Weekly paclitaxel, capecitabine, and bevacizumab with maintenance capecitabine and bevacizumab as first-line therapy for triple-negative, metastatic, or locally advanced breast cancer: Results from the GINECO A-TaXel phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to determine the efficacy and safety of first-line combination therapy with bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and capecitabine for triple-negative, locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (LA/MBC). METHODS: Patients with measurable triple-negative LA/MBC who had received no prior chemotherapy for their disease received 4-weekly cycles of paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 for up to 6 cycles) combined with capecitabine (800 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19) and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg on days 1 and 14) repeated every 4 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate; secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Between April 2010 and March 2012, 62 eligible patients were enrolled. The median age of the patients was 57 years, 74% had received adjuvant chemotherapy, and 65% had visceral metastases. Patients received a median of 6 cycles (range, 1-45 cycles). The objective response rate was 77% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 66%-88%), including complete response in 19% of patients. The median duration of response was 5.6 months (range, 1.3-27.6 months). The median progression-free survival was 7.6 months (95% CI, 6.3-9.0 months) and the median overall survival was 19.2 months (95% CI, 17.4-20.9 months). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were hypertension (35% of patients) and neutropenia (23% of patients); 5% of patients experienced febrile neutropenia. Grade ≥2 hand-foot syndrome, alopecia, and nail toxicity each occurred in 40% of patients (adverse events were recorded before every cycle and graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]). Treatment was interrupted because of toxicity in 22% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: A triplet regimen of paclitaxel, capecitabine, and bevacizumab followed by maintenance therapy with capecitabine and bevacizumab demonstrated high activity and manageable safety in this difficult-to-treat population. Cancer 2016;122:3119-26. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Health-related quality of life in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer comparing carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy with monotherapy.

In the Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique 0501 trial the carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy increased toxicity (most frequent, decreased neutrophil count, asthenia). We longitudinally compared health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the two treatment arms.In total, 451 patients aged 70-89 years with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin plus paclitaxel or vinorelbine or gemcitabine. HRQoL was assessed by means of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline, week 6 and week 18.Using a five-point decrease as the minimal clinically important difference, patients treated with the chemotherapy doublet exhibited a significant longer time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) for two HRQoL dimensions: physical functioning (median TUDD: 2.04 for the doublet versus 1.71 months for monotherapy; log-rank p=0.01) and nausea and vomiting (median: not reached versus 4.83, respectively; log-rank p=0.046). Cox multivariate analysis revealed the carboplatin and paclitaxel arm to be independently associated with longer TUDD for these two HRQoL dimensions. In addition, TUDD didn't significantly differ between the two arms for all the other HRQoL dimensions.The chemotherapy doublet did not reduce TUDD in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. Moreover, TUDD was prolonged for two HRQoL dimensions, namely physical functioning and nausea and vomiting.

Bevacizumab with or without erlotinib as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (GERCOR DREAM; OPTIMOX3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of an anti-VEGF or an anti-EGFR-targeted monoclonal antibody with chemotherapy has shown clinical activity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. However, combining both anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR antibodies with chemotherapy in first-line treatment resulted in adverse outcomes. We assessed whether the combination of erlotinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with bevacizumab could increase the efficacy of maintenance therapy in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was undertaken in 49 centres in France, Austria, and Canada. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with histologically confirmed, unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, WHO performance status 0-2, had received no previous therapy for metastatic disease, and had adequate organ function. Patients without disease progression after bevacizumab-based induction therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) by a minimisation technique to bevacizumab (7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks) or bevacizumab plus erlotinib (150 mg once daily) as maintenance therapy until progression. All patients were stratified by centre, baseline performance status, age, and number of metastatic sites. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival on maintenance therapy analysed by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00265824. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2007, and Oct 13, 2011, 700 eligible patients were enrolled; following induction treatment, patients without disease progression were randomly assigned to bevacizumab (n=228) or bevacizumab plus erlotinib (n=224). At the final analysis, median follow-up was 51·0 months (IQR 36·0-60·0) in the bevacizumab group and 48·3 months (31·5-61·0) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group. In the primary analysis (after 231 progression-free survival events), median progression-free survival from randomisation was 5·1 months (95% CI 4·1-5·9) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group compared with 6·0 months (4·6-7·9) in the bevacizumab group (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·79 [95% CI 0·60-1·06]; p=0·11; unstratified HR 0·76 [0·59-0·99]; p=0·043). In the final analysis, median progression-free survival from randomisation was 5·4 months (95% CI 4·3-6·2) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group compared with 4·9 months (4·1-5·7) in the bevacizumab group (stratified HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·66-1·01], p=0·059; unstratified HR 0·78 [0·68-0·96], p=0·019). At the final analysis, median overall survival from maintenance was 24·9 months (95% CI 21·4-28·9) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group and 22·1 months (19·6-26·7) in the bevacizumab group (stratified HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·63-0·99], p=0·036; unstratified HR 0·79 [0·64-0·98], p=0·035). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were skin rash (47 [21%] of 220 patients in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group vs none of 224 patients in the bevacizumab alone group), diarrhoea (21 [10%] vs two [<1%]), and asthenia (12 [5%] vs two [<1%]). INTERPRETATION: Maintenance bevacizumab plus erlotinib might be a new non-chemotherapy-based maintenance option for the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer after bevacizumab-based induction therapy. FUNDING: GERCOR and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Second-line therapy in elderly patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer.

There is no dedicated study on second-line treatment for elderly patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the results on second-line erlotinib therapy from our previously published phase III study comparing single-agent therapy with platinum-based doublet (carboplatin plus paclitaxel) therapy in 451 elderly patients. Erlotinib was given to patients exhibiting disease progression or experiencing excessive toxicity during first-line therapy, until further progression or unacceptable toxicity. In total, 292 (64.7%) patients received erlotinib as second-line therapy. Initial performance status 0-1, stage IV NSCLC and an Activities of Daily Living score of 6 were independent factors for receiving erlotinib. Median (95% CI) overall survival was 4 (3.2-6.7) versus 6.8 (5.0-8.3) months in the single-agent and doublet arms, respectively (p=0.089). Performance status 0-1, never having smoked, adenocarcinoma and weight loss ≤5% were favourable independent prognostic factors of survival, whereas the randomisation arm had no significant impact. Among the 292 patients who received erlotinib, 60 (20.5%) experienced grade 3-4 toxic effects, the most frequent being rash. Erlotinib as second-line therapy is feasible, leading to efficacy results similar to those obtained in a previous randomised study that was not dedicated to elderly patients, with acceptable toxicity.

Androgen-deprivation therapy alone or with docetaxel in non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 15): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Early chemotherapy might improve the overall outcomes of patients with metastatic non-castrate (ie, hormone-sensitive) prostate cancer. We investigated the effects of the addition of docetaxel to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with metastatic non-castrate prostate cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study, we enrolled patients in 29 centres in France and one in Belgium. Eligible patients were older than 18 years and had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate and radiologically proven metastatic disease; a Karnofsky score of at least 70%; a life expectancy of at least 3 months; and adequate hepatic, haematological, and renal function. They were randomly assigned to receive to ADT (orchiectomy or luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists, alone or combined with non-steroidal antiandrogens) alone or in combination with docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) intravenously on the first day of each 21-day cycle; up to nine cycles). Patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio, with dynamic minimisation to minimise imbalances in previous systemic treatment with ADT, chemotherapy for local disease or isolated rising concentration of serum prostate-specific antigen, and Glass risk groups. Patients, physicians, and data analysts were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00104715. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2004, and Dec 31, 2008, 192 patients were randomly allocated to receive ADT plus docetaxel and 193 to receive ADT alone. Median follow-up was 50 months (IQR 39-63). Median overall survival was 58·9 months (95% CI 50·8-69·1) in the group given ADT plus docetaxel and 54·2 months (42·2-not reached) in that given ADT alone (hazard ratio 1·01, 95% CI 0·75-1·36). 72 serious adverse events were reported in the group given ADT plus docetaxel, of which the most frequent were neutropenia (40 [21%]), febrile neutropenia (six [3%]), abnormal liver function tests (three [2%]), and neutropenia with infection (two [1%]). Four treatment-related deaths occurred in the ADT plus docetaxel group (two of which were neutropenia-related), after which the data monitoring committee recommended treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. After this recommendation, no further treatment-related deaths occurred. No serious adverse events were reported in the ADT alone group. INTERPRETATION: Docetaxel should not be used as part of first-line treatment for patients with non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING: French Health Ministry and Institut National du Cancer (PHRC), Sanofi-Aventis, AstraZeneca, and Amgen.

Identification of non-adherence to adjuvant letrozole using a population pharmacokinetics approach in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor metabolised via CYP2A6 and CYP3A4/5 enzymes, is used as adjuvant therapy for women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive early breast cancer. The objective of this study was to quantify the impact of CYP2A6 genotype on letrozole pharmacokinetics (PK), to identify non-adherent patients using a population approach and explore the possibility of a relationship between non-adherence and early relapse. METHODS: Breast cancer patients enrolled in the prospective PHACS study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01127295) and treated with adjuvant letrozole 2.5 mg/day were included. Trough letrozole concentrations (Css,trough) were measured every 6 months for 3 years by a validated LC-MS/MS method. Concentration-time data were analysed using non-linear mixed effects modelling. Three methods were evaluated for identification of non-adherent subjects using the base PK model. RESULTS: 617 patients contributing 2534 plasma concentrations were included and led to a one-compartment PK model with linear absorption and elimination. Model-based methods identified 28 % of patients as non-adherent based on high fluctuations of their Css,trough compared to 3 % based on patient declarations. The covariate analysis performed in adherent subjects revealed that CYP2A6 intermediate (IM) and slow metabolisers (SM) had 21 % (CI95 % = 12 - 30 %) and 46 % (CI95 % = 41 - 51 %) lower apparent clearance, respectively, compared to normal and ultrarapid metabolisers (NM+UM). Early relapse (19 patients) was not associated with model-estimated, concentration-based or declared adherence in the total population (p = 0.41, p = 0.37 and p = 0.45, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings will help future investigations focusing on the exposure-efficacy relationship for letrozole in adjuvant setting.

A potentially neuroprotective role for erythropoietin with paclitaxel treatment in ovarian cancer patients: a prospective phase II GINECO trial.

PURPOSE: A prospective phase II multicenter study was performed in two steps in paclitaxel-treated ovarian cancer patients in France. A French version of the four-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) questionnaire was validated. This was then used to evaluate neurotoxicity in relation to erythropoietin treatment. METHODS: Patients received standard second-line paclitaxel-based chemotherapy and erythropoietin for anemia. Neurotoxicity and hemoglobin levels were evaluated every cycle with the FACT/GOG-Ntx and NCI-CTCAE. The translated questionnaire was tested in 20 patients to confirm the translation accuracy. The final questionnaire was validated in 98 patients with internal consistency (Cronbach's coefficient) and item correlation (Pearson's r coefficient) tests. Neurotoxicity severity was analyzed according to erythropoietin intake (first three cycles versus no or late intake) and correlated with anemia. RESULTS: Patients received a median of six paclitaxel cycles (range 1-9). Neurotoxicity was validated in 484 questionnaires. Internal consistency was excellent with Cronbach's coefficients of ≥0.89 at inclusion, after 3 cycles and at study end. Inter-question correlation was high with Pearson's coefficients of 0.65-0.85. FACT/GOG-Ntx and NCI-CTCAE severity scoring was similar. Globally, the incidence of severe neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx and NCI-CTCAE) was found significantly higher in patients with severe anemia. Of 98 evaluable patients, 31 received erythropoietin during the first three cycles. Mean hemoglobin level was significantly lower in this group from baseline to cycle 4; however, these anemic patients with early EPO intake did not develop an increase rate of severe neurotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The French FACT/GOG-Ntx questionnaire is a reliable and valid tool for assessing chemotherapy-induced neuropathy. This study raises the possibility that erythropoietin might play a neuroprotective role when administered with paclitaxel.

Carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy compared with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: IFCT-0501 randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is recommended to treat advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in fit, non-elderly adults, but monotherapy is recommended for patients older than 70 years. We compared a carboplatin and paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy regimen with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised trial we recruited patients aged 70-89 years with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and WHO performance status scores of 0-2. Patients received either four cycles (3 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of carboplatin (on day 1) plus paclitaxel (on days 1, 8, and 15) or five cycles (2 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy. Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation method. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number NCT00298415. FINDINGS: 451 patients were enrolled. 226 were randomly assigned monotherapy and 225 doublet chemotherapy. Median age was 77 years and median follow-up was 30.3 months (range 8.6-45.2). Median overall survival was 10.3 months for doublet chemotherapy and 6.2 months for monotherapy (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78; p<0.0001); 1-year survival was 44.5% (95% CI 37.9-50.9) and 25.4% (19.9-31.3), respectively. Toxic effects were more frequent in the doublet chemotherapy group than in the monotherapy group (most frequent, decreased neutrophil count (108 [48.4%] vs 28 [12.4%]; asthenia 23 [10.3%] vs 13 [5.8%]). INTERPRETATION: Despite increased toxic effects, platinum-based doublet chemotherapy was associated with survival benefits compared with vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy in elderly patients with NSCLC. We feel that the current treatment paradigm for these patients should be reconsidered. FUNDING: Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique, Institut National du Cancer.

Tailoring maintenance chemotherapy upon response to induction chemotherapy as compared with pemetrexed continuation maintenance in advanced non-squamous NSCLC patients: Results of the IFCT-GFPC-1101 multicenter randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Benefit from maintenance in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC) might favor switch maintenance after disease stabilization (SD) and continuation after objective response (OR). This trial assessed a maintenance strategy conditioned by response to cisplatin-gemcitabine (CG) with G continuation for patients with OR or switch to pemetrexed (P) for patients with SD as compared with a control arm based on the Paramount regimen. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: age 18-70 years, ECOG PS 0-1, untreated stage IV NS-NSCLC without EGFR or ALK alteration, ineligibility to bevacizumab. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either CG (4 cycles) followed by G maintenance in case of OR followed by P at progression, or switch to P for patients with SD, or 4 cycles of CP followed by P (control arm). Primary endpoint: overall Survival. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2016, 932 patients were randomized (CG: 467, CP: 465) with well-balanced characteristics. 257 patients (56.7%) in the CG arm received maintenance (G: 142, P: 113) versus 277 patients (59.7%) in the CP arm. Median number of maintenance cycles was 5 for G and P (CG induction) and 4 for P (CP induction). OS adjusted HR was 0.97 (95% CI 0.84, 1.13; p = 0.71) with a median of 10.9 months (CG) versus 10.4 (CP). HR for PFS was 0.95 (95% CI 0.83, 1.09; p = 0.45) with a median of 4.8 months for CG versus 4.5 for CP. Safety profile was as expected. CONCLUSIONS: Adapting maintenance strategy according to response to induction chemotherapy does not improve patient outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT01631136.

Prognostic Value of Routinely Measured Inflammatory Biomarkers in Older Cancer Patients: Pooled Analysis of Three Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic assessment of older cancer patients is complicated by their heterogeneity. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of routine inflammatory biomarkers. METHODS: A pooled analysis of prospective multicenter cohorts of cancer patients aged ≥70 was performed. We measured CRP and albumin, and calculated Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) and CRP/albumin ratio. The GPS has three levels (0 = CRP ≤ 10 mg/L, albumin ≥ 35 g/L, i.e., normal values; 1 = one abnormal value; 2 = two abnormal values). One-year mortality was assessed using Cox models. Discriminative power was assessed using Harrell's C index (C) and net reclassification improvement (NRI). RESULTS: Overall, 1800 patients were analyzed (mean age: 79 ± 6; males: 62%; metastases: 38%). The GPS and CRP/albumin ratio were independently associated with mortality in patients not at risk of frailty (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 4.48 [2.03-9.89] for GPS1, 11.64 [4.54-29.81] for GPS2, and 7.15 [3.22-15.90] for CRP/albumin ratio > 0.215) and in patients at risk of frailty (2.45 [1.79-3.34] for GPS1, 3.97 [2.93-5.37] for GPS2, and 2.81 [2.17-3.65] for CRP/albumin ratio > 0.215). The discriminative power of the baseline clinical model (C = 0.82 [0.80-0.83]) was increased by adding GPS (C = 0.84 [0.82-0.85]; NRI events (NRI+) = 10% [2-16]) and CRP/albumin ratio (C = 0.83 [0.82-0.85]; NRI+ = 14% [2-17]). CONCLUSIONS: Routine inflammatory biomarkers add prognostic value to clinical factors in older cancer patients.

Prognostic Value of Tumor Deposits for Disease-Free Survival in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IDEA France Phase III Trial (PRODIGE-GERCOR).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: A post hoc analysis of all pathologic reports from patients with stage III CC included in the IDEA France phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00958737) investigating the duration of adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin or capecitabine and oxaliplatin therapy (3 v 6 months) was performed. The primary objective was to determine the prognostic impact of TD on disease-free survival (DFS). The effect of the addition of TD to LNM count on pN restaging was also evaluated. A multivariable analysis was performed to establish the association between TD and DFS. RESULTS: Of 1,942 patients, 184 (9.5%) had TDs. The pN1a/b and pN1c populations showed similar DFS. TD-positive patients had worse prognosis compared with TD-negative patients, with 3-year DFS rates of 65.6% (95% CI, 58.0% to 72.1%) and 74.7% (95% CI, 72.6% to 76.7%; P = .0079), respectively. On multivariable analysis, TDs were associated with a higher risk of recurrence or death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36; P = .0201). Other adverse factors included pT4 and/or pN2 disease (HR, 2.21; P < .001), the 3 months of adjuvant treatment (HR, 1.29; P = .0029), tumor obstruction (HR, 1.28; P = .0233), and male sex (HR, 1.24; P = .0151). Patients restaged as having pN2 disease (n = 35, 2.3%) had similar DFS as patients initially classified as pN2. CONCLUSION: The presence of TDs is an independent prognostic factor for DFS in patients with stage III CC. The addition of TD to LNM may help to better define the duration of adjuvant therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy in Patients With Advanced NSCLC With BRAF, HER2, or MET Mutations or RET Translocation: GFPC 01-2018.

INTRODUCTION: Immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy in patients with NSCLC harboring molecular alterations remains poorly elucidated. This study was undertaken to determine ICI efficacy against BRAF-, HER2-, MET-, and RET-NSCLC in a real-world setting. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicenter study in ICI-treated BRAF-, HER2-, MET- or RET-NSCLCs, we analyzed clinical characteristics and outcomes: ICI-treatment duration, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: There were 107 patients with NSCLC (mean age, 65.5 y) included from 21 centers: 37% were never-smokers, 54% were men, and 93% had adenocarcinoma. Among them, 44 had BRAF mutation (V600: 26), 23 had HER2 mutation, 30 had MET mutation, and nine had RET translocation. Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status was known for 70 patients and was greater than or equal to 1% in 34 patients. Before ICI, patients had received a median of one treatment line. Median duration of response, PFS, and OS were 15.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.6-not reached [NR]) months, 4.7 (95% CI: 2.3-7.4) months, and 16.2 (95% CI: 12.0-24.0) months, respectively, for the entire cohort. The response rates for BRAF-V600, BRAF-non-V600, HER2, MET, and RET-altered NSCLC were 26%, 35%, 27%, 36%, and 38%, respectively. For patients who were PD-L1 negative and those who were PD-L1 positive, PFS was 3.0 (95% CI: 1.2-NR) and 4.3 (95% CI: 2.1-8.5) months, respectively, and OS was 11.7 (95% CI: 4.1-NR) and 35.8 (95% CI: 9.0-35.2) months, respectively. Toxicities were reported in 28 patients (26%), including 11 patients (10%) with a grade greater than or equal to three. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world setting, ICI efficacy against patients with BRAF-, HER2-, MET-, or RET-NSCLC seemed close to that observed in unselected patients with NSCLC. Large prospective studies on these subsets of patients are needed.

Switch maintenance chemotherapy versus observation after carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: IFCT-1201 MODEL trial.

PURPOSE: Maintenance chemotherapy is a reasonable choice for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) not progressing after induction therapy with a platinum-based doublet. Nevertheless, there have been no studies dedicated to elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomised trial in patients aged 70-89 years, with advanced NSCLC (with neither EGFR mutation nor ALK rearrangement), who had not progressed after four cycles of monthly carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel in order to compare maintenance with either pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 d1, 22) in patients with non-squamous cell carcinoma or gemcitabine (1,150 mg/m2 d1, 8, 22) in squamous cell carcinoma to simple observation. The patients were required to have a performance status (PS) 0-2, mini-mental score >23, and creatinine clearance ≥45 mL/min. The primary end-point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 632 patients were enrolled from May 2013 to October 2016. Of the 328 (52.3%) patients randomised after induction therapy, 166 patients were assigned to the observation arm, versus 162 to the switch maintenance arm, 119 of whom received pemetrexed and 43 gemcitabine. The median OS from randomisation was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.0-17.0) in the observation arm and 14 months (95% CI: 10.9-16.9) in the maintenance arm (p = 0.72). The median progression-free survival (PFS) from randomisation was 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.6-3.1) in the observation arm versus 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.8-7.1) in the maintenance arm (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Switch maintenance therapy significantly prolonged PFS but not OS and, thus, should not be proposed to elderly patients with advanced NSCLC.

Effects of a physical activity programme to prevent physical performance decline in onco-geriatric patients: a randomized multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with cancer experience negative long-term functional effects of both cancer and treatments. Exercise may minimize their age-related and cancer-related functional decline. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre open-label 12 month randomized clinical trial with two parallel arms including participants aged ≥70 years with lymphoma or carcinoma requiring curative treatment. The study started at the beginning of any phase of cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy). The usual care group (UCG) received the current national recommendations in physical activity (a guideline without specific counselling). The intervention group (IG) received 1 year phoned physical activity advice individually adapted to physical assessment (twice a month during the first 6 months and then monthly). The primary outcome was the proportion of subjects with a 1 year decreased short physical performance battery (SPPB) score of 1 point or more. Physical, cognitive, and clinical secondary outcomes were also investigated. RESULTS: We allocated 301 participants (age 76.7 ± 5.0, female 60.6%) to each group. At baseline, the median SPPB was 10/12 in both groups. Breast was the most frequent tumour site (35.7%). After 1 year, 14.0% of participants in the UCG and 18.7% in the IG had a decrease in SPPB score of 1 point or more (P = 0.772). At 2 years, there was no difference in SPPB, gait speed, International Physical Activity Questionnaire score, and verbal fluency. Subgroup analyses after 2 years showed a decline in SPPB for 29.8% of UCG and 5.0% of IG breast cancer participants (P = 0.006), in 21.7% of UCG and 6.2% of IG female participants (P = 0.019), and in 24.5% of UCG and 11.1% of IG normal nutritional status participants (P = 0.009). Falls, hospitalization, institutionalization, and death rates were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized phoned physical activity advice had not reduced functional decline at 1 year but provided preliminary evidence that may prevent physical performance decline at 2 years in older adults with breast cancer.

Impact on health-related quality of life deterioration-free survival of a first-line therapy combining nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: Results of the randomized phase II AFUGEM GERCOR clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The phase II AFUGEM GERCOR trial aimed to assess the efficacy of a first-line therapy combining nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine (gemcitabine group) or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil (sLV5FU2 group) in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic cancer. Results of progression-free survival at 4 months (primary endpoint) were in favor of the sLV5FU2 group. This paper presents health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data as a secondary endpoint. METHODS: HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline and at each chemotherapy cycle until the end of treatment. The HRQoL deterioration-free survival (QFS) was used as a modality of longitudinal analysis. QFS was defined as the time between randomization and the first definitive HRQoL score deterioration as compared to the baseline score, or death. Sensitivity analysis was performed excluding death as an event. Univariate Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the treatment effect. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2014, 114 patients were randomized in a 1:2 ratio (39 in the gemcitabine group and 75 in the sLV5FU2 group). Patients in the sLV5FU2 group seemed to present longer QFS than those of the gemcitabine group for 14 out of 15 dimensions, with HRs < 1. Results of the sensitivity analysis excluding death as an event were significantly in favor of the sLV5FU2 group for physical functioning (HR = 0.51 [90% CI 0.27-0.97]) and pain (HR = 0.26 [90% CI 0.09-0.74]). CONCLUSION: The nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil combination had no negative impact in exploratory HRQoL analyses.

Efficacy of aflibercept with FOLFOX and maintenance with fluoropyrimidine as first­line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: GERCOR VELVET phase II study.

Aflibercept in combination with 5­fluorouracil (5­FU)/irinotecan improves overall survival in the second­line therapy of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this study, we evaluated the effects of aflibercept in first­line therapy with FOLFOX followed by maintenance with fluoropyrimidine. VELVET was a prospective, single­arm multicenter phase II study (completed). Patients with previously untreated, unresectable, evaluable or measurable mCRC, with an age ≥18 years, and an ECOG performance status of 0­2 received 6 cycles of modified FOLFOX7 (5­FU/folinic acid and oxaliplatin) with aflibercept at 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks followed by maintenance therapy with fluoropyrimidine with aflibercept until disease progression or limiting toxicity. The reintroduction of oxaliplatin was performed at first progression. The primary endpoint was progression­free survival (PFS) at 6 months. From May, 2013 to May, 2014, 49 patients were included and 48 were evaluable for response. In total, 33 patients (67.4%) were alive without progression at 6 months. The Kaplan­Meier survival 6­month and 1­year PFS rates were 79.1 and 36.1%, respectively, and the median PFS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 8.3­12.5). The objective response rate was 59.2% (N=29/49). The most common (≥10%) grade 3­4 adverse events were hypertension (23%), fatigue (15%), neutropenia (12%), neuropathy (12%) and stomatitis (10%). Three (6%) treatment­related deaths occurred: One from stroke, one from pulmonary embolism and one from neutropenic sepsis. On the whole, this study demonstrates the efficacy of aflibercept in combination with an oxaliplatin­based regimen in the first­line therapy of patients with mCRC. A strict monitoring of blood pressure and immediate management of hypertension during therapy is mandatory.

Three Versus 6 Months of Oxaliplatin-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: Disease-Free Survival Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant (IDEA) France, Phase III Trial.

Purpose Reduction of adjuvant treatment duration may decrease toxicities without loss of efficacy in stage III colon cancer. This could offer clear advantages to patients and health care providers. Methods In International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) France, as part of the IDEA international collaboration, patient with colon cancer patients were randomly assigned to 3 and 6 months of modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6: infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) by physician choice. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), and analyses were descriptive. Results A total of 2,010 eligible patients received either 3 or 6 months of chemotherapy (modified intention-to-treat population); 2,000 (99%) had stage III colon cancer (N1: 75%, N2: 25%); 1,809 (90%) received mFOLFOX6, and 201 (10%) received CAPOX. The median age was 64 years, and the median follow-up time was 4.3 years. Overall, 94% (3 months) and 78% (6 months) of patients completed treatment (fluoropyrimidines ± oxaliplatin). Maximal grade 2 and 3 neuropathy rates were 28% and 8% in the 3-month arm and 41% and 25% in the 6-month arm ( P < .001). Final rates of residual neuropathy greater than grade 1 were 3% in the 3-month arm and 7% in the 6-month arm ( P < .001). There were 578 DFS events: 314 and 264 in the 3- and 6-month arms, respectively. The 3-year DFS rates were 72% and 76% in the 3- and 6-month arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.46; P = .0112). In the 3 and 6-month arms, respectively, for patients who received mFOLFOX6, the 3-year DFS rates were 72% and 76% (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.51); for the T4 and/or N2 population, they were 58% and 66% (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.82); and for the T1-3N1 population, they were 81% and 83% (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.49). Conclusion IDEA France, in which 90% of patients received mFOLFOX6, shows superiority of 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy compared with 3 months, especially in the T4 and/or N2 subgroups. These results should be considered alongside the international IDEA collaboration data.

Anticancer Activity and Tolerance of Treatments Received Beyond Progression in Men Treated Upfront with Androgen Deprivation Therapy With or Without Docetaxel for Metastatic Castration-naïve Prostate Cancer in the GETUG-AFU 15 Phase 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel is the standard of care in fit men with metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer (mCNPC) following results from GETUG-AFU 15, CHAARTED, and STAMPEDE. No data are available on the efficacy of treatments used for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in men treated upfront with ADT plus docetaxel for mCNPC. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and tolerance of subsequent treatments in patients treated upfront with chemo-hormonal therapy for mCNPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective data from the GETUG-AFU 15 phase 3 trial were collected for treatments received for mCRPC. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: For the first three lines of salvage treatment for mCRPC we investigated the biochemical progression-free survival, maximum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline, overall survival, and tolerance. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 245 patients received at least one treatment for mCRPC. For docetaxel used in first-line, a PSA decline ≥50% was observed in 25/66 (38%) and in 4/20 patients (20%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel (p=0.14). The median biochemical progression-free survival was 6.0 mo (95% confidence interval: 3.6-7.7) and 4.1 mo (95% confidence interval: 1.3-4.9), respectively. For docetaxel used in first- or second-line, a PSA decline ≥50% was observed in 36/80 (45%) and in 4/29 patients (14%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel (p=0.07). PSA declines ≥50% were observed with bicalutamide in 12/28 (43%) and 4/23 patients (17%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel. Among men treated upfront with ADT plus docetaxel who received abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC, 10/19 patients (53%) achieved a PSA decline ≥50%. Few grade 3-4 events occurred. Study limitations include the observational design and retrospective characteristics of this analysis, without standardized therapeutic salvage protocols, and the limited number of patients in some of the treatment subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Docetaxel rechallenge following progression to mCRPC after upfront ADT plus docetaxel for mCNPC was active only in a limited number of patients. Available data on abiraterone and enzalutamide support maintained efficacy in this setting. The lack of standardized therapeutic protocols for men developing mCRPC limits the comparability between patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: Rechallenging docetaxel at castration-resistance was active only in a limited number of patients treated upfront with chemo-hormonal therapy for metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer. Anticancer activity was suggested with abiraterone or enzalutamide in this setting.

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.

Feasibility of Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin Combination Chemotherapy Without Central Venous Access Device in Patients With Stage III Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: 5-Fluorouracil and leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) is a standard adjuvant treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer (CC). Capecitabine is an oral fluoropyrimidine, and administration of oxaliplatin does not necessarily require the insertion of a central venous access device (CVAD). We evaluated the feasibility of XELOX without a CVAD as adjuvant treatment in patients with stage III CC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied prospectively collected data from patients with stage III CC treated with XELOX in the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy French trial. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with a CVAD and those with peripheral venous access (PVA), including patients who had and had not had a CVAD at the first cycle of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy without a CVAD was considered feasible if the patient received all cycles of adjuvant therapy without it. RESULTS: A total of 203 patients were included: 86 (43%) in the PVA group and 116 (57%) in the CVAD group. Of the 85 patients in the PVA group (1 patient was not treated), 69 (81.2%) did not require the insertion of a CVAD. However, 16 (18.8%) required CVAD insertion owing to systematic delay of the initially planned CVAD before the second cycle of chemotherapy in 7, complications related to PVA usage in 5, a switch to the modified FOLFOX6 regimen in 2, and other reasons in 2. The oxaliplatin dose was similar in both groups regardless of the chemotherapy duration. XELOX without a CVAD was feasible for 81.2% of the patients for whom a CVAD had not been planned before chemotherapy and for 88.4% of patients for whom chemotherapy was planned without the use of a CVAD. CONCLUSION: XELOX chemotherapy without a CVAD is a feasible approach for treating patients with stage III CC in the adjuvant setting.