Sunitinib-Induced Elevation of Mean Corpuscular Volume (MCV)-Exploring Its Possible Clinical Relevance in Cancer Patients.

Sunitinib is a broad-spectrum multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor mainly used as second-line therapy for non-resectable gastrointestinal stromal or first-line treatment option of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), and as an "off-label" option in pediatric oncology. It has been previously reported that sunitinib elevates the mean corpuscular volume of erythrocytes (MCV) in treated subjects. The aim of this study was to assess time-dependent changes of this effect and evaluate its possible clinical relevance. In this study, 179 adult and 21 pediatric patients with solid tumors treated with sunitinib were retrospectively analyzed. The laboratory and treatment-related data were collected for each treatment period. The regression model with a broken-line relationship was used to fit time dependence of the MCV. In the adult group, the MCV was increasing during the first 21.6 weeks (median) of treatment in a median level of 99.8 fL, where it stabilized. MCV increase was faster in the patients who suffered from treatment-related adverse events (21.3 vs. 24.6 weeks, p = 0.010). In the pediatric cohort, the MCV dynamics were similar to adults. In conclusion, MCV changes during sunitinib treatment in pediatric and adult patients may be of clinical utility in monitoring sunitinib treatment course.

Bevacizumab with FOLFIRI or XELIRI in the First-line Therapy of Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma: Results from Czech Observational Registry.

AIM: To retrospectively compare the efficacy of two irinotecan-based chemotherapy regimens combined with bevacizumab in first-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data of 558 patients with mCRC treated with first-line bevacizumab plus irinotecan-containing regimen were obtained from the national CORECT registry that collects data of all patients with mCRC treated with targeted-agents. The treatment outcomes of patients treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid (FOLFIRI) were compared to patients treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan and capecitabine (XELIRI). RESULTS: Among 4,312 patients with CRC treated with bevacizumab, only 13% (558) received irinotecan-based chemotherapy. No significant differences were observed in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival between FOLFIRI and XELIRI groups. Moreover, the toxicity of both regimens was also comparable. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis confirms the comparable activity of FOLFIRI and XELIRI regimens when combined with bevacizumab.

Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer that harbors KRAS mutations in exon 2 do not benefit from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy. Other activating RAS mutations may also be negative predictive biomarkers for anti-EGFR therapy. METHODS: In this prospective-retrospective analysis, we assessed the efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) as compared with FOLFOX4 alone, according to RAS (KRAS or NRAS) or BRAF mutation status. A total of 639 patients who had metastatic colorectal cancer without KRAS mutations in exon 2 had results for at least one of the following: KRAS exon 3 or 4; NRAS exon 2, 3, or 4; or BRAF exon 15. The overall rate of ascertainment of RAS status was 90%. RESULTS: Among 512 patients without RAS mutations, progression-free survival was 10.1 months with panitumumab-FOLFOX4 versus 7.9 months with FOLFOX4 alone (hazard ratio for progression or death with combination therapy, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.90; P=0.004). Overall survival was 26.0 months in the panitumumab-FOLFOX4 group versus 20.2 months in the FOLFOX4-alone group (hazard ratio for death, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.99; P=0.04). A total of 108 patients (17%) with nonmutated KRAS exon 2 had other RAS mutations. These mutations were associated with inferior progression-free survival and overall survival with panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment, which was consistent with the findings in patients with KRAS mutations in exon 2. BRAF mutations were a negative prognostic factor. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Additional RAS mutations predicted a lack of response in patients who received panitumumab-FOLFOX4. In patients who had metastatic colorectal cancer without RAS mutations, improvements in overall survival were observed with panitumumab-FOLFOX4 therapy. (Funded by Amgen and others; PRIME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00364013.).

MicroRNA expression profile associated with response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer accounts for approximately one third of all colorectal cancers (CRC), which belong among leading causes of cancer deaths worldwide. Standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (cT3/4 and/or cN+) includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with fluoropyrimidines (capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil) followed by radical surgical resection. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of tumors do not respond enough to the neoadjuvant treatment and these patients are at risk of relapse. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNAs playing significant roles in the pathogenesis of many cancers including rectal cancer. MiRNAs could present the new predictive biomarkers for rectal cancer patients. METHODS: We selected 20 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for advanced rectal cancer and whose tumors were classified as most sensitive or resistant to the treatment. These two groups were compared using large-scale miRNA expression profiling. RESULTS: Expression levels of 8 miRNAs significantly differed between two groups. MiR-215, miR-190b and miR-29b-2* have been overexpressed in non-responders, and let-7e, miR-196b, miR-450a, miR-450b-5p and miR-99a* have shown higher expression levels in responders. Using these miRNAs 9 of 10 responders and 9 of 10 non-responders (p < 0.05) have been correctly classified. CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot study suggests that miRNAs are part of the mechanisms that are involved in response of rectal cancer to the chemoradiotherapy and that miRNAs may be promising predictive biomarkers for such patients. In most miRNAs we identified (miR-215, miR-99a*, miR-196b, miR-450b-5p and let-7e), the connection between their expression and radioresistance or chemoresistance to inhibitors of thymidylate synthetase was already established.

Cediranib with mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab with mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a double-blind, randomized phase III study (HORIZON III).

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of cediranib (a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor [VEGFR TKI]) with that of bevacizumab (anti-VEGF-A monoclonal antibody) in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: HORIZON III [Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer] had an adaptive phase II/III design. Patients randomly assigned 1:1:1 received mFOLFOX6 [oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) and leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) intravenously followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 and then continuous infusion of 2,400 mg/m(2) over the next 46 hours every 2 weeks] with cediranib (20 or 30 mg per day) or bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 14 days). An independent end-of-phase II analysis concluded that mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg met predefined criteria for continuation; subsequent patients received mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg or mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab (randomly assigned 1:1). The primary objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: In all, 1,422 patients received mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg (n = 709) or mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab (n = 713). Primary analysis revealed no significant difference between arms for PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.25; P = .119), overall survival (OS; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.10; P = .541), or overall response rate (46.3% v 47.3%). Median PFS and OS were 9.9 and 22.8 months for mFOLFOX6/cediranib and 10.3 and 21.3 months for mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab. The PFS upper 95% CI was outside the predefined noninferiority limit (HR < 1.2). Common adverse events with more than 5% incidence in the cediranib arm included diarrhea, neutropenia, and hypertension. Cediranib-treated patients completed fewer chemotherapy cycles than bevacizumab-treated patients (median 10 v 12 cycles). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were significantly less favorable in cediranib-treated versus bevacizumab-treated patients (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Cediranib activity, in terms of PFS and OS, was comparable to that of bevacizumab when added to mFOLFOX6; however, the predefined boundary for PFS noninferiority was not met. The cediranib safety profile was consistent with previous studies but led to less favorable PROs compared with bevacizumab. Investigation of oral TKIs in CRC continues.

FDG-PET-positive foreign-body granuloma mimicking residual germinal tumor infiltration.

In some patients, granulomatous reactions around foreign-bodies with FDG-PET positivity may be misinterpreted as malignancy. We report a case of a 31-year-old man diagnosed with testicular germinal tumor with retroperitoneal and left supraclavicular metastases. The diagnosis was based on left supraclavicular lymph node biopsy. Restaging examinations after orchiectomy and chemotherapy showed normalization of tumor markers and significant regression of the retroperitoneal infiltrate, however, with a residual FDG-PET positive lesion in the left supraclavicular fossa. The etiology behind this infiltration was revealed by a repeated histological examination, which surprisingly showed a foreign-body granuloma formation around a cotton pad left after the first surgery.

[KRAS mutation testing in therapeutic algorithm for treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma]. / Vysetrení mutacního statutu genu KRAS jako soucást algoritmu lécby metastatického kolorektálního karcinomu.

Targeted therapy has become an integral part of treatment procedures of malignant tumors. Colorectal carcinomas are frequently targeted with monoclonal anti-EGFR antibodies (cetuximab and panitumumab). Activating somatic mutations in codons 12 and 13 of the exon 2 of KRAS gene are considered negative predictive factors of response to anti-EGFR therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. In the Czech Republic, evaluation of mutational status of KRAS gene is performed in several referral laboratories. In 2009, these laboratories performed 2580 tests of the KRAS mutational status--out of these, 60.2% cases reported non-mutated, wild-type KRAS. In one of the referral laboratories, we demonstrate the logistics of KRAS testing procedure. Stratification of patients with metastatic colorectal tumors based on their KRAS mutational status has evolved to a standard procedure. Laboratories performing these methods shall therefore adhere to the recommendations of the professional and accredited societies.

Randomized, phase III trial of panitumumab with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: the PRIME study.

PURPOSE: Panitumumab, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody that improves progression-free survival (PFS), is approved as monotherapy for patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The Panitumumab Randomized Trial in Combination With Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer to Determine Efficacy (PRIME) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as initial treatment for mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, phase III trial, patients with no prior chemotherapy for mCRC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2, and available tissue for biomarker testing were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive panitumumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4. The primary end point was PFS; overall survival (OS) was a secondary end point. Results were prospectively analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis by tumor KRAS status. RESULTS: KRAS results were available for 93% of the 1,183 patients randomly assigned. In the wild-type (WT) KRAS stratum, panitumumab-FOLFOX4 significantly improved PFS compared with FOLFOX4 (median PFS, 9.6 v 8.0 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.97; P = .02). A nonsignificant increase in OS was also observed for panitumumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 (median OS, 23.9 v 19.7 months, respectively; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.02; P = .072). In the mutant KRAS stratum, PFS was significantly reduced in the panitumumab-FOLFOX4 arm versus the FOLFOX4 arm (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.62; P = .02), and median OS was 15.5 months versus 19.3 months, respectively (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.57; P = .068). Adverse event rates were generally comparable across arms with the exception of toxicities known to be associated with anti-EGFR therapy. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that panitumumab-FOLFOX4 was well tolerated and significantly improved PFS in patients with WT KRAS tumors and underscores the importance of KRAS testing for patients with mCRC.

[Cetuximab and irinotecan for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer--pilot results from Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute]. / Cetuximab a irinotekan v lécbe metastatického kolorektálního karcinomu--pilotní výsledky z Masarykova onkologického ustavu.

BACKGROUND: Combination of cetuximab and irinotecan is an efficacious second- (and further-)-line treatment-alternative in patients with EGFR-positive metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to irinotecan. In this retrospective study we present treatment results of patients treated combination of cetuximab and irinotecan in Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Results were collected on forty-seven patients who started the therapy from July 2005 to February 2008. Primary outcomes were: response rate, time to progression and overall survival. Secondary outcomes were: treatment-related toxicity and identification of any predictive and prognostic markers. P-value was based on Gehan-Wilcoxon test or chi-square test and P-values < or = 0.05 were considered significant. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Forty-two patients were valuable for the treatment response. Objective response rate (complete and partial remission) was 35.7% (15 patients) and disease control (response and disease stabilization) was achieved in 30 patients (71.4%). The median time to progression was 6, 4 months (range 1, 5-25 months). On the date of statistical processing (median follow-up: 9, 2 months, range 2, 5-27 months) there were 26 patients alive and the median overall survival was 17, 1 months. We have confirmed correlation between the grade of the skin rush and the treatment response (p = 0.05) and time to progression ( p = 0.01), on the other hand there was no association between EGFR expression and these parameters. The therapy was also effective in 8 of 14 patients (57%), who had documented resistance to irinotecan. CONCLUSIONS: We have confirmed the efficacy of cetuximab and irinotecan combination for the therapy of patients with pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer. Our results are optimistic, but have to be validated in the course of time. The existence of nonresponding patients and by reason of pharmacoeconomy, we should give attention to the new molecular predictive and prognostic markers such as: K-ras-mutation and EGFR gene copy number.

Gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: a prospective observational study.

Pancreatic cancer has one of the worst prognosis of any malignant disease. Systemic therapy is often administered because the disease is usually detected at advanced stages. Gemcitabine (Gemzar trade mark, Eli Lilly & Co.) has proven activity in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) was given on days 1, 8 and 15, every 4 weeks. A total of 100 chemonaive patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer were enrolled; 32 and 68% had stage III and IV disease, respectively. The average number of administered cycles was 3.5 (range: 1 - 12). The overall response rate was 13%, with 13 partial responders. The median time to progression was 13.5 weeks (range: 3 - 56; 95% CI = 12 - 14). The median survival was 32 weeks (range: 4 - 104; 95% CI = 27 - 36). Clinical benefit response was acheived for 26 patients (26%). Grade 3/4 haematological toxicities occurred infrequently (anaemia: 5%; neutropenia: 8% and thrombocytopenia: 3% of patients). Grade 3/4 non-haematological toxicities were not observed. There were no treatment-related deaths. Gemcitabine treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer is effective and well-tolerated.