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.

FOLFIRI Followed by FOLFOX6 or the Reverse Sequence in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized GERCOR Study.

PURPOSE: In metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil (FU) with leucovorin (LV) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone. This phase III study investigated two sequences: folinic acid, FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by folinic acid, FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6; arm A), and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were randomly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m2 or dl-LV 400 mg/m2 followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m2 and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m2 every 46 hours every 2 weeks, either with irinotecan 180 mg/m2 or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion on day 1. At progression, irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin (arm A), or oxaliplatin by irinotecan (arm B). RESULTS: Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI (P = .99). Median second progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B (P = .64). In first-line therapy, FOLFIRI achieved 56% response rate (RR) and 8.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54% RR and 8.0 months median PFS (P = .26). Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4% RR and 2.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15% RR and 4.2 months PFS. In first-line therapy, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis, nausea/vomiting, and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI, and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6. CONCLUSION: Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy. The toxicity profiles were different.

Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-6) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer.

A regimen consisting of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-6) is widely used in France in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). The aim of our study was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus FOLFOX-6 for this indication. Patients were randomly assigned to receive XELOX or FOLFOX-6 for 6 months. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) in the per-protocol (PP) population; however, progression-free and overall survival (OS), time to response and response duration were also assessed. A total of 306 patients were enrolled (XELOX n = 156; FOLFOX-6 n = 150). ORR was 42 and 46% with XELOX and FOLFOX-6, respectively, in the PP population. The difference between groups was 4.7%; the upper limit of the unilateral 95% confidence interval (14.4%) was below the non-inferiority margin of 15%. In the intent-to-treat population, median progression-free survival was 8.8 months with XELOX and 9.3 months with FOLFOX-6, and median OS was 19.9 and 20.5 months, respectively. XELOX patients had significantly more grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (12% vs. 5%) and diarrhoea (14% vs. 7%), but significantly less grade 3/4 neutropenia (5% vs. 47%), febrile neutropenia (0% vs. 6%) and neuropathy (11% vs. 26%) than FOLFOX-6 patients. We conclude that XELOX is non-inferior in terms of efficacy to FOLFOX-6 in the first-line treatment of MCRC, but has a different toxicity profile.

Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene polymorphisms and FOLFOX response in colorectal cancer patients.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT: * Numerous clinical studies, including a few prospective ones, have reported conflicting results on the impact of gene polymorphisms related to fluorouracil (FU) and oxaliplatin pharmacodynamics. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: * This prospective study is the first to report that clinical response to FOLFOX is significantly related to methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene polymorphisms (677C-->T and 1298A-->C), with a response rate of 37, 53, 63 and 80% in patients harbouring no, one, two or three favourable MTHFR alleles, respectively. * Only polymorphisms of genes related to oxaliplatin pharmacodynamics (GSTpi 105Ile-->Val and XPD 751Ly-->Gln) influenced progression-free survival. * These results corroborate the observation that response was related to the cumulative FU dose, whereas progression-free survival was related to the cumulative oxaliplatin dose. AIMS: To test prospectively the predictive value of germinal gene polymorphisms related to fluorouracil (FU) and oxaliplatin (Oxa) pharmacodynamics on toxicity and responsiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients receiving FOLFOX therapy. METHODS: Advanced CRC patients (n= 117) receiving FOLFOX 7 therapy were enrolled. Gene polymorphisms relevant for FU [thymidylate synthase (TYMS, 28 bp repeats including the G-->C mutation + 6 bp deletion in 3'UTR), methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR, 677C-->T, 1298A-->C), dihydropyrimidine deshydrogenase (IVS14+1G-->A) and Oxa: glutathione S-transferase (GST) pi (105Ile-->Val, 114Ala-->Val), excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1) (118AAT-->AAC), ERCC2 (XPD, 751Lys-->Gln) and XRCC1 (399Arg-->Gln)] were determined (blood mononuclear cells). RESULTS: None of the genotypes was predictive of toxicity. Response rate (54.7% complete response + partial response) was related to FU pharmacogenetics, with both 677C-->T (P= 0.042) and 1298A-->C (P= 0.004) MTHFR genotypes linked to clinical response. Importantly, the score of favourable MTHFR alleles (677T and 1298C) was positively linked to response, with response rates of 37.1, 53.3, 62.5 and 80.0% in patients bearing no, one, two or three favourable alleles, respectively (P= 0.040). Polymorphisms of genes related to Oxa pharmacodynamics showed an influence on progression-free survival, with a better outcome in patients bearing GSTpi 105 Val/Val genotype or XPD 751Lys-containing genotype (P= 0.054). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that response to FOLFOX therapy in CRC patients may be driven by MTHFR germinal polymorphisms.

[BRAF V600E-mutant colorectal cancers: Where are we?] / Cancers colorectaux avec mutation V600E de BRAF : où en sommes-nous ?

The BRAFV600E mutation, observed in 8 % of colorectal cancers (CRC), introduces a particular phenotype and a poor prognosis at the localized or metastatic stage. BRAF mutant CRCs are more often localized in the right colon, poorly differentiated and mucinous. They affect an older population (more often female) and are associated with a more frequent metastatic lymph node and peritoneal evolution. The BRAFV600E mutation is associated with a sporadic microsatellite instability (MSI) status in 20 to 40% of cases. In localized colon cancer, it does not imply any modification of the adjuvant treatment. In metastatic CRC, the first action must be the systematic search for an MSI phenotype, given its frequent association with the presence of a BRAF mutation, in order to propose immunotherapy that has been demonstrated to be very effective in MSI metastatic CRC. In non-MSI CRC, a first-line trichimiotherapy associated with bevacizumab is an option to be favored in patients in good general condition but the association with an anti-EGFR can be discussed, especially when the objective is tumor response. At the same time, surgical resection must be systematically discussed in the case of resectable hepatic metastases since the presence of a BRAFV600E mutation is not a risk factor for recurrence and that prolonged survival may be observed after surgery. In the second or third line, the triplet encorafenib, binimetinib and cetuximab, as well as the doublet encorafenib and cetuximab are superior to the association of irinotecan plus cetuximab in terms of response and survival (phase III study BEACON) and represent a new therapeutic standard. Their use on the front line is under study.

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy in combination with chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of locally advanced anal canal carcinoma: Results of a phase I dose-escalation study with panitumumab (FFCD 0904).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Standard treatment of epidermoid anal cancer is 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and mitomycin C (MMC) based chemoradiotherapy (CRT). This phase I study aims to evaluate the addition of panitumumab (Pmab) to CRT and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Pmab and 5-FU in combination with CRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Immunocompetent patients with locally advanced tumour without metastases (Stage T2, T3 or T4, whatever N stage; Stage N1-N3 whatever T stage) followed two RT periods (45 Gy in 5 weeks and 20 Gy in 2 weeks, separated by a 2-week break) with concomitant CT sessions of 5FU/MMC at RT weeks 1, 5 and 8. Pmab was administered on RT weeks 1, 3, 5, 8 and 10 according to a predefined dose escalation schedule. RESULTS: Ten patients were enroled. One was excluded due to unmet dose constraints respect. Three patients received dose level (DL) 0 (Pmab 3 mg/kg + 5FU 600 mg/m2/day) and six received DL-1 (Pmab 3 mg/kg + 5FU 400 mg/m2/day). Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in all patients at DL 0 and 2 at DL-1. Most common grade 3-4 toxicities observed at DL 0 were haematologic (100%), dermatitis (67%), and anaemia (67%). No death occurred. Four months after ending CRT, five and two patients had a local complete response and a partial response, respectively. One patient had a colostomy with abdomino-perineal amputation due to a tumour recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD is 5FU at 400 mg/m2/day, MMC at 10 mg/m2 and Pmab at 3 mg/kg. The effect of the MTD on tumour response is evaluated in the phase 2 study.

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.

Cetuximab shows activity in colorectal cancer patients with tumors for which FISH analysis does not detect an increase in EGFR gene copy number.

BACKGROUND: EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) gene gain assessed by FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) has been shown to be predictive of response to EGFR-targeted therapies in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The aim or our study was to relate the EGFR gene copy number to therapeutic results in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with a cetuximab-containing regimen. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with metastatic CRC treated with a cetuximab-containing regimen between August 2004 and September 2006 were included in our study. EGFR status was assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and by FISH on fixed paraffin-embedded sections of tumor specimens. RESULTS: By IHC (n = 47), 39 patients (83%) had EGFR-positive tumors. EGFR gene copy gain was detected in 8 (19.5%) of 41 tumors. Neither EGFR expression assessed by IHC nor EGFR gene copy gain assessed by FISH were statistically significantly correlated with objective response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Of the 33 patients whose tumors were FISH negative, 8 patients (24.2%) had a partial response, and 10 (30.3%) had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: EGFR FISH analysis does not seem to be a sufficiently robust test for selecting candidate CRC patients for cetuximab therapy.

[Metastatic colorectal cancer: To stop or not to stop?] / Cancer colorectal métastatique : place du traitement d'entretien et de la pause thérapeutique.

The introduction of new regimens and targeted therapies has prolonged survival in metastatic colorectal cancer from 1 year during the fluoropyrimidines-only era to more than 30 months today. Avoiding the cumulative toxicity of oxaliplatin, but also the physical or psychological asthenia of prolonged chemotherapy, is currently a worthwhile management goal. Data from randomized controlled trials indicate that a formalized stop-and-go approach to the delivery of oxaliplatin does not compromise efficacy. This paper presents also a critical review of the randomized trials evaluating the place of bevacizumab and cetuximab as maintenance therapy. To conclude we recommend chemotherapy holidays only after 4 to 6 months of chemotherapy and only in the population of very good responders to the induction treatment.

Computed tomography scan efficacy in staging gastric linitis plastica lesion: a retrospective multicentric French study.

BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) scan is a key imaging technique in the staging of gastric adenocarcinoma and therapeutic management of patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of CT scan in the staging of parietal and metastatic invasion in gastric linitis plastica group. METHODS: A retrospective multicentric French study was conducted from January 2006 to December 2015 on patients with no metastatic gastric linitis plastica and operated by gastrec-tomy. A 2/1 matching based on pTNM stage and center was performed. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the linitis plastica group and 100 in the control group. Patients from the linitis group were significantly different from those from the control group with a lower age at diagnosis, a more advanced histological lesion, a more frequent undiagnosed peritoneal carcinomatosis, and a higher risk of R1 resection. Sensitivity and specificity of CT scan for the diagnosis of lymph node involvement were 44% and 75%, respectively, in the linitis plastica group and 55% and 60%, respectively, in the control group. The sensitivity and specificity of CT scan for the T3-T4 parietal invasion were 26% and 100%, respectively, in the linitis group and 40% and 72%, respectively, in the control group. CONCLUSION: CT scan has an equal sensitivity and specificity for the evaluation of lymph node and parietal involvement in gastric adenocarcinoma, including linitis plastica. CT scan remains the cornerstone of preoperative evaluation in gastric adenocarcinoma, including linitis plastica. However, CT presents a lack of sensitivity to diagnose low-volume peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Preoperative treatment combining capecitabine with radiation therapy in rectal cancer: a GERCOR Phase II Study.

OBJECTIVE(S): To assess efficacy and tolerability of preoperative capecitabine chemoradiation in rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients received radiotherapy 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks and capecitabine 825 mg/m(2) twice daily throughout radiotherapy. Surgery was performed 5-7 weeks after radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response, secondary endpoints were downstaging and tolerability. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were enrolled in a phase II study, median age 62 years (range 35-78). Sixty-three percent of tumours involved the lower third of the rectum, 45% were fixed. The median delivered radiotherapy dose was 44.8 Gy (range 39.6-45.0 Gy) over 33-49 days. The treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were diarrhoea (12%), skin reactions (8%) and asthenia (8%), with no grade 4 toxicity. Fifty patients underwent surgery (29 conservative) and 1 patient refused. The pathological complete response rate was 20% and a further 10% of patients had minimal residual disease. Additional tumour downstaging was seen in 28% of patients and the sphincter preservation rate was 58%. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative capecitabine chemoradiation is well tolerated and its efficacy supports further exploration, both as a single agent and as part of new therapeutic strategies.

Care pathway of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer in daily practice in France: Results from the REPERE national survey.

Data in the literature regarding the care pathway of pancreatic cancer patients are limited. The objective of the REPERE survey was to identify and describe the initial stages of the care pathway of pancreatic patients in the metastatic phase. From May to October 2015, 62 oncologists (ON) or gastroenterologists specialized in digestive oncology (GESDO) and 300 general practitioners (GP) completed an electronic questionnaire on the pathway of 728 patients recently diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Of these patients, 200 completed a questionnaire given by a specialized physician (ON/GESDO). Weight loss (65%), fatigue (53%) or anorexia (49%) were the main signs/symptoms that motivated the patients to seek medical advice. For 87% of patients, the general practitioner was the first medicine doctor they consulted. According to the respondents (patient, general practitioner or specialist), the median delay between the onset of the first symptoms and the final diagnosis of pancreatic cancer was between 41 and 65 days. This time lapse tended to decrease with associated jaundice (-15 days on average, standard deviation=8, P<0.1 NS) or with patient concerns triggered by the first symptoms (-11 days on average, standard deviation=6, P<0.05). On the contrary, the time lapse was longer (+14 days on average, standard deviation=6, P<0.05) when the general practitioner prescribed symptomatic treatment. In conclusion, diagnostic management of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer should be accelerated with efforts to raise practitioners' awareness.

Chemoradiotherapy with FOLFOX plus cetuximab in locally advanced oesophageal cancer: The GERCOR phase II trial ERaFOX.

BACKGROUND: To determine efficacy and toxicity of radiation therapy combined with oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and folinic acid (FOLFOX) and cetuximab in patients with locally advanced oesophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage III oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer were enrolled in a Simon's two-stage phase II study. Patients received FOLFOX and weekly cetuximab on week 1-10 with concurrent radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 30 fractions) on week 5-10. Primary end-point was clinical overall response rate (ORR). An ORR rate of more than 50% was expected. RESULTS: Among the 79 included patients, clinical ORR was 77% with 40% complete responses. Median overall survival and progression-free survival were 21.6 and 11.3 months, respectively. The most common grade III-IV toxicities observed during experimental chemoimmunotherapy followed by chemoradiation included neutropenia (28%), oesophagitis (12%), rash (11%), and allergy (9%). There was one treatment-related death due to oesophagitis with gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Cetuximab-FOLFOX regimen combined with radiotherapy demonstrated its efficacy and was well tolerated. Unfortunately, these results were not confirmed in two recent phase III studies.

FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study.

PURPOSE: In metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil (FU) with leucovorin (LV) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone. This phase III study investigated two sequences: folinic acid, FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by folinic acid, FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6; arm A), and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were randomly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m(2) or dl-LV 400 mg/m(2) followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m(2) and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m(2) every 46 hours every 2 weeks, either with irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) as a 2-hour infusion on day 1. At progression, irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin (arm A), or oxaliplatin by irinotecan (arm B). RESULT: Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI (P =.99). Median second progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B (P =.64). In first-line therapy, FOLFIRI achieved 56% response rate (RR) and 8.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54% RR and 8.0 months median PFS (P =.26). Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4% RR and 2.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15% RR and 4.2 months PFS. In first-line therapy, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis, nausea/vomiting, and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI, and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6. CONCLUSION: Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy. The toxicity profiles were different.

Randomized multicenter phase II trial of a biweekly regimen of fluorouracil and leucovorin (LV5FU2), LV5FU2 plus cisplatin, or LV5FU2 plus irinotecan in patients with previously untreated metastatic gastric cancer: a Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive Group Study--FFCD 9803.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and safety of a biweekly regimen of leucovorin (LV) plus fluorouracil (FU) alone or in combination with cisplatin or irinotecan in patients with previously untreated metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma and to select the best arm for a phase III study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty-six patients (two were ineligible) were enrolled onto the randomized multicenter phase II trial. Patients received LV 200 mg/m(2) (2-hour infusion) followed by FU 400 mg/m(2) (bolus) and FU 600 mg/m(2) (22-hour continuous infusion) on days 1 and 2 every 14 days (LV5FU2; arm A), LV5FU2 plus cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) (1-hour infusion) on day 1 or 2 (arm B), or LV5FU2 plus irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) (2-hour infusion) on day 1 (arm C). RESULTS: The overall response rates, which were confirmed by an independent expert panel, were 13% (95% CI, 3.4% to 23.3%), 27% (95% CI, 14.1% to 40.4%), and 40% (95% CI, 25.7% to 54.3%) for arms A, B, and C, respectively. Median progression-free survival and overall survival times were 3.2 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 4.6 months) and 6.8 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 11.1 months) with LV5FU2, respectively; 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.5 to 6.3 months) and 9.5 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 12.2 months) with LV5FU2-cisplatin, respectively; and 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 8.3 months) and 11.3 months (95% CI, 9.3 to 13.3 months) with LV5FU2-irinotecan, respectively. CONCLUSION: Of the three regimens tested, the combination of LV5FU2-irinotecan is the most promising and will be assessed in a phase III trial.

Postoperative chemoradiotherapy after surgical resection of gastric adenocarcinoma: can LV5FU2 reduce the toxic effects of the MacDonald regimen? A report on 23 patients.

AIM OF THE STUDY: A North American phase III trial has recently shown that postoperative chemoradiotherapy using the FUFOL Mayo Clinic regimen improves overall survival and relapse-free survival after surgical resection of gastric cancer. However, severe grade 3-4, hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicities were frequent. The aim of this retrospective and multicentric study was to determine the tolerance of a postoperative chemoradiotherapy regimen using LV5FU2 instead of the Mayo Clinic regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients with resected adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction at high risk of recurrence were treated with LV5FU2 chemotherapy and radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions and 5 weeks) delivered to the tumor bed and regional nodes. Nineteen patients were treated with two to four cycles before radiotherapy, then three cycles during radiotherapy, and finally four cycles after radiotherapy; four patients were only given three cycles during radiotherapy. RESULTS: Of the 23 patients assigned to this protocol, 20 completed treatment (87%). There was only one interruption of treatment because of hematologic or gastrointestinal toxicity. Tolerance of LV5FU2 regimen associated with radiotherapy was excellent: one grade 3 or 4 gastrointestinal toxicity (4.3%), no toxic death, and only one grade 3 neutropenia (4.3%) were reported. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy combined with LV5FU2 appears to be better tolerated than the Mayo Clinic regimen used in the North American study. These results have to be considered when elaborating future postoperative chemoradiotherapy trials for gastric cancer.

Complete pathological response of unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer after trans-arterial chemoembolization with drug-eluting beads loaded with irinotecan (DEBIRI) and concomitant systemic FOLFOX: A case report from the FFCD 1201 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Most liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC) are unresectable at diagnosis. Systemic chemotherapy allows secondary surgical resection in 10 to 20% of patients. Hepatic intra-arterial treatments could enhance response and resection rate. We therefore designed a prospective phase II trial testing the transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) using drug-eluting beads loaded with irinotecan (DEBIRI) with concomitant systemic FOLFOX regimen, the FFCD 1201 trial, in patients with liver limited metastatic CRC. CASE REPORT: A 48-year old patient was operated from an occlusive sigmoid adenocarcinoma. Magnetic resonance imaging showed 6 bilobar liver metastasis. The patient was considered as non-eligible for surgery initially. Patient was included in the FFCD 1201 trial and received 5 cycles of FOLFOX and 2 sessions of DEBIRI, with a quite good tolerability. Post-treatment evaluation showed a partial response and sufficient tumor shrinkage to make liver metastasis resectable. Right hepatectomy associated with wedge resection in the left liver was performed and pathological findings showed a complete pathological response (CPR). CONCLUSION: Combination of DEBIRI with FOLFOX could increase tumor shrinkage leading to secondary resection of liver metastases from CRC. This combination may also, as shown here for the first time in a patient with unresectable LM, induce CPR of all LM, known to be associated with better outcome. Our case also emphasizes the difficulty to morphologically assess pathological response and the need for new tool to better select patients who should be resected. Further results of the FFCD 1201 trial will bring more information on this new combination therapy.

Platinum-sensitivity in metastatic colorectal cancer: towards a definition.

BACKGROUND: First-line oxaliplatin-based therapy is the standard treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but its dose-limiting toxicity is sensory neuropathy. The OPTIMisation of OXaliplatin (OPTIMOX) stop-and-go approach with oxaliplatin-free interval (OFI) offers a reasonable strategy. Influence of the first-line oxaliplatin-based treatment efficacy and the duration of OFI on tumour sensitivity to oxaliplatin reintroduction were investigated. METHODS: This was a pooled analysis of OPTIMOX1 and OPTIMOX2 studies, on 285 patients with previously untreated mCRC and FOLFOX reintroduction. An optimal OFI was estimated. Efficacy endpoints measured from reintroduction of FOLFOX included response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). FINDINGS: Two groups of OFI <6 and ≥ 6 months, were defined. The RR following FOLFOX reintroduction were 14% and 22% in patients with an OFI <6 and ≥ 6 months, respectively (overall RR 19%). The median PFS after FOLFOX reintroduction following OFI< 6 and ≥ 6 months were 3.0 [95% confidence intervals (CI): 2.7-3.7] and 5.5 months [95% CI: 4.8-6.5], respectively. The median OS following OFI <6 months was 8.8 months [95% CI: 7.5-10.5] and OFI ≥ 6 was months 16.8 months [95% CI: 15.3-19.6]. In the case of partial response (PR), median PFS and OS were 4.6 [95% CI: 4.1-5.0] and 14 months [95% CI: 12.1-16.4], respectively, whereas in patients with initial stable disease (SD) 3.4 [95% CI: 2.7-4.7] and 10.3 months [95% CI: 7.3-12.9], respectively. INTERPRETATION: A sensitive population of patients more likely to benefit from oxaliplatin reintroduction is defined by the efficacy of induction therapy followed by an OFI of at least 6 months between two periods of FOLFOX therapy. OFI of < 6 months identifies a subgroup of partially-resistant patients who can still benefit from oxaliplatin reintroduction.

Adjuvant therapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin in stage II and elderly patients (between ages 70 and 75 years) with colon cancer: subgroup analyses of the Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer trial.

PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin combined with fluoropyrimidine improves survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. However, adjuvant chemotherapy with oxaliplatin is controversial in stage II and elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed subgroup analyses of stage II and elderly patients randomly assigned fluorouracil with leucovorin (FL) ± oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) in the Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin/Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer study. Comorbidities, severe adverse events, second cancers, management of relapse and death as a result of causes than other colon cancer were studied. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred forty-six patients were enrolled. Overall, 899 patients had stage II disease, including 330 low-risk and 569 high-risk patients. A total of 315 patients were ages 70 to 75 years. For stage II patients, the hazard ratio (HR) for comparing FOLFOX4 with FL was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.62 to 01.14) for disease-free survival (DFS), 0.70 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.99) for time to recurrence (TTR), and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.41) for overall survival (OS). There was no interaction between treatment and stage or age. Low-risk stage II patients did not benefit from oxaliplatin. In high-risk stage II patients, the HR comparing FOLFOX4 with FL was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51 to 1.01) for DFS, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.41 to 0.92) for TTR, and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.36) for OS. In elderly patients, the HR comparing FOLFOX4 with FL was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.64 to 1.35) for DFS, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.47 to 1.11) for TTR, and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.65) for OS. CONCLUSION: The results of these subset analyses show no statistically significant benefit (OS and DFS) for the addition of oxaliplatin to FL as adjuvant treatment for either stage II and elderly patients.

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

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