Risk-Adapted Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Concomitant Fluoropyrimidine-Radiotherapy Neoadjuvant Treatment for Patients With Resectable CT3-4 or N+ Rectal Cancer: Five-Year Disease-Free Survival Results of a Single-Center Series.

BACKGROUND: Providing adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation is currently a matter of debate. Recommendations from clinical guidelines range from offering no treatment to oxaliplatin-based combinations. We present a risk-adapted approach based on the response to initial chemoradiation as the strongest prognostic factor for disease-free survival (DFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred one patients were treated at a single institution with preoperative long-course radiotherapy plus concurrent fluoropyrimidines. Patients with disease downstaged to pT0-2N0 received adjuvant fluoropyrimidines alone, while the remaining received an oxaliplatin-based combination. The primary study end point was 5-year DFS. RESULTS: Overall, the disease of 54 patients was downstaged to pT0-2N0 (53.5%), while that of 47 patients was staged as pT3-4 or N+ (46.5%) after surgery. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 5-year DFS for patients in the good-prognosis group (downstaging to pT0-2 N0) and for those with poor prognosis (pT3-4 or N+) were 79.4% and 66.3%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.489; P = .043). Downstaging and pN+ were independent prognostic factors for DFS. CONCLUSION: A risk-adapted adjuvant therapy strategy based on pathologic stage after neoadjuvant chemoradiation is feasible and achieves high rates of 5-year DFS. Patients with good prognostic factors can be treated with adjuvant fluoropyrimidines alone, thus permitting the avoidance of oxaliplatin-derived toxicities.

Ramucirumab versus placebo as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib (REACH): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: VEGF and VEGF receptor-2-mediated angiogenesis contribute to hepatocellular carcinoma pathogenesis. Ramucirumab is a recombinant IgG1 monoclonal antibody and VEGF receptor-2 antagonist. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib. METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial (REACH), patients were enrolled from 154 centres in 27 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had hepatocellular carcinoma with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C disease or stage B disease that was refractory or not amenable to locoregional therapy, had Child-Pugh A liver disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had previously received sorafenib (stopped because of progression or intolerance), and had adequate haematological and biochemical parameters. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo every 2 weeks, plus best supportive care, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Randomisation was stratified by geographic region and cause of liver disease with a stratified permuted block method. Patients, medical staff, investigators, and the funder were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01140347. FINDINGS: Between Nov 4, 2010, and April 18, 2013, 565 patients were enrolled, of whom 283 were assigned to ramucirumab and 282 were assigned to placebo. Median overall survival for the ramucirumab group was 9·2 months (95% CI 8·0-10·6) versus 7·6 months (6·0-9·3) for the placebo group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·72-1·05]; p=0·14). Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurring in 5% or more of patients in either treatment group were ascites (13 [5%] of 277 patients treated with ramucirumab vs 11 [4%] of 276 patients treated with placebo), hypertension (34 [12%] vs ten [4%]), asthenia (14 [5%] vs five [2%]), malignant neoplasm progression (18 [6%] vs 11 [4%]), increased aspartate aminotransferase concentration (15 [5%] vs 23 [8%]), thrombocytopenia (13 [5%] vs one [<1%]), hyperbilirubinaemia (three [1%] vs 13 [5%]), and increased blood bilirubin (five [2%] vs 14 [5%]). The most frequently reported (≥1%) treatment-emergent serious adverse event of any grade or grade 3 or more was malignant neoplasm progression. INTERPRETATION: Second-line treatment with ramucirumab did not significantly improve survival over placebo in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. No new safety signals were noted in eligible patients and the safety profile is manageable. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Co.

Sorafenib and bevacizumab combination targeted therapy in advanced neuroendocrine tumour: a phase II study of Spanish Neuroendocrine Tumour Group (GETNE0801).

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib and bevacizumab as single agents have shown efficacy and acceptable toxicity in NETs phase II trials. Sorafenib and bevacizumab combination has shown manageable toxicity in phase I trials in solid tumours. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the combination of sorafenib and bevacizumab in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumours. METHODS: Open-label, uncontrolled, multicenter, phase II clinical trial. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: age ≥18 years, histologically confirmed measurable advanced NETs; 1 prior chemotherapy allowed; ECOG-PS 0-2. Patients were treated during 6 months and followed up for an additional 6 months. TREATMENT: sorafenib 200mg bid (days 1-5 of each week) and bevacizumab 5mg/kg once every 2 weeks (day 1, week 1). Tumour response was performed according to RECIST (v1.0) every 2 months during the treatment period. Adverse events were graded according to CTCAE (v3.0). FINDINGS: 44 Patients enrolled, 59.1% men, median age 60 years (range 32-76). 70.5% carcinoid tumours, 29.5% pancreatic tumour. Baseline target lesions mainly in the liver (86.4%). Global PFSR was 90.9% (91.7% carcinoid tumours and 88.9% pancreatic tumours). Median PFS was 12.4 months, median TTP was 14.5 months, ORR was 9.4% and DCR was 95.1%. Most common grade 3-4 toxicities: asthenia (11.4%) and hand-foot skin reaction (15.9%). INTERPRETATION: Sorafenib and bevacizumab combination showed clinical benefit but unfavourable safety results compared with drugs in monotherapy. Further development of this combination is not warranted and a sequential approach is recommended instead.

Sorafenib for non-selected patient population with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: efficacy and safety data according to liver function.

OBJECTIVE: Sorafenib is the standard treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, regardless of the liver functional reserve. We present a single institutional series of Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B patients treated with sorafenib with the aim to establish the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients of daily clinical conditions and to compare these results between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 51 patients were treated with sorafenib 400 mg/12 h until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival and overall survival for the overall population were 3.5 and 8.2 months, respectively, with a 1-year survival rate of 27 %. Overall survival was significantly longer for patients Child-Pugh A compared with those with Child-Pugh B liver function (8.7 vs. 4.7 months, respectively). The most common adverse events were fatigue (62.7 %), diarrhea (58 %), hypertension (31.3 %), and hand-foot syndrome (31.3 %), and in most cases grade 1 or 2 according to the NCI-CTC 3.0. Grade 4 liver-related events occurred mainly in Child-Pugh B patients with decompensated cirrhosis at the time of sorafenib initiation (54.5 % of that group). DISCUSSION: The benefit of sorafenib in Child-Pugh B patients, if exist, may be limited by frequent liver-related events, especially in decompensated patients, and then, toxicity and impact in quality of life should be carefully monitored.

Risk-adapted adjuvant chemotherapy after concomitant fluoropyrimidine-radiotherapy neoadjuvant treatment for patients with resectable cT3-4 or N+ rectal cancer.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer is not well defined.After neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery, at least a short period of treatment with 5-fluorouracil is recommended, and some investigators claim a more aggressive approach, in particular, for those patients with a high risk of systemic relapse. Nevertheless, there are few studies about adjuvant combination therapy tolerance and efficacy, and no randomized trials have been conducted comparing fluoropyrimidines versus combination therapy such as folinic acid plus 5-fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin(FOLFOX), considered the standard of care in stage IIIcolon cancer. We present an institutional series of risk adapted adjuvant therapy. Sixty evaluable patients who had received treatment with neoadjuvant fluoropyrimidine radiotherapy and surgery now received adjuvant fluoropyrimidines in the case of pT0-2N0 or oxaliplatin based combination in the case of pT3-4 or N+ . Overall, 33 patients experienced downstaging to pT2-0N0 (55%) and27 patients were restaged as pT3-4 or N+ (45%) after surgery. Local recurrence rate was 5% (three patients), one local and one local plus systemic in the adjuvant single agent group and one local plus systemic in the adjuvant FOLFOX group. Systemic relapse occurred in 14 patients(23.3%), five (15%) in the single-agent group and nine(33.3%) in the FOLFOX group. Disease-free survival at 3 years for patients in the good prognostic group(pT0-2N0) and poor prognostic group (pT3-4 or N+ ) were 78.7 and 62.2%, respectively. Severe diarrhoea was more frequent with fluoropyrimidines and neutropenia, mucositis and peripheral neuropathy were more common with FOLFOX. There were no toxic deaths. A risk-adapted adjuvant therapeutic decision is feasible with an acceptable safety profile even with the use of oxaliplatin based combinations. Three-year disease-free survival compares favourably with historical controls, especially in those patients with high risk factors for relapse.Phase III controlled trials are needed.

Phase III study of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin compared with continuous-infusion fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: final report of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumors Trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of this phase III trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus Spanish-based continuous-infusion high-dose fluorouracil (FU) plus oxaliplatin (FUOX) regimens as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 348 patients were randomly assigned to receive XELOX (oral capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 bid for 14 days plus oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks) or FUOX (continuous-infusion FU 2,250 mg/m2 during 48 hours on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, and 36 plus oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on days 1, 15, and 29 every 6 weeks). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in efficacy between XELOX and FUOX arms, which showed, respectively, median time to tumor progression (TTP; 8.9 v 9.5 months; P = .153); median overall survival (18.1 v 20.8 months; P = .145); and confirmed response rate (RR; 37% v 46%; P = .539). The safety profile of the two regimens was similar, although there were lower rates of grade 3/4 diarrhea (14% v 24%) and grade 1/2 stomatitis (28% v 43%), and higher rates of grade 1/2 hyperbilirubinemia (37% v 21%) and grade 1/2 hand-foot syndrome (14% v 5%) with XELOX versus FUOX, respectively. CONCLUSION: This randomized study shows a similar TTP of XELOX compared with FUOX in the first-line treatment of MCRC, although there was a trend for slightly lower RR and survival. XELOX can be considered as an alternative to FUOX.

Two consecutive phase II trials of biweekly oxaliplatin plus weekly 48-hour continuous infusion of nonmodulated high-dose 5-fluorouracil as first-line treatment for advanced colorectal cancer.

The combination of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) plus leucovorin (LV) with oxaliplatin has become one of the standard treatments for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). Two consecutive phase II trials assessed the efficacy and safety of combined therapy with oxaliplatin and high-dose 5-FU without LV for patients with advanced CRC. A total of 89 patients were enrolled in both trials. Fifty-nine patients in trial A underwent a scheduled regimen of biweekly oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) and weekly nonmodulated 5-FU 3.0 g/m(2). Increased incidence of toxicity led to a 25% reduction in the starting dose of 5-FU (2.25 g/m(2)) for trial B. Patients treated in trial B showed a higher cumulative dose and relative dose intensity for oxaliplatin and 5-FU than those treated in trial A. Response to treatment, time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), and duration of response were evaluated as efficacy variables. Overall response rate was preserved despite the reduction in 5-FU dose (55.9% and 63.0%, respectively). Median durations of responses were 10.6 and 10.4 months, median TTPs were 7.7 and 7.3 months, and OS times were 21.7 and 13.1 months, respectively. Reduction in the starting 5-FU dose from 3.0 to 2.25 g/m(2) resulted in a decrease in the main grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities (neutropenia, 22.0% to 10.0%) and nonhematologic toxicities (diarrhea, 52.5% to 23.3%; nausea/vomiting, 18.6% to 3.3%). Neurosensory toxicity was similar in both trials (16.9% and 16.7%). Biweekly oxaliplatin in combination with nonmodulated high-dose 5-FU is an active, well-tolerated treatment that offers a lower cost than a modulated schedule for patients with advanced, metastatic CRC.