Proportions and characteristics of interval cancer in annual fecal immunochemical test screening and postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: Results from a Japanese multicenter prospective study using questionnaires, the C-DETECT study.

OBJECTIVES: There are several types of colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the detection methods and intervals, including interval CRC (iCRC) and postcolonoscopy CRC (PCCRC). We aimed to examine their proportions and characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter prospective study using questionnaires in Japan ("C-DETECT study"), in which differences in CRC characteristics according to detection methods and intervals were examined from consecutive adult patients. Because the annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) was used in population-based screening, the annual FIT-iCRC was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 1241 CRC patients (1064 with invasive CRC) were included. Annual FIT-iCRC (a), 3-year PCCRC (b), and CRC detected within 1 year after a positive FIT with noncompliance to colonoscopy (c) accounted for 4.5%, 7.0%, and 3.9% of all CRCs, respectively, and for 3.9%, 5.4%, and 4.3% of invasive CRCs, respectively. The comparison among these (a, b, c) and other CRCs (d) demonstrated differences in the proportions of ≥T2 invasion ([a] 58.9%, [b] 44.8%, [c] 87.5%, [d] 73.0%), metastasis ([a] 33.9%, [b] 21.8%, [c] 54.2%, [d] 43.9%), right-sided CRC ([a] 42.9%, [b] 40.2%, [c] 18.8%, [d] 28.6%), and female sex ([a] 53.6%, [b] 49.4%, [c] 27.1%, [d] 41.6%). In metastatic CRC, (a) and (b) showed a higher proportions of BRAF mutations ([a] [b] 12.0%, [c] [d] 3.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Annual FIT-iCRC and 3-year PCCRC existed in nonnegligible proportions. They were characterized by higher proportions of right-sided tumors, female sex, and BRAF mutations. These findings suggest that annual FIT-iCRC and 3-year PCCRC may have biological features different from those of other CRCs.

Baseline ctDNA gene alterations as a biomarker of survival after panitumumab and chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Certain genetic alterations and right-sided primary tumor location are associated with resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor (EGFR) treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The phase 3 PARADIGM trial (n = 802) demonstrated longer overall survival with first-line anti-EGFR (panitumumab) versus antivascular endothelial growth factor (bevacizumab) plus modified FOLFOX6 in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC with left-sided primary tumors. This prespecified exploratory biomarker analysis of PARADIGM (n = 733) evaluated the association between circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) gene alterations and efficacy outcomes, focusing on a broad panel of gene alterations associated with resistance to EGFR inhibition, including KRAS, NRAS, PTEN and extracellular domain EGFR mutations, HER2 and MET amplifications, and ALK, RET and NTRK1 fusions. Overall survival was prolonged with panitumumab plus modified FOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus modified FOLFOX6 in patients with ctDNA that lacked gene alterations in the panel (that is, negative hyperselected; median in the overall population: 40.7 versus 34.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.92) but was similar or inferior with panitumumab in patients with ctDNA that contained any gene alteration in the panel (19.2 versus 22.2 months; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.53), regardless of tumor sidedness. Negative hyperselection using ctDNA may guide optimal treatment selection in patients with mCRC. ClinicalTrials.gov registrations: NCT02394834 and NCT02394795 .

Bevacizumab, Irinotecan, and Biweekly Trifluridine/Tipiracil for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: MODURATE, a Phase Ib Study.

BACKGROUND: In this phase Ib study MODURATE, we optimized the dosing schedule and tested the efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil, irinotecan, and bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin treatment failure. METHODS: We included a dose escalation (3 + 3 design) and an expansion cohort. Patients were administered trifluridine/tipiracil (25-35 mg/m2 twice daily, days 1-5), irinotecan (150-180 mg/m2, day 1), and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg, day 1) every 2 weeks. The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in the dose escalation cohort was administered to at least 15 patients in both cohorts combined. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled. Five dose-limiting toxicities were observed. RP2D was defined as trifluridine/tipiracil 35 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg. Of 16 patients who received RP2D, 86% (14/16) experienced grade ≥3 neutropenia without febrile neutropenia. Dose reduction, delay, and discontinuation occurred in 94%, 94%, and 6% of patients, respectively. Three patients (19%) showed partial response and 5 had stable disease for >4 months, with a median progression-free and overall survival of 7.1 and 21.7 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Biweekly trifluridine/tipiracil, irinotecan, and bevacizumab administration may have moderate antitumor activity with high risk of severe myelotoxicity in previously treated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer [UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000019828) and Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs041180028)].

Panitumumab vs Bevacizumab Added to Standard First-line Chemotherapy and Overall Survival Among Patients With RAS Wild-type, Left-Sided Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: For patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, adding anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) monoclonal antibodies to first-line doublet chemotherapy is routine, but the optimal targeted therapy has not been defined. Objective: To evaluate the effect of adding panitumumab (an anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody) vs bevacizumab (an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody) to standard first-line chemotherapy for treatment of RAS wild-type, left-sided, metastatic colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label, phase 3 clinical trial at 197 sites in Japan in May 2015-January 2022 among 823 patients with chemotherapy-naive RAS wild-type, unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (final follow-up, January 14, 2022). Interventions: Panitumumab (n = 411) or bevacizumab (n = 412) plus modified fluorouracil, l-leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) every 14 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point, overall survival, was tested first in participants with left-sided tumors, then in the overall population. Secondary end points were progression-free survival, response rate, duration of response, and curative (defined as R0 status) resection rate. Results: In the as-treated population (n = 802; median age, 66 years; 282 [35.2%] women), 604 (75.3%) had left-sided tumors. Median follow-up was 61 months. Median overall survival was 37.9 months with panitumumab vs 34.3 months with bevacizumab in participants with left-sided tumors (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.82; 95.798% CI, 0.68-0.99; P = .03) and 36.2 vs 31.3 months, respectively, in the overall population (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.98; P = .03). Median progression-free survival for panitumumab vs bevacizumab was 13.1 vs 11.9 months, respectively, for those with left-sided tumors (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.20) and 12.2 vs 11.4 months overall (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.24). Response rates with panitumumab vs bevacizumab were 80.2% vs 68.6%, respectively, for left-sided tumors (difference, 11.2%; 95% CI, 4.4%-17.9%) and 74.9% vs 67.3% overall (difference, 7.7%; 95% CI, 1.5%-13.8%). Median duration of response with panitumumab vs bevacizumab was 13.1 vs 11.2 months for left-sided tumors (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.10) and 11.9 vs 10.7 months overall (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.06). Curative resection rates with panitumumab vs bevacizumab were 18.3% vs 11.6% for left-sided tumors; (difference, 6.6%; 95% CI, 1.0%-12.3%) and 16.5% vs 10.9% overall (difference, 5.6%; 95% CI, 1.0%-10.3%). Common treatment-emergent adverse events were acneiform rash (panitumumab: 74.8%; bevacizumab: 3.2%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (panitumumab: 70.8%; bevacizumab: 73.7%), and stomatitis (panitumumab: 61.6%; bevacizumab: 40.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, adding panitumumab, compared with bevacizumab, to standard first-line chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival in those with left-sided tumors and in the overall population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02394795.

Biomarker analysis for patients with pancreatic cancer treated with nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin.

BACKGROUND: Nanoliposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) is a standard second-line therapy for patients with pancreatic cancer. Identification of biomarkers is important to determine appropriate treatment strategies. We investigated the clinical practice outcomes and biomarkers associated with the nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV regimen. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients treated with nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV as a second or subsequent treatment after gemcitabine-based therapy between June 2020 and March 2021 at Shizuoka Cancer Center. RESULTS: We analyzed 55 consecutive patients who met the selection criteria. At a median of 9.4 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 2.3 and 6.6 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) was significantly associated with PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-4.30; P = 0.028) and OS (0 vs. 1 or 2: HR 2.46; 95% CI 1.15-5.25; P = 0.029). The OS was significantly longer in patients with CA19-9 response than in those without CA19-9 response (12.6 vs. 5.6 months; HR 0.24; 95% CI 0.08-0.75; P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Nanoliposomal irinotecan was efficacious and tolerable in clinical practice. GPS and CA19-9 response were good candidates as predictive biomarkers, whereas GPS was a good candidate prognostic biomarker for the nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV regimen.

Discordance of microsatellite instability and mismatch repair immunochemistry occurs depending on the cancer type.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) and deficiency of mismatch repair (dMMR) are key markers for predicting the response of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and screening for Lynch syndrome (LS). This study examined the incidences of and factors associated with the concordance of MSI and MMR in human cancers. A total of 518 formalin-fixed cancer tissues were analyzed for MSI and MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC). MSI was analyzed by a PCR-based method using Promega markers. Concordance with MMR expression and factors associated with concordance were analyzed. In 2 colorectal cancer samples, MMR IHC failed due to inadequate staining conditions. In the remaining 516 cancers, a high level of MSI (MSI-H) was identified in 113 cases, and dMMR was identified in 112. The concordance of MSI and MMR IHC was 98.3%. Only 9 cases (4 pancreatobiliary, 3 colorectal, and 2 endometrial cancers) were discordant. Of the 113 MSI-H cases, 4 (3.5%) were proficient MMR (pMMR); of the 403 microsatellite stability (MSS) cases, 5 (1.2%) were dMMR. The independent factors associated with MSI-H/dMMR included meeting Amsterdam II criteria, assay purpose, and sampling method. Multivariate analysis revealed that cancer type (gastrointestinal cancers or others) was associated with concordance of MSI and MMR IHC. Three LS cases with pancreatic or endometrial cancer demonstrated MSS and dMMR, and one biliary cancer showed MSI-H and pMMR. Discordance between MSI and MMR IHC occasionally occurs in pancreaticobiliary and endometrial cancers. When suspected, both MSI and MMR IHC should be done to judge the ICI indication and screen for LS.

Genetic medicine in companion diagnostics of germline BRCA testing of Japanese pancreatic cancer patients.

In 2021, Japan's national health insurance made germline BRCA (g.BRCA) testing available to unresectable pancreatic cancer (PC) patients as a companion diagnostic (CD) of the PARP inhibitor. This study investigated the incidence of the g.BRCA variant (g.BRCAv.) and the status of the genetic medicine associated with its testing. A total of 110 PC patients underwent the testing, five of whom (4.5%) had a deleterious g.BRCA2v. (all truncations) but no g.BRCA1v. The turnaround time (TAT) to the doctors was 13 days, and to the patients, 17 days. A higher incidence of a BRCA-related family history and a shorter TAT were seen in the g.BRCAv. patients, but they were insignificant (p = 0.085 and p = 0.059, respectively). Genetic counseling was not performed for three g.BRCA2v. patients because two of them had no accessible relatives and one died of the cancer before the genetic report was completed. Two families underwent generic counseling and testing based on the patient's genetic data. g.BRCAv. is recognized in a small fraction of PC cases, and the following genetic counseling is done more for the relatives than for the patients. TAT was constant and did not affect much on the genetic counseling, but the earlier testing is expected for patients with a deadly cancer.

Effectiveness and safety of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in elderly patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) in patients aged ≥ 75 years with advanced pancreatic cancer and compare it with monotherapy (GEM or S-1). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of consecutive patients with advanced pancreatic cancer aged ≥ 75 years who received either GnP or monotherapy (GEM or S-1) between January 2014 and May 2020. The primary efficacy outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were included in this study; 51 were treated with GnP and 45 with monotherapy (31 with GEM and 14 with S-1). The median OS and progression-free survival were 10.8 and 6.7 months in the GnP group and 10.7 and 4.3 months in the monotherapy group, respectively. The treatment effect on OS was consistently favorable in the GnP group across most subgroups, particularly in patients with locally advanced cancer, modified Glasgow prognostic score of 0 or 1, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio < 3.1. The disease control rates were 76% and 48% in the GnP and monotherapy groups, respectively, and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurred in 23 (45%) and 11 (24%) patients of the GnP and monotherapy groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that GnP was not superior to monotherapy with regard to OS. However, multivariate analysis showed that GnP treatment positively affected the OS and could be considered as a treatment option, even for elderly patients.

Present status of germline findings in precision medicine for Japanese cancer patients: issues in the current system.

OBJECTIVE: Since 2019, precision cancer medicine has been covered by national insurance in Japan; however, to date, germline findings have not been fully reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate the current status and raise a problem of germline finding analysis and disclosure in Japanese precision cancer medicine. METHODS: Germline findings of 52 genes were examined in 296 cases with advanced cancer by a case series study. RESULTS: Six (2.0%) cases were examined by the Oncoguide™ NCC Oncopanel with germline testing, but no germline findings were reported. The remaining 290 (98.0%) cases were analyzed by FoundationOne® CDx (tumor-only testing), which recognized 404 pathogenic variants; those of BRCA1/2 were recognized in 16 (5.5%) tumors. Our institutional algorithm suggested 39 candidate germline findings in 34 cases, while the public algorithm listed at least 91 candidate germline findings. Four germline findings had been previously identified (BRCA1: 3 and ATM: 1). Nine of 30 cases with candidate germline findings excluding these known germline findings refused or deferred germline testing. Only 4 of 16 cases that received counseling underwent germline testing, and those 4 revealed 3 germline findings (BRCA2, CDK4 and RAD51C); in total, 8 (2.7%) germline findings were revealed. Reasons for refusing genetic counseling and/or germline testing included extra hospital visits, added expense for germline testing due to limited national insurance coverage, poor patient physical condition and no known family members associated with the possible germline finding. CONCLUSIONS: In current Japanese precision cancer medicine, only a small fraction of the patients undergoes germline testing and demonstrated germline finding. The current results suggested a need for earlier indications for precision cancer medicine, broader insurance coverage and more efficient germline finding prediction algorithms, to increase the number of germline testings and to improve the following managements.

Microsatellite instability is biased in Amsterdam II-defined Lynch-related cancer cases with family history but is rare in other cancers: a summary of 1000 analyses.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a key marker for predicting the response of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and for screening Lynch syndrome (LS). AIM: This study aimed to see the characteristics of cancers with high level of MSI (MSI-H) in genetic medicine and precision medicine. METHODS: This study analyzed the incidence of MSI-H in 1000 cancers and compared according to several clinical and demographic factors. RESULTS: The incidence of MSI-H was highest in endometrial cancers (26.7%, 20/75), followed by small intestine (20%, 3/15) and colorectal cancers (CRCs)(13.7%, 64/466); the sum of these three cancers (15.6%) was significantly higher than that of other types (2.5%)(P < 0.0001). MSI-H was associated with LS-related cancers (P < 0.0001), younger age (P = 0.009), and family history, but not with smoking, drinking, or serum hepatitis virus markers. In CRC cases, MSI-H was significantly associated with a family history of LS-related cancer (P < 0.0001), Amsterdam II criteria [odds ratio (OR): 5.96], right side CRCs (OR: 4.89), and multiplicity (OR: 3.31). However, MSI-H was very rare in pancreatic (0.6%, 1/162) and biliary cancers (1.6%, 1/64) and was null in 25 familial pancreatic cancers. MSI-H was more recognized in cancers analyzed for genetic counseling (33.3%) than in those for ICI companion diagnostics (3.1%)(P < 0.0001). Even in CRCs, MSI-H was limited to 3.3% when analyzed for drug use. CONCLUSIONS: MSI-H was predominantly recognized in LS-related cancer cases with specific family histories and younger age. MSI-H was limited to a small proportion in precision medicine especially for non-LS-related cancer cases.

Incurable locoregional disease is a strong poor prognostic factor in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Distant metastasis is a poor prognostic factor in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. However, limited information on the prognostic impact of locoregional disease is available, despite its life-threatening features. We investigated the prognostic impact of incurable locoregional disease and distant metastasis in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 156 patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who received palliative chemotherapy between August 2006 and December 2019. RESULTS: The median follow-up time for all censored patients was 12.1 (range 1.9-63.5) months. The median overall survival was 12.4 (95% confidence interval 10.1-15.1) months. Incurable locoregional disease (hazard ratio: 2.31, P = 0.007), liver metastasis (hazard ratio: 2.84, P = 0.006), disease-free interval > 13 months (hazard ratio: 0.51, P = 0.041), cetuximab use (hazard ratio: 0.59, P = 0.007), and immune checkpoint inhibitor use (hazard ratio: 0.56, P = 0.006) were associated with prognosis. The number of distant metastatic sites was not associated with overall survival (1-2: hazard ratio: 0.60, P = 0.16; 3-4: hazard ratio: 1.34, P = 0.50). Patients with incurable locoregional disease had more life-threatening events than those with curable locoregional disease. CONCLUSION: The presence of incurable locoregional disease had a significant prognostic impact, whereas the number of distant metastatic sites had no prognostic impact. Liver metastasis was a poor prognostic factor for recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Five-year follow-up of nivolumab treatment in Japanese patients with esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma (ATTRACTION-1/ONO-4538-07).

BACKGROUND: In the phase II ATTRACTION-1 study, nivolumab demonstrated a promising antitumor activity among Japanese patients with treatment-refractory advanced esophageal cancer. Here, we report the follow-up results of ATTRACTION-1 of > 5 years. METHODS: We enrolled patients with esophageal cancer that was refractory or intolerant to a standard chemotherapy. Then, nivolumab (3 mg/kg) was administered every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was a centrally assessed objective response rate. RESULTS: Nivolumab was administered to 65 patients with esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma (ESCC). The centrally assessed objective response rate was 17.2%. The overall survival rates at 3 and 5 years were 10.9% and 6.3%, respectively. Three-year survivors tended to have more reduced target lesions. A total of 63.1% of the patients exhibited treatment-related adverse events, and no new safety signal was observed. Patients with select adverse events tended to have better overall survival than those without. No apparent chronological order was observed between the first response and the onset of select adverse events. CONCLUSION: Our follow-up analysis of more than 5 years is currently the longest and is the first to demonstrate that nivolumab has long-term efficacy and safety for advanced ESCC.

Comparison of clinical features between immune-related sclerosing cholangitis and hepatitis.

Background Immune-related hepatotoxicity is often regarded as immune-related hepatitis (irHepatitis) despite including immune-related sclerosing cholangitis (irSC). This study examined the clinical differences between irSC and irHepatitis. Methods A single-center retrospective study of 530 consecutive patients who received immunotherapy between August 2014 and April 2020 was performed. IrSC and irHepatitis were respectively defined as the radiological presence and absence of bile duct dilation and wall thickness. Results Forty-one patients (7.7%) developed immune-related hepatotoxicity. A CT scan was performed on 12 patients, including 11 of 12 with ≥ grade 3 aminotransferase elevations. IrSC and irHepatitis were diagnosed in 4 (0.8%) and 8 (1.5%) patients, respectively. All the irSC patients had been treated with anti-PD-1. IrHepatitis was more common among patients receiving anti-CTLA-4 than among those receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (14%, 7/50 vs. 0.2%, 1/480, P < 0.001). A ≥ grade 2 alkaline phosphatase (ALP) elevation resulting in a cholestatic pattern was seen in all 4 irSC patients. Among the irSC patients, 3 (3/4, 75%) developed ≥ grade 3 aminotransferases elevation. The median duration from the start of immunotherapy until ≥ grade 2 liver enzymes elevation was 257 and 55.5 days in irSC and irHepatitis patients. The median times for progression from grade 2 to 3 liver enzyme elevation were 17.5 and 0 days, respectively. Conclusions IrSC and irHepatitis have different characteristics in the class of immune checkpoint inhibitor and onset pattern. Radiological examination for the diagnosis of irSC should be considered for patients with ≥ grade 2 ALP elevation resulting in a cholestatic pattern. (Registration number J2020-36, Date of registration June 3, 2020).

Efficacy and safety of S-1 following gemcitabine with cisplatin for advanced biliary tract cancer.

Background Combination therapy of gemcitabine with cisplatin (GC) is a standard first-line therapy for unresectable or recurrent biliary tract cancer (BTC). S-1 is often used as a second-line therapy in clinical practice, based on the results of some clinical studies investigating its efficacy and safety following gemcitabine monotherapy. However, few studies have reported on the clinical outcomes of S-1 following GC. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the efficacy and safety of S-1 following GC for unresectable and recurrent BTC. Methods We retrospectively collected the data of 116 patients (pts) who were treated with S-1 as a second-line therapy following GC for unresectable or recurrent BTC at Shizuoka Cancer Center (November 2009 to July 2019). Results Of these 116 pts., 84 were assessable. Patient characteristics were as follows: intrahepatic bile duct/extrahepatic bile duct/gallbladder cancer, 30/23/31 pts.; metastatic/recurrent/locally advanced, 57/17/10 pts. The median time to treatment failure and overall survival were 2.5 and 6.0 months, respectively. Among 65 pts. with measurable lesions, the overall response rate was 3.1% (2/65 pts) and the disease control rate was 24.6% (19/65 pts). The common grade 3/4 toxicities included anemia (12%), neutropenia (4%), infections (16%), fatigue (6%), and diarrhea (4%). Dose reduction or treatment schedule modification of S-1 was required in 29 pts. (34.5%), and 17 pts. (20%) terminated S-1 due to adverse events. Conclusions The efficacy and safety of S-1 following GC were almost the same as those of S-1 following GEM monotherapy for unresectable or recurrent BTC.

Safety and efficacy of panitumumab in combination with trifluridine/tipiracil for pre-treated patients with unresectable, metastatic colorectal cancer with wild-type RAS: The phase 1/2 APOLLON study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of combination treatment with panitumumab plus trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who were refractory/intolerant to standard therapies other than anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy. METHODS: APOLLON was an open-label, multicentre, phase 1/2 trial. In the phase 1 part, 3 + 3 de-escalation design was used to investigate the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D); all patients in the phase 2 part received the RP2D. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and safety. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were enrolled (phase 1, n = 7; phase 2, n = 49) at 25 Japanese centres. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in patients receiving panitumumab (6 mg/kg every 2 weeks) plus FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2 twice daily; days 1-5 and 8-12 in a 28-day cycle), which became RP2D. PFS rate at 6 months was 33.3% (90% confidence interval [CI] 22.8-45.3). Median PFS, OS, ORR, DCR, and TTF were 5.8 months (95% CI 4.5-6.5), 14.1 months (95% CI 12.2-19.3), 37.0% (95% CI 24.3-51.3), 81.5% (95% CI 68.6-90.8), and 5.8 months (95% CI 4.29-6.21), respectively. Neutrophil count decreased (47.3%) was the most common Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: Panitumumab plus FTD/TPI exhibited favourable anti-tumour activity with a manageable safety profile and may be a therapeutic option for pre-treated mCRC patients.

Evaluation of Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Versus Radical Esophagectomy in Clinical T1bN0M0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The standard treatment for patients with clinical T1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is radical esophagectomy. Definitive chemoradiotherapy is regarded as a treatment option, and recently, good clinical outcomes of this treatment have been reported. This study compared prognosis after definitive chemoradiotherapy with radical esophagectomy. METHODS: From January 2011 to December 2019, 68 consecutive patients who were diagnosed clinical T1bN0M0 squamous cell carcinoma were enrolled and investigated retrospectively. Patients were classified into two groups whether treated by surgery or definitive chemoradiotherapy. Survival outcomes were compared, and subsequent therapies after recurrence were also investigated. RESULTS: Among 68 patients, 39 patients underwent surgery and 29 patients received definitive chemoradiotherapy. No significant difference was noted in overall survival between the two groups. However, the rate of 5-year recurrence-free survival was significantly lower in definitive chemoradiotherapy group than that of surgery group (91.1 vs. 62.7%, hazard ratio 3.976, 95% confidence interval 1.076-14.696, p = 0.039). Patients who had local recurrence after definitive chemoradiotherapy received endoscopic submucosal dissection or photodynamic therapy as salvage therapies, which resulted in no disease progression and a good prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Definitive chemoradiotherapy may become a promising alternative therapy comparable with radical esophagectomy in patients with clinical T1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Early detection of recurrence by frequent follow-up after definitive chemoradiotherapy is important to control disease within local recurrence, and salvage therapy for local lesions could contribute to long-term survival.

Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan (IRI) and oxaliplatin (Ox) are standard therapeutic agents of the first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that treatment with Ox-based compared with IRI-based regimens was associated with better overall survival (OS). However, these reports did not include trials of molecular targeting agents and did not take methods for the administration of concomitant drugs, such as bolus or continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil, into account. A systematic literature review was performed to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles between IRI- and Ox-based regimens as the first-line treatments for mCRC. METHODS: This meta-analysis used data from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and SCOPUS. The primary endpoint was OS, and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Nineteen trials involving 4571 patients were included in the analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of OS, PFS, and ORR. There was no significant heterogeneity. Regarding ≥ grade 3 AEs, IRI-based regimens were associated with a high incidence of leukopenia, febrile neutropenia, and diarrhea. Moreover, there was a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients who received Ox-based regimens. In a subgroup analysis, IRI combined with bevacizumab was correlated with a better PFS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.82-0.98, P = 0.02), but not with OS (pooled HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.80-1.03, P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: Although the safety profiles of IRI- and Ox-based regimens varied, their efficacy did not significantly differ. The combination of anti-VEGF antibody and IRI was associated with better PFS compared with anti-VEGF antibody and Ox. Both regimens could be used as the first-line treatments for mCRC with consideration of the patients' condition or toxicity profiles.

Phase II study of cetuximab plus S-1/cisplatin therapy in Japanese patients with advanced gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line S-1 plus cisplatin in combination with cetuximab for Japanese patients with advanced gastric cancer, including gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This open-label, single arm, multicenter, phase 2 trial was conducted to assess first-line cetuximab plus S-1 plus cisplatin for advanced gastric cancer. A total of 40 patients from 10 centers were enrolled. Cetuximab was administered weekly, with the initial infusion at 400 mg/m2 and then 250 mg/m2 each subsequent week. S-1 plus cisplatin chemotherapy was concomitantly conducted in a 5-week cycle: S-1 (40-60 mg, adjusted for body surface area) was given twice daily for 3 consecutive weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period, and cisplatin (60 mg/m2) was given on day 8 of each cycle for a maximum of 8 cycles. Treatment continued until the occurrence of radiographically confirmed progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was the best overall response. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and safety. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were evaluable. One patient (2.5%) had a complete response; 15 patients (37.5%) had a partial response. The observed overall response rate according to the independent review committee was 40.0% (95% confidence interval, 24.9-56.7; P = 0.7043 [one-sided null hypothesis: overall response rate ≤ 43%]); median PFS was 5.6 months (95% confidence intervals, 4.2-8.3). No adverse events leading to death were reported during the study, and no specific safety concerns were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the addition of cetuximab to S-1 plus cisplatin was well tolerated in patients with advanced gastric cancer but provided no additional clinical benefit in this study. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01388790.

Cumulative incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with advanced cancer in prospective observational study.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is frequently observed in patients with advanced cancer. The objective of this prospective observational study was to estimate, based on intensive screening, using computed tomography, lower-extremity ultrasonography, and D-dimer testing, the prevalence of VTE in patients with advanced cancer. Patients with metastatic or locally advanced cancer without anticoagulant therapy, who were planning to receive chemotherapy during 4 weeks, were eligible. Evaluations of VTE were performed at pretreatment, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after the start of chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was cumulative incidence of VTE for 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included incidence of VTE (pretreatment, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after the start of chemotherapy), VTE according to primary cancer site, symptomatic VTE, pulmonary thromboembolism (PE), and treatment of VTE. We enrolled 860 patients with a median age of 68 years, including 34% female and 71% lung cancer. Cumulative incidence of VTE for 24 weeks was 22.6% (95% confidence interval: 19.8%-25.5%) (194 of 860 patients). Incidence of VTE was 11.3% pretreatment, 16.8% 12 weeks, and 14.1% 24 weeks. Symptomatic VTE was observed in 4.0% and PE in 1.0% of patients. By multivariate analysis, sex, D-dimer level, and platelet count were independent risk factors of VTE for 24 weeks. This large prospective observational study showed that cumulative incidence of VTE was high in advanced cancer patients, mainly lung cancer. Although most patients showed asymptomatic VTE, intensive screening of VTE may be considered in advanced cancer patients, especially in women with high level of D-dimer and decreased platelet count (UMIN000015243).

The Negative Impact of Preoperative Chemotherapy on Survival After Esophagectomy for Vulnerable Elderly Patients with Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The standard treatment for patients 75 years of age or younger with cStage 2 or 3 esophageal cancer is preoperative chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy. The optimal treatment for elderly patients, especially those considered vulnerable, remains unclear. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the data for 42 patients ages 75-80 years with cStage 2 or 3 esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy between October 2002 and February 2019. The patients who received preoperative chemotherapy were compared with those who did not. The study also examined short- and long-term outcomes and the impact of preoperative chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) stratified by performance status (PS). RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, 18 underwent esophagectomy without preoperative chemotherapy and 24 underwent esophagectomy after preoperative chemotherapy. A significantly greater proportion of the patients with PS 0 received preoperative chemotherapy than the patients with PS 1 (P =0.007). The multivariate analysis showed preoperative chemotherapy to be an independent negative prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 5.025; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.136-22.222; P = 0.033). Subgroup analysis showed that preoperative chemotherapy had a significant negative impact on the OS of the patients with PS 1 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative chemotherapy was ineffective for the patients with PS 0 and had a significantly negative impact on the OS of the patients with PS 1. Preoperative chemotherapy should not be administered to patients 75 years of age or older with cStage 2 or 3 esophageal cancer.