Phase 2 trial comparing sorafenib, pravastatin, their combination or supportive care in HCC with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is limited data regarding the role for systemic treatment in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. METHODS: PRODIGE 21 was a multicentric prospective non-comparative randomized trial. Patients were randomized to receive sorafenib (Arm A), pravastatin (Arm B), sorafenib-pravastatin (Arm C) combination, or best supportive care (Arm D). Primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP), secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 160 patients were randomized and 157 patients were included in the final analysis. 86% of patients were BCLC C and 55% had macrovascular invasion. The safety profiles of the drugs were as expected. Median TTP was 3.5, 2.8, 2.0 and 2.2 months in arms A, B, C and D, respectively, but analysis was limited by the number of patients deceased without radiological progression (59%). Median OS was similar between the four arms: 3.8 [95% CI: 2.4-6.5], 3.1 [95% CI: 1.9-4.3], 4.0 [95% CI: 3.2-5.5] and 3.5 months [95% CI: 2.2-5.4] in arms A, B, C and D, respectively. Median OS was 4.0 months [95% CI: 3.3-5.5] for patients treated with sorafenib, vs 2.9 months [95% CI: 2.2-3.9] for patients not treated with sorafenib. In patients with ALBI grade 1/2, median OS was 6.1 months [95% CI: 3.8-8.3] in patients treated with sorafenib vs 3.1 months [95% CI: 1.9-4.8] for patients not treated with sorafenib. CONCLUSION: In the overall Child-Pugh B population, neither sorafenib nor pravastatin seemed to provide benefit. In the ALBI grade 1/2 sub-population, our trial suggests potential benefit of sorafenib. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was referenced in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01357486).

Microsatellite Instability in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Receiving Fluoropyrimidine With or Without Oxaliplatin: An ACCENT Pooled Analysis of 12 Adjuvant Trials.

PURPOSE: In patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) whose tumors demonstrate microsatellite instability (MSI), the efficacy of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine (FP) with or without oxaliplatin has not been clearly demonstrated and the prognostic value of MSI remains uncertain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individual patient data from the ACCENT database were used to evaluate the effect of FP with or without oxaliplatin on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with MSI stage III CC and the prognostic value of MSI in patients treated with FP plus oxaliplatin, by stratified Cox models adjusted for demographic and clinicopathological factors. RESULTS: MSI status was available for 5,457 patients (609 MSI, 11.2%; 4848 microsatellite stable [MSS], 88.8%) from 12 randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Oxaliplatin significantly improved OS of MSI patients from the two RCTs testing FP with or without oxaliplatin (n = 185; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.93). Among the 4,250 patients treated with FP plus oxaliplatin (461 MSI and 3789 MSS), MSI was associated with better OS in the N1 group compared with MSS (aHR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.95) but similar survival in the N2 population (aHR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.48; P interaction = .029). The main independent prognosticators of MSI patients treated with FP plus oxaliplatin were T stage (aHR = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.29 to 3.38) and N stage (aHR = 3.57; 95% CI, 2.32 to 5.48). Similar results were observed for DFS in all analyses. CONCLUSION: Adding oxaliplatin to FP improves OS and DFS in patients with MSI stage III CC. Compared with MSS, MSI patients experienced better outcomes in the N1 group but similar survival in the N2 group.

Pravastatin combination with sorafenib does not improve survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Sorafenib is the standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Combining sorafenib with another treatment, to improve overall survival (OS) within an acceptable safety profile, might be the next step forward in the management of patients with advanced HCC. We aimed to assess whether a combination of sorafenib and a statin improved survival in patients with HCC. METHODS: The objective of the PRODIGE-11 trial was to compare the respective clinical outcomes of the sorafenib-pravastatin combination (arm A) versus sorafenib alone (arm B) in patients with advanced HCC. Child-Pugh A patients with advanced HCC who were naive to systemic treatment (n = 323) were randomly assigned to sorafenib-pravastatin combination (n = 162) or sorafenib alone (n = 161). The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, time to tumor progression, time to treatment failure, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: After randomization, 312 patients received at least 1 dose of study treatment. After a median follow-up of 35 months, 269 patients died (arm A: 135; arm B: 134) with no difference in median OS between treatments arms (10.7 months vs. 10.5 months; hazard ratio = 1.00; p = 0.975); no difference was observed in secondary survival endpoints either. In the univariate analysis, the significant prognostic factors for OS were CLIP score, performance status, and quality of life scores. The multivariate analysis showed that the only prognostic factor for OS was the CLIP score. The main toxicity was diarrhea (which was severe in 11% of patients in arm A, and 8.9% in arm B), while severe nausea-vomiting was rare, and no toxicity-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Adding pravastatin to sorafenib did not improve survival in patients with advanced HCC. LAY SUMMARY: Sorafenib has proven efficacy for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, overall survival remains poor in these patients, so we were interested to see if the addition of a statin, pravastatin, improved outcomes in patients with advanced HCC. This randomized-controlled trial demonstrated that the sorafenib-pravastatin combination did not improve overall survival in this study population compared to sorafenib alone. Clinical trial number: NCT01075555.

Sorafenib alone vs. sorafenib plus GEMOX as 1st-line treatment for advanced HCC: the phase II randomised PRODIGE 10 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib remains one major first-line therapeutic options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), with modest efficacy. We investigated the addition of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) to sorafenib in aHCC patients. METHODS: Our multicentre phase II trial randomised aHCC first-line patients to sorafenib (400 mg BID) or sorafenib-GEMOX every 2 weeks (1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine; 100 mg/m2 oxaliplatin). Primary endpoint was the 4-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were randomised (sorafenib-GEMOX: n = 48; sorafenib: n = 46). Median age was 64 years, PS 0 (69%) or 1 (31%), 63% patients had cirrhosis, 29% portal vein thrombosis and 70% extra-hepatic disease. Median duration of sorafenib treatment was 4 months (1-51); median number of GEMOX cycles was 7 (1-16). The 4-month PFS rates were 64% and 61% in the sorafenib-GEMOX and sorafenib arms, respectively; median PFS and OS were 6.2 (95% CI: 3.8-6.8) and 13.5 (7.5-16.2) months, and 4.6 (3.9-6.2) months and 14.8 (12.2-22.2), respectively. The ORR/DCR were 9%/70% and 15%/77% in the sorafenib-GEMOX and sorafenib alone arms, respectively. Main toxicities were (sorafenib-GEMOX/sorafenib) neutropenia (23%/0), thrombocytopenia (33%/0), diarrhoea (18%/9), peripheral neuropathy (5%/0) and hand-foot syndrome (5%/18). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of GEMOX had an inpact on ORR and was well-tolerated as frontline systemic therapy. The benefit on PFS seems moderate; no subsequent study was planned.

Prognostic Value of Methylator Phenotype in Stage III Colon Cancer Treated with Oxaliplatin-based Adjuvant Chemotherapy.

Purpose: There are conflicting results concerning the prognostic value of the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) in patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. We studied this phenotype in stage III colon cancer characterized for mismatch repair (MMR), RAS, and BRAF status, and treated with adjuvant FOLFOX-based regimen.Experimental Design: Tumor samples of 1,907 patients enrolled in the PETACC-8 adjuvant phase III trial were analyzed. The method used was methylation-specific PCR, where CIMP+ status was defined by methylation of at least 3 of 5 following genes: IGF2, CACNA1G, NEUROG1, SOCS1, and RUNX3 Association between CIMP status and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and survival after recurrence (SAR), was assessed by Cox model adjusted for prognostic factors and treatment arm (FOLFOX4 ± cetuximab).Results: CIMP status was successfully determined in 1,867 patients (97.9%): 275 (14.7%) tumors were CIMP+ Compared with CIMP- patients, CIMP+ patients were more frequently older (P = 0.002), females (P = 0.04), with right-sided (P < 0.0001), grade 3-4 (P < 0.0001), pN2 (P = 0.001), dMMR (P < 0.0001), BRAF mutated (P < 0.0001), and RAS wild-type (P < 0.0001) tumors. In multivariate analysis, CIMP+ status was associated with shorter OS [HR, 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.94; P = 0.04] and SAR [HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.20-2.56; P < 0.0004]; but not DFS [HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.86-1.54; P = 0.34]. A nonsignificant trend of detrimental effect of cetuximab was observed in patients with CIMP+ tumors for OS, DFS, and SAR.Conclusions: In a large cohort of well-defined patients with stage III colon cancer, CIMP+ phenotype is associated with a shorter OS and SAR but not to DFS. Clin Cancer Res; 24(19); 4745-53. ©2018 AACR.

Efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 resin microspheres compared with sorafenib in locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is the recommended treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sorafenib to that of selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: SARAH was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial done at 25 centres specialising in liver diseases in France. Patients were eligible if they were aged at least 18 years with a life expectancy greater than 3 months, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, Child-Pugh liver function class A or B score of 7 or lower, and locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] stage C), or new hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for surgical resection, liver transplantation, or thermal ablation after a previously cured hepatocellular carcinoma (cured by surgery or thermoablative therapy), or hepatocellular carcinoma with two unsuccessful rounds of transarterial chemoembolisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a permutated block method with block sizes two and four to receive continuous oral sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or SIRT with 90Y-loaded resin microspheres 2-5 weeks after randomisation. Patients were stratified according to randomising centre, ECOG performance status, previous transarterial chemoembolisation, and presence of macroscopic vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib or underwent at least one of the SIRT work-up exams. This study has been completed and the final results are reported here. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01482442. FINDINGS: Between Dec 5, 2011, and March 12, 2015, 467 patients were randomly assigned; after eight patients withdrew consent, 237 were assigned to SIRT and 222 to sorafenib. In the SIRT group, 53 (22%) of 237 patients did not receive SIRT; 26 (49%) of these 53 patients were treated with sorafenib. Median follow-up was 27·9 months (IQR 21·9-33·6) in the SIRT group and 28·1 months (20·0-35·3) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·7-9·9) in the SIRT group versus 9·9 months (8·7-11·4) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% CI 0·94-1·41] for SIRT vs sorafenib; p=0·18). In the safety population, at least one serious adverse event was reported in 174 (77%) of 226 patients in the SIRT group and in 176 (82%) of 216 in the sorafenib group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20 [9%] vs 41 [19%]), liver dysfunction (25 [11%] vs 27 [13%]), increased laboratory liver values (20 [9%] vs 16 [7%]), haematological abnormalities (23 [10%] vs 30 [14%]), diarrhoea (three [1%] vs 30 [14%]), abdominal pain (six [3%] vs 14 [6%]), increased creatinine (four [2%] vs 12 [6%]), and hand-foot skin reaction (one [<1%] vs 12 [6%]). 19 deaths in the SIRT group and 12 in the sorafenib group were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with locally advanced or intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma after unsuccessful transarterial chemoembolisation, overall survival did not significantly differ between the two groups. Quality of life and tolerance might help when choosing between the two treatments. FUNDING: Sirtex Medical Inc.

Ramucirumab as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib: Patient-focused outcome results from the randomised phase III REACH study.

PURPOSE: To report patient-focused outcomes as measured by quality of life (QoL) and performance status (PS) in REACH, a phase III placebo-controlled randomised study, assessing ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who received prior sorafenib. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A, PS 0 or 1 and prior sorafenib. Patients received ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo (1:1) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle. QoL was assessed by FACT Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI)-8 and EuroQoL (EQ-5D) at baseline; cycles 4, 10, and 16; and end of treatment. PS was assessed at baseline, each cycle, and end of treatment. Deterioration in FHSI-8 was defined as a ≥3-point decrease from baseline and PS deterioration was defined as a change of ≥2. Both intention-to-treat and pre-specified subgroup of patients with baseline serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL were assessed. RESULTS: There were 565 patients randomised to ramucirumab and placebo. Compliance with FHSI and EQ-5D was high and similar between groups. In the ITT population, deterioration in FHSI-8, EQ-5D, and PS was similar between ramucirumab and placebo. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, ramucirumab significantly reduced deterioration in FHSI-8 at the end of treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.0381), and there was a trend towards a delay in the deterioration of symptoms in FHSI-8 (HR 0.690; P = 0.054) and PS (HR 0.642; P = 0.057) in favour of ramucirumab. CONCLUSIONS: We report one of the most comprehensive data sets of QoL and symptom burden in patients undergoing systemic therapy for advanced HCC. Ramucirumab was associated with no worsening of QoL. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, the significant survival benefit observed in patients treated with ramucirumab was coupled with a trend in patient-focused outcome benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01140347.

Nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (AFUGEM GERCOR): a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine has become a standard treatment regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, retrospective data suggest that gemcitabine might be inefficient in 50-60% of patients and thus not an optimum regimen in combination with nab-paclitaxel. We did a phase 2 trial to assess the activity and safety of a new regimen of nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil. METHODS: We did a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial in 15 hospitals and institutions in France. Eligible participants were previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (previous adjuvant chemotherapy after curative intent resection was allowed if the interval between the end of chemotherapy and relapse was more than 12 months). Patients had to have at least one measurable lesion assessed by CT scan or MRI and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less. We randomly assigned participants (1:2) centrally to 28-day cycles of either gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil plus nab-paclitaxel. The randomisation was by minimisation, stratified by centre and ECOG performance status. Drugs were administered in each cycle as follows: nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) as 30-min intravenous infusions on days 1, 8, and 15; leucovorin (400 mg/m2) as a 120-min intravenous infusion on days 1 and 15; and fluorouracil (400 mg/m2) as a 5-min bolus intravenous infusion followed by a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion of 2400 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15. Patients continued treatment until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or patient withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months in the first 72 assessable patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with a target of 50% for the regimen to be deemed sufficiently active to warrant further study. We did the primary analysis on the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population, defined as all randomly assigned and assessable patients regardless of their eligibility and received treatments. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01964534. The trial has ended and we report the final analysis here. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2013, and Oct 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 114 patients to treatment: 75 patients to the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and 39 to the gemcitabine group. One patient in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group did not have a 4-month assessment, and was thus excluded from the modified ITT analysis. Median follow-up was 13·1 months (95% CI 12·5-14·1). At 4 months, 40 (56%, 90% CI 45-66) of 72 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were alive and free from disease progression (21 [54%, 40-68] of 39 patients in the gemcitabine group were also alive and progression-free at 4 months). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 33 (87%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group and in 56 (77%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with different toxicity profiles. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were neutropenia without fever (17 [23%]), fatigue (16 [22%]), paraesthesia (14 [19%]), diarrhoea (nine [12%]), and mucositis (seven [10%]); in the gemcitabine group they were neutropenia without fever (12 [32%]), thrombocytopenia (seven [18%]), fatigue (eight [21%]), anaemia (five [13%]), increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase concentrations (five [13%] for both), and paraesthesia (four [11%]). Two participants died; one in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group from septic shock, and one in the gemcitabine group from diabetes compensation with acidosis; these deaths were deemed to be not related to treatment. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 28 (38%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and in 14 (37%) of 38 in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: Nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil fulfilled the primary endpoint in that more than the required 50% of our study population were progression-free at 4 months, with a tolerable toxicity profile. This regimen thus deserves further assessment in a phase 3 trial. FUNDING: GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) and Celgene through grants to GERCOR.

Neoadjuvant FOLFOX 4 versus FOLFOX 4 with Cetuximab versus immediate surgery for high-risk stage II and III colon cancers: a multicentre randomised controlled phase II trial--the PRODIGE 22--ECKINOXE trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with high risk stage II and stage III colon cancer (CC), curative surgery followed by adjuvant FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy has become the standard of care. However, for 20 to 30% of these patients, the current curative treatment strategy of surgical excision followed by adjuvant chemotherapy fails either to clear locoregional spread or to eradicate distant micrometastases, leading to disease recurrence. Preoperative chemotherapy is an attractive concept for these CCs and has the potential to impact upon both of these causes of failure. Optimum systemic therapy at the earliest possible opportunity may be more effective at eradicating distant metastases than the same treatment given after the delay and immunological stress of surgery. Added to this, shrinking the primary tumor before surgery may reduce the risk of incomplete surgical excision, and the risk of tumor cell shedding during surgery. METHODS/DESIGN: PRODIGE 22--ECKINOXE is a multicenter randomized phase II trial designed to evaluate efficacy and feasibility of two chemotherapy regimens (FOLFOX-4 alone and FOLFOX-4 + Cetuximab) in a peri-operative strategy in patients with bulky CCs. Patients with CC deemed as high risk T3, T4 and/or N2 on initial abdominopelvic CT scan are randomized to either colectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy (control arm), or 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX-4 (for RAS mutated patients). In RAS wild-type patients a third arm testing FOLFOX+ cetuximab has been added prior to colectomy. Patients in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy arms will receive postoperative treatment for 4 months (8 cycles) to complete their therapeutic schedule. The primary endpoint of the study is the histological Tumor Regression Grade (TRG) as defined by Ryan. The secondary endpoints are: treatment strategy safety (toxicity, primary tumor related complications under chemotherapy, peri-operative morbidity), disease-free and recurrence free survivals at 3 years, quality of life, carcinologic quality and completeness of the surgery, initial radiological staging and radiological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and the correlation between histopathological and radiological response. Taking into account a 50% prevalence of CC without RAS mutation, accrual of 165 patients is needed for this Phase II trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01675999 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Surgery alone versus chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for stage I and II esophageal cancer: final analysis of randomized controlled phase III trial FFCD 9901.

PURPOSE: Although often investigated in locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC), the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) in early stages is unknown. The aim of this multicenter randomized phase III trial was to assess whether NCRT improves outcomes for patients with stage I or II EC. METHODS: The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were disease-free survival, postoperative morbidity, in-hospital mortality, R0 resection rate, and prognostic factor identification. From June 2000 to June 2009, 195 patients in 30 centers were randomly assigned to surgery alone (group S; n = 97) or NCRT followed by surgery (group CRT; n = 98). CRT protocol was 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks with two courses of concomitant chemotherapy composed of fluorouracil 800 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2). We report the long-term results of the final analysis, after a median follow-up of 93.6 months. RESULTS: Pretreatment disease was stage I in 19.0%, IIA in 53.3%, and IIB in 27.7% of patients. For group CRT compared with group S, R0 resection rate was 93.8% versus 92.1% (P = .749), with 3-year overall survival rate of 47.5% versus 53.0% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.40; P = .94) and postoperative mortality rate of 11.1% versus 3.4% (P = .049), respectively. Because interim analysis of the primary end point revealed an improbability of demonstrating the superiority of either treatment arm (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.59; P = .66), the trial was stopped for anticipated futility. CONCLUSION: Compared with surgery alone, NCRT with cisplatin plus fluorouracil does not improve R0 resection rate or survival but enhances postoperative mortality in patients with stage I or II EC.

Feasibility of preoperative and postoperative chemoradiotherapy in gastric adenocarcinoma. Two phase II studies done in parallel. Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive 0308.

BACKGROUND: For resectable gastric cancer, both postoperative chemoradiotherapy and perioperative chemotherapy demonstrate high-level evidence for improved survival in Western populations. To evaluate the feasibility of pre- or postoperative chemoradiotherapy, we proposed two multicentre phase II studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with localised, histologically confirmed gastric cancer and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status <2 judged suitable for curative resection were eligible. Eligible patients were assigned to either preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection or surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy depending on each centre. Chemoradiotherapy regimen included four courses of FOLFIRI (5 Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Irinotecan) regimen then Concurrent fluorouracil at 200 mg/m2/d by continuous infusion 5 days each week. A dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions in the preoperative study, or 45 Gy in 25 fractions in the postoperative study, was delivered. The primary end-point for both studies was the proportion of patients, who completed the therapeutic sequence. RESULTS: Between September 2007 and January 2010, 63 patients were included in both studies. The postoperative study was stopped for futility at the first step. In the preoperative study, 31 patients (73.8%, confidence interval (CI) 95%: 65.8-90.1%) received complete therapeutic sequence. Serum albumin and dietary restriction evaluated by QLQ-STO22 (Quality of Life-Stomach module) score were significantly linked with chemoradiotherapy feasibility in univariate analysis with respectively Odds-ratio (OR) 1.16 [CI 95%: 1.01-1.33] and 0.17 [0.03-0.89], p=0.04. Median overall survival time was 26.4 months in the preoperative study. CONCLUSION: Feasibility of chemoradiotherapy was not achieved for these studies: 73.8% (CI 95%: 65.8-90.1) and 42.9% (CI 95%: 21.8-66%) in preoperative and postoperative settings respectively.

Body mass index at diagnosis and survival among colon cancer patients enrolled in clinical trials of adjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Although obesity is an established risk factor for developing colon cancer, its prognostic impact and relation to patient sex in colon cancer survivors remains unclear. METHODS: The authors examined the prognostic and predictive impact of the body mass index (BMI) in patients with stage II and III colon carcinoma (N = 25,291) within the Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints (ACCENT) database. BMI was measured at enrollment in randomized trials of 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy. Association of BMI with the time to recurrence (TTR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were determined using Cox regression models. Statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 7.8 years, obese and underweight patients had significantly poorer survival compared with overweight and normal-weight patients. In a multivariable analysis, the adverse prognostic impact of BMI was observed among men but not among women (Pinteraction = .0129). Men with class 2 and 3 obesity (BMI ≥ 35.0 kg/m(2) ) had a statistically significant reduction in DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.33; P = .0297) compared with normal-weight patients. Underweight patients had a significantly shorter TTR and reduced DFS (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.28; P < .0001) that was more significant among men (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.15-1.50; P < .0001) than among women (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.23; P = .0362; Pinteraction = .0340). BMI was not predictive of a benefit from adjuvant treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity and underweight status were associated independently with inferior outcomes in patients with colon cancer who received treatment in adjuvant chemotherapy trials.

Clinical outcome of the ACCORD 12/0405 PRODIGE 2 randomized trial in rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The ACCORD 12 trial investigated the value of two different preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CT-RT) regimens in T3-4 Nx M0 resectable rectal cancer. Clinical results are reported after follow-up of 3 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between November 2005 and July 2008, a total of 598 patients were randomly assigned to preoperative CT-RT with CAP45 (45-Gy RT for 5 weeks with concurrent capecitabine) or CAPOX50 (50-Gy RT for 5 weeks with concurrent capecitabine and oxaliplatin). Total mesorectal excision was planned 6 weeks after CT-RT. The primary end point was sterilization of the operative specimen, which was achieved in 13.9% versus 19.2% of patients, respectively (P = .09). Clinical results were analyzed for all randomly assigned patients according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: At 3 years, there was no significant difference between CAP45 and CAPOX50 (cumulative incidence of local recurrence, 6.1% v 4.4%; overall survival, 87.6% v 88.3%; disease-free survival, 67.9% v 72.7%). Grade 3 to 4 toxicity was reported in four patients in the CAP45 group and in two patients in the CAPOX50 group. Bowel continence, erectile dysfunction, and social life disturbance were not different between groups. In multivariate analysis, the sterilization rate (Dworak score) of the operative specimen was the main significant prognostic factor (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.50). CONCLUSION: At 3 years, no significant difference in clinical outcome was achieved with the intensified CAPOX regimen. When compared with other recent randomized trials, these results indicate that concurrent administration of oxaliplatin and RT is not recommended.

Defective mismatch repair as a predictive marker for lack of efficacy of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in colon cancer.

PURPOSE: Prior reports have indicated that patients with colon cancer who demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or defective DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have improved survival and receive no benefit from fluorouracil (FU) -based adjuvant therapy compared with patients who have microsatellite-stable or proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors. We examined MMR status as a predictor of adjuvant therapy benefit in patients with stages II and III colon cancer. METHODS: MSI assay or immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins were performed on 457 patients who were previously randomly assigned to FU-based therapy (either FU + levamisole or FU + leucovorin; n = 229) versus no postsurgical treatment (n = 228). Data were subsequently pooled with data from a previous analysis. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Overall, 70 (15%) of 457 patients exhibited dMMR. Adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.93; P = .02) in patients with pMMR tumors. Patients with dMMR tumors receiving FU had no improvement in DFS (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.42 to 2.91; P = .85) compared with those randomly assigned to surgery alone. In the pooled data set of 1,027 patients (n = 165 with dMMR), these findings were maintained; in patients with stage II disease and with dMMR tumors, treatment was associated with reduced overall survival (HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.02 to 8.54; P = .04). CONCLUSION: Patient stratification by MMR status may provide a more tailored approach to colon cancer adjuvant therapy. These data support MMR status assessment for patients being considered for FU therapy alone and consideration of MMR status in treatment decision making.

Evidence for cure by adjuvant therapy in colon cancer: observations based on individual patient data from 20,898 patients on 18 randomized trials.

PURPOSE: Limited data are available on the time course of treatment failures (recurrence and/or death), the nature and duration of adjuvant treatment benefit, and long-term recurrence rates in patients with resected stage II and III colon cancer. METHODS: The data set assembled by the Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints Group, a collection of individual patient data from 18 trials and more than 20,800 patients testing fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in patients with stage II or III colon cancer, was analyzed. RESULTS: A significant overall survival (OS) benefit of adjuvant therapy was consistent over the 8-year follow-up period. The risk of recurrence in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy never exceeds that of control patients, signifying that adjuvant therapy cures some patients, as opposed to delaying recurrence. After 5 years, recurrence rates were less than 1.5% per year, and after 8 years, they were less than 0.5% per year. Significant disease-free survival (DFS) benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy was observed in the first 2 years. After 2 years, DFS rates in treated and control patients were not significantly different, and after 4 years, no trend toward benefit was demonstrated. This benefit was primarily driven by patients with stage III disease. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy provides significant DFS benefit, primarily by reducing the recurrence rate, within the first 2 years of adjuvant therapy with some benefit in years 3 to 4, translating into long-term OS benefit. This reflects the curative role of chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting. After 5 years, recurrence rates in patients treated on clinical trials are low, and after 8 years, they are minimal; thus, long-term follow-up for recurrence is of little value.

Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: No effective systemic therapy exists for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. A preliminary study suggested that sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, the platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and Raf may be effective in hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In this multicenter, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 602 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who had not received previous systemic treatment to receive either sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) or placebo. Primary outcomes were overall survival and the time to symptomatic progression. Secondary outcomes included the time to radiologic progression and safety. RESULTS: At the second planned interim analysis, 321 deaths had occurred, and the study was stopped. Median overall survival was 10.7 months in the sorafenib group and 7.9 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the sorafenib group, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.87; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the median time to symptomatic progression (4.1 months vs. 4.9 months, respectively, P=0.77). The median time to radiologic progression was 5.5 months in the sorafenib group and 2.8 months in the placebo group (P<0.001). Seven patients in the sorafenib group (2%) and two patients in the placebo group (1%) had a partial response; no patients had a complete response. Diarrhea, weight loss, hand-foot skin reaction, and hypophosphatemia were more frequent in the sorafenib group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, median survival and the time to radiologic progression were nearly 3 months longer for patients treated with sorafenib than for those given placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00105443.)

Survival following recurrence in stage II and III colon cancer: findings from the ACCENT data set.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to examine five possible prognostic factors in patients with recurrent stage II and III colon cancer: time from randomization on an adjuvant therapy clinical trial to tumor recurrence (< 1 year, 1 to 2 years, 2 to 3 years, 3 to 4 years, > 4 years), initial stage (II v III), initial adjuvant treatment (fluorouracil [FU]-based v surgery alone), the era in which the patient entered an adjuvant therapy clinical trial (1978 to 1985, 1986 to 1992, 1993 to 1999), and patient age at recurrence. METHODS: The Adjuvant Colon Cancer End Points (ACCENT) data set was analyzed using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, stratified by study. RESULTS: 5,722 (32.9%) of 17,381 patients experienced recurrence. Median survival following recurrence was 13.3 months. Time from randomization to recurrence was highly prognostic of survival following recurrence (P < .0001). Longer survival following recurrence was seen in patients with initial stage II versus III disease (P < .0001; 14.3% 6-year overall survival after recurrence in initial stage II patients), patients entered more recently onto trials (P < .0001), and patients initially treated with surgery alone versus FU adjuvant treatment (P = .0005). All relationships were maintained in multivariate models. CONCLUSION: Time from initial treatment to recurrence and initial stage are important prognostic factors in patients with recurrent colon cancer. Survival following recurrence increased modestly from 1978 to 1999. Patients who had a recurrence following adjuvant therapy had poorer prognosis than those who progressed after surgery alone. These prognostic factors may be useful for clinical trial design and treatment decisions in patients with recurrent colon cancer.

Preoperative radiotherapy with or without concurrent fluorouracil and leucovorin in T3-4 rectal cancers: results of FFCD 9203.

PURPOSE: In 1992, preoperative radiotherapy was considered in France as the standard treatment for T3-4 rectal cancers. The present randomized trial compares preoperative radiotherapy with chemoradiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were eligible if they presented a resectable T3-4, Nx, M0 rectal adenocarcinoma accessible to digital rectal examination. Preoperative radiotherapy with 45 Gy in 25 fractions during 5 weeks was delivered. Concurrent chemotherapy with fluorouracil 350 mg/m2/d during 5 days, together with leucovorin, was administered during the first and fifth week in the experimental arm. Surgery was planned 3 to 10 weeks after the end of radiotherapy. All patients should receive adjuvant chemotherapy with the same fluorouracil/leucovorin regimen. The primary end point of the trial was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 733 patients were eligible. Grade 3 or 4 acute toxicity was more frequent with chemoradiotherapy (14.6% v 2.7%; P < .05). There was no difference in sphincter preservation. Complete sterilization of the operative specimen was more frequent with chemoradiotherapy (11.4% v 3.6%; P < .05). The 5-year incidence of local recurrence was lower with chemoradiotherapy (8.1% v 16.5%; P < .05). Overall 5-year survival in the two groups did not differ. CONCLUSION: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy despite a moderate increase in acute toxicity and no impact on overall survival significantly improves local control and is recommended for T3-4, N0-2, M0 adenocarcinoma of the middle and distal rectum.

Capecitabine as adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin is the standard adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. The oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine is an established alternative to bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated capecitabine in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 1987 patients with resected stage III colon cancer to receive either oral capecitabine (1004 patients) or bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen; 983 patients) over a period of 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was at least equivalence in disease-free survival; the primary safety end point was the incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxic effects due to fluoropyrimidines. RESULTS: Disease-free survival in the capecitabine group was at least equivalent to that in the fluorouracil-plus-leucovorin group (in the intention-to-treat analysis, P<0.001 for the comparison of the upper limit of the hazard ratio with the noninferiority margin of 1.20). Capecitabine improved relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04) and was associated with significantly fewer adverse events than fluorouracil plus leucovorin (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oral capecitabine is an effective alternative to intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer.