Liver Metastases and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Efficacy in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have limited activity in microsatellite-stable (MSS) or mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer. Recent findings suggest the efficacy of ICIs may be modulated by the presence of liver metastases (LM). Objective: To investigate the association between the presence of LM and ICI activity in advanced MSS colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this secondary analysis of the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO26 (CCTG CO.26) randomized clinical trial, patients with treatment-refractory colorectal cancer were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to durvalumab plus tremelimumab or best supportive care alone between August 10, 2016, and June 15, 2017. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) with 80% power and 2-sided α = .10. The median follow-up was 15.2 (0.2-22.0) months. In this post hoc analysis performed from February 11 to 14, 2022, subgroups were defined based on the presence or absence of LM and study treatments. Intervention: Durvalumab plus tremelimumab or best supportive care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hazard ratios (HRs) and 90% CIs were calculated based on a stratified Cox proportional hazards regression model. Plasma tumor mutation burden at study entry was determined using a circulating tumor DNA assay. The primary end point of the study was OS, defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR). Results: Of 180 patients enrolled (median age, 65 [IQR, 36-87] years; 121 [67.2%] men; 19 [10.6%] Asian, 151 [83.9%] White, and 10 [5.6%] other race or ethnicity), LM were present in 127 (70.6%). For patients with LM, there was a higher proportion of male patients (94 of 127 [74.0%] vs 27 of 53 [50.9%]; P = .005), and the time from initial cancer diagnosis to study entry was shorter (median, 40 [range, 8-153] vs 56 [range, 14-181] months; P = .001). Plasma tumor mutation burden was significantly higher in patients with LM. Patients without LM had significantly improved PFS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR, 0.54 [90% CI, 0.35-0.96]; P = .08; P = .02 for interaction). Disease control rate was 49% (90% CI, 36%-62%) in patients without LM treated with durvalumab plus tremelimumab, compared with 14% (90% CI, 6%-38%) in those with LM (odds ratio, 5.70 [90% CI, 1.46-22.25]; P = .03). On multivariable analysis, patients without LM had significantly improved OS and PFS compared with patients with LM. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the CCTG CO.26 study, the presence of LM was associated with worse outcomes for patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Patients without LM had improved PFS and higher DCR with durvalumab plus tremelimumab. Liver metastases may be associated with poor outcomes of ICI treatment in advanced colorectal cancer and should be considered in the design and interpretation of future clinical studies evaluating this therapy.

Bevacizumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.

Cisplatin-Based versus Carboplatin-Based Chemotherapy for Extrapulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinomas: A Real-World Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the survival differences between cisplatin/etoposide versus carboplatin/etoposide chemotherapy regimens in the management of patients with extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). METHODS: Administrative cancer care databases in the province of Alberta, Canada, were reviewed, and patients with extrapulmonary NECs (including those with small cell and large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas) who were treated with either cisplatin/etoposide or carboplatin/etoposide, 2004-2019, were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to compare the survival outcomes according to the type of platinum agent, and multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to assess the impact of the type of platinum agent on overall survival outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 263 eligible patients were included in this analysis. These include 176 patients who received cisplatin/etoposide and 87 patients who received carboplatin/etoposide. Using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, patients treated with cisplatin had better overall survival compared to patients treated with carboplatin (p = 0.005). Multivariable Cox regression analysis suggested that the following factors were associated with worse overall survival: higher Charlson comorbidity index (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.05-1.30), gastrointestinal primary site (HR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.12-2.14), stage IV disease (HR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.28-2.38), and use of carboplatin (HR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.02-1.92). CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggested that cisplatin/etoposide might be associated with better overall survival compared to carboplatin/etoposide among patients with extrapulmonary NECs. It is unclear if this is related to differences in inherent responsiveness to the 2 platinum agents or due to differences in comorbidity burden between the 2 treatment groups.

Patterns of colorectal cancer diagnosis among younger adults in a real-world, population-based cohort.

Aims: To review the patterns of early-onset (<50 years old) colorectal cancer (CRC) in Alberta across the past 15 years among different socioeconomic and demographic patient subgroups. Methods: This is a retrospective, population-based study based on Alberta administrative databases. Income level was identified via income information from the 2006 Canadian census. Patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed 2004-2018 were included. Frequency analyses were used to examine the percentage of early-onset CRC cases among different subgroups over the period studied. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with the development of early-onset CRC. Results: A total of 24,912 patients were included, of whom 2096 (8.4%) were diagnosed at age <50 years and 22,816 (91.6%) at age ≥50 years. The percentage of patients diagnosed at age <50 years increased over time (10.2% in 2018 vs 7.9% in 2004; p < 0.003). Higher income was associated with younger age at diagnosis of CRC (odds ratio [OR] for quartile 1 vs quartile 4: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.47-0.62). Other factors associated with younger age at diagnosis included female sex (OR for male vs female: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.78-0.94), distal CRC (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.50-1.84) and North zone (OR for South zone vs North zone: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.60-0.92). Conclusion: The proportion of patients (out of the overall CRC population) with early-onset CRC, increased in Alberta throughout the study duration (particularly left-sided CRC). There is a need to reassess the current age limits for CRC screening in Canada in view of these findings.

Lay abstract In this study, we found that the percentage of younger individuals with colorectal cancer has increased in Alberta, particularly for cancers arising from the rectum and left side of the colon. Reassessment of the recommended age to start colorectal cancer screening in Canada is needed.

Hospitalizations among early-stage colon cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: a real-world study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the patterns of hospitalizations among early-stage colon cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and to identify high-risk groups that may benefit from more careful monitoring in a real-world, population-based context. METHODS: This is a population-based study using linked administrative databases from the province of Alberta, Canada. Any events of hospitalization among patients with non-metastatic colon cancer undergoing upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy were reviewed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with risk of hospitalization, and the impact of hospitalization on overall survival was assessed through Kaplan-Meier estimates and Multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2257 patients were considered eligible and were included in the current analysis, including 483 patients (21.4%) who were hospitalized within 6 months of the start of adjuvant chemotherapy, and 1774 patients (78.6%) who were not. The following factors were associated with a higher hospitalization risk: older age (OR: 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.03), higher comorbidity (OR: 1.48; 95% CI 1.31-1.67), women (OR for men versus women: 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.98), living in the North zone (OR for Edmonton zone versus North zone: 0.60; 95% CI 0.42-0.87), and CAPOX chemotherapy (OR for CAPOX versus FOLFOX: 1.50; 95% CI 1.12-2.00). Patients with a history of hospitalization during adjuvant chemotherapy had a worse overall survival compared to patients who were not hospitalized (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, one out of five colon cancer patients were hospitalized during adjuvant chemotherapy. Older individuals, women, those with higher comorbidity, and those receiving adjuvant CAPOX were more likely to be hospitalized.

Real-world patterns of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The aim of the study was to analyze the real-world treatment patterns of adjuvant chemotherapy administration among patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Cases with non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, diagnosed 2007-2018, treated with upfront surgical resection, and recorded within Alberta Cancer registry were accessed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate factors predicting use of adjuvant chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and multivariable Cox regression analysis were used to compare overall survival among patients treated with adjuvant gemcitabine versus those treated with adjuvant gemcitabine + capecitabine. A total of 695 patients who have undergone upfront surgical treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, including 445 patients (64%) who received adjuvant chemotherapy and 250 patients (36%) who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. The following factors were associated with lower probability to receive adjuvant chemotherapy: older age (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.93-0.96), node negativity (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.33-0.67), higher Charlson comorbidity index (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.74-0.99), and living within the Northern zone of the province (OR for Calgary zone versus North zone: 2.24; 95% CI 1.29-3.90). Within patients who received adjuvant gemcitabine ± capecitabine, factors associated with worse overall survival included higher Charlson comorbidity index (HR 1.18; 95% CI 1.00-1.40), and node-positive disease (HR for node-negative versus node-positive disease: 0.51; 95% CI 0.33-0.78). Type of chemotherapy was not predictive of overall survival (HR for gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus capecitabine: 1.40; 95% CI 0.98-2.00). P value for interaction between type of chemotherapy and nodal status was 0.038. In this real-world study, the added benefit of adjuvant gemcitabine + capecitabine (compared to adjuvant gemcitabine) seems to be limited to patients with node-positive disease.

Real-world patterns of chemotherapy administration and attrition among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world patterns of systemic treatment attrition rates among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Databases based from the provincial cancer registry and electronic medical records in Alberta were accessed, and cases with a de novo diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer with no history of other primary cancers (2004-2017) were reviewed. Rates of chemotherapy administration in first and subsequent lines of treatment were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for factors associated with non-administration of chemotherapy was evaluated. The impact of administration of all three chemotherapy agents (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) across the course of treatment was assessed through multivariable Cox regression analysis with time-dependent covariates. RESULTS: A total of 4179 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were included in the current study. This includes 1988 patients receiving at least one cycle of chemotherapy and 2191 patients who did not receive any chemotherapy. The following factors were associated with a higher probability of no chemotherapy use: older age (OR 1.064; 95% CI 1.057-1.070), higher Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.444; 95% CI 1.342-1.554), female sex (OR for male sex versus female sex 0.763; 95% CI 0.660-0.881), rural residence (OR for residence in zone 2 (Calgary) versus zone 5 (North zone) 0.346; 95% CI 0.272-0.440), proximal tumor location (OR 1.255; 95% CI 1.083-1.454), and earlier year at diagnosis (OR (continuous) 0.895; 95% CI 0.879-0.911). Within the cohort of patients who received at least one cycle of chemotherapy, 42.5% received one line of chemotherapy only, and 30.5% received two lines of chemotherapy. The use of all three chemotherapy drugs was associated with better overall survival (HR 3.305; 95% CI 2.755-3.965) and colorectal cancer-specific survival (HR 3.367; 95% CI 2.753-4.117). CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who received active chemotherapy in this population-based study received only one line of therapy. This highlights the significance of choosing effective treatments in the first-line treatment as the attrition rate is high. Furthermore, the use of all three chemotherapy agents across the course of treatment was associated with better outcomes.

Effect of Combined Immune Checkpoint Inhibition vs Best Supportive Care Alone in Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer: The Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO.26 Study.

Importance: Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibition has not shown activities in advanced refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), other than in those patients who are microsatellite-instability high (MSI-H). Objective: To evaluate whether combining programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibition improved patient survival in metastatic refractory CRC. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized phase 2 study was conducted in 27 cancer centers across Canada between August 2016 and June 2017, and data were analyzed on October 18, 2018. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum; received all available standard systemic therapies (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab if appropriate; cetuximab or panitumumab if RAS wild-type tumors; regorafenib if available); were aged 18 years or older; had adequate organ function; had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and measurable disease. Interventions: We randomly assigned patients to receive either 75 mg of tremelimumab every 28 days for the first 4 cycles plus 1500 mg durvalumab every 28 days, or best supportive care alone (BSC) in a 2:1 ratio. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and a 2-sided P<.10 was considered statistically significant. Circulating cell-free DNA from baseline plasma was used to determine microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutation burden (TMB). Results: Of 180 patients enrolled (121 men [67.2%] and 59 women [32.8%]; median [range] age, 65 [36-87] years), 179 were treated. With a median follow-up of 15.2 months, the median OS was 6.6 months for durvalumab and tremelimumab and 4.1 months for BSC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 90% CI, 0.54-0.97; P = .07). Progression-free survival was 1.8 months and 1.9 months respectively (HR, 1.01; 90% CI, 0.76-1.34). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were significantly more frequent with immunotherapy (75 [64%] patients in the treatment group had at least 1 grade 3 or higher adverse event vs 12 [20%] in the BSC group). Circulating cell-free DNA analysis was successful in 168 of 169 patients with available samples. In patients who were microsatellite stable (MSS), OS was significantly improved with durvalumab and tremelimumab (HR, 0.66; 90% CI, 0.49-0.89; P = .02). Patients who were MSS with plasma TMB of 28 variants per megabase or more (21% of MSS patients) had the greatest OS benefit (HR, 0.34; 90% CI, 0.18-0.63; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: This phase 2 study suggests that combined immune checkpoint inhibition with durvalumab plus tremelimumab may be associated with prolonged OS in patients with advanced refractory CRC. Elevated plasma TMB may select patients most likely to benefit from durvalumab and tremelimumab. Further confirmation studies are warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02870920.

Vitamin and herbal supplements' use among patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers included in eight clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the patterns of vitamin and herbal supplement use among patients with advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancers and the association of such behavior with the efficacy and toxicity of systemic anticancer treatment. METHODS: Project data sphere (PDS) was used to access de-identified datasets of eight clinical trials of advanced GI cancers. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors predicting the use of supplements. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to evaluate the association of supplement use with overall and progression-free survival. Results were stratified according to the site of the primary tumor [pancreatic, gastric, colorectal or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)] The association between supplement use and selected chemotherapy side effects was evaluated through Chi-squared testing and subsequent logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 3441 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 775 patients reported use of supplements and 2666 patients reported no use of supplements. Higher ECOG performance score (Odds ratio: OR for ECOG 1 versus 0: 1.629; 95% CI 1.363-1.947; P < 0.001) and pancreatic primary site (OR for gastric cancer versus pancreatic cancer: 0.538; 95% CI 0.408-0.709; P < 0.001) was associated with greater use of these supplements. Supplement use was associated with a better overall survival among patients with pancreatic cancer (P = 0.002) but not other GI malignancies. Supplement use was associated with a higher probability of anemia and diarrhea among patients with pancreatic cancer (P < 0.001 for both), gastric cancer (P = 0.016; P = 0.036, respectively) and colorectal cancer (P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: There is an association between the use of vitamin and herbal supplements and a higher probability of hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicities. There is a need for more studies to confirm the association between such behavior and better overall survival among patients with pancreatic cancer.

Napabucasin versus placebo in refractory advanced colorectal cancer: a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Napabucasin is a first-in-class cancer stemness inhibitor that targets STAT3, which is a poor prognostic factor in colorectal cancer. This study aimed to test napabucasin in advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS: This study was a double-blind randomised phase 3 trial done at 68 centres in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. Patients with advanced colorectal cancer with a good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (0-1) for whom all available standard therapies had failed were eligible for the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive placebo or napabucasin through a web-based system with a permuted block method, after stratification by ECOG performance status, KRAS status, previous VEGF inhibitor treatment, and time from diagnosis of metastatic disease. Napabucasin 480 mg or matching placebo was taken orally every 12 h. All patients received best supportive care. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in an intention-to-treat analysis. This is the final analysis of this trial, which is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01830621. FINDINGS: Accrual began on April 15, 2013, and was stopped for futility on May 23, 2014, at which point 282 patients had undergone randomisation (138 assigned to the napabucasin group and 144 to the placebo group). Overall survival did not differ significantly between groups: median overall survival was 4·4 months (95% CI 3·7-4·9) in the napabucasin group and 4·8 months (4·0-5·3) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·13, 95% CI 0·88-1·46, p=0·34). The safety population included 136 patients in the napabucasin group and 144 patients in the placebo group. More patients who received napabucasin had any grade of treatment-related diarrhoea (108 [79%] of 136 patients), nausea (69 [51%]), and anorexia (52 [38%]) than did patients who received placebo (28 [19%] of 144 patients, 35 [24%], and 23 [16%], respectively). The most common severe (grade 3 or worse) treatment-related adverse events were abdominal pain (five [4%] patients receiving napabucasin vs five [3%] receiving placebo), diarrhoea (21 [15%] vs one [1%]), fatigue (14 [10%] vs eight [6%]), and dehydration (six [4%] vs one [1%]). 251 (89%) patients had data on pSTAT3 expression, of whom 55 (22%) had pSTAT3-positive tumours (29 in the napabucasin group, 26 in the placebo group). In a prespecified biomarker analysis of pSTAT3-positive patients, overall survival was longer in the napabucasin group than in the placebo group (median 5·1 months [95% CI 4·0-7·5] vs 3·0 months [1·7-4·1]; HR 0·41, 0·23-0·73, p=0·0025). INTERPRETATION: Although there was no difference in overall survival between groups in the overall unselected population, STAT3 might be an important target for the treatment of colorectal cancer with elevated pSTAT3 expression. Nevertheless, these results require validation. FUNDING: Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute and Boston Biomedical.

Association of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Capecitabine Efficacy in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the TRIO-013/LOGiC Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Capecitabine is an oral cytotoxic chemotherapeutic commonly used across cancer subtypes. As with other oral medications though, it may suffer from drug interactions that could impair its absorption. OBJECTIVE: To determine if gastric acid suppressants such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may impair capecitabine efficacy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary analysis of TRIO-013, a phase III randomized trial, compares capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) with or without lapatinib in 545 patients with ERBB2/HER2-positive metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (GEC); patients were randomized 1:1 between CapeOx with or without lapatinib. Proton pump inhibitor use was identified by medication records. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Specific subgroups were accounted for, such as younger age (<60 years), Asian ethnicity, female sex, and disease stage (metastatic/advanced) in multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling. The TRIO-013 trial accrued and randomized patients between June 2008 and January 2012; this analysis took place in January 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were divided based on PPI exposure. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary study outcome was PFS and OS between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Secondary outcomes included disease response rates and toxicities. RESULTS: Of the 545 patients with GEC (median age, 60 years; 406 men [74%]) included in the study, 229 received PPIs (42.0%) and were evenly distributed between arms. In the placebo arm, PPI-treated patients had poorer median PFS, 4.2 vs 5.7 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.29-1.81, P < .001); OS, 9.2 vs 11.3 months (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.62; P = .04); and disease control rate (83% vs 72%; P = .02) vs patients not treated with PPIs. In multivariate analysis considering age, race, disease stage, and sex, PPI-treated patients had poorer PFS (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.42-1.94; P < .001) and OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71; P = .001). In patients treated with CapeOx and lapatinib, PPIs had less effect on PFS (HR, 1.08; P = .54) and OS (HR, 1.26; P = .10); however, multivariate analysis in this group demonstrated a significant difference in OS (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.06-1.66; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Proton pump inhibitors negatively effected capecitabine efficacy by possibly raising gastric pH levels, leading to altered dissolution and absorption. These results are consistent with previous erlotinib and sunitinib studies. Whether PPIs affected lapatinib is unclear given concurrent capecitabine. Given capecitabine's prevalence in treatment breast cancer and colon cancer, further studies are under way. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00680901.

A Uridine Glucuronosyltransferase 2B7 Polymorphism Predicts Epirubicin Clearance and Outcomes in Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epirubicin is metabolized by uridine glucuronosyltransferase 2B7 (UGT2B7), an enzyme rich in single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We studied whether the -161 C > T germline SNP in UGT2B7 was related to epirubicin metabolism and whether differences exist in the toxicity and efficacy of epirubicin-based chemotherapy among patients who were TT homozygotes, CT heterozygotes, and CC homozygotes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 132 women with non-metastatic breast cancer receiving FEC (5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 100 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2)) were prospectively enrolled. Toxicity was assessed in cycle 1 using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 2.0. RESULTS: The sequence at -161 was studied in 132 subjects; 37 were TT homozygotes, 63 were CT heterozygotes, 26 were CC homozygotes, and 6 could not be genotyped. The CC genotype patients had decreased epirubicin clearance (median, 103.3 L/hr) compared with the CT/TT genotype patients (median, 134.0 L/hr; P = .002). The CC homozygous patients had an increased risk of grade 3 to 4 leukopenia compared with the TT homozygotes or heterozygotes (P = .038 and P = .032, respectively). TT homozygotes or heterozygotes had an increased risk of early recurrence (P = .039; χ(2) test). CONCLUSION: The results of the present prospective pharmacogenetic study suggest that the UGT2B7 -161 C > T SNP correlate with drug metabolism, toxicity, and efficacy in patients receiving epirubicin chemotherapy. Further studies of this UGT2B7 SNP as a predictor of epirubicin toxicity and efficacy are warranted.

Clinical determinants of weight loss in patients receiving radiation and chemoirradiation for head and neck cancer: a prospective longitudinal view.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the effects of systemic inflammation and symptoms of head and neck cancer patients on dietary intake and weight in relation to mode of treatment. METHODS: In all, 38 orally fed patients had intake, weight, C-reactive protein (CRP), and symptoms prospectively assessed at baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up. RESULTS: Intake/weight declined and CRP increased substantially in chemoirradiation patients (-11.4 ± 5.2 kg, -1214 kcal/day, 23.4 ± 24.9 mg/L; p < .05) versus radiotherapy patients (-3.5 ± 4.8 kg, -483 kcal/day, 8.3 ± 13.9 mg/L) during posttreatment (repeated-measures ANOVA). Multivariate generalized estimating equations modeling identified reduced swallowing capacity was a key predictor of energy intake in both treatment groups (p < .001); multiple symptoms experienced by radiotherapy/chemoirradiation patients were significant predictors of weight loss; additionally, in chemoirradiation patients, CRP was an independent predictor of weight loss (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of symptoms and systemic inflammation are important clinical targets to manage weight loss in patients with head and neck cancer, especially those treated with chemoirradiation.

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.

Targeting metastatic upper gastrointestinal adenocarcinomas.

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) tumors, including adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and biliary tree, have traditionally been difficult to treat with cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents. There has been little drug development success in treating these cancers over the last 20 years, perhaps a reflection of a combination of the aggressive biology of these tumors, the void in effective and specific drug development for these varied tumors, and the lack of properly designed, biologically-based clinical trials. Recently, so called "targeted agents" have risen to the forefront in the care of cancer patients and have made strong impacts in many areas of oncology, particularly gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), colon, breast, and lung cancers. Unfortunately, slow progress has been made using such agents in upper GI tumors. However, more recently, trials in some tumor types have demonstrated gains in progression free survival and overall survival. In this review, we discuss the drugs and pathways that have been most successful in the treatment of upper GI tumors and present the relevant data supporting their use for each tumor site. Additionally, we will explore a few novel pathways that may prove effective in the treatment of upper GI malignancies in the near future.

Antiangiogenic agents in advanced gastrointestinal malignancies: past, present and a novel future.

Advanced gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies are varied in presentation, prognosis, and treatment options. With the exception of resectable recurrent colorectal cancer, metastatic GI malignancies are incurable. Cytotoxic chemotherapies have been the mainstay of therapy for decades but limited extension of survival or clinical benefit has been achieved in non-colorectal GI cancers. There has been great interest in the incorporation of antiangiogenic strategies to improve outcomes for these patients. Clear benefits have been identified with bevacizumab and sorafenib in colorectal cancer and hepatocellular cancer, respectively; other GI tumor sites have lacked impressive results with antiangiogenic agents. In this review, we will present the benefits, or lack thereof, of clinically tested antiangiogenic compounds in GI malignancies and explore some potential new therapeutic anti-angiogenesis options for these diseases.

Sarcopenia as a determinant of chemotherapy toxicity and time to tumor progression in metastatic breast cancer patients receiving capecitabine treatment.

PURPOSE: Body composition has emerged as an important prognostic factor in cancer patients. Severe depletion of skeletal muscle (sarcopenia) and, hence, of overall lean body mass may represent an occult condition in individuals with normal or even high body weight. Sarcopenia has been associated with poor performance status, 5-fluorouracil toxicity, and shortened survival in cancer patients. Here, we prospectively studied patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving capecitabine treatment in order to determine if sarcopenia was associated with a higher incidence of toxicity and a shorter time to tumor progression (TTP). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Fifty-five women with metastatic breast cancer resistant to anthracycline and/or taxane treatment were included. Skeletal muscle cross-sectional area at the third lumbar vertebra was measured by computerized tomography, and sarcopenia was defined using a previously published cutoff point. Toxicity was assessed after cycle 1 of treatment, and TTP was determined prospectively. RESULTS: Approximately 25% of patients were classified as sarcopenic, and this feature was seen in normal weight, overweight, and obese individuals. Toxicity was present in 50% of sarcopenic patients, compared with only 20% of nonsarcopenic patients (P = 0.03), and TTP was shorter in sarcopenic patients (101.4 days; confidence interval, 59.8-142.9) versus nonsarcopenic patients (173.3 days; confidence interval, 126.1-220.5; P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Sarcopenia is a significant predictor of toxicity and TTP in metastatic breast cancer patients treated with capecitabine. Our results raise the potential use of body composition assessment to predict toxicity and individualize chemotherapy dosing.

Health-related quality of life in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab: overall and KRAS-specific results of the NCIC CTG and AGITG CO.17 Trial.

PURPOSE: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group CO.17 demonstrated the antiepidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody cetuximab improves overall and progression-free survival in patients with advanced, chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), particularly in patients with wild-type KRAS tumors. This article reports the health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) outcomes from CO.17. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (N = 572) with pretreated EGFR-detectable advanced CRC were randomly assigned to cetuximab and best supportive care (BSC) or to BSC alone. HRQL primary end points assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 were physical function (PF) and global health status (GHS); mean changes from baseline to 8 and 16 weeks were assessed. Post hoc analysis by KRAS mutation status was performed. RESULTS: Questionnaire compliance was 94% at baseline, but it declined differentially (67% v 47% for cetuximab v BSC at 16 weeks). PF change scores were -3.9 for cetuximab and -8.6 for BSC (P = .046) at 8 weeks and were -5.9 and -12.5 for cetuximab and BSC, respectively, (P = .027) at 16 weeks. GHS change scores were -0.5 and -7.1 (P = .008) at 8 weeks and were -3.6 and -15.2 (P = .008) at 16 weeks for cetuximab and BSC, respectively. In patients who had tumors with wild-type KRAS status, cetuximab resulted in less PF deterioration at 8 weeks (-0.7 v -7.2; P = .11) and 16 weeks (-3.4 v -13.8; P = .008) compared with BSC. Patients with wild-type status who received cetuximab experienced improved GHS at 8 weeks, whereas patients who received BSC alone deteriorated (3.2 v -7.7; P = .002). Cetuximab preserved GHS at 16 weeks (-0.2 v -18.1; P < .001). No significant differences were noted between study arms for patients with mutated KRAS tumors. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab offers important HRQL and survival benefits for pretreated patients with advanced, wild-type KRAS CRC.

Randomized phase III study of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin compared with fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) is noninferior to fluorouracil. folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The initial design of this trial was a randomized, two-arm, noninferiority, phase III comparison of XELOX versus FOLFOX-4. After patient accrual had begun, the trial design was amended in 2003 after bevacizumab phase III data became available. The resulting 2 x 2 factorial design randomly assigned patients to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to also receive either bevacizumab or placebo. We report here the results of the analysis of the XELOX versus FOLFOX-4 arms. The analysis of bevacizumab versus placebo with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is reported separately. The prespecified primary end point for the noninferiority analysis was progression-free survival. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 634 patients from the original two-arm portion of the study, plus an additional 1,400 patients after the start of the amended 2 x 2 design, for a total of 2,034 patients. The median PFS was 8.0 months in the pooled XELOX-containing arms versus 8.5 months in the FOLFOX-4-containing arms (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 97.5% CI, 0.93 to 1.16). The median overall survival was 19.8 months with XELOX versus 19.6 months with FOLFOX-4 (HR, 0.99; 97.5% CI, 0.88 to 1.12). FOLFOX-4 was associated with more grade 3/4 neutropenia/granulocytopenia and febrile neutropenia than XELOX, and XELOX with more grade 3 diarrhea and grade 3 hand-foot syndrome than FOLFOX-4. CONCLUSION: XELOX is noninferior to FOLFOX-4 as a first-line treatment for MCRC, and may be considered as a routine treatment option for appropriate patients.

Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 x 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 x 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.