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.

Maintenance Therapy With Cetuximab After FOLFIRI Plus Cetuximab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The optimal maintenance strategy after induction chemotherapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains to be debated. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with single-agent cetuximab after FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) plus cetuximab induction therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: The TIME (Treatment After Irinotecan-Based Frontline Therapy: Maintenance With Erbitux]) (PRODIGE 28 [Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive]-UCGI 27 [UniCancer GastroIntestinal Group]) phase 2 noncomparative, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 15, 2014, to November 23, 2018, among 139 patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC. The cutoff date for analysis was July 21, 2022. Interventions: After first-line induction therapy with 8 cycles of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, patients without disease progression were randomized (1:1) to biweekly maintenance with cetuximab or observation. On disease progression, the same induction regimen was recommended for 16 weeks followed by further maintenance with cetuximab or observation until disease progression under the full induction regimen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 6-month progression-free rate from randomization. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. An exploratory biomolecular analysis, using next-generation sequencing, investigated the putative prognostic value of the tumor mutation profile. Results: Of 214 patients enrolled (141 men [65.9%]; median age, 67 years [range, 23-85 years]), 139 were randomized to receive cetuximab (n = 67; 45 men [67.2%]; median age, 64 years [range, 34-85 years]) or to be observed (n = 72; 50 men [69.4%]; median age, 68 years [23-85 years]). The 6-month progression-free rate was 38.8% ([26 of 67] 95% CI, 27.1%-51.5%) in the cetuximab group and 5.6% ([4 of 72] 95% CI, 1.5%-13.6%) in the observation group. At a median follow-up of 40.5 months (95% CI, 33.6-47.5 months), median progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.7-7.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.7 months) in the observation group. Median overall survival (OS) was 24.8 months (95% CI, 18.7-30.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 19.7 months (95% CI, 13.3-24.4 months) in the observation group. In an exploratory multivariate analysis, any tumor-activating mutation in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway genes was associated with shorter PFS from randomization regardless of treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.01-2.62]; P = .04). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 treatment-related toxic effect in the cetuximab group during maintenance therapy was rash (8 of 67 [11.9%]). Conclusion and Relevance: The randomized clinical trial did not meet its primary end point but suggests clinically meaningful PFS and OS benefits associated with cetuximab maintenance therapy. However, maintenance cetuximab or treatment breaks after first-line combination FOLFIRI-cetuximab therapy seems inappropriate for patients with MAPK-mutated independently of the side of primary tumor. A more complete assessment of MAPK pathway mutations warrants further investigation to the refine treatment strategy for patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02404935.

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).

Resection of small bowel adenocarcinoma metastases: Results of the ARCAD-NADEGE cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Data are lacking with regard to curative resection of metastasis from small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA). This study evaluated outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with curatively resected metastatic SBA. METHODS: A series of 34 patients undergoing resection of metastatic SBA from January 2009 to November 2014 at French centers were included into this cohort study. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and prognostic factors. Univariate analyses were performed to determine prognostic risk factors. RESULTS: The sites of SBA metastases were peritoneal (29.4%), liver (26.5%), lymph nodes (11.8%), lung (2.9%), multiple (14.7%), and other (14.7%). Thirty (88.2%) patients received adjuvant or perioperative chemotherapy, mainly was oxaliplatin-based (76.5%). The median OS was 28.6 months and RFS was 18.7 months. Fourteen (41.2%) patients survived for more than 36 months. In univariate analysis, poor differentiation (P = 0.006), invaded margins (P = 0.003), and lymphatic invasion in the primary tumor (P = 0.039) were associated with decreased OS. CONCLUSION: Overall survival of patients after resection of metastatic SBA remains poor, but long-term survivors are observed. Resection of metastatic SBA should be consider if patients are expected to be operated on with curative intent and have moderately or well-differentiated tumors.

The transfer of multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer to healthcare: What are the implications for the management of patients and families?

Until recently, the molecular diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) was mostly based on BRCA1/2 testing. Next generation sequencing and the recent discovery of new genes involved in HBOC now permit the transfer of genomic capture targeting multiple candidate genes from research to clinical use. However, the implications for the management of patients and their families have not been extensively studied, in particular since some of these genes are not well-established cancer predisposing genes. We studied 583 consecutive patients from Burgundy (France) fulfilling the criteria for BRCA testing using a next generation sequencing 25-genes panel including 20 well-established high-risk cancer genes as well as more recently identified predisposing HBOC cancer. A pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation was found in 51 patients (9%). Besides, we found 37 pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutations in 10 different high to low-risk genes in 34 patients (6%). The most frequently mutated genes were CHEK2 (n = 12; 2%), ATM (n = 9; 1.5%), and PALB2 (n = 4; 0.6%). Three patients had a mutation in two different predisposing genes. The analysis of clinical actionability conducted in mutation-positive individuals revealed that additional disease-specific screening and/or prevention measures beyond those based on personal and family history alone had been recommended in 69% of cases. In conclusion, multigene panel testing is a powerful tool to identifying high to low-risk HBOC susceptibility genes. The penetrance and spectrum of cancers with these other genes are sometimes undefined, and further collaborative work is crucial to address this question.