INTEGRATE II: randomised phase III controlled trials of regorafenib containing regimens versus standard of care in refractory Advanced Gastro-Oesophageal Cancer (AGOC): a study by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG).

BACKGROUND: Advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer (AGOC) carries a poor prognosis. No standard of care treatment options are available after first and second-line therapies. Regorafenib is an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. Regorafenib 160 mg daily prolonged progression free survival compared to placebo (INTEGRATE, phase 2). Regorafenib 80 mg daily in combination with nivolumab 3 mg/kg showed promising objective response rates (REGONIVO). METHODS/DESIGN: INTEGRATE II (INTEGRATE IIa and IIb) platform comprises two international phase III randomised controlled trials (RCT) with 2:1 randomisation in favor of experimental intervention. INTEGRATE IIa (double-blind) compares regorafenib 160 mg daily on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle to placebo. INTEGRATE IIb (open label) compares REGONIVO, regorafenib 90 mg days 1 to 21 in combination with intravenous nivolumab 240 mg days 1 and 15 each 28-day cycle with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (control). Treatment continues until disease progression or intolerable adverse events as per protocol. Eligible participants include adults with AGOC who have failed two or more lines of treatment. Stratification is by location of tumour (INTEGRATE IIa only), geographic region, prior VEGF inhibitor and prior immunotherapy use (INTEGRATE IIb only). Primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are progression free survival, objective response rate, quality of life, and safety. Tertiary/correlative objectives include biomarker and pharmacokinetic evaluation. DISCUSSION: INTEGRATE II provides a platform to evaluate the clinical utility of regorafenib alone, as well as regorafenib in combination with nivolumab in treatment of participants with refractory AGOC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: INTEGRATE IIa prospectively registered 1 April 2016 Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000420448 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02773524). INTEGRATE IIb prospectively registered 10 May 2021 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04879368.

Predictive value of chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 loss for benefit from bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: A post hoc analysis of the randomized phase III-trial AGITG-MAX.

The VEGF-A monoclonal antibody bevacizumab is currently recommended for first-line treatment of all metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Cost-benefit ratio and side-effects however necessitate patient selection. A large retrospective yet nonrandomized study showed that patients with loss of chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 in the tumor and treated with bevacizumab have 3 months improved median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefit compared to patients without this loss and/or treatment modality. Implementation for loss of chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 as a marker in clinical practice mandates evidence in a randomized controlled trial for bevacizumab. Of the trials with randomization of chemotherapy vs chemotherapy with bevacizumab, the AGITG-MAX trial was the only one with tumor materials available. Chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 copy number status was measured for 256 AGITG-MAX trial patients and correlated with PFS according to a predefined analysis plan with marker-treatment interaction as the primary end-point. Chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 losses were detected in 71% of patients (181/256) characteristic for mCRC. Consistent with the nonrandomized study, significant PFS benefit of bevacizumab was observed in patients with chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 loss (P = .009), and not in patients without 18q loss (P = .67). Although significance for marker-treatment interaction was not reached (Pinteraction  = .28), hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval of this randomized cohort (HRinteraction  = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.39-1.32) shows striking overlap with the nonrandomized study cohorts (HRinteraction  = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.32-0.8) supported by a nonsignificant Cochrane χ2 test (P = .11) for heterogeneity. We conclude that post hoc analysis of the AGITG-MAX RCT provides supportive evidence for chromosome 18q11.2-q12.1 as a predictive marker for bevacizumab in mCRC patients.

A phase 1 safety and bioimaging trial of antibody DS-8895a against EphA2 in patients with advanced or metastatic EphA2 positive cancers.

Ephrin type-A 2 (EphA2) is a transmembrane receptor expressed in epithelial cancers. We report on a phase I dose escalation and biodistribution study of DS-8895a, an anti-EphA2 antibody, in patients with advanced EphA2 positive cancers. DS-8895a was administered at 1, 3, 10 or 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks to determine safety, pharmacokinetics and anti-tumor efficacy. All patients underwent 89Zr trace-labelled infusion of DS-8895a (89Zr-DS-8995a) positron emission tomography imaging to determine the biodistribution of DS-8895a, and correlate findings with EphA2 expression, receptor saturation and response. Nine patients were enrolled on study. Of patients enrolled, seven patients received at least one infusion of DS-8895a: four patients received 1 mg/kg dose (Cohort 1) and three patients received 3 mg/kg dose (Cohort 2). Median age was 67.0 years (range 52-81), majority male (71%), and median number of prior systemic therapies was three (range 0-8). The primary cancer diagnosis was colorectal cancer (two patients) and one patient each had gastric, head and neck, high-grade serous adenocarcinoma, lung, and pancreatic cancers. No dose-limiting toxicities or treatment-related adverse events reported. The best response for the patients in Cohort 1 was stable disease and in Cohort 2 was progressive disease. 89Zr-DS-8895a demonstrated no normal tissue uptake and specific low-grade uptake in most tumours. DS-8895a had limited therapeutic efficacy at doses evaluated and 89Zr-DS-8895a demonstrated low tumour uptake. The biodistribution data from this study were key in halting further development of DS-8895a, highlighting the importance of biodistribution studies in drug development. (Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02252211).

Prognostic significance of postsurgery circulating tumor DNA in nonmetastatic colorectal cancer: Individual patient pooled analysis of three cohort studies.

Studies in multiple solid tumor types have demonstrated the prognostic significance of ctDNA analysis after curative intent surgery. A combined analysis of data across completed studies could further our understanding of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as a prognostic marker and inform future trial design. We combined individual patient data from three independent cohort studies of nonmetastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Plasma samples were collected 4 to 10 weeks after surgery. Mutations in ctDNA were assayed using a massively parallel sequencing technique called SafeSeqS. We analyzed 485 CRC patients (230 Stage II colon, 96 Stage III colon, and 159 locally advanced rectum). ctDNA was detected after surgery in 59 (12%) patients overall (11.0%, 12.5% and 13.8% for samples taken at 4-6, 6-8 and 8-10 weeks; P = .740). ctDNA detection was associated with poorer 5-year recurrence-free (38.6% vs 85.5%; P < .001) and overall survival (64.6% vs 89.4%; P < .001). The predictive accuracy of postsurgery ctDNA for recurrence was higher than that of individual clinicopathologic risk features. Recurrence risk increased exponentially with increasing ctDNA mutant allele frequency (MAF) (hazard ratio, 1.2, 2.5 and 5.8 for MAF of 0.1%, 0.5% and 1%). Postsurgery ctDNA was detected in 3 of 20 (15%) patients with locoregional and 27 of 60 (45%) with distant recurrence (P = .018). This analysis demonstrates a consistent long-term impact of ctDNA as a prognostic marker across nonmetastatic CRC, where ctDNA outperforms other clinicopathologic risk factors and MAF further stratifies recurrence risk. ctDNA is a better predictor of distant vs locoregional recurrence.

Circulating tumor DNA dynamics and recurrence risk in patients undergoing curative intent resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), the role of pre- and postoperative systemic therapy continues to be debated. Previous studies have shown that circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis, as a marker of minimal residual disease, is a powerful prognostic factor in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Serial analysis of ctDNA in patients with resectable CRLM could inform the optimal use of perioperative chemotherapy. Here, we performed a validation study to confirm the prognostic impact of postoperative ctDNA in resectable CRLM observed in a previous discovery study. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We prospectively collected plasma samples from patients with resectable CRLM, including presurgical and postsurgical samples, serial samples during any pre- or postoperative chemotherapy, and serial samples in follow-up. Via targeted sequencing of 15 genes commonly mutated in CRC, we identified at least 1 somatic mutation in each patient's tumor. We then designed a personalized assay to assess 1 mutation in plasma samples using the Safe-SeqS assay. A total of 380 plasma samples from 54 patients recruited from July 2011 to Dec 2014 were included in our analysis. Twenty-three (43%) patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 42 patients (78%) received adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery. Median follow-up was 51 months (interquartile range, 31 to 60 months). At least 1 somatic mutation was identified in all patients' tumor tissue. ctDNA was detectable in 46/54 (85%) patients prior to any treatment and 12/49 (24%) patients after surgery. There was a median 40.93-fold (19.10 to 87.73, P < 0.001) decrease in ctDNA mutant allele fraction with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, but ctDNA clearance during neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with a better recurrence-free survival (RFS). Patients with detectable postoperative ctDNA experienced a significantly lower RFS (HR 6.3; 95% CI 2.58 to 15.2; P < 0.001) and overall survival (HR 4.2; 95% CI 1.5 to 11.8; P < 0.001) compared to patients with undetectable ctDNA. For the 11 patients with detectable postoperative ctDNA who had serial ctDNA sampling during adjuvant chemotherapy, ctDNA clearance was observed in 3 patients, 2 of whom remained disease-free. All 8 patients with persistently detectable ctDNA after adjuvant chemotherapy have recurred. End-of-treatment (surgery +/- adjuvant chemotherapy) ctDNA detection was associated with a 5-year RFS of 0% compared to 75.6% for patients with an undetectable end-of-treatment ctDNA (HR 14.9; 95% CI 4.94 to 44.7; P < 0.001). Key limitations of the study include the small sample size and the potential for false-positive findings with multiple hypothesis testing. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed the prognostic impact of postsurgery and posttreatment ctDNA in patients with resected CRLM. The potential utility of serial ctDNA analysis during adjuvant chemotherapy as an early marker of treatment efficacy was also demonstrated. Further studies are required to define how to optimally integrate ctDNA analyses into decision-making regarding the use and timing of adjuvant therapy for resectable CRLM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12612000345886.

Overexpression of TP53 protein is associated with the lack of adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in patients with stage III colorectal cancer.

TP53 mutations drive colorectal cancer development, with missense mutations frequently leading to accumulation of abnormal TP53 protein. TP53 alterations have been associated with poor prognosis and chemotherapy resistance, but data remain controversial. Here, we examined the predictive utility of TP53 overexpression in the context of current adjuvant treatment practice for patients with stage III colorectal cancer. A prospective cohort of 264 stage III patients was tested for association of TP53 expression with 5-year disease-free survival, grouped by adjuvant treatment. Findings were validated in an independent retrospective cohort of 274 stage III patients. Overexpression of TP53 protein (TP53+) was found in 53% and 52% of cases from the prospective and retrospective cohorts, respectively. Among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, TP53+ status was associated with shorter disease-free survival (p ≤ 0.026 for both cohorts), while no difference in outcomes between TP53+ and TP53- cases was observed for patients treated with surgery alone. Considering patients with TP53- tumors, those receiving adjuvant treatment had better outcomes compared with those treated with surgery alone (p ≤ 0.018 for both cohorts), while no treatment benefit was apparent for patients with TP53+ tumors. Combined cohort-stratified analysis adjusted for clinicopathological variables and DNA mismatch repair status confirmed a significant interaction between TP53 expression and adjuvant treatment for disease-free survival (pinteraction = 0.030). For the combined cohort, the multivariate hazard ratio for TP53 overexpression among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy was 2.03 (95% confidence interval 1.41-2.95, p < 0.001), while the hazard ratio for adjuvant treatment among patients with TP53- tumors was 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.24-0.71, p = 0.001). Findings were maintained irrespective of tumor location or when restricted to mismatch repair-proficient tumors. Our data suggest that adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in stage III colorectal cancer is restricted to cases with low-level TP53 protein expression. Identifying TP53+ tumors could highlight patients that may benefit from more aggressive treatment or follow-up.

Atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (IMblaze370): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer is typically unresponsive to immunotherapy. This phase 3 study was designed to assess atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report the comparison of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab monotherapy versus regorafenib in the third-line setting. METHODS: IMblaze 370 is a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial, done at 73 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and disease progression on or intolerance to at least two previous systemic chemotherapy regimens were enrolled. We used permuted-block randomisation (block size four) to assign patients (2:1:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus cobimetinib (60 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle), atezolizumab monotherapy (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks), or regorafenib (160 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle). Stratification factors were extended RAS status (wild-type vs mutant) and time since diagnosis of first metastasis (<18 months vs ≥18 months). Recruitment of patients with high microsatellite instability was capped at 5%. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. IMblaze370 is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02788279. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2016, and Jan 19, 2017, 363 patients were enrolled (183 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 90 in the regorafenib group). At data cutoff (March 9, 2018), median follow-up was 7·3 months (IQR 3·7-13·6). Median overall survival was 8·87 months (95% CI 7·00-10·61) with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib, 7·10 months (6·05-10·05) with atezolizumab, and 8·51 months (6·41-10·71) with regorafenib; the hazard ratio was 1·00 (95% CI 0·73-1·38; p=0·99) for the combination versus regorafenib and 1·19 (0·83-1·71; p=0·34) for atezolizumab versus regorafenib. Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 109 (61%) of 179 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 28 (31%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 46 (58%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events in the combination group were diarrhoea (20 [11%] of 179), anaemia (ten [6%]), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (12 [7%]), and fatigue (eight [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 71 (40%) of 179 patients in the combination group, 15 (17%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 18 (23%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group (sepsis) and one in the regorafenib group (intestinal perforation). INTERPRETATION: IMblaze370 did not meet its primary endpoint of improved overall survival with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab versus regorafenib. The safety of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib was consistent with those of the individual drugs. These results underscore the challenge of expanding the benefit of immunotherapy to patients whose tumours have lower baseline levels of immune inflammation, such as those with microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc.

The Impact of Positive Resection Margins on Survival and Recurrence Following Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies. METHODS: Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1 mm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1 mm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.

Phase II study of everolimus (RAD001) monotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced biliary tract cancer with biomarker exploration: the RADiChol Study.

BACKGROUND: Advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. This exploratory phase II study aimed to evaluate the activity of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus in advanced BTC and explore prognostic biomarkers. METHODS: Patients with advanced BTCs, who had not received chemotherapy for advanced disease, were enroled to receive everolimus (10 mg daily). The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events. Activation status of the RAS and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mTOR pathways was assessed by DNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry on archival tumour tissue. RESULTS: The study enroled 27 patients and the DCR at 12 weeks was 48%. Median PFS was 5.5 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.1-10.0 months) and median OS was 9.5 months (95% CI: 5.5-16.6 months). DCR at 12 weeks was significantly worse for gall bladder carcinoma compared to other anatomical sites, and there was a trend towards a worsened PFS and OS. Treatment was well tolerated. KRAS (12%) and PIK3CA mutations (12%) were uncommon. Immunohistochemical staining for PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways did not significantly correlate with outcome. CONCLUSION: In unselected patients, everolimus demonstrated clinical activity as first-line monotherapy in advanced BTC.

Rilotumumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine as first-line therapy in advanced MET-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (RILOMET-1): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rilotumumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the ligand of the MET receptor, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF). We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of rilotumumab combined with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine, and to assess potential biomarkers, in patients with advanced MET-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study was done at 152 centres in 27 countries. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, MET-positive tumours (≥25% of tumour cells with membrane staining of ≥1+ staining intensity), and evaluable disease, who had not received previous systemic therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computerised voice response system to receive rilotumumab 15 mg/kg intravenously or placebo in combination with open-label chemotherapy (epirubicin 50 mg/m2 intravenously; cisplatin 60 mg/m2 intravenously; capecitabine 625 mg/m2 orally twice daily) in 21-day cycles for up to ten cycles. After completion of chemotherapy, patients continued to receive rilotumumab or placebo monotherapy until disease progression, intolerability, withdrawal of consent, or study termination. Randomisation was stratified by disease extent and ECOG performance status. Both patients and physicians were masked to study treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01697072. FINDINGS: Between Nov 7, 2012, and Nov 21, 2014, 609 patients were randomly assigned to rilotumumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (rilotumumab group; n=304) or placebo plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (placebo group; n=305). Study treatment was stopped early after an independent data monitoring committee found a higher number of deaths in the rilotumumab group than in the placebo group; all patients in the rilotumumab group subsequently discontinued all study treatment. Median follow-up was 7·7 months (IQR 3·6-12·0) for patients in the rilotumumab group and 9·4 months (5·3-13·1) for patients in the placebo group. Median overall survival was 8·8 months (95% CI 7·7-10·2) in the rilotumumab group compared with 10·7 months (9·6-12·4) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 1·34, 95% CI 1·10-1·63; p=0·003). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the rilotumumab and placebo groups were neutropenia (86 [29%] of 298 patients vs 97 [32%] of 299 patients), anaemia (37 [12%] vs 43 [14%]), and fatigue (30 [10%] vs 35 [12%]). The frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the rilotumumab and placebo groups (142 [48%] vs 149 [50%]). More deaths due to adverse events occurred in the rilotumumab group than the placebo group (42 [14%] vs 31 [10%]). In the rilotumumab group, 33 (11%) of 298 patients had fatal adverse events due to disease progression, and nine (3%) had fatal events not due to disease progression. In the placebo group, 23 (8%) of 299 patients had fatal adverse events due to disease progression, and eight (3%) had fatal events not due to disease progression. INTERPRETATION: Ligand-blocking inhibition of the MET pathway with rilotumumab is not effective in improving clinical outcomes in patients with MET-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Amgen.

Prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer given systemic therapy: an analysis of individual patient data from prospective randomised trials from the Analysis and Research in Cancers of the Digestive System (ARCAD) database.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer have reduced overall survival compared with patients with metastatic colorectal cancer without peritoneal involvement. Here we further investigated the effect of the number and location of metastases in patients receiving first-line systemic chemotherapy. METHODS: We analysed individual patient data for previously untreated patients enrolled in 14 phase 3 randomised trials done between 1997 and 2008. Trials were included if protocols explicitly pre-specified and solicited for patients with peritoneal involvement in the trial data collection process or had done a formal peritoneum-focused review of individual pre-treatment scans. We used stratified multivariable Cox models to assess the prognostic associations of peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer with overall survival and progression-free survival, adjusting for other key clinical-pathological factors (age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score, primary tumour location [colon vs rectum], previous treatment, and baseline BMI). The primary endpoint was difference in overall survival between populations with and without peritoneal metastases. FINDINGS: Individual patient data were available for 10 553 patients. 9178 (87%) of 10 553 patients had non-peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer (4385 with one site of metastasis, 4793 with two or more sites of metastasis), 194 (2%) patients had isolated peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer, and 1181 (11%) had peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer and other organ involvement. These groups were similar in age, ethnic origin, and use of targeted treatment. Patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer were more likely than those with non-peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer to be women (565 [41%] of 1371 vs 3312 [36%] of 9169 patients; p=0·0003), have colon primary tumours (1116 [84%] of 1334 patients vs 5603 [66%]; p<0·0001), and have performance status of 2 (136 [10%] vs 521 [6%]; p<0·0001). We recorded a higher proportion of patients with mutated BRAF in patients with peritoneal-only (eight [18%] of 44 patients with available data) and peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer with other sites of metastasis (34 [12%] of 289), compared with patients with non-peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer (194 [9%] of 2230; p=0·028 comparing the three groups). Overall survival (adjusted HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·63-0·91; p=0·003) was better in patients with isolated non-peritoneal sites than in those with isolated peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer. Overall survival of patients with two of more non-peritoneal sites of metastasis (adjusted HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·86-1·25, p=0.69) and those with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer plus one other site of metastasis (adjusted HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·89-1·37, p=0·37) was similar to those with isolated peritoneal metastases. Compared with patients with isolated peritoneal metastases, those with peritoneal metastases and two or more additional sites of metastasis had the shortest survival (adjusted HR 1·40; CI 1·14-1·71; p=0·0011). INTERPRETATION: Patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer have significantly shorter overall survival than those with other isolated sites of metastases. In patients with several sites of metastasis, poor survival is a function of both increased number of metastatic sites and peritoneal involvement. The pattern of metastasis and in particular, peritoneal involvement, results in prognostic heterogeneity of metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: None.

Panitumumab added to docetaxel, cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine in oesophagogastric cancer: ATTAX3 phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomised phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of panitumumab added to docetaxel-based chemotherapy in advanced oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: Patients with metastatic or locally recurrent cancer of the oesophagus, oesophagogastric junction or stomach received docetaxel and a fluoropyrimidine with or without panitumumab for 8 cycles or until progression. The primary end point was response rate (RECIST1.1). We planned to enrol 100 patients, with 50% expected response rate for combination therapy. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients were enrolled. A safety alert from the REAL3 trial prompted a review of data that found no evidence of adverse outcomes associated with panitumumab but questionable efficacy, and new enrolment was ceased. Enrolled patients were treated according to protocol. Response rates were 49% (95% CI 34-64%) in the chemotherapy arm and 58% (95% CI 42-72%) in the combination arm. Common grade 3 and 4 toxicities included infection, anorexia, vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue. At 23.7 months of median follow-up, median progression-free survival was 6.9 months vs 6.0 months and median overall survival was 11.7 months vs 10.0 months in the chemotherapy arm and the combination arm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adding panitumumab to docetaxel-based chemotherapy for advanced oesophagogastric cancer did not improve efficacy and increased toxicities.

A Randomized Phase II Study of FOLFOX With or Without the MET Inhibitor Onartuzumab in Advanced Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach and Gastroesophageal Junction.

BACKGROUND: The phase II YO28252 study (NCT01590719) examined first-line onartuzumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with metastatic, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. MET immunohistochemistry expression as a biomarker of onartuzumab activity was also examined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive standard mFOLFOX6 plus onartuzumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo in 2-week cycles for 12 cycles, followed by onartuzumab or placebo until disease progression. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) in intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET-positive populations. The target hazard ratio (HR) was 0.70 for patients in the ITT group and 0.60 in the MET-positive population. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 123 patients were enrolled (n = 62 onartuzumab, n = 61 placebo). Median PFS was 6.77 versus 6.97 months for onartuzumab versus placebo, respectively (HR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.63; p = .71). In the MET-positive population, median PFS was 5.95 versus 6.80 months, onartuzumab versus placebo (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.60-3.20; p = .45). Median OS was 10.61 months for onartuzumab versus 11.27 months for placebo) (HR, 1.06, 0.64-1.75; p = .83). In the MET-positive population, median OS was 8.51 versus 8.48 months for onartuzumab versus placebo, respectively (HR, 1.12, 95% CI, 0.45-2.78; p = .80). ORR was 60.5% for the onartuzumab group and 57.1% for placebo. Grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) were seen in 88.3% of patients receiving onartuzumab and in 78.3% of patients receiving placebo, with serious AEs in 55% and 40%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The addition of onartuzumab to mFOLFOX6 in gastric cancer did not improve efficacy in an unselected population or in a MET immunohistochemistry-positive population. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The YO28252 study demonstrated that the addition of the anti-MET agent onartuzumab to mFOLFOX6 for treatment of gastric cancer did not improve efficacy in an overall study population or those selected for positive MET status by immunohistochemistry. This highlights the importance of correctly selecting biomarkers for targeted therapies. A multivariate analysis suggested that MET positivity may still be prognostic for worse median overall survival in gastric cancer; therefore, it is important to continue investigation into the optimal approach to inhibit MET signaling in gastric cancer.

Proangiogenic tumor proteins as potential predictive or prognostic biomarkers for bevacizumab therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Tumor biomarkers to more accurately predict a patient's response to a given therapy are much needed in oncology practice. For metastatic colorectal cancer the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) monoclonal antibody bevacizumab is now commonly included in first-line therapy regimens and has led to modest but significant improvements in patient outcomes compared with chemotherapy. Given the modest gains there is a pressing need for predictive biomarkers to better identify patients who would benefit from this targeted therapy. We used a multiplex protein assay to determine the tumor expression levels of the proangiogenic proteins IL-6, IL-8, bFGF, PDGF-BB and VEGF-A in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumors from the MAX clinical trial patients with available tissue samples. Patients were dichotomized into "low" vs. "high" expression subgroups based on median baseline levels to correlate with objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). "Low" tumor VEGF-A level was predictive of better ORR for bevacizumab [ORR (low) 53% vs. (high) 19%, interaction p = 0.03] but not for PFS [hazard ratio, HR (low) 0.73 vs. (high) 0.62, interaction p = 0.68] in the comparison of capecitabine (C) versus C and bevacizumab (CB) and CB plus mitomycin (M). When analyzed as a dichotomized variable, "high" VEGF-A was prognostic for shorter PFS (unadjusted HR 1.34, p = 0.06; adjusted HR 1.55, p = 0.008). The other four proteins were neither predictive of bevacizumab benefits nor prognostic for ORR, PFS or OS. "Low" tumor VEGF-A was associated with longer PFS after adjustment for other baseline factors. Proangiogenic proteins were not predictive of benefit with bevacizumab for PFS.

Peritoneal Tumor DNA as a Prognostic Biomarker in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Gastric cancers commonly spread to the peritoneum. Its presence significantly alters patient prognosis and treatment-intent; however, current methods of peritoneal staging are inaccurate. Peritoneal tumor DNA (ptDNA) is tumor-derived DNA detectable in peritoneal lavage fluid. ptDNA positivity may indicate peritoneal micrometastasis and may be more sensitive than cytology in staging the peritoneum. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated the prognostic potential of ptDNA in gastric cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched using PRISMA guidelines. Studies published between January 1, 1990, and April 30, 2023, containing quantitative data relating to ptDNA in gastric cancer were meta-analyzed. RESULTS: Six studies were analyzed. Of the total 757 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma, 318 (42.0%) were stage I, 311 (41.0%) were stage II/III, 116 (15.3%) were stage IV, and 22 (2.9%) were undetermined. Overall, ptDNA detected cytology-positive cases with a sensitivity and specificity of 85.2% (95% CI, 66.5 to 100.0) and 91.5% (95% CI, 86.5 to 96.6), respectively. Additionally, ptDNA was detected in 54 (8.5%) of 634 cytology-negative patients. The presence of ptDNA negatively correlated with pathological stage I (relative risk [RR], 0.29 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.66]) and positively correlated with pathological stage IV (RR, 8.61 [95% CI, 1.86 to 39.89]) disease. Importantly, ptDNA positivity predicted an increased risk of peritoneal-specific metastasis (RR, 13.81 [95% CI, 8.11 to 23.53]) and reduced 3-year progression-free (RR, 5.37 [95% CI, 1.39 to 20.74]) and overall (hazard ratio, 4.13 [95% CI, 1.51 to 11.32]) survival. CONCLUSION: ptDNA carries valuable prognostic information and can detect peritoneal micrometastases in patients with gastric cancer. Its clinical utility in peritoneal staging for gastric cancer deserves further investigation.

The association of healthcare contact days with physical function and survival in CCTG/AGITG CO.17.

INTRODUCTION: While contact days-days with healthcare contact outside home-are increasingly adopted as a measure of time toxicity and treatment burden, they could also serve as a surrogate of treatment-related harm. We sought to assess the association between contact days and patient-reported outcomes, and the prognostic ability of contact days. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of CO.17 that evaluated cetuximab vs supportive care in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. CO.17 collected EORTC-QLQ-C30 instrument data. We assessed the association between number of contact days in a window and changes in physical function and global health status, and the association between number of contact days in the first 4 weeks with overall survival (OS). RESULTS: There was a negative association between the number of contact days and change in physical function (per each additional contact day at 4 weeks, 1.50 point decrease; and 8 weeks, 1.06 point decrease, p < .0001 for both), but not with global health status. This negative association was seen in patients receiving cetuximab, but not supportive care. More contact days in the first 4 weeks was associated with worse OS for all comers and patients receiving cetuximab (per each additional contact day; all comers, aHR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.05- 1.10; and cetuximab, aHR 1.08, 95%CI 1.05- 1.11, p < .0001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of a clinical trial, more contact days early in the course was associated with declines in physical function and worse survival in all-comers and in participants receiving cancer-directed treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00079066.

First-Line Nivolumab and Relatlimab Plus Chemotherapy for Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The Phase II RELATIVITY-060 Study.

PURPOSE: Open-label phase II study (RELATIVITY-060) to investigate the efficacy and safety of first-line nivolumab, a PD-1-blocking antibody, plus relatlimab, a lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3)-blocking antibody, plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (GC) or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC). METHODS: Patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab + relatlimab (fixed-dose combination) + chemotherapy or nivolumab + chemotherapy. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review [BICR]) in patients whose tumors had LAG-3 expression ≥1%. RESULTS: Of 274 patients, 138 were randomly assigned to nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy and 136 to nivolumab + chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 11.9 months. In patients with LAG-3 expression ≥1%, BICR-assessed ORR (95% CI) was 48% (38 to 59) in the nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy arm and 61% (51 to 71) in the nivolumab + chemotherapy arm; median progression-free survival (95% CI) by BICR was 7.0 months (5.8 to 8.4) versus 8.3 months (6.9 to 12.1; hazard ratio [HR], 1.41 [95% CI, 0.97 to 2.05]), and median overall survival (95% CI) was 13.5 months (11.9 to 19.1) versus 16.0 months (10.9 to not estimable; HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.54]), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 69% and 61% of all treated patients, and 42% and 36% of patients discontinued because of any-grade TRAEs in the nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy and nivolumab + chemotherapy arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: RELATIVITY-060 did not meet its primary end point of improved ORR in patients with LAG-3 expression ≥1% when relatlimab was added to nivolumab + chemotherapy compared with nivolumab + chemotherapy. Further studies are needed to address whether adding anti-LAG-3 to anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy can benefit specific GC/GEJC patient subgroups.

BCL-XL inhibitors enhance the apoptotic efficacy of BRAF inhibitors in BRAFV600E colorectal cancer.

Metastatic BRAFV600E colorectal cancer (CRC) carries an extremely poor prognosis and is in urgent need of effective new treatments. While the BRAFV600E inhibitor encorafenib in combination with the EGFR inhibitor cetuximab (Enc+Cet) was recently approved for this indication, overall survival is only increased by 3.6 months and objective responses are observed in only 20% of patients. We have found that a limitation of Enc+Cet treatment is the failure to efficiently induce apoptosis in BRAFV600E CRCs, despite inducing expression of the pro-apoptotic protein BIM and repressing expression of the pro-survival protein MCL-1. Here, we show that BRAFV600E CRCs express high basal levels of the pro-survival proteins MCL-1 and BCL-XL, and that combining encorafenib with a BCL-XL inhibitor significantly enhances apoptosis in BRAFV600E CRC cell lines. This effect was partially dependent on the induction of BIM, as BIM deletion markedly attenuated BRAF plus BCL-XL inhibitor-induced apoptosis. As thrombocytopenia is an established on-target toxicity of BCL-XL inhibition, we also examined the effect of combining encorafenib with the BCL-XL -targeting PROTAC DT2216, and the novel BCL-2/BCL-XL inhibitor dendrimer conjugate AZD0466. Combining encorafenib with DT2216 significantly increased apoptosis induction in vitro, while combining encorafenib with AZD0466 was well tolerated in mice and further reduced growth of BRAFV600E CRC xenografts compared to either agent alone. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that combined BRAF and BCL-XL inhibition significantly enhances apoptosis in pre-clinical models of BRAFV600E CRC and is a combination regimen worthy of clinical investigation to improve outcomes for these patients.

Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment. METHODS: A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L. CONCLUSION: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC.