Intergroup Randomized Phase III Study of Postoperative Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin Versus Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Bevacizumab for Patients with Stage II or III Rectal Cancer Receiving Preoperative Chemoradiation: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Research Group (E5204).

BACKGROUND: The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improved outcomes for patients with metastatic colon cancer. E5204 was designed to test whether the addition of bevacizumab to mFOLFOX6, following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and definitive surgery, could improve overall survival (OS) in patients with stage II/III adenocarcinoma of the rectum. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: Patients with stage II/III rectal cancer who had completed neoadjuvant 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation and had undergone complete resection were enrolled. Patients were randomized to mFOLFOX6 (Arm A) or mFOLFOX6 with bevacizumab (Arm B) administered every 2 weeks for 12 cycles. RESULTS: E5204 registered only 355 patients (17% of planned accrual goal) as it was terminated prematurely owing to poor accrual. At a median follow-up of 72 months, there was no difference in 5-year overall survival (88.3% vs. 83.7%) or 5-year disease-free survival (71.2% vs. 76.5%) between the two arms. The rate of treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) was 68.8% on Arm A and 70.7% on Arm B. Arm B had a higher proportion of patients who discontinued therapy early as a result of AEs and patient withdrawal than did Arm A (32.4% vs. 21.5%, p = .029).The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs were neutropenia, leukopenia, neuropathy, diarrhea (without prior colostomy), and fatigue. CONCLUSION: At 17% of its planned accrual, E5204 did not meet its primary endpoint. The addition of bevacizumab to FOLFOX6 in the adjuvant setting did not significantly improve OS in patients with stage II/III rectal cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: At 17% of its planned accrual, E5204 was terminated early owing to poor accrual. At a median follow-up of 72 months, there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival (88.3% vs. 83.7%) or in 5-year disease-free survival (71.2% vs. 76.5%) between the two arms. Despite significant advances in the treatment of rectal cancer, especially in improving local control rates, the risk of distant metastases and the need to further improve quality of life remain a challenge. Strategies combining novel agents with chemoradiation to improve both distant and local control are needed.

Refining the Use of Adjuvant Oxaliplatin in Clinical Stage II or III Rectal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines include the use of adjuvant oxaliplatin in clinical stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma. However, its efficacy is supported by a single phase II trial. We aimed to examine whether oxaliplatin confers survival benefit in this patient population. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (2006-2013) we identified 6,868 individuals with clinical stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy. We used multivariate Cox regression to evaluate survival differences according to treatment intensity and change from clinical to pathological stage. RESULTS: We demonstrated an association with improved overall survival with the use of doublet adjuvant chemotherapy in pathological stage III rectal adenocarcinoma (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.92). This association was confirmed in patients with clinical stage III and subsequent pathological stage III disease (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.83) and was not observed in patients who progressed from clinical stage II to pathological stage III disease. Doublet adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with improved overall survival in patients with pathological stage 0 or I disease, regardless of their clinical stage. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant oxaliplatin following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal adenocarcinoma was confirmed in patients with clinical stage III and subsequent pathological stage III disease. Omission of oxaliplatin can be considered in pathological complete response or pathological stage I disease. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Current guidelines include the use of oxaliplatin as part of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in patients with clinical stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma (RAC). However, its efficacy is supported only by a single phase II trial. This study found an association with improved overall survival with the use of doublet AC in patients diagnosed with clinical stage III and subsequent pathological stage III, and not in patients with pathological stage 0 or I, regardless of their clinical stage. Therefore, omission of oxaliplatin can be considered in patients with either pathological complete response or pathological stage I RAC, thereby avoiding oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy.

A new look at the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant therapy (IDEA) classification-Defining novel predictive and prognostic markers in stage III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: The International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant therapy (IDEA) pooled analysis compared 3 to 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer. The overarching goal was to reduce chemotherapy-related toxicity, mainly oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy. Patients were classified into low-risk and high-risk groups, suggesting that low-risk patients may be offered only 3 months of treatment. We aimed to evaluate the benefit of monotherapy versus doublet chemotherapy in low and high IDEA risk groups. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (2004-2014), we identified 56,728 low-risk and 47,557 high-risk individuals with stage III colon cancer, according to the IDEA classification. We used multivariate Cox regression to evaluate the magnitude of survival differences between IDEA risk groups, according to treatment intensity (doublet versus monotherapy). In a secondary analysis, we examined the prognostic and predictive value of subgroups of age, tumour sidedness and lymph node ratio (LNR). RESULTS: Low and high IDEA risk groups derived similar benefit from doublet adjuvant chemotherapy as compared with monotherapy, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.86) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.78-0.83), respectively. The only subpopulations that did not benefit from doublet chemotherapy were low-risk patients older than 72 years (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-1.01) and high-risk patients older than 85 years (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.77-1.05). LNR and tumour sidedness were shown as additional prognostic, but not predictive, factors within the IDEA risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: IDEA risk classification per se does not predict for treatment benefit from doublet chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer. However, omission of oxaliplatin can be considered in IDEA low-risk patients older than 72 years.

Concurrent RT with 5-FU/epirubicin and cisplatin or irinotecan for locally advanced upper GI adenocarcinoma.

From the results of recent studies, it is likely that multimodality therapy with chemotherapy and radiation treatment may improve the overall outcome of locally advanced upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, and biliary tract carcinomas. However, more effective, more optimal, and less toxic chemotherapy regimen(s) with concomitant radiotherapy are needed beyond the concurrent continuous-infusion fluorouracil (5-FU) with radiation that is commonly applied in general practice. Epirubicin (Ellence), cisplatin, and irinotecan (Camptosar) are all active cytotoxic chemotherapy agents in upper GI cancers. Two phase I studies were designed to test the tolerability of the combination of radiotherapy with infusional 5-FU, epirubicin, and cisplatin (ECF) or 5-FU, irinotecan, and epirubicin (EIF) in the treatment of locally advanced upper GI malignancies.