Adjuvant Therapy for Stage II Colon Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage II colon cancer. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS: Twenty-one observational studies and six randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS: Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) is not routinely recommended for patients with stage II colon cancer who are not in a high-risk subgroup. Patients with T4 tumors are at higher risk of recurrence and should be offered ACT, whereas patients with other high-risk factors, including sampling of fewer than 12 lymph nodes in the surgical specimen, perineural or lymphovascular invasion, poorly or undifferentiated tumor grade, intestinal obstruction, tumor perforation, or grade BD3 tumor budding, may be offered ACT. The addition of oxaliplatin to fluoropyrimidine-based ACT is not routinely recommended, but may be offered as a result of shared decision making. Patients with mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability tumors should not be routinely offered ACT; if the combination of mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability and high-risk factors results in a decision to offer ACT, oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy is recommended. Duration of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy is also addressed, with recommendations for 3 or 6 months of treatment with capecitabine and oxaliplatin or fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, with decision making informed by key evidence of 5-year disease-free survival in each treatment subgroup and the rate of adverse events, including peripheral neuropathy.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Evaluation of determinants for age disparities in the survival improvement of colon cancer: results from a cohort of more than 486,000 patients in the United States.

Over the past two decades, elderly colon cancer patients experienced less improvement in survival than their younger counterparts, yet the contributing factors remain unknown. We aimed to evaluate factors that may contribute to the age disparity of survival improvement among patients with colon cancer. Using data from the National Cancer Database, we identified patients diagnosed with colon cancer between 2004 and 2012 with follow-up data up to 2017. The hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for 5-year OS associated with study variables were estimated using multivariable Cox regression. Among 486,284 patients included in this study, elderly patients (aged ≥75) had a lower adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) treatment guidelines (% of non-adherence: 45.3%) than younger patients (aged <50, 19.3%; P<0.001). After adjusting for demographics, access to care and clinical characteristics, compared with patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2006, younger and older patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2012 experienced 16% (HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.81-0.88) and 6% (HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.93-0.95) reductions in mortality (P for interaction=1.42×10-5), respectively. After an additional adjustment for guideline adherence status, no significant difference in the improvement of survival was noted (P for interaction=0.17). The association patterns were similar regardless of tumor stage, race, and high comorbidity scores (all P for interaction>0.05). Several patient-related factors were identified in association with noncompliance to NCCN guidelines, including comorbidity status. However, over 60% of noncompliance elderly patients had a Charlson comorbidity score of 0. The observed age disparity in survival improvement among colon cancer patients was primarily explained by a slower improvement in adherence to NCCN treatment guidelines in elderly than younger patients. Many older adults were not receiving recommended therapies despite minimal comorbidities. Our findings call for measures to increase adherence to treatment guidelines among elderly patients to improve survival.

First-in-Human Phase I Study of Aprutumab Ixadotin, a Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 2 Antibody-Drug Conjugate (BAY 1187982) in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 2 is overexpressed in several tumor types, including triple-negative breast cancer and gastric cancer, both of which have a high unmet medical need. Aprutumab ixadotin (BAY 1187982) is the first antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) to target FGFR2 and the first to use a novel auristatin-based payload. OBJECTIVE: This first-in-human trial was conducted to determine the safety, tolerability, and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of aprutumab ixadotin in patients with advanced solid tumors from cancer indications known to be FGFR2-positive. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, phase I dose-escalation trial (NCT02368951), patients with advanced solid tumors received escalating doses of aprutumab ixadotin (starting at 0.1 mg/kg body weight), administered intravenously on day 1 of every 21-day cycle. Primary endpoints included safety, tolerability, and the MTD of aprutumab ixadotin; secondary endpoints were pharmacokinetic evaluation and tumor response to aprutumab ixadotin. RESULTS: Twenty patients received aprutumab ixadotin across five cohorts, at doses of 0.1-1.3 mg/kg. The most common grade ≥ 3 drug-related adverse events were anemia, aspartate aminotransferase increase, proteinuria, and thrombocytopenia. Dose-limiting toxicities were thrombocytopenia, proteinuria, and corneal epithelial microcysts, and were only seen in the two highest dosing cohorts. The MTD was determined to be 0.2 mg/kg due to lack of quantitative data following discontinuations at 0.4 and 0.8 mg/kg doses. One patient had stable disease; no responses were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Aprutumab ixadotin was poorly tolerated, with an MTD found to be below the therapeutic threshold estimated preclinically; therefore, the trial was terminated early. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02368951.

Potentially Curable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline update is to incorporate recently reported practice-changing evidence into ASCO's recommendations on potentially curable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to evaluate data from PRODIGE 24/CCTG PA.6, a phase III, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of postoperative leucovorin calcium, fluorouracil, irinotecan hydrochloride, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) versus gemcitabine alone, presented at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting. In addition, PubMed was searched for additional papers that may influence the existing recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Expert Panel only updated Recommendation 4.1 as a result of the practice-changing data. Recommendation 4.1 states that all patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma who did not receive preoperative therapy should be offered 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy in the absence of medical or surgical contraindications. The modified combination regimen of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (mFOLFIRINOX; oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 D1, and 5-fluorouracil 2.4 g/m2 over 46 hours every 14 days for 12 cycles) is now preferred in the absence of concerns for toxicity or tolerance; alternatively, doublet therapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine or monotherapy with gemcitabine alone or fluorouracil plus folinic acid alone can be offered.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Adenocarcinoma Ex-Goblet Cell: a Retrospective Experience.

PURPOSE: Adenocarcinoma ex-goblet cell carcinoids (AGCCs) are rare appendiceal tumors with mixed neuroendocrine and glandular features. They tend to behave more aggressively than typical carcinoid tumors, affect younger patients, and have a greater predilection for spreading to the peritoneum. Outcomes of AGCC patients treated with chemotherapy, extrapolated from colon cancer regimens, in the adjuvant or metastatic setting have not been explicitly reported. We sought to explore outcomes of AGCC patients with either local disease treated with adjuvant FOLFOX or metastatic disease treated with FOLFOX/FOLFIRI post-cytoreductive debulking (or CRS plus HIPEC in the peritoneal-limited setting). METHODS: We performed a single-institution retrospective analysis of 23 pathologically identified AGCC patients from Vanderbilt University Medical Center treated with chemotherapy in either the adjuvant or metastatic settings. Each patient's tumor was categorized as group B or group C based on the criteria from Tang et al. Median progression-free survival (PFS) or disease-free survival (DFS) (in the curative setting) and overall survival (OS) were determined for each patient and specified patient subgroup. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: AGCC patients who were treated with FOLFOX chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting or FOLFOX/FOLFIRI in the metastatic setting experienced prolonged PFS, DFS, and OS. Five patients with peritoneal-limited disease treated with CRS plus HIPEC have not yet reached median PFS or OS. While small sample size, patient selection, and retrospective nature limit the generalizability of findings from our analysis, the efficacy signals we observed suggest prospective evaluation with chemotherapy and CRS plus HIPEC is warranted in AGCC patients.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Tumors, Version 2.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Tumors provide recommendations for the management of adult patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), adrenal gland tumors, pheochromocytomas, and paragangliomas. Management of NETs relies heavily on the site of the primary NET. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the management options and the 2018 updates to the guidelines for locoregional advanced disease, and/or distant metastasis originating from gastrointestinal tract, bronchopulmonary, and thymus primary NETs.

Intervention Protocol for Investigating Yoga Implemented During Chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Fatigue and other treatment-related symptoms are critical therapeutic targets for improving quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer during chemotherapy. Yoga is a promising intervention for improving these therapeutic targets and has been primarily investigated in the group-class format, which is less feasible for cancer patients with high symptom burden to attend. Thus, we developed a protocol for implementing yoga individually in the clinic among patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: We followed recommended domains for developing a yoga protocol to be used in an efficacy trial. These recommendations include consideration to the style, delivery, components of the intervention, dose, specific class sequences, facilitation of home practice, measurement of intervention fidelity, selection of instructors, and dealing with modifications. The intervention protocol was developed by an interdisciplinary team. PROTOCOL: Yoga Skills Training (YST) consists of four 30-minute in-person sessions and was implemented while in the chair during chemotherapy infusions for colorectal cancer with recommended daily home practice for eight weeks. Therapeutic goals of the YST are to reduce fatigue, circadian disruption, and psychological distress. Elements of the YST are awareness meditation, gentle seated movement, breathing practice, and relaxation meditation. Attention, comfort, and ease are also highlighted. CONCLUSION: This description of a protocol for integrating yoga with conventional cancer treatment will inform future study designs and clinical practice. The design of the YST is novel because it implements yoga-most commonly studied when taught to groups outside of the clinical setting- individually during clinical care.

Randomized phase II open-label study of mFOLFOX6 in combination with linifanib or bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although CRC is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States, second-line CRC treatment is limited. In this trial we examined the efficacy and safety of linifanib, an oral, potent, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor and platelet-derived growth factor receptor families, with mFOLFOX6, compared with bevacizumab and mFOLFOX6, in previously treated metastatic CRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred forty-eight patients with advanced CRC previously treated with fluoropyrimidine or irinotecan received bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, intravenous), low-dose linifanib (7.5 mg), or high-dose linifanib (12.5 mg), with mFOLFOX6. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in PFS occurred between bevacizumab and linifanib doses (low, hazard ratio [HR], 1.453 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.830-2.539]; high, HR, 1.257 [95% CI, 0.672-2.351]). Median OS values were similar for bevacizumab and high-dose linifanib (bevacizumab, 16.5 months [95% CI, 13.0-not available]; high-dose linifanib, 16.4 months [95% CI, 11.9-21.7]; low-dose linifanib, 12.0 months [95% CI, 10.1-13.0]). ORRs were similar (bevacizumab, 34.7% [95% CI, 21.7-49.6]; low-dose linifanib, 24.0% [95% CI, 13.1-38.2]; high-dose linifanib, 22.4% [95% CI, 11.8-36.6]). Median cycles of 5-fluorouracil were reduced in the linifanib arms, versus the bevacizumab arm. Grade 3/4 adverse event occurrences were more frequent with linifanib. Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, hypothyroidism, and thrombocytopenia were more common with high-dose linifanib than bevacizumab. CONCLUSION: Combining linifanib with mFOLFOX6 as a second-line treatment for metastatic CRC did not improve PFS, radiographic findings, or duration of response versus bevacizumab and mFOLFOX6.

Treatment of early-stage pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death, and it is estimated that over 43,000 people would be diagnosed with and over 36,000 people would die of pancreatic cancer in the United States in 2010. Surgical resection remains the only chance for possible cure, but only 15% to 20% of patients newly diagnosed with pancreatic cancer are considered for surgical resection. Of these, the median five-year survival rate is still less than 20%, with most resections resulting in recurrent disease. This suggests that even seemingly resectable pancreatic cancer has microscopic systemic spread before operative intervention occurs. Both adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies have been studied in an effort to improve survival for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

Update on adjuvant trials for pancreatic cancer.

Adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer remains a controversial topic, with a paucity of randomized controlled trials in this area and various limitations in the trials that have been conducted to date, leaving many questions as to a true "standard of care" for patients with resectable or potentially resectable disease. Several large and well-conducted phase 3 trials have reported results recently and have helped to solidify the role of chemotherapy, with either 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine, as an effective intervention in the adjuvant setting. The role of radiotherapy remains unclear, but it does seem to be feasible and safe, and there are trials in development that may shed more light on this question. Many small trials have pointed to the potential utility of neoadjuvant strategies in selecting the patients who are most likely to benefit from surgery and in improving outcomes by providing systemic therapy early on. Larger trials are ongoing in hopes that they will give more definitive answers as to when this strategy should be used. It is hoped that trials using novel agents, either alone or in combination with more traditional therapies, will better define the best strategy for improving outcomes in patients with resectable disease.

Adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: to treat or not to treat?

Despite attempted curative resection of localized adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, most patients experience a recurrence and die of their disease. The Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, and European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer trials have suggested the benefit of adjuvant therapy. However, the relatively few randomized trials available have not established a definite standard of care due to study limitations. Although these trials, and the recently published Chariti Onkologie (CONKO)-001 trial, have shown a definite advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy, the most effective chemotherapy and the role of radiation therapy remain unclear. This review will discuss the data available from reported trials of adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer, address the issues leading to the ongoing controversies, and consider future directions for clinical trials.

Chemotherapeutic advances in pancreatic cancer.

Advances in chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer have been limited. In the past decade, the standard therapy for metastatic disease has switched from 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) to gemcitabine. However, several other cytotoxic agents have shown limited but promising efficacy in pancreatic cancer, and many of these appear to be well suited for combination chemotherapy. Although 5-FU and cisplatin have not demonstrated substantial survival benefits when combined with gemcitabine, results of several phase III trials with other agents are still pending. For locally advanced disease, most recent studies have incorporated gemcitabine into combined-modality therapy. Similarly, in surgically resectable disease, current trials are incorporating gemcitabine into adjuvant therapy. Other trials are using neoadjuvant therapy as a possible means to improve upon current surgical results. However, much hope comes from the development of newer "targeted" therapies for this disease. Although matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors and farnesyl transferase inhibitors did not appear to be effective in initial studies, other targeted therapies are beginning to enter clinical trials.