Effect of Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy With Double-Tract Reconstruction vs Total Gastrectomy on Hemoglobin Level and Vitamin B12 Supplementation in Upper-Third Early Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy (PG) with double-tract reconstruction (DTR) have been reported to have an incidence of reflux esophagitis that is as low as that observed after total gastrectomy (TG). It is unclear whether PG has an advantage over TG for the treatment of patients with upper early gastric cancer (GC). Objective: To evaluate the effect of laparoscopic PG with DTR (LPG-DTR) vs laparoscopic TG (LTG) on levels of hemoglobin and vitamin B12 supplementation required among patients with clinically early GC in the upper third of the stomach (upper-third early GC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter open-label superiority randomized clinical trial was conducted at 10 institutions in Korea. A total of 138 patients with upper-third cT1N0M0 GC were enrolled between October 27, 2016, and September 9, 2018. Follow-up ended on December 3, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized to undergo either LPG-DTR or LTG. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary co-end points were change in hemoglobin level and cumulative amount of vitamin B12 supplementation at 2 years after LPG-DTR or LTG. The secondary end points included morbidity, postoperative reflux esophagitis, quality of life, overall survival, and disease-free survival. Quality of life outcomes were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) 30-item core questionnaire (C30) and the EORTC QLQ stomach cancer-specific questionnaire at 3 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Results: Among 138 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.0 [10.9] years; 87 men [63.0%]; all of Asian race and Korean ethnicity), 68 (mean [SD] age, 56.7 [10.4] years; 39 men [57.4%]) were randomized to receive LPG-DTR and 69 (mean [SD] age, 61.3 [11.3] years; 48 men [69.6%]) were randomized to receive LTG. The mean (SD) changes in hemoglobin levels from baseline to month 24 were -5.6% (7.4%) in the LPG-DTR group and -6.9% (8.3%) in the LTG group, for an estimated difference of -1.3% (95% CI, -4.0% to 1.4%; P = .35). The mean (SD) cumulative amount of vitamin B12 supplementation was 0.4 (1.3) mg in the LPG-DTR group and 2.5 (3.0) mg in the LTG group, for an estimated difference of 2.1 mg (95% CI, 1.3-2.9 mg; P < .001). The late complication rates in the LPG-DTR and LTG groups were 17.6% and 10.1%, respectively (P = .31). The incidence of reflux esophagitis was not different between the LPG-DTR and LTG groups (2.9% vs 2.9%; P = .99). Compared with the LTG group, the LPG-DTR group had better physical functioning scores (85.2 [15.6] vs 79.9 [19.3]; P = .03) and social functioning scores (89.5 [17.9] vs 82.4 [19.4]; P = .03) on the EORTC QLQ-C30. Two-year overall survival (98.5% vs 100%; P = .33) and disease-free survival (98.5% vs 97.1%; P = .54) did not significantly differ between the LPG-DTR vs LTG groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patients with upper-third early GC who received LPG-DTR required less vitamin B12 supplementation than those who received LTG, with no increase in complication rates and no difference in overall and disease-free survival rates. There was no difference in change in hemoglobin level between groups. In addition, the LPG-DTR group had better physical and social functioning than the LTG group. These findings suggest that LPG-DTR may be as safe as LTG and may be a function-preserving procedure for the treatment of patients with upper-third early GC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02892643.

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 and molecular distinctions in patients with refractory colon cancer who benefit from regorafenib treatment.

Regorafenib (Stivarga, BAY 73-4506; Bayer Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany) is a novel oral multikinase inhibitor that blocks the activity of several protein kinases. However, few guidelines exist for novel biomarkers to select patients who will likely benefit from regorafenib treatment. Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with regorafenib were evaluated in this study. Tumor tissues of these patients were subjected to next-generation sequencing-based cancer panel tests. The relationship between molecular profiling and efficacy of regorafenib was analyzed. Among the 76 mCRC patients, the median age was 58 years (range 22-79 years), and 73.7% received regorafenib as a third-line therapy. The primary tumor locations were the right side (n = 15, 19.8%) and the left side (n = 61, 80.2%). Most patients (97.4%) had received prior anti-angiogenetic agents, and a prior anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) agent had been administered to 32.9%. Of these 76 patients, 65 were evaluated to determine the efficacy of treatment. We observed zero complete responses, seven confirmed partial responses (PR 9.2%), 26 stable disease states (34.2%), and 32 disease progressions (42.1%). The overall confirmed response rate and the disease control rate were 9.2% and 43.4%, respectively. Genomic analysis revealed that APC mutations were significant in patients who demonstrated a tumor response to regorafenib (p < 0.05). Interestingly, FGFR1 amplification was detected in only three of 76 patients (3.9%), and these three patients achieved a PR to regorafenib. The median progression-free survival time was 2.8 months (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.6-4.0). Patients with BRAF mutation and/or SMAD4 mutation had significantly worse progression-free survival (PFS) than those without such a mutation. On pathway analysis, Tumor Growth Factor (TGF)-beta pathways were significantly associated with worse PFS. We found that efficacy of regorafenib might be correlated with specific genetic aberrations, such as APC mutation and FGFR1 amplification. In addition, SMAD4 mutation and TGF-beta pathway were associated with worse PFS after regorafenib. We found that efficacy of regorafenib might be correlated with specific genetic aberrations, such as APC mutation and FGFR1 amplification. In addition, SMAD4 mutation and the TGF-beta pathway were associated with worse PFS after regorafenib.

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.

Pemetrexed Monotherapy as Salvage Treatment in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Refractory to Standard Chemotherapy: A Phase II Single-arm Prospective Trial.

Background: We designed a single-arm, open-label phase II study to determine the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed monotherapy with vitamin supplementation in patients with refractory colorectal cancer (CRC) that failed to respond to standard treatments including 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan with or without biologic agents. Methods: Patients were treated with pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks, with folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation. Treatment was continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Between June 2016 and October 2016, 24 patients were enrolled in this study. Results: One patient withdrew consent, leaving a total of 23 patients for evaluation. The median age of the patients was 54.0 years (range, 23.0 to 67.0), and the median ECOG performance status was 1 (1-2). The median number of previous systemic chemotherapies was 3 (range, 2 to 5). There was no patient with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). However, stable disease was observed in 10 patients (43.4%) and maintained more than 6 months in 7 of 10 patients. The median progression-free survival was 1.6 months (95% CI, 1.1-2.0) and the median overall survival was 9.8 months (95% CI, 5.9-13.6). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in one patient with elevated liver enzymes and hematologic adverse event of grade 2 anemia was observed in one patient. There were no cases of dose reduction or treatment-related deaths and all toxicities were manageable. Conclusions: Pemetrexed monotherapy showed moderate disease control and acceptable toxicity profile as salvage therapy for refractory CRC.

Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction is superior to laparoscopic total gastrectomy for proximal early gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with double tract reconstruction (DTR) is known to reduce reflux symptoms, which is a major concern after proximal gastrectomy. The aim of this study is to compare retrospectively the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing LPG with DTR with those treated by laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). METHODS: Ninety-two and 156 patients undergoing LPG with DTR and LTG for proximal stage I gastric cancer were retrospectively analyzed for short- and long-term clinical outcomes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the demographics, T-stage, N-stage, and complications between the groups. The LPG with DTR group had a shorter operative time and lower estimated blood loss than the LTG group (198.3 vs. 225.4 min, p < 0.001; and 84.7 vs. 128.3 mL p = 0.001). The incidence of reflux symptoms ≥ Visick grade II did not significantly differ between the groups during a mean follow-up period of 37.2 months (1.1 vs. 1.9%, p = 0.999). The hemoglobin change was significantly lower in the LPG with DTR group compared to in the LTG group in the first and second postoperative years (5.03 vs. 9.18% p = 0.004; and 3.45 vs. 8.30%, p = 0.002, respectively), as was the mean amount of vitamin B12 supplements 2 years after operation (0.1 vs. 3.1 mg, p < 0.001). The overall survival rate was similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: LPG with DTR maintained comparable oncological safety and anastomosis-related late complications compared to LTG and is preferred over LTG in terms of preventing postoperative anemia and vitamin B12 deficiency.

Feasibility of hyperthermic pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in a porcine model.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis is an unmet therapeutic need. Several types of intraperitoneal chemotherapy have been introduced. However, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy has limited drug distribution and poor peritoneal penetration. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) does not have the benefits of hyperthermia. We developed a device to apply hyperthermic PIPAC (H-PAC) and evaluated its feasibility in a porcine model. METHODS: The device for H-PAC consisted of a laparoscopic aerosol spray and a heater to create hyperthermic capnoperitoneum. We operated on five pigs for the development of the new device and on another five pigs as a survival model. After a pilot experiment of the survival model (Pig A), a hyperthermic pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol of indocyanine green was administered after insertion of three trocars (Pig B) and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) (Pig C) without chemotherapeutic agents. After that, H-PAC with cisplatin was administered after insertion of three trocars (Pig D) and LADG (Pig E). Autopsies were performed on postoperative day 7. RESULTS: Median operation time was 85 min (80-110 min). Intraperitoneal temperature was constant for 1 h of H-PAC (38.8-40.2 °C). All five pigs were healthy and survived for 7 days. Median weight loss was 0.2 kg. Autopsy tissues of stomach, peritoneum, and jejunum were intact in all five pigs. CONCLUSIONS: H-PAC was feasible and safe in a porcine model.

A phase II study of preoperative mFOLFOX6 with short-course radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and liver-only metastasis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of upfront mFOLFOX6 followed by short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) and surgery in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and liver-only metastases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-arm phase II study involved 32 patients. mFOLFOX6 was administered for four cycles followed by SCRT and another four cycles of mFOLFOX6. Surgery was performed 4-6 weeks after the last chemotherapy cycle. The primary endpoint was complete (R0) resection rate. Secondary endpoints were response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and complication rates. RESULTS: Surgical resection of the rectum and liver was performed in 25 patients (78%) and R0 resection was achieved in 20 patients (63%). Local tumor downstaging was observed in 54% of patients. Median OS and PFS were 38 and 9 months, respectively. One patient discontinued treatment due to toxicity and no treatment-related deaths occurred. Patients who progressed after 4 cycles of mFOLFOX6 were less likely to receive resection. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen was safe and effective in inducing local tumor response and achieving R0 resection in this patient population.

A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiaton Therapy With 5-Fluorouracil/Leucovorin or Irinotecan/S-1 in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with leucovorin (FL) versus irinotecan/S-1 (IS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with resectable LARC (clinical stage T3/4, lymph node positive, or both) were randomly assigned to receive preoperative radiation (45-50.4 Gy in 25 to 28 daily fractions) and concomitant chemotherapy either with a bolus injection of FL (400 mg/m(2)/day 5-fluorouracil and 20 mg/m(2)/day leucovorin) for 3 consecutive days every 4 weeks for 2 cycles (FL group) or with 40 mg/m(2) irinotecan on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29, and 35 mg/m(2) S-1 twice on the day of irradiation (IS group). Curative surgery was performed approximately 4 to 8 weeks after the completion of CRT. The postoperative chemotherapy regimen was FL with a primary endpoint of a pCR rate evaluation. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two eligible patients were randomly assigned, and the median follow-up duration was 43.8 months (95% confidence interval, 40.8-46.8 months). One hundred thirty-three patients (93.7%) of 142 underwent total mesorectal excision; pCR was achieved in 11 (16.7%) of 66 patients in the FL group and 17 (25.8%) of 67 patients in the IS group (P=.246). When good responders were defined as patients with Mandard grades 1 and 2, the rate of good responders was significantly higher in the IS group than in the FL group (54.6% vs 36.4%, respectively, P=.036). The preoperative rates of grade 3 and 4 toxicities were higher in the IS group (7.0%) than in the FL group (1.4%, P=.095). The 3-year disease-free survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups (79.7% vs 76.6%, respectively, P=.896). CONCLUSIONS: IS-based preoperative CRT did not increase pCR rate, but it did increase acute toxicities compared with standard 5-FU treatment. Therefore, further investigation is needed.

Oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy as a standard of care for colon cancer in clinical practice: Outcomes of the ACCElox registry.

AIM: The ACCElox registry was set up to assess therapeutic management of early-stage colon cancer with oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based regimen and the duration of adjuvant chemotherapy in current clinical practice. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted between 2006 and 2008 in 19 countries on 1548 newly diagnosed patients with stage II/III colon cancer, who had complete resection of the primary tumor and treated with at least one dose of oxaliplatin. The patient/disease characteristics, dose intensity, toxicity management, treatment delay and duration of disease-free survival (DFS)/relapse were assessed. RESULTS: About 73 and 27% of the patients were diagnosed with stage III (Dukes C) and stage II (Dukes B2) colon cancer, respectively. Overall, 74.4% patients completed the prescribed chemotherapy (FOLFOX 88%) and 97.6% patients received at least two cycles of oxaliplatin chemotherapy. The median actual dose intensity of oxaliplatin per cycle was 85 mg/m(2) . Relapse within 3 years occurred in 18.4% of patients with similar rate in all three groups (FOLFOX - 18.1%, FLOX - 19%, XELOX - 18.6%). At 3 years follow-up only 72 deaths were reported. The most common adverse events (AEs) at any cycle were neutropenia (63.9%), thrombocytopenia (23.3%), diarrhea (9.7%), sensory neuropathy (4.5%) and infection (2.6%). Disorders of central and peripheral nervous systems were frequently reported AEs at 6 months (54.3%, grade ≥1) and 12 months (36.4%, grade ≥1) of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Majority of the patients completed the prescribed oxaliplatin/5-FU regimen. There was no significant difference in the DFS among these regimens. Our results confirm the favorable benefit/risk profile of oxaliplatin/5-FU-based regimens in this setting in clinical practice.

Adjuvant chemoradiation with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin versus S-1 in gastric cancer patients following D2 lymph node dissection surgery: a feasibility study.

PURPOSE: We retrospectively analyzed the feasibility and adverse events for two regimens, postoperative chemoradiation (CRT) with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) compared to S-1 in D2-resected gastric cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 405 gastric cancer patients who underwent curative gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection and received adjuvant therapy between January 2008 and July 2009. Feasibility and adverse events for the CRT and S-1 regimens were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of the 405 patients, 244 (60.2%) had CRT and 161 (39.8%) had S-1 treatment. The regimen was selected based on the preferences of the physician and the patient. S-1 was more frequently administered to patients with older age (age≥70) and those with early-stage disease (stage II). The stage was significantly more advanced in the CRT group compared to the S-1 group (S-1 vs. CRT: stage II, 59.6% vs. 36.1%; stage III/IV, 28.0% vs. 48.3%, respectively; p<0.001). The completion rate of the planned therapy was significantly higher in the CRT group than in the S-1 group (95.1% vs. 72.8%, respectively; p<0.001). Regarding severe adverse events (grade 3-4), neutropenia (CRT vs. S-1; 40.2% vs. 8.7%, respectively, p<0.001), nausea (CRT vs. S-1; 5.7% vs. 0%, respectively; p=0.002) and stomatitis (CRT vs. S-1; 7.4% vs. 2.5%, respectively; p=0.034) were significantly more frequent in the CRT cohort compared to the S-1 group. CONCLUSION: Both adjuvant CRT with 5-FU/LV and adjuvant S-1 are safe and feasible in D2-resected gastric cancer patients. Patients with old age or early stage disease tend to prefer S-1 therapy to chemoradiation.

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.

Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus fluorouracil and leucovorin as adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (ADORE): an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with rectal cancer is controversial, especially when used after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy, including fluorouracil and leucovorin, has been widely used; however, the addition of oxaliplatin to fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX), a standard adjuvant regimen for colon cancer, has not been tested in rectal cancer. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant fluorouracil and leucovorin with that of FOLFOX in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised trial, patients with postoperative pathological stage II (ypT3-4N0) or III (ypTanyN1-2) rectal cancer after preoperative fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based software platform to receive adjuvant chemotherapy with either four cycles of fluorouracil and leucovorin (fluorouracil 380 mg/m(2) and leucovorin 20 mg/m(2) on days 1-5, every 4 weeks) or eight cycles of FOLFOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 200 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m(2) on day 1, and fluorouracil infusion 2400 mg/m(2) for 46 h, every 2 weeks). Stratification factors were pathological stage (II vs III) and centre. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. This study is fully enrolled, is in long-term follow-up, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00807911. FINDINGS: Between Nov 19, 2008, and June 12, 2012, 321 patients were randomly assigned to fluorouracil and leucovorin (n=161) and FOLFOX (n=160). 141 (95%) of 149 patients in the fluorouracil plus leucovorin group and 141 (97%) of 146 in the FOLFOX group completed all planned cycles of adjuvant treatment. Median follow-up was 38·2 months (IQR 26·4-50·6). 3-year disease-free survival was 71·6% (95% CI 64·6-78·6) in the FOLFOX group and 62·9% (55·4-70·4) in the fluorouracil plus leucovorin group (hazard ratio 0·657, 95% CI 0·434-0·994; p=0·047). Any grade neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, nausea, and sensory neuropathy were significantly more common in the FOLFOX group than in the fluorouracil plus leucovorin group; however, we noted no significant difference in the frequency of these events at grade 3 or 4. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (38 [26%] of 149 patients in the fluorouracil plus leucovorin group vs 52 [36%] of 146 patients in the FOLFOX group), leucopenia (eight [5%] vs 12 [8%]), febrile neutropenia (four [3%] vs one [<1%]), diarrhoea (four [3%] vs two [1%]), and nausea (one [<1%] vs two [1%]). INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant FOLFOX improves disease-free survival compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision, and warrants further investigation. FUNDING: Korea Healthcare Technology R&D Project (South Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare).

Pharmacogenetic analysis of adjuvant FOLFOX for Korean patients with colon cancer.

PURPOSE: Ethnic diversity of genetic polymorphism can result in individual differences in the efficacy and toxicity of cancer chemotherapy. METHODS: We analyzed 20 germline polymorphisms in 10 genes (TS, MTHFR, ERCC1, XPD, XRCC1, ABCC2, AGXT, GSTP1, GSTT1 and GSTM1) from prospectively enrolled 292 Korean patients treated with adjuvant oxaliplatin plus leucovorin plus 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) for colon cancer. RESULTS: In contrast to previous studies in Caucasians, neutropenia (grade 3-4, 60.5 %) was frequently observed, whereas only 16.4 % experienced grade 2 or more sensory neuropathy. Neutropenia was more frequent in MTHFR 677TT [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.32, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.19-4.55] and ERCC1 19007TT (adjusted OR 4.58, 95 % CI 1.20-17.40) genotypes. Patients harboring XRCC1 23885GG experienced less grade 2-4 neuropathy [adjusted OR 0.52, 95 % CI 0.27-0.99]. MTHFR 677TT (p = 0.002) and XRCC1 23885GG (p = 0.146) genotypes were also more prevalent in Koreans compared to Caucasians. TS 'low' genotype (adjusted HR 1.83, 95 % CI 1.003-3.34) was significantly related to shorter disease-free survival. Overall survival was not significantly different according to the polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS: Polymorphisms in MTHFR, XRCC1 and TS are related to toxicities and disease-free survival in patients with colon cancer. The ethnic differences in frequencies of genotypes may explain the ethnic difference in toxicity profile following adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy.

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.

Safety and efficacy of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy with capecitabine after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical outcomes and safety of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with capecitabine after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma at a single institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing adjuvant CRT with capecitabine after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2004 and 2007 yielded a total of 55 patients. Capecitabine was administered at 850 mg/m(2) twice daily every day per week radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions) over the 5 weeks. Sixteen percent of patients (N=9) went on to receive gemcitabine. RESULTS: Of 55 patients, 42 had curative (R0) resection and 13 had incomplete resection (R1). Median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival were 18.3 and 8.0 months for all patients, respectively. Patients receiving additional gemcitabine after adjuvant CRT with capecitabine showed better OS and progression free survival than those not receiving additional gemcitabine (P<0.05). In multivariate analysis, lymphovascular invasion (present vs. absent) and addition gemcitabine therapy (yes vs. no) were significant independent prognostic factors for OS (P<0.05). Local recurrence was observed in 10 patients, and distant recurrence in 26 patients, synchronously accounting for 6 recurrences. Ten patients (18.2%) had severe grade 3 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Capecitabine-based CRT after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma showed favorable outcomes and tolerable toxicity profiles.

Phase 1 trial of S-1 in combination with sorafenib for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Sorafenib is a multi-kinase inhibitor, which was approved as first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We conducted a phase 1 study of sorafenib plus S-1 in patients with advanced HCC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We designed to escalate S-1 at 4 different dose levels with fixed dose of sorafenib. Four dose levels were as follows: level 1, D1-14 S-1 50 mg/m(2)/day + D1-21 sorafenib 400 mg bid; level 2, D1-14 S-1 60 mg/m(2)/day + D1-21 sorafenib 400 mg bid; level 3,, D1-14 S-1 70 mg/m(2)/day + D1-21 sorafenib 400 mg bid; level 4, D1-14 S-1 80 mg/m(2)/day + D1-21 sorafenib 400 mg bid. The treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: From August 2009 to July 2010, 20 patients with advanced HCC were enrolled. The median age was 48 years (range, 29-74). Eighteen (90%) patients had hepatitis B viral infection and 19 (95%) patients were rated as Child-Pugh class A. The dose-limiting toxicities were grade 4 infection and thrombocytopenia. After a median follow-up duration of 8.6 months (range, 3.7-14.2 months), median PFS was 3.9 months (95% CI, 0.8-7.0 months) and median OS was 10.4 months (95% CI, 0-22.4 months). In pharmacokinetic analysis, there was no statistically significant drug interaction between sorafenib and S-1. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of sorafenib and S-1 showed tolerable toxicity profile and modest clinical efficacy in patients with advanced HCC. The recommended dose of sorafenib and S-1 was 400 mg twice daily and 40 mg/m(2) twice daily, respectively.

The effect of postoperative pelvic irradiation after complete resection of metastatic rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The 2010 NCCN clinical practice guidelines recommend radiation as a part of the standard adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment for stage IV rectal cancer patients. This study evaluated the oncologic efficacy of postoperative radiotherapy (RTx) in loco-regional control after complete removal of primary and metastatic lesions in stage IV rectal cancer. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with metastatic rectal cancer were enrolled and analyzed. Twenty-eight of the enrolled patients received concurrent postoperative RTx with chemotherapy (RTx group) and the remaining 40 received only postoperative systemic chemotherapy (CTx) without RTx (non-RTx group). The eligibility criteria were as follows: a primary rectal tumor located in the low or mid-rectum, no postoperative macroscopic and microscopic evidence of residual tumor in primary and metastatic sites, and no history of prior CTx or pelvic RTx. RESULTS: The recurrence rates were 75.0% in the RTx group and 72.5% in the non-RTx group. Local recurrence rates were 7.1% (RTx group) and 22.5% (non-RTx group) (P = 0.108). There were no differences in overall survival (OS), local recurrence-free survival, and disease-free survival between the two groups. The 2-year OS rates were 78.9% (RTx group) and 74.1% (non-RTx group) (P = 0.395). CONCLUSIONS: Survival benefit of postoperative RTx in stage IV rectal cancer after complete removal of tumors was not apparent. RTx could be recommended for selected patients at high risk of local recurrence or for palliation of symptoms.