Oxaliplatin (3 months v 6 months) With 6 Months of Fluoropyrimidine as Adjuvant Therapy in Patients With Stage II/III Colon Cancer: KCSG CO09-07.

PURPOSE: The combination of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine for 6 months is one of the standard options for adjuvant therapy for high-risk stage II and III colorectal cancers (CRCs). The optimal duration of oxaliplatin to diminish neurotoxicity without compromising efficacy needs to be clarified. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, randomized, phase III, noninferiority trial randomly assigned patients with high-risk stage II and III CRC to 3 and 6 months of oxaliplatin with 6 months of fluoropyrimidine groups (3- and 6-month arms, respectively). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), and the noninferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.25. RESULTS: In total, 1,788 patients were randomly assigned to the 6-month (n = 895) and 3-month (n = 893) arms, and 83.6% in the 6-month arm and 85.7% in the 3-month arm completed the treatment. The neuropathy rates with any grade were higher in the 6-month arm than in the 3-month arm (69.5% v 58.3%; P < .0001). The 3-year DFS rates were 83.7% and 84.7% in the 6-month and 3-month arms, respectively, with an HR of 0.953 (95% CI, 0.769 to 1.180; test for noninferiority, P = .0065) within the noninferiority margin. Among patients with stage III CRC treated by capecitabine plus oxaliplatin, the 3-year DFS of the 3-month arm was noninferior as compared with that of the 6-month arm with an HR of 0.713 (95% CI, 0.530 to 0.959; P = .0009). However, among patients with high-risk stage II and stage III CRC treated by infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, the noninferiority of the 3-month arm compared with the 6-month arm was not proven. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that adding 3 months of oxaliplatin to 6 months of capecitabine could be considered an alternative adjuvant treatment for stage III CRC (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01092481).

Clinical effects of using a massage chair on stress measures in adults: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Since the clinical benefits of a massage chair have not been fully elucidated, we aimed to assess the effects of the long-term use of a massage chair on stress measures in adults. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Community. Interventions In total, 80 adults aged 50-75 years were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=41) and control group (n=39). The intervention group used the massage chair twice a day for 6 months. The control group was educated about lifestyle modification. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the change in serum cortisol levels in the morning (8 a.m.) and afternoon (1 p.m.), and the secondary outcomes included changes in levels of dehydroepiandrosterone-sulfate (DHEA-S), serotonin, insulin-like growth factor, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, and natural killer cell activity, and results from a questionnaire on mood, cognition, and quality of life. RESULTS: The use of the massage chair was associated with a decreasing trend in serum cortisol levels at 1 p.m. (-2.68 ug/dL, p = 0.059). Serum DHEA-S levels significantly decreased with the intervention (-9.66 ug/dL, p = 0.003). In addition, the perceived rate of depression and health status considerably improved following the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic stress in adults could be effectively managed using a massage chair.

A Randomized Phase II Study of Perioperative Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab Versus Postoperative Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab in Patients With Upfront Resectable Hepatic Colorectal Metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Whether patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) gain a survival benefit from perioperative chemotherapy remains controversial. The benefit of including bevacizumab in chemotherapy also remains unclear. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-six patients with CRLM were randomly assigned to either 6 cycles of FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin)/FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan) with bevacizumab before and after surgery or 12 cycles after surgery. Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. RESULTS: The median PFS of all patients was 37.4 months at 5.4 years follow-up, and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached. The PFS between the perioperative group and the postoperative group did not reveal a statistical difference (P = .280). The OS was significantly better in the perioperative group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI],) 0.35-1.02; P = .049). In subgroup patients with carcinoembryonic antigens (CEA) ≥ 5 ng/mL or those with over 2 liver metastases, perioperative group had longer OS than postoperative group (CEA: HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.93; P = .030; number of liver metastases: HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.30-0.99; P = .049). The largest liver metastases size, disease-free interval, and sidedness did not affect PFS or OS. There was no difference between the 2 groups in postoperative complications with bevacizumab or adverse events during chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable CRLMs, perioperative chemotherapy had no effect on PFS, but improved OS. Patients with high CEA levels or over 2 liver metastases may benefit from perioperative chemotherapy.

Oxaliplatin-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy (ADORE): Long-Term Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the role of oxaliplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). METHODS: The ADORE trial (adjuvant oxaliplatin in rectal cancer) is a multicenter, randomized trial in patients with postoperative ypStage II (ypT3-4N0) or III (ypTanyN1-2) rectal cancer after fluoropyrimidine-based preoperative CRT and TME. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive adjuvant chemotherapy either with FL (fluorouracil 380 mg/m2 and leucovorin 20 mg/m2) or FOLFOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 on day 1, fluorouracil infusion 2,400 mg/m2 for 46 hours). Stratification factors included ypStage and participating center. Primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: A total of 321 patients were enrolled between November 19, 2008, and June 12, 2012. Six-year DFS rates were 68.2% in the FOLFOX arm versus 56.8% in the FL arm, with a stratified hazard ratio of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.93; P = .018) by intention-to-treat analysis. In the subgroup analysis for DFS, FOLFOX was favorable versus FL in patients with ypStage III, ypN1b, ypN2, high-grade histology, minimally regressed tumor, and an absence of lymphovascular or perineural invasion. Six-year overall survival rate was 78.1% in the FOLFOX arm versus76.4% in the FL arm (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.19; P = .21). In the subgroup analysis for OS, FOLFOX was favorable versus FL in patients with ypN2 and minimally regressed tumor. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant FOLFOX improved DFS in patients with rectal cancer with ypStage II and III disease after preoperative CRT. Adjuvant FOLFOX may be considered on the basis of the postoperative pathologic stage in those who received preoperative CRT and TME.

A phase II study of preoperative chemoradiation with tegafur-uracil plus leucovorin for locally advanced rectal cancer with pharmacogenetic analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a high dose of oral tegafur-uracil (400 mg/m2) plus leucovorin with preoperative chemoradiation of locally advanced rectal cancer and to explore the impact of polymorphisms of cytochrome P 2A6 (CYP2A6), uridine monophosphate synthetase (UMPS), and ATP-binding cassette B1 (ABCB1) on clinical outcome. METHODS: Patients with cT3 or cT4 rectal cancer were enrolled and were given tegafur-uracil 400 mg/m2/day and leucovorin 90 mg/m2/day for 7 days a week during preoperative chemoradiation (50.4 Gy/28 fractions) in this phase II trial. Primary endpoint was pathologic complete response rate, and the secondary endpoint was to explore the association between clinical outcomes and genetic polymorphisms CYP2A6 (*4, *7, *9 and *10), UMPS G638C, and three ABCB1 genotypes (C1236T, C3435T, and G2677T). RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were given study treatment, and 90 underwent surgery. Pathologic complete response was noted in 10 patients (11.1%). There was no grade 4 or 5 toxicity; 20 (22.0%) experienced grade 3 toxicities, including diarrhea (10, 11.0%), abdominal pain (2, 2.2%), and anemia (2, 2.2%). Relapse-free survival and overall survival at 5 years were 88.6% and 94.2%, respectively. Patients with the UMPS 638 CC genotype experienced significantly more frequent grade 2 or 3 diarrhea (p for trend = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative chemoradiation with tegafur-uracil 400 mg/m2/day with leucovorin was feasible, but did not meet the expected pathologic complete response rate. The UMPS 638 CC genotype might be a candidate biomarker predicting toxicity in patients receiving tegafur-uracil/leucovorin-based preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11812525 , registered on 25 July 2016. Retrospectively registered.

S-1 plus oxaliplatin versus capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: updated results from a phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: We report updated progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) data from a trial that compared capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) versus S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: This trial was a randomized, two-armed, non-inferiority phase 3 comparison of CapeOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1) versus SOX (S-1 40 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1). The primary end point was to show non-inferiority of SOX relative to CapeOX in terms of PFS. Thus, a follow-up exploratory analysis of PFS and OS was performed. RESULTS: The intention to treat (ITT) population was comprised of 340 patients (SOX arm: 168 and CapeOX arm: 172). The updated median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI 6.4-8.0) in the SOX group and 6.3 months (95% CI 4.9-6.7) in the CapeOX group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [0.66-1.04], p = .10). The median OS was 19.0 months (95% CI 15.3-23.0) in the SOX group and 18.4 months (95% CI 14.1-20.7) in the CapeOX group (HR, 0.86 [0.68-1.08], p = .19). Subgroup analyses according to principal demographic factors such as sex, age, ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status, primary tumor location, measurability, previous adjuvant therapy, number of metastatic organs, and liver metastases showed no interaction between any of these characteristics and the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Updated survival analysis shows that SOX is similar to CapeOX, confirming the initial PFS analysis. Therefore, the SOX regimen could be an alternative first-line doublet chemotherapy strategy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00677443 and May 12 2008.

S-1 plus oxaliplatin versus capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) is one of the reference doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy treatments for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CapeOX with that of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX), a promising alternative treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients (1:1) from 11 institutions in South Korea to receive either CapeOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1) or SOX (S-1 40 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1). Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks and continued for as many as nine cycles of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy, except in instances of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or a patient's refusal. Maintenance chemotherapy with S-1 or capecitabine was allowed after discontinuation of oxaliplatin. Randomisation was done with a computer-generated sequence (stratified by primary sites, previous adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment, and the presence of measurable lesions). The primary endpoint was to show non-inferiority of SOX relative to CapeOX in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). The primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00677443. FINDINGS: Between May 14, 2008, and Sept 23, 2009, we randomly assigned 168 patients to receive SOX and 172 to receive CapeOX. Median PFS was 8·5 months (95% CI 7·6-9·3) in the SOX group and 6·7 months (6·2-7·1) in the CapeOX group (hazard ratio, 0·79 [95% CI 0·60-1·04]; p(non-inferiority)<0·0001, p(log-rank)=0·09). The upper limit of the CI was below the predefined margin of 1·43, showing the non-inferiority of SOX to CapeOX. We recorded a higher incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia (49 [29%] vs 24 [15%]), thrombocytopenia (37 [22%] vs 11 [7%]), and diarrhoea (16 [10%] vs seven [4%]) in the SOX group than in the CapeOX group. The frequency of any grade of hand-foot syndrome was greater in the CapeOX group than it was in the SOX group (51 [31%] vs 23 [14%]). INTERPRETATION: The SOX regimen could be an alternative first-line doublet chemotherapy strategy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Further investigation is needed to explore its potential when used together with other targeted agents or as adjuvant chemotherapy. FUNDING: Korea Healthcare Technology Research and Development Project, Ministry of Health and Welfare, South Korea.