survival in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Combining biologic monoclonal antibodies with chemotherapeutic cytotoxic drugs provides clinical benefit to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, but the optimal choice of the initial biologic therapy in previously untreated patients is unknown. Objective: To determine if the addition of cetuximab vs bevacizumab to the combination of leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) regimen or the combination of leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) regimen is superior as first-line therapy in advanced or metastatic KRAS wild-type (wt) colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients (≥18 years) enrolled at community and academic centers throughout the National Clinical Trials Network in the United States and Canada (November 2005-March 2012) with previously untreated advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer whose tumors were KRAS wt chose to take either the mFOLFOX6 regimen or the FOLFIRI regimen as chemotherapy and were randomized to receive either cetuximab (n = 578) or bevacizumab (n = 559). The last date of follow-up was December 15, 2015. Interventions: Cetuximab vs bevacizumab combined with either mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI chemotherapy regimen chosen by the treating physician and patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival and overall response rate, site-reported confirmed or unconfirmed complete or partial response. Results: Among 1137 patients (median age, 59 years; 440 [39%] women), 1074 (94%) of patients met eligibility criteria. As of December 15, 2015, median follow-up for 263 surviving patients was 47.4 months (range, 0-110.7 months), and 82% of patients (938 of 1137) experienced disease progression. The median overall survival was 30.0 months in the cetuximab-chemotherapy group and 29.0 months in the bevacizumab-chemotherapy group with a stratified hazard ratio (HR) of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.77-1.01; P = .08). The median progression-free survival was 10.5 months in the cetuximab-chemotherapy group and 10.6 months in the bevacizumab-chemotherapy group with a stratified HR of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.84-1.08; P = .45). Response rates were not significantly different, 59.6% vs 55.2% for cetuximab and bevacizumab, respectively (difference, 4.4%, 95% CI, 1.0%-9.0%, P = .13). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with KRAS wt untreated advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, there was no significant difference in overall survival between the addition of cetuximab vs bevacizumab to chemotherapy as initial biologic treatment. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00265850.

Randomized phase 3 study in low-grade lymphoma comparing maintenance anti-CD20 antibody with observation after induction therapy: A trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E1496).

BACKGROUND: In an ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group study (E1496), maintenance rituximab (MR) was reported to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in comparison with observation (OBS) alone in patients with indolent lymphoma after induction chemotherapy. Here the long-term follow-up of the same patient cohort is presented. METHODS: Patients with indolent lymphoma received induction chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP). Patients with stable disease or a better response were then randomized to weekly rituximab (375 mg/m(2) × 4 doses) every 6 months for 2 years (MR) or to OBS. The primary endpoint was PFS; the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate, and toxicities. RESULTS: Of the 387 patients who initially received CVP induction, 158 were randomized to MR, and 153 were randomized to OBS. After a median follow-up of 11.5 years, patients on MR had longer median PFS (4.8 years) than patients on OBS (1.3 years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; P < .0001). However, there was no difference in OS between MR and OBS (10-year OS, 67% vs 59%; median OS, 13.5 years vs not reached; HR, 0.91; P = .69). Other than MR, only minimal residual disease after induction therapy was significantly associated with PFS on multivariate analysis (HR, 0.71; P = .02). A low initial tumor burden, minimal residual disease, follicular histology, a low Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score, and female sex were associated with longer OS. There was no increase in the rate of second primary malignancies with MR vs OBS. CONCLUSIONS: With long-term follow-up, MR did not influence OS. The PFS benefit was maintained. MR should be considered optional for patients with indolent B-cell lymphoma. Cancer 2016;122:2996-3004. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Final analysis of a phase II study of modified FOLFIRINOX in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Modifications of FOLFIRINOX are widely used despite the absence of prospective data validating efficacy in metastatic disease (metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC)) or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). We conducted a multicentre phase II study of modified FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer to assess the impact of dose attenuation in MPC and efficacy in LAPC. METHODS: Patients with untreated MPC or LAPC received modified FOLFIRINOX (irinotecan and bolus 5-fluorouracil reduced by 25%). Adverse events (AEs) were compared with full-dose FOLFIRINOX. Response rate (RR), median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were determined. RESULTS: In total, 31 and 44 patients with LAPC and MPC were enrolled, respectively. In MPC, efficacy of modified FOLFIRINOX was comparable with FOLFIRINOX with RR 35.1%, OS 10.2 months (95% CI 7.65-14.32) and PFS 6.1 months (95% CI 5.19-8.31). In LAPC, efficacy was notable with RR 17.2%, resection rate 41.9%, PFS 17.8 months (95% CI 11.0-23.9) and OS 26.6 months (95% CI 16.7, NA). Neutropenia (P<0.0001), vomiting (P<0.001) and fatigue (P=0.01) were significantly decreased. [(18)F]-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging response did not correlate with PFS or OS. CONCLUSIONS: In this first prospective study of modified FOLFIRINOX in MPC and LAPC, we observed decreased AEs compared with historical control patients. In MPC, the efficacy appears comparable with FOLFIRINOX. In LAPC, PFS and OS were prolonged and support the continued use of FOLFIRINOX in this setting.