Genetic variation in ST6GAL1 is a determinant of capecitabine and oxaliplatin induced hand-foot syndrome.

Cancer patients treated with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) often develop hand-foot syndrome (HFS) or palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. Genetic variation in ST6GAL1 is a risk factor for type-2 diabetes (T2D), a disease also associated with HFS. We analysed genome-wide association data for 10 toxicities in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) patients from the COIN and COIN-B trials. One thousand and fifty-five patients were treated with XELOX ± cetuximab and 745 with folinic acid, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin ± cetuximab. We also analysed rs6783836 in ST6GAL1 with HFS in CRC patients from QUASAR2. Using UK Biobank data, we sought to confirm an association between ST6GAL1 and T2D (17 384 cases, 317 887 controls) and analysed rs6783836 against markers of diabetes, inflammation and psoriasis. We found that 68% of patients from COIN and COIN-B with grade 2-3 HFS responded to treatment as compared to 58% with grade 0-1 HFS (odds ratio [OR] = 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-1.2, P = 2.0 × 10-4 ). HFS was also associated with improved overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.84-0.99, P = 4.6 × 10-2 ). rs6783836 at ST6GAL1 was associated with HFS in patients treated with XELOX (OR = 3.1, 95% CI = 2.1-4.6, P = 4.3 × 10-8 ) and was borderline significant in patients receiving capecitabine from QUASAR2, but with an opposite allele effect (OR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.42-1.03, P = .05). ST6GAL1 was associated with T2D (lead SNP rs3887925, OR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.92-0.96, P = 1.2 × 10-8 ) and the rs6783836-T allele was associated with lowered HbA1c levels (P = 5.9 × 10-3 ) and lymphocyte count (P = 2.7 × 10-3 ), and psoriasis (P = 7.5 × 10-3 ) beyond thresholds for multiple testing. In conclusion, HFS is a biomarker of treatment outcome and rs6783836 in ST6GAL1 is a potential biomarker for HFS with links to T2D and inflammation.

Genome-wide association studies of toxicity to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in 1800 patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Chemotherapies administered at normal therapeutic dosages can cause significant side-effects and may result in early treatment discontinuation. Inter-individual variation in toxicity highlights the need for biomarkers to personalise treatment. We sought to identify such biomarkers by conducting 40 genome-wide association studies, together with gene and gene set analyses, for any toxicity and 10 individual toxicities in 1800 patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy ± cetuximab from the MRC COIN and COIN-B trials (385 patients received FOLFOX, 360 FOLFOX + cetuximab, 707 XELOX and 348 XELOX + cetuximab). Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), genes and gene sets that reached genome-wide or suggestive significance were validated in independent patient groups. We found that MROH5 was significantly associated with neutropenia in MAGMA gene analyses in patients treated with XELOX (P = 6.6 × 10-7 ) and was independently validated in those receiving XELOX + cetuximab; pooled P = 3.7 × 10-7 . rs13260246 at 8q21.13 was significantly associated with vomiting in patients treated with XELOX (odds ratio = 5.0, 95% confidence interval = 3.0-8.3, P = 9.8 × 10-10 ) but was not independently replicated. SNPs at 139 loci had suggestive associations for toxicities and lead SNPs at five of these were independently validated (rs6030266 with diarrhoea, rs1546161 with hand-foot syndrome, rs9601722 with neutropenia, rs13413764 with lethargy and rs4600090 with nausea; all with pooled P's < 5.0 × 10-6 ). In conclusion, the association of MROH5 with neutropenia and five other putative biomarkers warrant further investigation for their potential clinical utility. Despite our comprehensive genome-wide analyses of large, well-characterised, clinical trials, we found a lack of common variants with modest effect sizes associated with toxicities.

Comprehensive pharmacogenetic profiling of the epidermal growth factor receptor pathway for biomarkers of response to, and toxicity from, cetuximab.

BACKGROUND: Somatic mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) intracellular signalling pathways predict non-response to cetuximab in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). We hypothesised that common germline variants within these pathways may also play similar roles. METHODS: We analysed 54 potentially functional, common, inherited EGFR pathway variants in 815 patients with aCRC treated with oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy plus cetuximab. Primary endpoints were response and skin rash (SR). We had >85% power to detect ORs=1.6 for variants with minor allele frequencies >20%. RESULTS: We identified five potential biomarkers for response and four for SR, although none remained significant after correction for multiple testing. Our initial data supported a role for Ser313Pro in PIK3R2 in modulating response to cetuximab-in patients with KRAS wild-type CRCs, 36.4% with one allele encoding proline responded, as compared with 71.2% homozygous for allele encoding serine (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.56, p=0.0014), and this association was predictive for cetuximab (pinteraction=0.017); however, independent replication failed to validate this association. No previously proposed predictive biomarkers were validated. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the need to validate potential pharmacogenetic biomarkers. We did not find strong evidence for common germline biomarkers of cetuximab response and toxicity.

Intermittent chemotherapy plus either intermittent or continuous cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with KRAS wild-type advanced colorectal cancer (COIN-B): a randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Advanced colorectal cancer is treated with a combination of cytotoxic drugs and targeted treatments. However, how best to minimise the time spent taking cytotoxic drugs and whether molecular selection can refine this further is unknown. The primary aim of this study was to establish how cetuximab might be safely and effectively added to intermittent chemotherapy. METHODS: COIN-B was an open-label, multicentre, randomised, exploratory phase 2 trial done at 30 hospitals in the UK and one in Cyprus. We enrolled patients with advanced colorectal cancer who had received no previous chemotherapy for metastases. Randomisation was done centrally (by telephone) by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation with a random element. Treatment allocation was not masked. Patients were assigned (1:1) to intermittent chemotherapy plus intermittent cetuximab or to intermittent chemotherapy plus continuous cetuximab. Chemotherapy was FOLFOX (folinic acid and oxaliplatin followed by bolus and infused fluorouracil). Patients in both groups received FOLFOX and weekly cetuximab for 12 weeks, then either had a planned interruption (those taking intermittent cetuximab) or planned maintenance by continuing on weekly cetuximab (continuous cetuximab). On RECIST progression, FOLFOX plus cetuximab or FOLFOX was recommenced for 12 weeks followed by further interruption or maintenance cetuximab, respectively. The primary outcome was failure-free survival at 10 months. The primary analysis population consisted of patients who completed 12 weeks of treatment without progression, death, or leaving the trial. We tested BRAF and NRAS status retrospectively. The trial was registered, ISRCTN38375681. FINDINGS: We registered 401 patients, 226 of whom were enrolled. Results for 169 with KRAS wild-type are reported here, 78 (46%) assigned to intermittent cetuximab and 91 (54%) to continuous cetuximab. 64 patients assigned to intermittent cetuximab and 66 of those assigned to continuous cetuximab were included in the primary analysis. 10-month failure-free survival was 50% (lower bound of 95% CI 39) in the intermittent group versus 52% (lower bound of 95% CI 41) in the continuous group; median failure-free survival was 12.2 months (95% CI 8.8-15.6) and 14.3 months (10.7-20.4), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were skin rash (21 [27%] of 77 patients vs 20 [22%] of 92 patients), neutropenia (22 [29%] vs 30 [33%]), diarrhoea (14 [18%] vs 23 [25%]), and lethargy (20 [26%] vs 19 [21%]). INTERPRETATION: Cetuximab was safely incorporated in two first-line intermittent chemotherapy strategies. Maintenance of biological monotherapy, with less cytotoxic chemotherapy within the first 6 months, in molecularly selected patients is promising and should be validated in phase 3 trials.

Addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial.

BACKGROUND: In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. FINDINGS: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3-29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4-30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87-1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0-12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1-13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82-1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5-27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5-24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5-31·7). INTERPRETATION: This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Cancer Research Wales, UK Medical Research Council, Merck KGgA.

Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial.

BACKGROUND: When cure is impossible, cancer treatment should focus on both length and quality of life. Maximisation of time without toxic effects could be one effective strategy to achieve both of these goals. The COIN trial assessed preplanned treatment holidays in advanced colorectal cancer to achieve this aim. METHODS: COIN was a randomised controlled trial in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. Patients received either continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination (arm A), continuous chemotherapy plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent (arm C) chemotherapy. In arms A and B, treatment continued until development of progressive disease, cumulative toxic effects, or the patient chose to stop. In arm C, patients who had not progressed at their 12-week scan started a chemotherapy-free interval until evidence of disease progression, when the same treatment was restarted. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and B is described in a companion paper. Here, we compare arms A and C, with the primary objective of establishing whether overall survival on intermittent therapy was non-inferior to that on continuous therapy, with a predefined non-inferiority boundary of 1.162. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. FINDINGS: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to continuous and 815 to intermittent therapy). Median survival in the ITT population (n=815 in both groups) was 15.8 months (IQR 9.4-26.1) in arm A and 14.4 months (8.0-24.7) in arm C (hazard ratio [HR] 1.084, 80% CI 1.008-1.165). In the per-protocol population (arm A, n=467; arm C, n=511), median survival was 19.6 months (13.0-28.1) in arm A and 18.0 months (12.1-29.3) in arm C (HR 1.087, 0.986-1.198). The upper limits of CIs for HRs in both analyses were greater than the predefined non-inferiority boundary. Preplanned subgroup analyses in the per-protocol population showed that a raised baseline platelet count, defined as 400,000 per µL or higher (271 [28%] of 978 patients), was associated with poor survival with intermittent chemotherapy: the HR for comparison of arm C and arm A in patients with a normal platelet count was 0.96 (95% CI 0.80-1.15, p=0.66), versus 1.54 (1.17-2.03, p=0.0018) in patients with a raised platelet count (p=0.0027 for interaction). In the per-protocol population, more patients on continuous than on intermittent treatment had grade 3 or worse haematological toxic effects (72 [15%] vs 60 [12%]), whereas nausea and vomiting were more common on intermittent treatment (11 [2%] vs 43 [8%]). Grade 3 or worse peripheral neuropathy (126 [27%] vs 25 [5%]) and hand-foot syndrome (21 [4%] vs 15 [3%]) were more frequent on continuous than on intermittent treatment. INTERPRETATION: Although this trial did not show non-inferiority of intermittent compared with continuous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer in terms of overall survival, chemotherapy-free intervals remain a treatment option for some patients with advanced colorectal cancer, offering reduced time on chemotherapy, reduced cumulative toxic effects, and improved quality of life. Subgroup analyses suggest that patients with normal baseline platelet counts could gain the benefits of intermittent chemotherapy without detriment in survival, whereas those with raised baseline platelet counts have impaired survival and quality of life with intermittent chemotherapy and should not receive a treatment break. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Pharmacogenetic analyses of 2183 patients with advanced colorectal cancer; potential role for common dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase variants in toxicity to chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Inherited genetic variants may influence response to, and side-effects from, chemotherapy. We sought to generate a comprehensive inherited pharmacogenetic profile for oxaliplatin and 5FU/capecitabine therapy in advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). METHODS: We analysed more than 200 potentially functional, common, inherited variants in genes within the 5FU, capecitabine, oxaliplatin and DNA repair pathways, together with four rare dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) variants, in 2183 aCRC patients treated with oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy with, or without, cetuximab (from MRC COIN and COIN-B trials). Primary end-points were response, any toxicity and peripheral neuropathy. We had >85% power to detect odds ratios (ORs) = 1.3 for variants with minor allele frequencies >20%. RESULTS: Variants in DNA repair genes (Asn279Ser in EXO1 and Arg399Gln in XRCC1) were most associated with response (OR 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.9, P = 0.004, and OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-0.9, P = 0.003, respectively). Common variants in DPYD (Cys29Arg and Val732Ile) were most associated with toxicity (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-1.0, P = 0.008, and OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.1, P = 0.006, respectively). Two rare DPYD variants were associated with increased toxicity (Asp949Val with neutropenia, nausea and vomiting, diarrhoea and infection; IVS14+1G>A with lethargy, diarrhoea, stomatitis, hand-foot syndrome and infection; all ORs > 3). Asp317His in DCLRE1A was most associated with peripheral neuropathy (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, P = 0.003). No common variant associations remained significant after Bonferroni correction. CONCLUSIONS: DNA repair genes may play a significant role in the pharmacogenetics of aCRC. Our data suggest that both common and rare DPYD variants may be associated with toxicity to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.

A Phase I study of pazopanib in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Pazopanib plus gemcitabine combination therapy was explored in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: In a modified 3 + 3 enrollment scheme, oral once-daily pazopanib was administered with intravenous gemcitabine (Days 1 and 8, 21-day cycles). Three protocol-specified dose levels were tested: pazopanib 400 mg plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), pazopanib 800 mg plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), and pazopanib 800 mg plus gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2). Maximum-tolerated dose was based on dose-limiting toxicities during treatment Cycle 1. In the expansion phase, six additional patients were enrolled at the highest tolerable dose level. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled. At the highest dose level tested (pazopanib 800 plus gemcitabine 1,250), patients received >80% of their planned dose and the regimen was deemed safe and tolerable. The most common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue, neutropenia, nausea, and decreased appetite. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were the most common events leading to dose modifications. Pharmacokinetic interaction between pazopanib and gemcitabine was not observed. One objective partial response at the highest dose was observed in a patient with metastatic melanoma. Prolonged disease stabilization (>12 cycles) was reported in three patients (metastatic melanoma, cholangiocarcinoma, and colorectal carcinoma). CONCLUSION: Combination pazopanib plus gemcitabine therapy is tolerable, with an adverse event profile reflective of that associated with the individual agents. There was no apparent pharmacokinetic interaction with pazopanib plus gemcitabine co-administration, although patient numbers were limited. Further investigation of combined pazopanib plus gemcitabine is warranted.

Fulminant hepatic failure in a patient with advanced extragonadal germ cell tumour.

Fulminant hepatic failure (FHF) in association with metastatic cancer, without evidence of liver metastases, has not been previously reported in the literature. This report concerns a case of FHF in a 36-year-old man with advanced germ cell tumour arising from an extragonadal (retroperitoneal) primary. Liver function and encephalopathy improved following chemotherapy, suggesting prompt diagnosis and treatment may have cured the patient. Following completion of chemotherapy, he developed spontaneous bacterial endocarditis, requiring aortic valve replacement, a rare complication of curative chemotherapy. At 44 months post completion of chemotherapy, he has regained his premorbid performance status and has returned to work.