Adjuvant treatment with S-1 in patients after R0-resection of adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagogastric junction - A multicenter phase I/II feasibility study (GMBH-STO-0114).

INTRODUCTION: S-1 has been shown to be an effective adjuvant treatment option for East Asian patients who underwent gastrectomy for stage II/III gastric cancer. We conducted a phase I/II study to evaluate the feasibility, tolerability and efficacy of administering S-1 in the adjuvant setting after R0-resection of adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) in Caucasian patients. METHODS: In this single-cohort, open-label, phase I/II trial, we enrolled patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or EGJ having undergone R0-resection with or without neoadjuvant treatment. One treatment cycle consisted of oral S-1 (30mg/m² bid) for 14 days. Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks for 18 cycles (54 weeks). Primary endpoint was feasibility and tolerability. Safety was evaluated according to the common toxicity criteria adverse events 4.0 criteria. Secondary endpoints were one-year relapse-free survival rate, relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between 10/2015 and 02/2018, 32 patients were enrolled in 12 German centres and 30 started adjuvant study treatment. Seventeen patients completed all 18 cycles. Two patients terminated study treatment due to adverse events (AEs), 7 due to patient's or investigator's decision and 4 due to recurrence or distant metastasis during adjuvant therapy. Dose levels were reduced to 25 mg/m² in 9 patients, and to 20 mg/m² in 1 patient. Of patients completing all 18 cycles, 5 did so with reduced dosage of S-1. Documented grade ≥ 3 AEs were neutropenia, diarrhoea, vomiting, polyneuropathy, palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia and rash. Serious AEs were observed in 7 patients. Median RFS was 32.2 months. One-year relapse-free survival rate was 77%. Data on OS were still premature at the end of the study. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant treatment with S-1 for one year is a feasible and safe treatment option for Caucasian patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma or cancer of the EGJ cancer after R0-resection.

Gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel combined with afatinib in metastatic pancreatic cancer - Results of a phase 1b clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The combination of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel is an established standard treatment in the first-line treatment of metastatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (mPDAC). Afatinib, an oral second-generation pan ErbB family tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has shown promising pre-clinical signs in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this phase 1b trial was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of afatinib in combination with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with mPDAC. METHODS: Treatment naïve patients (≥18 years) with histologically proven mPDAC and good performance status (ECOG 0/1) were enrolled to receive gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in combination with afatinib. Treatment was continued until disease progression, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint MTD was determined using a 3 + 3 design. Treatment started at dose level 0 with intravenous gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel 1000 mg/m2 / 125 mg/m2 (day 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle) + oral afatinib 30 mg daily. At dose level + 1 afatinib was increased to 40 mg. Secondary endpoints included safety parameters and exploratory endpoints evaluated treatment efficacy. RESULTS: Twelve patients were included in this trial, and 11 patients were treated and analysed in the safety and full analysis set (FAS). At dose level 0 the first three patients did not experience a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). At dose leve (DL) + 1 two patients experienced a DLT. Accordingly, enrolment continued at DL 0 with three more patients, of which one experienced DLT (skin rash ≥ CTCAE grade 3). Seven patients (63.6%) experienced at least one treatment-emergent serious adverse event (TESAE), with four patients (36.4%) experiencing TESAEs grade 3-5 related to the study medication. In the FAS, the objective response rate (ORR) was 36.4%, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.5 months and median overall survival in nine evaluable patients was 7.5 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 1b clinical trial, the MTD of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (1000 mg/m2 / 125 mg/m2) and afatinib (30 mg) was established. In a cohort of 11 patients, the combination showed an acceptable safety profile.

Negative Hyperselection of Resistance Mutations for Panitumumab Maintenance in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (PanaMa Phase II Trial, AIO KRK 0212).

PURPOSE: We evaluated additional mutations in RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) as prognostic and predictive biomarkers for the efficacy of added panitumumab to a 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid (FU/FA) maintenance as pre-specified analysis of the randomized PanaMa trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Mutations (MUT) were identified using targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS; Illumina Cancer Hotspot Panel v2) and IHC. RAS/BRAF V600E/PIK3CA/AKT1/ALK1/ERBB2/PTEN MUT and HER2/neu overexpressions were negatively hyperselected and correlated with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since start of maintenance treatment, and objective response rates (ORR). Univariate/multivariate Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: 202 of 248 patients (81.5%) of the full analysis set (FAS) had available NGS data: hyperselection WT, 162 (80.2%); MUT, 40 (19.8%). From start of maintenance therapy, hyperselection WT tumors were associated with longer median PFS as compared with hyperselection MUT mCRC (7.5 vs. 5.4 months; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.07; P = 0.11), OS (28.7 vs. 22.2 months; HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.77; P = 0.001), and higher ORR (35.8% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.26). The addition of panitumumab to maintenance was associated with significant benefit in hyperselection WT tumors for PFS (9.2 vs. 6.0 months; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93; P = 0.02) and numerically also for OS (36.9 vs. 24.9 months; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.61-1.36; P = 0.50), but not in hyperselection MUT tumors. Hyperselection status interacted with maintenance treatment arms in terms of PFS (P = 0.06) and OS (P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Extended molecular profiling beyond RAS may have the potential to improve the patient selection for anti-EGFR containing maintenance regimens.

Prognostic and predictive impact of metastatic organ involvement on maintenance therapy in advanced metastatic colorectal cancer: Subgroup analysis of patients treated within the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212).

Despite molecular selection, patients (pts) with RAS wildtype mCRC represent a heterogeneous population including diversity in metastatic spread. We investigated metastatic patterns for their prognostic and predictive impact on maintenance therapy with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid ± panitumumab. The study population was stratified according to (1) number of involved metastatic sites (single vs multiple organ metastasis), liver-limited disease vs (2) liver metastasis plus one additional site, and (3) vs liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regressions were used to correlate efficacy endpoints. Single organ metastasis was observed in 133 pts (53.6%) with 102 pts (41.1%) presenting with liver-limited disease, while multiple organ metastases were reported in 114 pts (46.0). Multiple compared to single organ metastases were associated with less favorable PFS (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.93; P = .004) and OS (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.98-1.93; P = .068) of maintenance therapy. While metastatic spread involving one additional extrahepatic site was not associated with clearly impaired survival compared to liver-limited disease, pts with liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites demonstrated less favorable PFS (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.30-2.83; P < .001), and OS (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.51-3.76; P < .001) of maintenance therapy. Pmab-containing maintenance therapy appeared active in both pts with multiple (HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86; P = .006) as well as to a lesser numerical extent in pts with single organ metastasis (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.57-1.21; P = .332; Interaction P = .183). These data may support clinical decisions when EGFR-based maintenance therapy is considered.

Health-related quality of life in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with fluorouracil and folinic acid with or without panitumumab as maintenance therapy: a prespecified secondary analysis of the PanaMa (AIO KRK 0212) trial.

BACKGROUND: The PanaMa trial demonstrated significant benefit in progression-free survival with the addition of panitumumab (Pmab) to fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) as maintenance therapy following first-line induction therapy with FOLFOX/Pmab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report health-related quality of life (HRQOL) analyses from the PanaMa trial. METHODS: HRQOL outcomes were evaluated using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) at every cycle of therapy until disease progression/death. HRQOL outcomes were mean and individual changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 from baselines (before induction therapy and before maintenance therapy) to each cycle of treatment. Comparative analyses were performed by randomisation status and treatment arm for induction- and maintenance-therapy, respectively. The trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01991873). RESULTS: At least one HRQOL questionnaire was completed by a total of 349/377 (93%) patients who received induction therapy, and by 237/248 (96%) patients who were randomised and received maintenance therapy. During induction therapy, most HRQOL dimensions remained stable or showed improvement, while appetite loss and diarrhoea significantly deteriorated. During maintenance therapy, HRQOL dimensions remained stable, while those that deteriorated during induction therapy showed significant improvement, without significant differences between the treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Maintenance therapy improves HRQOL dimensions that initially deteriorated during induction therapy while stabilising HRQOL in other dimensions. The addition of Pmab to FU/FA as maintenance therapy in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs progression-free survival without negative impact on HRQOL.

Integrated Analysis of the RASH Study with the Use of the "Burden of Therapy" (BOTh®TM) Methodology-A Novel Tool for Assessing Adverse Events in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer.

This analysis of the RASH trial (NCT01729481) aimed at gaining a better understanding of the "Burden of Therapy" (BOTh®TM) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In the RASH study, 150 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic PDAC were treated with gemcitabine plus erlotinib (gem/erlotinib) for four weeks. Patients who developed a skin rash during this four-week run-in phase continued with the gem/erlotinib treatment, while rash-negative patients were switched to FOLFIRINOX. The study demonstrated a 1-year survival rate of rash-positive patients who received gem/erlotinib as first-line treatment that was comparable to previous reports of patients receiving FOLFIRINOX. To understand whether these comparable survival rates may be accompanied by better tolerability of the gem/erlotinib treatment compared to FOLFIRINOX, the BOTh®TM methodology was used to continuously quantify and depict the burden of therapy generated by treatment emergent events (TEAEs). Sensory neuropathy was significantly more common in the FOLFIRINOX arm, and prevalence as well as severity increased over time. In both arms, the BOTh®TM associated with diarrhea decreased over the course of treatment. The BOTh®TM caused by neutropenia was comparable in both arms but decreased in the FOLFIRINOX arm over time, possibly due to chemotherapy dose reductions. Overall, gem/erlotinib was associated with a slightly higher overall BOTh®TM, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.6735). In summary, the BOTh®TM analysis facilitates the evaluation of TEAEs. In patients fit for intense chemotherapeutic regimens, FOLFIRINOX is associated with a lower BOTh®TM than gem/erlotinib.

Consensus Molecular Subtypes as Biomarkers of Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Maintenance Therapy With or Without Panitumumab in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (PanaMa, AIO KRK 0212).

PURPOSE: Consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) were evaluated as prognostic and predictive biomarkers of patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) with or without panitumumab (Pmab) after Pmab + mFOLFOX6 induction within the randomized phase II PanaMa trial. METHODS: CMSs were determined in the safety set (ie, patients that received induction) and full analysis set (FAS; ie, randomly assigned patients who received maintenance) and correlated with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since the start of induction or maintenance treatment and objective response rates (ORRs). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CI were calculated by univariate/multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 377 patients of the safety set, 296 (78.5%) had available CMS data: CMS1/2/3/4: 29 (9.8%)/122 (41.2%)/33 (11.2%)/112 (37.8%) and unclassifiable: 17 (5.7%). The CMSs were prognostic biomarkers in terms of PFS (P < .0001), OS (P < .0001), and ORR (P = .02) since the start of induction treatment. In FAS patients (n = 196), with CMS2/4 tumors, the addition of Pmab to FU/FA maintenance therapy was associated with longer PFS (CMS2: HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.95], P = .03; CMS4: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.38 to 1.03], P = .07) and OS (CMS2: HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52], P = .66; CMS4: HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96], P = .04). The CMS interacted significantly with treatment in terms of PFS (CMS2 v CMS1/3: P = .02; CMS4 v CMS1/3: P = .03) and OS (CMS2 v CMS1/3: P = .03; CMS4 v CMS1/3: P < .001). CONCLUSION: The CMS had a prognostic impact on PFS, OS, and ORR in RAS wild-type mCRC. In PanaMa, Pmab + FU/FA maintenance was associated with beneficial outcomes in CMS2/4, whereas no benefit was observed in CMS1/3 tumors.

Depth of response of induction therapy and consecutive maintenance treatment in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: An analysis of the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212).

BACKGROUND: In patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, depth of response (DpR) has gained importance as a novel end-point in clinical trials. We investigated the overall DpR, as well as the prognostic and predictive impact of DpR to induction therapy (six cycles of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin [FU/FA], oxaliplatin [FOLFOX] and panitumumab [Pmab]) on consecutive maintenance therapy (FU/FA plus Pmab or FU/FA alone) in patients treated within the PanaMa trial. METHODS: Central radiological assessment was performed according to RECIST 1.1. DpR was defined as percentage change in tumour diameter within defined time intervals (induction therapy, maintenance therapy, total course of therapy). For prognostic and predictive analyses, median DpR (

FOLFOX plus panitumumab or FOLFOX alone as additive therapy following R0/1 resection of RAS wild-type colorectal cancer liver metastases - The PARLIM trial (AIO KRK 0314).

PURPOSE: This trial investigates the addition of panitumumab to chemotherapy with fluorouracil/folinic acid and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in a 2:1 randomised, controlled, open-label, phase II trial in RAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients with R0/1-resected liver metastases. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) two years after randomisation. The experimental arm (12 weeks of biweekly mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab followed by 12 weeks of panitumumab alone) was considered active if the two-year PFS rate was ≥65%. Based on historical data, a two-year PFS rate of 50% was estimated in the control arm (12 weeks of biweekly FOLFOX). The trial was performed with a power of 80% and an alpha of 0.05. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01384994. RESULTS: The full analysis set consists of 70 patients (pts) in the experimental arm and 36 pts in the control arm. The primary endpoint was missed with a two-year PFS of 35.7% with FOLFOX plus panitumumab and 30.6% in the control arm. In comparative analyses, trends towards improved PFS (HR 0.83; 95%CI, 0.52-1.33; P = 0.44) and OS (HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.34-1.46; P = 0.34) were observed in favour of the panitumumab-based study arm. No new or unexpected safety signals were observed with FOLFOX plus panitumumab following liver resection. CONCLUSION: The PARLIM trial failed to demonstrate a two-year PFS rate of 65% after resection of colorectal liver metastases. The positive trends in survival endpoints may support future trials evaluating treatment with anti-EGFR agents after resection of liver metastases.

First-line fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab followed by irinotecan-escalation versus initial fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan and bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer - Final survival and per-protocol analysis of the randomised XELAVIRI trial (AIO KRK 0110).

BACKGROUND: The randomised open-label phase III XELAVIRI trial failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of the sequential application of fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab followed by additional irinotecan at first progression (Arm A) versus initial combination of all agents (Arm B) for untreated metastatic colorectal cancer in the initial analysis of time-to-failure-of-strategy (TFS, 90% confidence boundary of 0.8). Here, we evaluate efficacy in the full analysis set (FAS), the per-protocol set, in addition to age-related and molecular subgroups. METHODS: Median TFS, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Cox regression models assessed hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) (TFS: 90%; OS, PFS: 95%). RESULTS: Of 421 patients, 390 (92.6%), 391 (92.9%) and 357 (84.8%) events for TFS, OS and PFS were observed in the FAS with a median follow-up of 54.2 months (Arm A) versus 52.9 months (Arm B). Non-inferiority of sequential treatment for TFS was missed in the FAS (HR 0.93; 90% CI, 0.79-1.10; P = 0.482) and not shown in the per-protocol set (HR 0.93; 90% CI, 0.75-1.13, P = 0.433). Formal non-inferiority for TFS was observed for patients older than 70 years (HR 1.06; 90% CI, 0.80-1.41; P = 0.670) and patients with RAS mutant tumours (HR 1.12; 90% CI, 0.87-1.43; P = 0.465). In RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours, combination treatment was significantly superior to sequential therapy in all end-points. CONCLUSIONS: In the overall population, XELAVIRI just missed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of sequential compared to combination therapy for TFS. However, the non-inferiority of sequential treatment was observed in elderly patients and RAS mutant tumours. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration ID (clinicaltrials.gov) NCT01249638.

Efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab vs FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in 1st-line treatment of older patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: an analysis of the randomised trial FIRE-3.

BACKGROUND: The evidence on the efficacy of anticancer therapy is limited in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This retrospective analysis of phase III FIRE-3 trial assesses the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab according to the patients' age and sidedness of primary tumour. METHODS: The study endpoints overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients, followed by stratification according to primary tumour sidedness. ORR was compared using Fisher´s exact test, OS and PFS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate Cox regression analyses assessed hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for OS and PFS. RESULTS: Overall, older patients with RAS WT tumours had a significantly shorter OS when compared to younger patients (25.9 months vs 29.3 months, HR 1.29; P = 0.02). Also the proportion of right-sided tumours was significantly greater in older patients (27.1% vs 17.9%; P = 0.029). Secondary resection rates were numerically higher in younger patients (25.4% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.068) than in older patients. This was primarily seen in the Cetuximab arm, where older patients underwent less likely resection (13.1% vs. 26%; P = 0.02). Older patients with left-sided tumours showed only a trend towards greater efficacy of cetuximab (HR 0.86; P = 0.38). In patients with right-sided primary tumours, older patients did not appear to benefit from cetuximab in contrast to younger patients (≥65 years: 16.6 months vs 23.6 months, HR 1.1; P = 0.87; <65 years: 21.9 months vs 16.4 months HR 1.5; P = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: In FIRE-3, OS was generally shorter in older patients in comparison to younger patients. This could be explained by the overrepresentation of right-sided tumours and a lower secondary resection rate in older patients. The efficacy of targeted therapy was dependent on tumour sidedness in older patients with RAS WT mCRC. CLINICAL TRIAL: FIRE-3 (NCT00433927).

Response and Disease Dynamics in Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer With Bevacizumab-Based Sequential vs. Combination Chemotherapy-Analysis of the Phase 3 XELAVIRI Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and time to DpR represent exploratory endpoints that may serve as early efficacy parameters and predictors of long-term outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We analyzed these endpoints in mCRC patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-based sequential (initial fluoropyrimidines) versus combination (initial fluoropyrimidines plus irinotecan) chemotherapy within the phase 3 XELAVIRI trial. METHODS: DpR (change from baseline to smallest tumor diameter), ETS (≥20% reduction in tumor diameter at first reassessment), and time to DpR (study randomization to DpR image) were analyzed. We evaluated progression-free survival and overall survival with ETS as stratification parameter according to treatment arm, molecular subgroup, and sex. RESULTS: In 370 patients analyzed, a higher rate of ETS (60.9% vs. 43.5%; p = 0.001) and significantly greater DpR (-40.0% vs. -24.7%; p < 0.001) were observed in the initial combination therapy arm. The improvement was pronounced in RAS/BRAF wild-type tumors. ETS correlated with improved survival irrespective of treatment arm (PFS: p < 0.001; OS: p = 0.012) and molecular subgroup (PFS: p < 0.001; OS: p < 0.001). Male patients in contrast to female patients with ETS had survival benefit (PFS: p < 0.001, HR 0.532; OS: p < 0.001, HR 0.574 vs. PFS: p = 0.107; OS: p = 0.965). CONCLUSIONS: Initial irinotecan-based combination therapy with bevacizumab improved ETS and DpR in mCRC patients with a particularly high irinotecan sensitivity of RAS/BRAF wild-type tumors. ETS seems to be a suitable prognostic marker for fluoropyrimidine- and bevacizumab-based combinations in mCRC. This finding was rather driven by male patients, potentially indicating that ETS might be less predictive of long-term outcome in an elderly, female population.

Exact Primary Tumor Location in mCRC: Prognostic Value and Predictive Impact on Anti-EGFR mAb Efficacy.

Primary tumor sidedness (left vs. right) has prognostic and predictive impact on anti-EGFR agent efficacy and thus management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This analysis evaluates the relevance of primary tumor location (PTL) in RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC patients, when dividing the colorectal frame into six segments. This pooled analysis, performed on a single-patient basis of five randomized first-line therapy trials, evaluates the impact of exact PTL classification on baseline characteristics, prognosis and prediction of anti-EGFR antibody efficacy by chi-square and log-rank tests, the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox and logistic regressions. The PTL was significantly associated with metastatic spread: liver (p = 0.001), lung (p = 0.047), peritoneal (p < 0.001) and lymph nodes (p = 0.048). A multivariate analysis indicated an impact on anti-EGFR agent efficacy in terms of overall survival depending on the exact primary tumor location: from detrimental in caecal (HR 2.63), rather neutral effects in the ascending colon (HR 1.24), right flexure/transverse colon (HR 0.99) and left flexure/descending colon (HR 0.91) to clear benefit in sigmoid (HR 0.71) and rectal (HR 0.58) primaries. Exact primary tumor location affects anti-EGFR antibody efficacy in a rather continuous than a dichotomous fashion in RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC patients. This perspective might help to support clinical decisions when anti-EGFR antibodies are considered.

Panitumumab Plus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Versus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Alone as Maintenance Therapy in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized PANAMA Trial (AIO KRK 0212).

PURPOSE: The randomized PANAMA trial investigated the efficacy of panitumumab (Pmab) when added to maintenance therapy with fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Following first-line induction therapy with six cycles of FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab, responding patients (stable disease or partial or complete remission) were randomly assigned (1:1, open-label) to maintenance treatment with either FU/FA plus Pmab or FU/FA alone. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of progression-free survival (PFS, time from random assignment until progression or death) in favor of FU/FA plus Pmab with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, a power of 80%, and a significance level of 10%. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate of maintenance therapy, and toxicity. Survival end points were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test and Cox regressions. Dichotomous variables were compared by Fisher's exact test; odds ratios were indicated when appropriate. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01991873). RESULTS: Overall, 248 patients were randomly assigned and received maintenance therapy with either FU/FA plus Pmab (125 patients) or FU/FA alone (123 patients). At data cutoff, with 218 events (of 218 needed), PFS of maintenance therapy was significantly improved with FU/FA plus Pmab (8.8 months v 5.7 months; HR, 0.72; 80% CI, 0.60 to 0.85; P = .014). Overall survival (event rate 54%) numerically favored the FU/FA plus Pmab arm (28.7 months v 25.7 months; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.18; P = .32). Objective response rates were 40.8% in patients receiving FU/FA plus Pmab versus 26.0% in patients receiving FU/FA alone (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.36; P = .02). The most frequent Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event grade ≥ 3 event during maintenance therapy was skin rash (7.2%). CONCLUSION: In RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, maintenance therapy with FU/FA plus Pmab induced a significantly superior PFS compared with FU/FA alone. If active maintenance therapy is aspired following induction therapy with FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab, FU/FA plus Pmab appears to be the most favorable option.

Study protocol of an open-label, single arm phase II trial investigating the efficacy, safety and quality of life of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with liposomal irinotecan combined with Oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil/Folinic acid followed by curative surgical resection in patients with hepatic Oligometastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (HOLIPANC).

BACKGROUND: According to current guidelines, treatment of patients with hepatic oligometastasis in pancreatic cancer is not reflected and systemic chemotherapy is recommended in those patients. Retrospective data suggest beneficial outcomes in patients with hepatic oligometastasis, though prospective data from clinical trials addressing this particular patient group is not available. METHODS: In this single arm, phase-2 trial, survival data from patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by R0/R1 resection will be compared to historic data from patients with oligometastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. The clinical trial will focus on a well-defined patient collective with metastatic load limited to the liver as target organ with a maximum of five metastases. The combination of liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI), oxaliplatin (OX) and 5-fluouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) (nal-IRI + OX+ 5-FU/FA, NAPOX) was chosen as neoadjuvant chemotherapy; the choice was based on an ongoing clinical study in which NAPOX appeared manageable, with promising anti-tumor activity in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. In total 150 patients will be enrolled for this trial with an aim of 55 patients receiving a complete macroscopic synchronous tumor and metastatic resection. DISCUSSION: This is the first clinical study to prospectively evaluate the value of multimodality therapy concepts in oligometastatic pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT 2019-002734-37 ; NCT04617457 .

Consensus molecular subtypes in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with sequential versus combined fluoropyrimidine, bevacizumab and irinotecan (XELAVIRI trial).

BACKGROUND: The XELAVIRI trial compared sequential (fluoropyrimidine and bevacizumab; irinotecan (Iri) at progression) versus initial combination therapy (fluoropyrimidine, bevacizumab, Iri) of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In the confirmatory analysis, the primary end-point (non-inferiority of sequential therapy regarding time to failure of strategy, TFS) was not met. Nevertheless, significant differences regarding treatment efficacy were observed according to RAS status. Here, we evaluate the consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) as additional biomarkers for sequential versus combination therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Gene expression was measured using NanoString after mRNA extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour specimens. CMS were predicted using multinomial regression and correlated with updated data for TFS, overall (OS) and progression-free survival. RESULTS: CMS were predicted in 337 of 421 (80.0%) patients (CMS1: 18.4%; CMS2: 51.6%; CMS3: 2.7%; CMS4: 27.3%). CMS2 together with RAS/BRAF wild-type status was identified as potential predictive marker of benefit from initial combination therapy for OS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.96, p = 0.036) and progression-free survival (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.29-0.79, p = 0.004) and also trending in TFS (HR 0.63, 90% CI 0.41-0.95, p = 0.066). In patients with RAS-mutated mCRC, CMS1 was associated with longer OS after initial combination therapy (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.95, p = 0.038). Interaction testing (two-sided) of CMS and RAS/BRAF status in favour of the combination treatment strategy was significant for OS (p = 0.012) CONCLUSIONS: In patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC, CMS2 may serve as an additional biomarker of benefit from the initial combination therapy, including Iri. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration ID (clinicaltrials.gov) NCT01249638.

A randomized, multicenter phase II study comparing efficacy, safety and tolerability of two dosing regimens of cisplatin and pemetrexed in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed and cisplatin is a first-line standard in non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without targetable mutations. It became the backbone of checkpoint-inhibitor-chemotherapy combinations. Single high doses of cisplatin pose toxicity risks and require hyperhydration, potentially prolonging outpatient application. The aim of this study was to compare efficacy, safety and tolerability of split-dose cisplatin with the standard schedule. METHODS: Patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned to up to six 21-day cycles of pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 (arm A), or pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 (day 1) and cisplatin 40 mg/m2 (day 1 + 8, arm B), followed by pemetrexed maintenance. Primary endpoint was objective response rate. Secondary objectives were overall survival, progression-free survival, time to progression, treatment compliance, toxicity profile, and quality of life. RESULTS: We enrolled 130 patients (129 evaluable). Median cycle numbers in A and B were six (1-6) and five (1-6). Dose intensities were comparable between arms. More patients in A received pemetrexed maintenance (24.2% versus 11.1%). With 16 (24.2%) in A and 19 (30.2%) patients in B achieving objective responses [odds ratio 0.74 (0.34-1.62), p = 0.55] the primary endpoint was met. Overall survival was not different between arms (median 14.4 versus 14.9 months); [HR = 1.07; (0.68-1.68), p = 0.78]. Median progression-free survival was 7.0 months in A and 6.2 months in B [HR = 1.63; (1.17-2.38); p = 0.01]. Adverse events of CTCAE grade ⩾3, particularly hematological, were more frequent in B. No difference in grade 4 and 5 infections between arms was noted. Treatment-related asthenia and nausea/vomiting of any grade were more frequent in A. Global health status, fatigue and constipation measured on day 1 of cycle 4 demonstrated superior scores in B. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed and split-dose cisplatin is safe and effective. Advantages of split-dose cisplatin with regard to specific toxicities allow personalization of this important chemotherapy backbone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) number 2011-001963-37.

Trastuzumab in combination with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel as perioperative treatment for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma: A phase II trial of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie Gastric Cancer Study Group.

Perioperative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT) is a mainstay in the treatment of esophagogastric adenocarcinomas (EGA). Trastuzumab improved survival when added to chemotherapy in patients with HER-2-positive metastatic EGA. We investigated the combination of trastuzumab and FLOT as perioperative treatment in patients with locally advanced EGA. A multicenter phase II study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of perioperative FLOT (24-hours 5-FU 2600 mg/m2 , leucovorin 200 mg/m2 , oxaliplatin 85 mg/mg2 , docetaxel 50 mg/m2 , trastuzumab 6 mg/kg then 4 mg/kg d1, repeated d15 for four cycles preoperatively and postoperatively followed by 9 cycles of trastuzumab monotherapy) in patients with HER-2 positive EGA. Patients had ≥cT2, any N, M0 EGA. The primary endpoint was the rate of centrally assessed pathological complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints comprised disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS), R0 resection rate, toxicity and surgical morbidity. Fifty-six evaluable patients (median age 62 years) were included; n = 40 had tumors originating from the esophagogastric junction; T stage was (cT2/3/4/unknown): 4/42/8/2; n = 50 patients had cN+ disease. Main adverse events grades 3-4: leukopenia (17.9%), neutropenia (46.6%) and diarrhea (17.0%). All patients underwent tumor resections. R0 resection rate was 92.9%. Eight patients had anastomotic leakage. One postoperative death occurred. pCR was found in 12 patients (21.4%) and a further n = 14 patients (25.0%) had near complete response. Median DFS was 42.5 months and the 3-year OS rate was 82.1%. The primary endpoint of achieving a pCR >20% was reached. No unexpected safety issues were observed. Survival data are promising.

A Randomized Phase II Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pioglitazone, Clarithromycin and Metronomic Low-Dose Chemotherapy with Single-Agent Nivolumab Therapy in Patients with Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Treated in Second or Further Line (ModuLung).

Background: Most non-small cell lung cancers occur in elderly and frequently comorbid patients. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the efficacy of biomodulatory active therapy regimen, concertedly interfering with tumor-associated homeostatic pathways to achieve tumor control paralleled by modest toxicity profiles. Patients and Methods: The ModuLung trial is a national, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomized phase II trial in patients with histologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV squamous (n = 11) and non-squamous non-small cell (n = 26) lung cancer who failed first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned on a 1:1 ratio to the biomodulatory or control group, treated with nivolumab. Patients randomized to the biomodulatory group received an all-oral therapy consisting of treosulfan 250 mg twice daily, pioglitazone 45 mg once daily, clarithromycin 250 mg twice daily, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results: The study had to be closed pre-maturely due to approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICi) in first-line treatment. Thirty-seven patients, available for analysis, were treated in second to forth-line. Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly inferior for biomodulation (N = 20) vs. nivolumab (N = 17) with a median PFS (95% confidence interval) of 1.4 (1.2-2.0) months vs. 1.6 (1.4-6.2), respectively; with a hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 1.908 [0.962; 3.788]; p = 0.0483. Objective response rate was 11.8% with nivolumab vs. 5% with biomodulation, median follow-up 8.25 months. The frequency of grade 3-5 treatment related adverse events was 29% with nivolumab and 10% with biomodulation. Overall survival (OS), the secondary endpoint, was comparable in both treatment arms; biomodulation with a median OS (95% confidence interval) of 9.4 (6.0-33.0) months vs. nivolumab 6.9 (4.6-24.0), respectively; hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.733 [0.334; 1.610]; p = 0.4368. Seventy-five percent of patients in the biomodulation arm received rescue therapy with checkpoint inhibitors. Conclusions: This trial shows that the biomodulatory therapy was inferior to nivolumab on PFS. However, the fact that OS was similar between groups gives rise to the hypothesis that the well-tolerable biomodulatory therapy may prime tumor tissues for efficacious checkpoint inhibitor therapy, even in very advanced treatment lines where poor response to ICi might be expected with increasing line of therapy.

Kinetics of Renal Function during Induction in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results of Two Prospective Studies by the German Myeloma Study Group DSMM.

BACKGROUND: Preservation of kidney function in newly diagnosed (ND) multiple myeloma (MM) helps to prevent excess toxicity. Patients (pts) from two prospective trials were analyzed, provided postinduction (PInd) restaging was performed. Pts received three cycles with bortezomib (btz), cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (dex; VCD) or btz, lenalidomide (len), and dex (VRd) or len, adriamycin, and dex (RAD). The minimum required estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was >30 mL/min. We analyzed the percent change of the renal function using the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO)-defined categories. RESULTS: Seven hundred and seventy-two patients were eligible. Three hundred and fifty-six received VCD, 214 VRd, and 202 RAD. VCD patients had the best baseline eGFR. The proportion of pts with eGFR <45 mL/min decreased from 7.3% at baseline to 1.9% PInd (p < 0.0001). Thirty-seven point one percent of VCD versus 49% of VRd patients had a decrease of GFR (p = 0.0872). IMWG-defined "renal complete response (CRrenal)" was achieved in 17/25 (68%) pts after VCD, 12/19 (63%) after RAD, and 14/27 (52%) after VRd (p = 0.4747). CONCLUSIONS: Analyzing a large and representative newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM) group, we found no difference in CRrenal that occurred independently from the myeloma response across the three regimens. A trend towards deterioration of the renal function with VRd versus VCD may be explained by a better pretreatment "renal fitness" in the latter group.