Aprepitant plus palonosetron versus dexamethasone plus palonosetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with moderate-emetogenic chemotherapy: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial.

Background: Despite significant progress in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) by using dexamethasone combined with palonosetron for patients who received moderate-emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), some of these patients still suffer from CINV. We evaluated whether aprepitant combined with palonosetron can improve the efficacy in the prevention of CINV in patients receiving MEC. Methods: This was a single-centre, open-label, phase III, randomized controlled trial, which was done at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University of China. The registered patients planned to receive mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and 5-fluorouracil) but had not received any chemotherapy previously. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the aprepitant group (aprepitant 125 mg orally on day 1, 80 mg on day 2-3) and the dexamethasone group (dexamethasone 10 mg intravenously on day 1, 5 mg on days 2 and 3), both groups with palonosetron 0.25 mg intravenously on day 1. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a complete response (CR), defined as the absence of vomiting and no use of rescue medications in the overall phase (0-120 h). The primary outcome and safety were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which excluded all patients who used estazolam within 24 h before registration and those who refused to keep a diary documenting the severity of nausea, frequency of vomiting, and the use of rescue therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02909478. Findings: Between Sep 1, 2017, and Oct 23, 2019, 320 patients were enrolled, and 315 patients were evaluated. The proportion of patients who achieved CR was significantly higher with aprepitant than that noted with dexamethasone in the overall phase (88.8% vs. 74.2%; P = 0.0010; rate difference, RD 15%, 95% CI, 6% to 23%) and in the delayed phase (25-120 h), 90.6% vs. 75.5%, (P < 0.0001; RD 15%, 95%CI, 7% to 23%). No significant difference of CR rate was observed in the acute phase (0-24 h), 93.8% vs. 93.5%, (P = 0.94; RD 0%, 95% CI, -5% to 6%)). In the overall phase, the incidence of insomnia (P < 0.0010), dyspepsia (P = 0.038), and flushing (P = 0.0010) reported by the patients was significantly higher in the dexamethasone group than that in the aprepitant group. Interpretation: Aprepitant combined with palonosetron is superior to dexamethasone combined with palonosetron in patients who received the MEC regimen mFOLFOX6 in terms of preventing CINV. Funding: The National Key R&D Program of China (2019YFC1316000) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81974369).

mFOLFOXIRI with or without bevacizumab for conversion therapy of RAS/BRAF/PIK3CA mutant unresectable colorectal liver metastases: the FORBES non-randomized phase II trial.

Background: The aim of this non-randomized single-center phase II trial was to prospectively assess the clinical efficacy of triplet chemotherapy with modified 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (mFOLFOXIRI) plus bevacizumab as conversion therapy for initially unresectable rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (RAS)/v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF)/phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase catalytic alpha (PIK3CA) mutant colorectal liver-limited metastases (CRLMs). Methods: Patients with RAS/BRAF/PIK3CA mutant initially unresectable CRLMs were recruited at a ratio of 2:1 to receive mFOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (experimental group) or mFOLFOXIRI alone (control group). The rate of patients attaining no evidence of disease (NED) was the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), depth of tumor response (DpR), secondary resection rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: The rate of NED achieved was 40.7% and 30.8%, respectively, in the experimental (n=54) and control groups (n=26); the adjusted odds ratio was 4.519 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.247-16.375, P=0.022]. The ORR was 77.4% in the experimental group and 60.0% in the control group (P=0.112). The median DpR was significantly greater in the experimental group (45.6% vs. 34.9%, P=0.041). The median PFS was 12.6 months in the experimental group and 9.1 months in the control group [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.584, 95% CI: 0.304-1.121, P=0.106]. Median OS was prolonged in the experimental group compared with the control group (42.6 vs. 35.3 months, adjusted HR: 0.443, 95% CI: 0.195-1.006, P=0.052). Thirty patients (55.6%) in the experimental group and 16 (61.5%) in the control group experienced grade 3/4 adverse events. Conclusions: We observed that the combination of mFOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab increased the rate of clinical NED and showed a trend toward improved survival compared with mFOLFOXIRI alone. This could represent a conversion therapy option for fit patients with initially unresectable RAS/BRAF/PIK3CA mutant CRLMs.

Neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade with toripalimab, with or without celecoxib, in mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high, locally advanced, colorectal cancer (PICC): a single-centre, parallel-group, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 blockade is highly effective in patients with mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer. The role of single-agent PD-1 blockade in the neoadjuvant setting for resectable mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer remains unclear. We investigated the efficacy and safety of PD-1 blockade with toripalimab, with or without the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib, as neoadjuvant treatment for mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high, locally advanced, colorectal cancers. METHODS: The PD-1 Inhibitor in Microsatellite Instability Colorectal Cancer (PICC) trial was a single-centre, open-label, parallel-group, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 study undertaken at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China). Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years, had histologically confirmed mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer, had clinical stage T3-T4 or any T with lymph node positivity (N+), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1, and adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), without any stratification or balanced blocking, to receive toripalimab 3 mg/kg intravenously on day 1, with or without celecoxib 200 mg orally twice daily from day 1 to 14 of each 14-day cycle, for six cycles before surgical resection. Adjuvant treatment with toripalimab with or without celecoxib was permitted at the investigators' discretion. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with pathological complete response, defined as tumours without any viable tumour cells in the resected primary tumour sample and all sampled regional lymph nodes. All efficacy and safety analyses were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment and who received at least one dose of toripalimab. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03926338, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 1, 2019, and April 1, 2021, 53 patients were screened, of whom 34 were randomly assigned to either the toripalimab plus celecoxib group (n=17) or the toripalimab monotherapy group (n=17). As of data cutoff (Aug 10, 2021), median follow-up was 14·9 months (IQR 8·8-17·0). All patients received study treatment and underwent surgical resection; there were no treatment-related surgical delays. All 34 patients had an R0 resection (>1 mm resection margin). 15 of 17 patients (88% [95% CI 64-99]) in the toripalimab plus celecoxib group and 11 of 17 patients (65% [38-86]) in the toripalimab monotherapy group had a pathological complete response. All patients continued to receive adjuvant toripalimab with or without celecoxib for a total perioperative duration of 6 months and were alive and free of recurrence at data cutoff. During neoadjuvant treatment, ten (59%) patients in the toripalimab plus celecoxib group and ten (59%) in the toripalimab monotherapy group had grade 1-2 treatment-related adverse events. Only one (3%) of 34 patients, who was in the toripalimab plus celecoxib group, had a grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse event during the neoadjuvant phase, which was grade 3 increased aspartate aminotransferase levels. In the adjuvant phase, only one (3%) of 34 patients, who was in the toripalimab monotherapy group, had a grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events, which was grade 3 increased aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase levels. INTERPRETATION: Neoadjuvant toripalimab with or without celecoxib could be a potential therapeutic option for patients with mismatch repair deficient or microsatellite instability-high, locally advanced, colorectal cancer. This treatment was associated with a high pathological complete response rate and an acceptable safety profile, which did not compromise surgery. Longer term follow-up is needed to assess effects on survival-related endpoints. FUNDING: The National Key R&D Program of China, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology-Junshi Biosciences Oncology Immunity Research. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Duration of FOLFOX Adjuvant Chemotherapy in High-Risk Stage II and Stage III Colon Cancer With Deficient Mismatch Repair.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the impact of 3 months of mFOLFOX6 adjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone in comparison with 6 months of mFOLFOX6 on disease-free survival (DFS) in deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) colon cancer (CC) patients. METHODS: This retrospective study identified a cohort of patients with high-risk stage II and III dMMR CC who underwent curative surgery between May 2011 and July 2019. DFS was compared using the Kaplan-Meier survival methods and Cox proportional hazards models. Propensity-score matching was performed to reduce imbalance in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 242 dMMR CC patients were identified; 66 patients received 6 months of mFOLFOX6, 87 patients received 3 months of mFOLFOX6, and 89 patients were treated with surgery alone. The 3-year DFS rate was 72.8% in 3-month therapy group and 86.1% in 6-month therapy group, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.78 (95CI%, 1.18 to 6.47; P= 0.019). The difference in DFS between surgery alone group and 6-month therapy group was also observed but was nonsignificant (HR= 2.30, 95%CI, 0.99 to 5.38; P=0.054). The benefit of 6-month therapy in DFS compared with 3-month therapy group was pronounced for patients with stage III (HR=2.81, 95%CI, 1.03 to 7.67; P=0.044) but not for high-risk stage II patients. Propensity score matched analysis confirmed a DFS benefit in the 6-month therapy group. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that a 6-month duration of mFOLFOX6 adjuvant chemotherapy in dMMR CC patients may be associated with improved DFS compared with 3-month therapy, particularly in patients with stage III. The observational nature of the study implies caution should be taken in the interpretation of these results.