Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery in colorectal carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short-term and long-term outcomes from the CHECK study - protocol for a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Up to one-fifth of patients with colorectal cancer will develop peritoneal metastases, frequently without other districts' involvement. Despite the recent unsuccesses of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases treatment, the rationale in the prophylactic setting remains strong. Several clinical and pharmacokinetic data suggest that the efficacy of intraperitoneal chemotherapy is highest when the disease is microscopic. However, robust evidence demonstrating whether the addition of HIPEC for high-risk colorectal cancers offers better control of local recurrence is lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre randomised phase 3 trial comparing prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin, over standard surgical excision in patients with colorectal cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; 388 patients will be included in this study. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical colorectal resection, omentectomy, appendectomy, round ligament of the liver resection and bilateral adnexectomy) plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin and standard surgery in terms of local recurrence-free survival. The main secondary endpoints are disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The primary endpoint will be described with a cumulative incidence function and will be analysed with Grey test to take account of the competing risks. DFS and OS will be described with the Kaplan-Meier method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been evaluated by the Italian Medicines Agency, local ethics committees and will be submitted to the Ministry of Health to notify the start of the trial according to the regulation of trials on devices with CE mark/certification.The results will be submitted for presentation at academic meetings and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, whatever the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03914820.

Effect of duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer (IDEA collaboration): final results from a prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: A prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised phase 3 trials was done to investigate disease-free survival regarding non-inferiority of 3 months versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer; non-inferiority was not shown. Here, we report the final overall survival results. METHODS: In this prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised phase 3 trials, we included patients with stage III colon cancer aged at least 18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 recruited between June 20, 2007, and Dec 31, 2015, across 12 countries in the CALGB/SWOG 80702, IDEA France, SCOT, ACHIEVE, TOSCA, and HORG trials, who started any treatment (modified intention-to-treat). Patients in all trials were randomly assigned to 3 months or 6 months of adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) every 2 weeks or capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) in different doses and methods every 3 weeks, at the treating physician's discretion. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (time to relapse, secondary colorectal primary tumour, or death due to all causes), and overall survival (time to death due to all causes) was the prespecified secondary endpoint. The non-inferiority margin for overall survival was set as a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·11. Pre-planned subgroup analyses included regimen and risk group. Non-inferiority was declared if the one-sided false discovery rate adjusted (FDRadj) p value was less than 0·025. FINDINGS: With median follow-up of 72·3 months (IQR 72·2-72·5), 2584 deaths among 12 835 patients were observed. 5064 (39·5%) patients received CAPOX and 7771 (60·5%) received FOLFOX. 5-year overall survival was 82·4% (95% CI 81·4-83·3) with 3 months of therapy and 82·8% (81·8-83·8) with 6 months of therapy (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·95-1·11]; non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·058). For patients treated with CAPOX, 5-year overall survival was 82·1% (80·5-83·6) versus 81·2% (79·2-82·9; HR 0·96 [0·85-1·08]); non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·033), and for patients treated with FOLFOX 5-year overall survival was 82·6% (81·3-83·8) and 83·8% (82·6-85·0; HR 1·07 [0·97-1·18]; non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·34). Updated disease-free survival results confirmed previous findings (HR 1·08 [95% CI 1·02-1·15]; non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·25). Data on adverse events were not further recorded. INTERPRETATION: Non-inferiority of 3 months versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer was not confirmed in terms of overall survival, but the absolute 0·4% difference in 5-year overall survival should be placed in clinical context. Overall survival results support the use of 3 months of adjuvant CAPOX for most patients with stage III colon cancer. This conclusion is strengthened by the substantial reduction of toxicities, inconveniencies, and cost associated with a shorter treatment duration. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute.

Duration of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004, a regimen of 6 months of treatment with oxaliplatin plus a fluoropyrimidine has been standard adjuvant therapy in patients with stage III colon cancer. However, since oxaliplatin is associated with cumulative neurotoxicity, a shorter duration of therapy could spare toxic effects and health expenditures. METHODS: We performed a prospective, preplanned, pooled analysis of six randomized, phase 3 trials that were conducted concurrently to evaluate the noninferiority of adjuvant therapy with either FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) administered for 3 months, as compared with 6 months. The primary end point was the rate of disease-free survival at 3 years. Noninferiority of 3 months versus 6 months of therapy could be claimed if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio did not exceed 1.12. RESULTS: After 3263 events of disease recurrence or death had been reported in 12,834 patients, the noninferiority of 3 months of treatment versus 6 months was not confirmed in the overall study population (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 1.15). Noninferiority of the shorter regimen was seen for CAPOX (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.06) but not for FOLFOX (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.26). In an exploratory analysis of the combined regimens, among the patients with T1, T2, or T3 and N1 cancers, 3 months of therapy was noninferior to 6 months, with a 3-year rate of disease-free survival of 83.1% and 83.3%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.12). Among patients with cancers that were classified as T4, N2, or both, the disease-free survival rate for a 6-month duration of therapy was superior to that for a 3-month duration (64.4% vs. 62.7%) for the combined treatments (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.23; P=0.01 for superiority). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stage III colon cancer receiving adjuvant therapy with FOLFOX or CAPOX, noninferiority of 3 months of therapy, as compared with 6 months, was not confirmed in the overall population. However, in patients treated with CAPOX, 3 months of therapy was as effective as 6 months, particularly in the lower-risk subgroup. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.).

The value of lactate dehydrogenase serum levels as a prognostic and predictive factor for advanced pancreatic cancer patients receiving sorafenib.

Although lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) serum levels, indirect markers of angiogenesis, are associated with a worse outcome in several tumours, their prognostic value is not defined in pancreatic cancer. Moreover, high levels are associated even with a lack of efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, contributing to explain negative results in clinical trials. We assessed the role of LDH in advanced pancreatic cancer receiving sorafenib. Seventy-one of 114 patients included in the randomised phase II trial MAPS (chemotherapy plus or not sorafenib) and with available serum LDH levels, were included in this analysis. Patients were categorized according to serum LDH levels (LDH ≤ vs.> upper normal rate). A significant difference was found in progression free survival (PFS) and in overall survival (OS) between patients with LDH values under or above the cut-off (PFS: 5.2 vs. 2.7 months, p = 0.0287; OS: 10.7 vs. 5.9 months, p = 0.0021). After stratification according to LDH serum levels and sorafenib treatment, patients with low LDH serum levels treated with sorafenib showed an advantage in PFS (p = 0.05) and OS (p = 0.0012). LDH appears to be a reliable parameter to assess the prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer patients, and it may be a predictive parameter to select patients candidate to receive sorafenib.

Sequential Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: results from a large cohort of patients.

BACKGROUND: Only scanty data are available to evaluate the impact of sequential TKIs on overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This retrospective study investigated the efficacy of the sequence sorafenib-sunitinib (SO-SU) and vice versa (SU-SO) in a real-life scenario. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Median progression free-survival (PFS) and OS were evaluated. The correlation between PFS and OS was also assessed. RESULTS: In total, 104 patients received SO-SU and 21 (16.8%) SO-SU. No differences in PFS or OS were observed (PFS for SO-SU=26.1 months, and for SU-SO=20.0 months; OS=35.3 and 27.0 months, respectively). For both sequences, only a weakly-positive correlation between PFS and OS was observed. CONCLUSION: Our data support the use of the sequence of the two TKIs in a real-life setting. No strong evidence of a correlation between PFS and OS was observed.

Randomised phase II trial (NCT00637975) evaluating activity and toxicity of two different escalating strategies for pregabalin and oxycodone combination therapy for neuropathic pain in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Neuropathic pain is commonly associated with cancer. Current treatments include combination opioid and adjuvant therapies, but no guidelines are available for dose escalation strategies. This phase II study compared the efficacy and tolerability of two dose escalation strategies for oxycodone and pregabalin combination therapy. METHODS: Patients (N = 75) with oncological neuropathic pain, previously untreated with pregabalin, were recruited in 5 Italian institutions between 2007 and 2010. Patients were randomised to two different dose escalation strategies (arm A; N = 38) oxycodone at a fixed dose with increasing pregabalin doses; (arm B; N = 37) pregabalin at a fixed dose with increasing oxycodone doses. Patients were evaluated from daily diaries and follow-ups at 3, 7, 10, and 14 days after beginning treatment with a numerical rating scale (NRS), neuropathic pain scale (SDN), and well-being scale (ESAS). The primary endpoint was a ≥1/3 reduction in pain (NRS); secondary endpoints included the time to analgesia and adverse effects. The study had a 90% probability of detecting the best strategy for a true difference of at least 15%. RESULTS: More patients in arm A (76%) than arm B (64%) achieved ≥1/3 overall pain reduction even after controlling for baseline factors (gender, baseline pain). Group A reported fewer side effects than group B; constipation 52.8% vs. 66.7%; nausea: 27.8% vs. 44.4%; drowsiness: 44.4% vs. 55.6%; confusion: 16.7% vs. 27.8%; itching: 8.3% vs. 19.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Both strategies effectively controlled neuropathic pain, but according to the adopted selection design arm A is preferable to arm B for pain control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00637975.

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.

Adjuvant chemotherapy after potentially curative resection of metastases from colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of two randomized trials.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy administered after surgical resection of colorectal cancer metastases may reduce the risk of recurrence and improve survival, but its benefit has never been demonstrated. Two phase III trials (Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive [FFCD] Trial 9002 and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group/Gruppo Italiano di Valutazione Interventi in Oncologia [ENG] trial) used a similar design and showed a trend favoring adjuvant chemotherapy, but both had to close prematurely because of slow accrual, thus lacking the statistical power to demonstrate the predefined difference in survival. We report here a pooled analysis based on individual data from these two trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After complete resection of colorectal liver or lung metastases, patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy (CT arm; fluorouracil [FU] 400 mg/m(2) administered intravenously [IV] once daily plus dl-leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) [FFCD] x 5 days or FU 370 mg/m(2) plus l-leucovorin 100 mg/m(2) IV x 5 days [ENG] for six cycles at 28-day intervals) or to surgery alone (S arm). RESULTS: A total of 278 patients (CT, n = 138; S, n = 140) were included in the pooled analysis. Median progression-free survival was 27.9 months in the CT arm as compared with 18.8 months in the S arm (hazard ratio = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.76; P = .058). Median overall survival was 62.2 months in the CT arm compared with 47.3 months in the S arm (hazard ratio = 1.32; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.82; P = .095). Adjuvant chemotherapy was independently associated with both progression-free survival and overall survival in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: This pooled analysis shows a marginal statistical significance in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy with an FU bolus-based regimen after complete resection of colorectal cancer metastases.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer: a randomized phase III trial conducted by GOIRC.

BACKGROUND: Complete surgical resection of gastric cancer is potentially curative, but long-term survival is poor. METHODS: Patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the stomach of stages IB, II, IIIA and B, or IV (T4N2M0) and treated with potentially curative surgery were randomly assigned to follow-up alone or to intravenous treatment with four cycles (repeated every 21 days) of PELF (cisplatin [40 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 5], epirubicin [30 mg/m(2), days 1 and 5], L-leucovorin [100 mg/m(2), days 1-4], and 5-fluorouracil [300 mg/m(2), days 1-4] in a hospital setting. Frequencies and severity of adverse events were determined. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between the treatment arms using Kaplan-Meier analysis and a Cox proportional hazards regression model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: From January 1995 through September 2000, 258 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy (n = 130) or surgery alone (n = 128). Patient characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Among those who received chemotherapy, grade 3 or 4 toxic effects including vomiting, mucositis, and diarrhea were experienced by 21.1%, 8.4%, and 11.8% of patients, respectively. Leucopenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia of grade 3 or 4 were experienced by 20.3%, 3.3%, and 4.2% of patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 72.8 months, 128 patients (49.6%) experienced recurrence and 139 (53.9%) deaths were observed, one toxicity-related. Relative to treatment with surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy did not increase disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] of recurrence = 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.27) or overall survival (HR of death = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.26). CONCLUSIONS: Our results failed to provide proof of an effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with PELF on overall survival or disease-free survival. The estimated effect of chemotherapy (10% reduction in the hazard of death or relapse) is modest and consistent with the results of meta-analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy without platinum agents.

Adjuvant treatment of high-risk, radically resected gastric cancer patients with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, cisplatin, and epidoxorubicin in a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Promising findings obtained using a weekly regimen of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), epidoxorubicin, leucovorin (LV), and cisplatin (PELFw) to treat locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer prompted the Italian Group for the Study of Digestive Tract Cancer (GISCAD) to investigate the efficacy of this regimen as adjuvant treatment for high-risk radically resected gastric cancer patients. METHODS: From January 1998 to January 2003, 400 gastric cancer patients at high risk for recurrence including patients with serosal invasion (stage pT3 N0) and/or lymph node metastasis (stage pT2 or pT3 N1, N2, or N3), were enrolled in a trial of adjuvant chemotherapies; 201 patients were randomly assigned to receive the PELFw regimen, consisting of eight weekly administrations of cisplatin (40 mg/m2), LV (250 mg/m2), epidoxorubicin (35 mg/m2), 5-FU (500 mg/m2), and glutathione (1.5 g/m2) with the support of filgrastim, and 196 patients were assigned to a regimen consisting of six monthly administrations of a 5-day course of 5-FU (375 mg/m2 daily) and LV (20 mg/m2 daily, 5-FU/LV). Disease-free and overall survival were estimated and compared between arms using hazard ratios (HRs) and Kaplan-Meier estimates. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The 5-year survival rates were 52% in the PELFw arm and 50% in the 5-FU/LV arm. Compared with the 5-FU/LV regimen, the PELFw regimen did not reduce the risk of death (HR = 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70 to 1.29) or relapse (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.75 to 1.29). Less than 10% of patients in either arm experienced a grade 3 or 4 toxic episode. Neutropenia (occurring more often in the PELFw arm) and diarrhea and mucositis (more prevalent in the 5-FU/LV arm) were the most common serious side effects. Nevertheless, only 19 patients (9.4%) completed the treatment in the PELFw arm and 85 (43%) patients completed the treatment in the 5-FU/LV arm. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no benefit from an intensive weekly chemotherapy in gastric cancer. The extent of toxicity experienced by the patients in the adjuvant setting suggests that, in gastric cancer, chemotherapy may be more safely administered preoperatively.

Randomized trial of intraportal and/or systemic adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with colon carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection of colon cancer is standard treatment. However, the choice of best delivery route--that is, systemic (i.e., intravenous or oral) or regional (i.e., intraportal, intraperitoneal, or hepatic arterial infusion)--has been controversial. In a randomized clinical trial of patients with colon cancer, we compared the benefits of chemotherapy delivered by these routes individually or in combination. METHODS: From April 2, 1992, through April 30, 1998, 1084 eligible patients with Dukes' stage B or C colon carcinoma were randomly assigned: 369 patients to the IP regimen (continuous portal vein infusion of 5-fluorouracil at 500 mg/m2 of body surface daily and heparin at 5000 IU daily for 7 consecutive days, beginning on the day of surgery), 358 patients to the SY regimen (six 28-day courses of systemic leucovorin at 100 mg/m2 daily on days 1 through 5 followed by systemic bolus 5-fluorouracil at 370 mg/m2 daily on days 1 through 5, with treatment initiated 15-35 days after surgery), and 357 patients to the IP+SY regimen (the IP regimen followed by the SY regimen, with the same scheduling). Primary survival was analyzed with the log-rank statistic and a Cox multivariable regression model. All statistical tests were two sided. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 99 months, 389 events (recurrences, second malignancies, or deaths) had occurred, and 361 patients died. Sites of first recurrences were similar among the three arms. At 5 years, overall and event-free survival rates were similar among those on the IP (74% and 68%, respectively), SY (78% and 71%), and IP+SY (73% and 67%) regimens. When compared with the group on the SY regimen, the risk for death associated with the IP regimen (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82 to 1.36) was similar to that associated with the IP+SY regimen (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.78 to 1.45) (P =.69), as were the risks for first event (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.37 and HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.41, respectively) (P=.74). CONCLUSION: Overall and event-free survival rates were similar in all three arms. The combined regimen was no better than either single regimen alone.