Early onset metastatic colorectal cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality rates have been increasing among young patients (YP), for uncertain reasons. It is unclear whether YP have a distinct tumor biology or merit a different treatment approach to older patients (OP). METHODS: We reviewed prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with metastatic CRC (MCRC) enrolled in the multi-site Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) Australian registry. Clinicopathological features, treatment and survival outcomes were compared between YP (<50 years) and OP (≥50 years). RESULTS: Of 3692 patients diagnosed August 2009 - March 2023, 14 % (513) were YP. YP were more likely than OP to be female (52% vs. 40 %, P < 0.0001), have ECOG performance status 0-1 (94% vs. 81 %, P < 0.0001), to have a left-sided primary (72% vs. 63 %, P = 0.0008) and to have fewer comorbidities (90% vs. 60 % Charleston score 0, P < 0.0001). There were no differences in the available molecular status, which was more complete in YP. YP were more likely to have de novo metastatic disease (71% vs. 57 %, P < 0.0001). YP were more likely to undergo curative hepatic resection (27% vs. 17 %, P < 0.0001), to receive any chemotherapy (93% vs. 78 % (P < 0.0001), and to receive 3+ lines of chemotherapy (30% vs. 24 % (P < 0.0034)). Median first-line progression free survival (10.2 versus 10.6 months) was similar for YP vs OP, but overall survival (32.1 versus 25.4 months, HR = 0.745, P < 0.0001) was longer in YP. CONCLUSION: Known prognostic variables mostly favored YP versus OP with newly diagnosed mCRC, who were also more heavily treated. Consistent with this, overall survival outcomes were improved. This data does not support that CRC in YP represent a distinct subset of mCRC patients, or that a modified treatment approach is warranted.

Exploring management and outcomes of elderly patients with glioblastoma using data from two randomised trials (GEINO1401/EX-TEM).

PURPOSE: The impact of age on optimal management of glioblastoma remains unclear. A recent combined analysis of two randomised trials, GEINO14-01 and EX-TEM, found no benefit from extending post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Here, we explore the impact of age. METHODS: Relevant intergroup statistics were used to identify differences in tumour, treatment and outcome characteristics based on age with elderly patients (EP) defined as age 65 years and over. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. RESULTS: Of the combined 205 patients, 57 (28%) were EP. Of these, 95% were ECOG 0-1 and 65% underwent macroscopic resection compared with 97% and 61% of younger patients (YP) respectively. There were numerically less MGMT-methylated (56% vs. 63%, p = 0.4) and IDH-mutated (4% vs. 13%, p = 0.1) tumours in EP vs. YP. Following surgery, EP were more likely to receive short course chemoradiation (17.5% vs. 6%, p = 0.017). At recurrence, EP tended to receive or best supportive care (28.3% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.09) or non-surgical options (96.2% vs. 84.6%, p = 0.06), but were less likely to receive bevacizumab (23.1% vs. 49.5%, p < 0.01). Median PFS was similar at 9.3months in EP and 8.5months in YP, with similar median OS at 20months. CONCLUSION: In this trial population of predominantly fit EP, survival was similar to YP despite a proportion receiving less aggressive therapy at diagnosis and recurrence. Advancing age does not appear to be an adverse prognostic factor for glioblastoma when patients are fit for treatment, and a less aggressive approach in selected patients may not compromise outcomes.

A combined analysis of two prospective randomised studies exploring the impact of extended post-radiation temozolomide on survival outcomes in newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: The optimal duration of post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma remains unclear, with no published phase III randomised trials. Standard-of-care stipulates 6 months. However, in routine care, it is often extended to 12 months, despite lacking robust supporting data. METHODS: GEINO14-01 (Spain) and EX-TEM (Australia) studies enrolled glioblastoma patients without progression at the end of 6 months post-radiation temozolomide. Participants were randomised 1:1 to six additional months of temozolomide or observation. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression free survival from date of randomisation (6mPFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. 204 patients were required to detect an improvement in 6mPFS from 50 to 60% (80% power). Neither study recruited sufficient patients. We performed a combined analysis of individual patient data. RESULTS: 205 patients were recruited: 159 in GEINO14-01 (2014-2018) and 46 in EX-TEM (2019-2022). Median follow-up was 20.0 and 14.5 months. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was no significant improvement in 6mPFS (57.2% vs 64.0%, OR0.75, p = 0.4), nor across any subgroups, including MGMT methylated; PFS (HR0.92, p = 0.59, median 7.8 vs 9.7 months); or OS (HR1.03, p = 0.87, median 20.1 vs 19.4 months). During treatment extension, 64% experienced any grade adverse event, mainly fatigue and gastrointestinal (both 54%). Only a minority required treatment changes: 4.5% dose delay, 7.5% dose reduction, 1.5% temozolomide discontinuation. CONCLUSION: For glioblastoma patients, extending post-radiation temozolomide from 6 to 12 months is well tolerated but does not improve 6mPFS. We could not identify any subset that benefitted from extended treatment. Six months should remain standard-of-care.

Initial experience of TAS-102 chemotherapy in Australian patients with Chemo-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

For patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment with Trifluridine/Tipiracil, also known as TAS-102, improves overall survival. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in a real-world population from Victoria, Australia. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry was undertaken. The characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving TAS-102 were assessed and compared to those enrolled in the registration study (RECOURSE). Across 13 sites, 107 patients were treated with TAS-102. The median age was 60 years (range: 31-83), compared to 63 for RECOURSE. Comparing registry TAS-102-treated and RECOURSE patients, 75% vs 100% were ECOG performance status 0-1, 74% vs 79% had initiated treatment more than 18 months from diagnosis of metastatic disease and 36% vs 49% were RAS wild-type. Median time on treatment was 10.4 weeks (range: 1.7-32). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.3 months compared to 2 months in RECOURSE, while median overall survival was the same at 7.1 months. Two patients (2.3%) had febrile neutropenia and there were no treatment-related deaths, where TAS-102 dose at treatment initiation was at clinician discretion.TRACC registry patients treated with TAS-102 were younger than those from the RECOURSE trial, with similar overall survival observed. Less strict application of RECIST criteria and less frequent imaging may have contributed to an apparently longer PFS.

The impact and indications for Oncotype DX on adjuvant treatment recommendations when third-party funding is unavailable.

OBJECTIVES: Industry-supported decision impact studies demonstrate that Oncotype Dx (ODX) changes treatment recommendations (TR) in 24-40% of hormone receptor+/HER2- patients. ODX is not reimbursed by third-party payers in Australia, potentially resulting in more selective use. We sought to evaluate the impact of self-funded ODX on TRs. METHODS: Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, indication for ODX and pre- and post-recurrence score (RS) TR. Primary endpoint was frequency of TR change and associations with TR change were sought. RESULTS: Eighteen physicians contributed 382 patients (median age 54). A total of 232 (61%) of tumors were T1 and were grade 1, 2 and 3 in 49 (13%), 252 (66%) and 79 (21%). A total of 257 (67%) were node negative. Assay indications were: confirm need for chemotherapy (CT) (36%), confirm omission of CT (40%) and genuine equipoise (24%). RS was low (≤17) in 55%, intermediate (18-31) in 36% and high (≥32) in 9%. Thirty-eight percent of patients had TR change post-ODX. Sixty-five percent of patients recommended CT pre-ODX changed to hormone therapy alone (HT)-more likely if lower grade and if ER and/or PR > 10%. Fourteen percent of patients with pre-ODX TR for HT added CT-more likely if ER and/or PR ≤10% and if Ki67 > 15% Overall, TR for CT decreased from 47% to 24%. CONCLUSION: Patient-funded ODX changed TRs in 38% of patients, de-escalating 65% from CT to HT and adding CT to 14% of those recommended HT. These changes were greater than an industry-funded study suggesting that physicians can identify situations where the assay may influence decisions.

Treatment and outcomes of metastatic colorectal cancer in Australia: defining differences between public and private practice.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have suggested improved outcomes for cancer patients managed in private centres, despite universal healthcare within Australia. AIMS: To compare patient, disease, treatment and survival data for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) managed in private versus public centres. METHODS: Analysis of prospectively collected registry data for consecutive patients with mCRC managed at 16 participating centres from July 2009. RESULTS: Data for 1065 patients were examined. Age, gender and Charlson comorbidity score were similar for public and private patients. Private patients were more commonly Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score 0-1 (85% vs 78%, P = 0.008), in the highest Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage quintile (57% vs 18%, P < 0.001) or had a single metastatic site (62% vs 54%, P = 0.009). Patients treated in private were more likely to receive chemotherapy (84% vs 70%, P < 0.001), bevacizumab (59% vs 50%, P = 0.008), be treated with curative intent (37% vs 26%, P < 0.001) and undergo metastasectomy (30% vs 22%, P = 0.001). These management differences remained statistically significant after adjusting for baseline characteristics. Management in the private setting was associated with superior overall survival (median 27.9 vs 20 months, hazard ratio 0.7, 95% confidence interval: 0.57 to 0.86, P = 0.001), significant in multivariate analysis adjusting for all baseline covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in baseline characteristics were noted for private versus public patients. However, these do not explain the higher rates of treatment delivery in the private setting, which likely contributed towards the observed survival difference. Further studies are required to determine if the increased likelihood of intervention in the private setting is driven by patient, clinician and/or institutional factors.

Surveillance following treatment for colorectal cancer in Australia. Has best practice been adopted by medical oncologists?

BACKGROUND: Intensive follow up after surgery for colorectal cancer is associated with a significant survival advantage and is endorsed by expert panels, but are physicians convinced of the benefit? METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to all members of the Medical Oncology Group of Australia, assessing surveillance practices after completion of adjuvant treatments. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 141 (55%) medical oncologists of which 121 were considered evaluable. Thirteen per cent (n = 16) routinely did not carry out follow-up investigations. Of those carrying out surveillance, 47% (n = 51) nominated identifying potentially resectable metastatic disease as prime consideration. Many (44%) were motivated by patient reassurance and expectation. Carcinoembryonic antigen levels were commonly monitored 3 monthly in years 1 (77%, n = 85) and 2 (57%, n = 63) and 6 monthly thereafter (67%, n = 74). Eighty per cent (n = 88) carried out computed tomography (CT) surveillance 1 year after surgery, 69% (n = 76) at year 2 and 55% (n = 60) at year 3. Twenty-six per cent (n = 29) continued scanning annually up to 5 years. Inclusion of CT chest was routine for 33% (n = 36) and never carried out by 11% (n = 12). CONCLUSION: A significant minority (13%) of oncologists carry out no follow-up investigations, despite level I evidence of a survival advantage similar to standard adjuvant therapies. Further education and study of physician attitudes and reservations to routine surveillance are required.

Increasing underrepresentation of elderly patients with advanced colorectal or non-small-cell lung cancer in chemotherapy trials.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients are underrepresented in chemotherapy trials for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the change in underrepresentation over time has not been documented. AIMS: This study aimed to quantify (i) the change in the median age of patients enrolled in clinical trials for metastatic CRC and NSCLC between 1982-1991 and 1992-2001 compared with the general colorectal and lung cancer population, and (ii) the proportion of trials with an upper age limit for eligibility. METHODS: A retrospective review of data from the Victorian Cancer Registry and all large published randomized chemotherapy trials for advanced CRC and NSCLC between 1982 and 2001 was conducted. RESULTS: The median age of patients with CRC enrolled in clinical trials remained constant between the two decades (62.0 and 62.2 years), whereas the median age of the CRC population increased from 68.4 to 70.2 years, increasing the median age difference from 6.4 to 8.0 years. The median age of patients with lung cancer in clinical trials increased from 59.8 to 61.8 years, whereas the median age of the lung cancer population increased from 67.4 to 70.4 years, widening the age difference from 7.6 to 8.6 years. More trials set an upper age limit for eligibility in the first decade than in the second decade for both CRC (51 vs 29%, P = 0.04) and NSCLC (68 vs 41%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: International clinical trials for CRC and NSCLC are becoming increasingly unsuitable for application to Australian patients because of the increasing age discrepancy, despite fewer trials restricting eligibility by age.

Rapid screening for depression--validation of the Brief Case-Find for Depression (BCD) in medical oncology and palliative care patients.

Depression in oncology patients is under-recognised and associated with poor outcomes. Screening can increase case recognition. The Brief Case-Find for Depression (BCD) is a four-question, interviewer-administered instrument that has been previously validated in a general medical setting. The primary aim of this study was to validate the BCD in a medical oncology/palliative care setting, primarily by comparing its association with physical illness measures and with the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Eligible adult oncology patients gave informed consent and completed the above measures and a pain scale. Agreement between the BCD and other instruments was assessed. Construct validity was determined by comparing depressed/nondepressed patients with respect to performance status, symptoms, pain score and functional impairment. A total of 100 patients had a median age of 58 (range 21-90) and ECOG performance status (PS) 2 (0-4). In all, 60% had metastatic disease. The therapeutic goal was curative/adjuvant in 39% and palliative in 61%. Prevalence of depression according to the various measures was: BCD 34%, PRIME-MD 12%, BDI 19% and HADS 14%. In total, 45% of patients responded positively to a single-item screening question. The BCD showed fair agreement with the PRIME-MD (kappa=0.21), moderate agreement with the BDI (kappa=0.43) and fair agreement with the HADS (kappa=0.27). Against the PRIME-MD diagnosis of depression, the BCD had greater sensitivity, but lesser specificity and overall agreement, compared with the BDI and depression scale of the HADS. Patients with probable depression (according to BCD) had inferior PS (P=0.0064), increased pain (P=0.045) and greater impairment of functioning (PRIME-MD: P=0.0003). There was no association with gender, age, disease status or therapeutic goal. Depression is common in oncology patients. The BCD is a quick, easy-to-administer screen for depression, which has reasonable psychometric properties in this population.

Comparison of neutropenia in a randomized, crossover trial of 3-, 6-, and 24-h infusions of paclitaxel.

OBJECTIVE: Paclitaxel is most commonly infused over 3 hs rather than the original schedule of 24 h as the briefer infusion duration results in greater convenience, similar efficacy, significantly less myelosuppression, and less cost. While differences in toxicity between 3- and 24-h infusions are well described, there is little information about the effect of modest prolongation of infusion duration, which is often employed in patients who develop hypersensitivity reactions. To assess whether prolonging a 3-h infusion significantly increases the degree of neutropenia, we reviewed our data from a randomized, crossover trial of 3-h versus 6-h versus 24-h regimens of paclitaxel. METHODS: Results from 12 patients who were randomized to receive one 3-h, one 6-h and one 24-h infusion of paclitaxel in varied sequences during their first three cycles of treatment were analysed. The blood counts were monitored closely throughout each cycle of treatment. RESULTS: Crossover trial methodology was used to assess the differences in the degree of neutropenia caused by the three different infusion regimens. The 24-h infusion regimen resulted in significantly worse neutropenia than the 3- or 6-h infusion regimens. There was no statistically significant difference between the 3- and 6-h infusion regimens with respect to all endpoints. The estimated mean difference in the duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia between the 3- and 6-h infusion regimens (6 h - 3-h) was 1.1 day (95% CI: -0.9, 3.2), and for grade 4 neutropenia, the estimated mean difference in the duration was 0.8 day (95% CI: -0.4, 2.0). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the duration of paclitaxel infusions from 3 to 6 h does not result in a statistically significant increase in the degree of neutropenia. Any additional neutropenia is likely to be of brief duration.