Different prognostic values of KRAS exon 2 submutations and BRAF V600E mutation in microsatellite stable (MSS) and unstable (MSI) stage III colon cancer: an ACCENT/IDEA pooled analysis of seven trials.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations in stage III colon cancer (CC) remains controversial and has never been clearly analyzed in patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors due to sample size limitations. Data are also lacking for KRAS submutations and prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined clinicopathological variables and prognosis in patients with surgically resected stage III CC who participated in seven clinical trials from the ACCENT/IDEA databases. Associations between KRAS exon 2 and BRAFV600E mutations and time to recurrence (TTR), overall survival (OS), and survival after recurrence (SAR) were assessed using a Cox model. We also analyzed the prognostic value of KRAS exon 2 submutations. RESULTS: Among 8460 patients, 11.4% had MSI-H status. In the MSI-H group, BRAFV600E, KRAS exon 2 mutants, and double-wild-type statuses were detected in 40.6%, 18.1%, and 41.3%, respectively, whereas and in the microsatellite stable (MSS) group, these were detected in 7.7%, 38.6%, and 53.8%, respectively. In the MSS group, 5-year TTR rates of 61.8%, 66.3%, and 72.9% were observed among patients with BRAFV600E, KRAS exon 2 mutants, and those who were DWT, respectively [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.58 and 1.31, both P < 0.001]. In the MSI-H group, 5-year TTR rates did not differ significantly among the mutated subgroups. Similar results were found for OS. However, survival after relapse was significantly shorter in the KRAS exon 2- and BRAFV600E-mutated patients in both MSS (adjusted HR = 2.06 and 1.15; both P < 0.05) and MSI-H (adjusted HR = 1.99 and 1.81; both P < 0.05) groups. In the MSS group, KRAS exon 2 mutations were associated with TTR, but only p.G12C, p.G12D, and p.G13D were associated with poor outcomes after disease recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for both KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations in stage III patients should be considered as they can better define individual patient prognosis, and may also enable patient selection for (neo)adjuvant trials dedicated to specific molecular subtypes with poor prognosis.

Association of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes with survival depends on primary tumor sidedness in stage III colon cancers (NCCTG N0147) [Alliance].

BACKGROUND: Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are a robust and independent prognostic variable in localized colon cancer. Given reported differences in molecular features and prognosis of right- versus left-sided tumors, we examined the association of TIL densities with patient survival by primary tumor sidedness in stage III cancers, including clinical low- (T1-3, N1) and high-risk (T4 and/or N2) groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase III trial of FOLFOX-based adjuvant chemotherapy, TIL densities were analyzed and dichotomized in colon carcinomas (N = 1532) based on a previously determined cut point optimized for disease-free survival (DFS). Right-sided tumors were defined as proximal to the splenic flexure. Associations of TILs and sidedness with 5-year DFS were examined using Kaplan-Meier methodology along with multivariable modeling and relative contribution analysis by Cox regression. RESULTS: Lower TIL densities were found in left- versus right-sided tumors (P < 0.0001). The association of TIL densities with DFS differed significantly by tumor sidedness (Pinteraction = 0.045). Overall, patient tumors with low (versus high) TILs had significantly poorer DFS in right-sided (hazard ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.45-2.82; Padj < 0.0001), but not left-sided tumors (Padj = 0.1731). Among clinical low-risk patients, low (versus high) TILs were adversely prognostic only in right-sided tumors (Padj = 0.0058). Among high-risk patients, low TILs were prognostic independent of sidedness (Padj < 0.025). The relative contribution of TILs to DFS was substantially greater in right- versus left-sided tumors (24% versus 1.5%). In high-risk tumors, TILs had the highest relative contribution to DFS (42%) of all variables. In low-risk tumors, the contribution of TILs (16%) to DFS was second to KRAS. CONCLUSIONS: The association of TIL densities with patient survival differed by primary tumor sidedness and clinical risk group, suggesting that TILs should be interpreted in this context among stage III colon cancers. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00079274; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00079274.

Analysis of tumor microenvironmental features to refine prognosis by T, N risk group in patients with stage III colon cancer (NCCTG N0147) (Alliance).

BACKGROUND: Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), tumor budding, and micropapillary architecture may influence tumor growth and metastatic potential, thereby enhancing prognostic stratification. We analyzed these features and their relative contribution to overall outcome and in low (T1-3 N1) and high (T4 and/or N2) risk groups that are used to inform the duration of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resected stage III colon cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Among 1532 patients treated in a phase III adjuvant trial of FOLFOX-based therapy, intraepithelial TIL densities, tumor budding, and micropapillary features were analyzed and quantified in routine histopathological sections with light microscopy. Optimal cut-points were determined in association with disease-free survival (DFS) in training and validation sets. Associations or relative contributions of individual features or combined variables with DFS were determined using multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: TILs, tumor budding, and micropapillary features were shown to differ significantly by T, N risk groups and by mismatch repair (MMR) status. Low TILs, high budding, and their combined variable [hazard ratio = 2.07 (95% CI, 1.50% to 2.88%); Padj < 0.0001], but not micropapillary features, were each significantly associated with poorer DFS in a training data set and confirmed in a validation set. TILs were prognostic in proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) and deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) tumors; budding was prognostic only in pMMR tumors. The percentage relative contribution of budding/TILs to DFS was second only to nodal status overall, was second (24.4%) after KRAS in low-risk patients, and was the most important contributor (45.4%) in high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: TIL density and tumor budding were each validated as significant prognostic variables and their combined variable provided robust prognostic stratification by T, N risk groups, being the strongest predictor of DFS among high-risk stage III patients. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00079274.

Evaluation of the change of outcomes over a 10-year period in patients with stage III colon cancer: pooled analysis of 6501 patients treated with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin in the ACCENT database.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004, adjuvant 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX or FLOX) have been the standard of care for patients with resected colon cancer. Herein we examine the change of outcomes over a 10-year period in patients with stage III colon cancer who received this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data from the ACCENT database was used to compare the outcomes in older (1998-2003) and newer (2004-2009) treatment eras for patients with stage III colon cancer who received adjuvant FOLFOX or FLOX. The outcomes were compared between the two groups by the multivariate Cox proportional-hazards model adjusting for age, sex, performance score, T stage, N stage, tumor sidedness, and histological grade. RESULTS: A total of 6501 patients with stage III colon cancer who received adjuvant FOLFOX or FLOX in six randomized trials were included in the analysis. Patients enrolled in the new era group experienced statistically significant improvement in time to recurrence [3-year rate, 76.1% versus 73.0%; adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj) = 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92), P = 0.0008], disease-free survival (DFS) [3-year rate, 74.7% versus 72.3%; HRadj = 0.88 (0.79-0.98), P = 0.024], survival after recurrence (SAR) [median time, 27.0 versus 17.7 months; HRadj = 0.65 (0.57-0.74), P < 0.0001], and overall survival (OS) [5-year rate, 80.9% versus 75.7%; HRadj = 0.78 (0.69-0.88), P < 0.0001]. The improved outcomes remained in patients diagnosed at 45 years of age or older, low-risk patients (T1-3 and N1), left colon, mismatch repair proficient (pMMR), BRAF, and KRAS wild-type tumors. CONCLUSION: Improved outcomes were observed in patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in clinical trials who received adjuvant FOLFOX/FLOX therapy in 2004 or later compared with patients in the older era. Prolonged SAR calls for revalidation of 3-year DFS as the surrogate endpoint of OS in adjuvant clinical trials and reevaluation of optimal follow-up of OS to confirm the trial findings based on the DFS endpoints. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBERS: NCT00079274; NCT00096278; NCT00004931; NCT00275210; NCT00265811; NCT00112918.

Phase I dose-escalation study of copanlisib in combination with gemcitabine or cisplatin plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Copanlisib is a pan-class I phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor with predominant PI3K-α/δ activity that has demonstrated clinical activity and manageable safety when administered as monotherapy in a phase II study. Combination therapy may overcome compensatory signalling that could occur with PI3K pathway inhibition, resulting in enhanced inhibitory activity, and preclinical studies of copanlisib with gemcitabine have demonstrated potent anti-tumour activity in vivo. METHODS: A phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study to evaluate the safety, tolerability and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of copanlisib with gemcitabine or with cisplatin plus gemcitabine (CisGem) in patients with advanced malignancies, including an expansion cohort in patients with biliary tract cancer (BTC) at the RP2D of copanlisib plus CisGem. Copanlisib and gemcitabine were administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle; maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and RP2D of copanlisib were determined. Copanlisib plus CisGem was administered on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle; pharmacokinetics and biomarkers were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty patients received treatment as follows: dose-escalation cohorts, n=16; copanlisib plus CisGem cohort, n=14; and BTC expansion cohort, n=20. Copanlisib 0.8 mg kg-1 plus gemcitabine was the MTD and RP2D for both combinations. Common treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea (86%), hyperglycaemia (80%) and decreased platelet count (80%). Copanlisib exposure displayed a dose-proportional increase. No differences were observed upon co-administration of CisGem. Response rates were as follows: copanlisib plus gemcitabine, 6.3% (one partial response in a patient with peritoneal carcinoma); copanlisib plus CisGem, 12% (one complete response and three partial responses all in patients with BTC (response rate 17.4% in patients with BTC)). Mutations were detected in PIK3CA (1 out of 43), KRAS (10 out of 43) and BRAF (2 out of 22), with phosphate and tensin homologue protein loss in 41% (12 out of 29). CONCLUSIONS: Copanlisib plus CisGem demonstrated a manageable safety profile, favourable pharmacokinetics, and potentially promising clinical response.

Prediction of overall survival in stage II and III colon cancer beyond TNM system: a retrospective, pooled biomarker study.

Background: TNM staging alone does not accurately predict outcome in colon cancer (CC) patients who may be eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy. It is unknown to what extent the molecular markers microsatellite instability (MSI) and mutations in BRAF or KRAS improve prognostic estimation in multivariable models that include detailed clinicopathological annotation. Patients and methods: After imputation of missing at random data, a subset of patients accrued in phase 3 trials with adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 3016)-N0147 (NCT00079274) and PETACC3 (NCT00026273)-was aggregated to construct multivariable Cox models for 5-year overall survival that were subsequently validated internally in the remaining clinical trial samples (n = 1499), and also externally in different population cohorts of chemotherapy-treated (n = 949) or -untreated (n = 1080) CC patients, and an additional series without treatment annotation (n = 782). Results: TNM staging, MSI and BRAFV600E mutation status remained independent prognostic factors in multivariable models across clinical trials cohorts and observational studies. Concordance indices increased from 0.61-0.68 in the TNM alone model to 0.63-0.71 in models with added molecular markers, 0.65-0.73 with clinicopathological features and 0.66-0.74 with all covariates. In validation cohorts with complete annotation, the integrated time-dependent AUC rose from 0.64 for the TNM alone model to 0.67 for models that included clinicopathological features, with or without molecular markers. In patient cohorts that received adjuvant chemotherapy, the relative proportion of variance explained (R2) by TNM, clinicopathological features and molecular markers was on an average 65%, 25% and 10%, respectively. Conclusions: Incorporation of MSI, BRAFV600E and KRAS mutation status to overall survival models with TNM staging improves the ability to precisely prognosticate in stage II and III CC patients, but only modestly increases prediction accuracy in multivariable models that include clinicopathological features, particularly in chemotherapy-treated patients.

Ramucirumab combined with FOLFOX as front-line therapy for advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, or gastric adenocarcinoma: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter Phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: We report the first randomized, Phase II trial of ramucirumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 monoclonal antibody, as front-line therapy in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from the USA with advanced esophageal, gastric, or GEJ adenocarcinoma randomly received (1:1) mFOLFOX6 plus ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or mFOLFOX6 plus placebo every 2 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) with 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 (one-sided α = 0.15). Secondary end points included evaluation of response and overall survival (OS); an exploratory ramucirumab exposure-response analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Of 168 randomized patients, 52% of tumors were located in the stomach/GEJ and 48% in the esophagus. The trial did not meet the primary end point of PFS [6.4 versus 6.7 months, HR 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.69-1.37)] or the secondary end point of OS (11.7 versus 11.5 months) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Objective response rates (45.2% versus 46.4%) were similar between arms. Most Grade ≥3 toxicities did not differ significantly between arms, yet premature discontinuation of FOLFOX and ramucirumab (for reasons other than progressive disease) was more common among ramucirumab- versus placebo-treated patients. In an exploratory analysis that censored for premature discontinuation, the HR for PFS favored the ramucirumab arm (HR 0.76), particularly in patients with gastric/GEJ cancer. An exploratory exposure-response analysis indicated that patients with higher ramucirumab exposure had longer OS. CONCLUSION: The addition of ramucirumab to front-line mFOLFOX6 did not improve PFS in the ITT population. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01246960.

MiR-320e is a novel prognostic biomarker in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Advances in early detection and treatment have improved outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there remains a need for robust prognostic and predictive biomarkers. We conducted a systematic discovery and validation of microRNA (miRNA) biomarkers in two clinical trial cohorts of CRC patients. METHODS: We performed an initial 'discovery' phase using Affymetrix miRNA expression arrays to profile stage III CRC patients with and without tumour recurrence (n=50 per group) at 3-years of follow-up. All patients received adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) plus oxaliplatin, that is, FOLFOX, treatment. During 'validation', we analysed miRNAs using qRT-PCR in an independent cohort of 237 stage II-IV CRC patients treated with 5-FU-based chemotherapy, as well as in normal colonic mucosa from 20 healthy subjects. Association with disease recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was examined using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: In the discovery cohort, miR-320e expression was significantly elevated in stage III colon cancers from patients with vs without recurrence (95% confidence interval (CI)=1.14-1.42; P<0.0001). These results were then independently validated in stage II and III tumours. Specifically, increased miR-320e expression was associated with poorer DFS (hazard ratio (HR)=1.65; 95% CI=1.27-2.13; P=0.0001) and OS (HR=1.78; 95% CI=1.31-2.41; P=0.0003) in stage III CRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: In two clinical trial cohorts, a systematic biomarker discovery and validation approach identified miR-320e to be a novel prognostic biomarker that is associated with adverse clinical outcome in stage III CRC patients treated with 5-FU-based adjuvant chemotherapy. These findings have important implications for the personalised management of CRC patients.

Survival following early-stage colon cancer: an ACCENT-based comparison of patients versus a matched international general population†.

BACKGROUND: Post-treatment survival experience of early colon cancer (CC) patients is well described in the literature, which states that cure is probable for some patients. However, comparisons of treated patients' survival versus that expected from a matched general population (MGP) are limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 32 745 patients from 25 randomized adjuvant trials conducted from 1977 to 2012 in 41 countries were pooled. Observed long-term survival of these patients was compared with expected survival matched on sex, age, country, and year, both overall and by stage (II and III), sex, treatment [surgery, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), 5-FU + oxaliplatin], age (<70 and 70+), enrollment year (pre/post 2000), and recurrence (yes/no). Comparisons were made at randomization and repeated conditional on survival to 1, 2, 3, and 5 years. CC and MGP equivalence was tested, and observed Kaplan-Meier survival rates compared with expected MGP rates 3 years out from each landmark. Analyses were also repeated in patients without recurrence. RESULTS: Within most cohorts, long-term survival of CC patients remained statistically worse than the MGP, though conditional survival generally improved over time. Among those surviving 5 years, stage II, oxaliplatin-treated, elderly, and recurrence-free patients achieved subsequent 3-year survival rates within 5% of the MGP, with recurrence-free patients achieving equivalence. CONCLUSIONS: Conditional on survival to 5 years, long-term survival of most CC patients on clinical trials remains modestly poorer than an MGP, but achieves MGP levels in some subgroups. These findings emphasize the need for access to quality care and improved treatment and follow-up strategies.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasonography and physician specialty on the management of patients with esophagus cancer.

While endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are the most accurate techniques for locoregional staging of esophageal cancer, little evidence exists that these innovations impact on clinical care. The objective on this study was to determine the frequency with which EUS and EUS-FNA alter the management of patients with localized esophageal cancer, and assess practice variation among specialists at a tertiary care center. Three gastroenterologists, three medical oncologists, three radiation oncologists and four thoracic surgeons were asked to independently report their management recommendations as the anonymized staging information of 50 prospectively enrolled patients from another study were sequentially disclosed on-line. Compared to initial management recommendations, that were based upon history, physical examination, upper endoscopy and CT scan results, EUS prompted a change in management 24% (95% CI: 12-36%) of the time; usually to a more resource-intensive approach (71%), for example from recommending palliation to recommending neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. EUS-FNA plus cytology results altered management an additional 8% (95% CI: 6-15%) of the time. Agreement between specialists ranged from fair (intraclass correlation [ICC=0.32) to substantial (ICC=0.65); improving with additional information. Among specialists, agreement was greatest for patients with stage I disease. EUS and EUS-FNA changed patient management the most for patients with stages IIA, IIB or III disease. EUS, with or without FNA, significantly impacts the management of patients with localized esophageal cancer. With respect to the optimal treatment for each patient, agreement among physicians incrementally increases with endoscopic ultrasound results. Specialty training appears to influence therapeutic decision-making behavior.

Intraoperative radiotherapy for treatment of locally advanced and recurrent esophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) allows delivery of radiotherapy doses in excess of those typically deliverable with conventional external beam radiotherapy. IORT has potential utility in clinical situations, such as treatment of esophageal and gastric malignancies, in which the radiation tolerance of normal organs limits the dose that can be given with conventional radiotherapy techniques. We reviewed the records of 50 patients who received IORT for locally advanced primary or recurrent gastric or esophageal adenocarcinomas deemed unresectable for cure. IORT was given as a single fraction of electron beam radiotherapy (10-25 Gy) after maximal tumor resection: R0 in 42%, R1 in 46%, and R2 in 12%. Forty-eight patients also received external beam radiotherapy (8-55 Gy), 46 received radiosensitizing chemotherapy, and nine received systemic chemotherapy after radiotherapy. Outcomes were estimated with Kaplan-Meier analysis. Median survival was 1.6 years. Overall survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 70%, 40%, and 27%. Of 42 patients who died, 37 died from cancer progression and three from multifactorial treatment toxicity. Median survival for patients with recurrent disease versus primary disease was 3.0 years versus 1.3 years (P < 0.05), with a delay of metastatic failure in patients with recurrent tumors (P = 0.06). At 3 years, distant metastatic failure was 79%, local failure was 10%, and regional failure was 15%. IORT for locally advanced primary or recurrent gastric malignancies effectively decreases the risk of local failure. For patients with isolated local recurrences, IORT may be effective salvage therapy. However, more effective systemic therapy is needed as a component of treatment.

Phase II trial of oral vinorelbine for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in patients > or = 65 years of age: an NCCTG study.

BACKGROUND: A one-stage phase II trial was conducted to assess the tumor response rate and toxicity profile of single agent oral vinorelbine as first or second-line chemotherapy for women at least 65 years of age with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with metastatic breast cancer aged > or = 65 years of age were enrolled to receive oral vinorelbine on a weekly basis. The oral vinorelbine was given at 60 mg/m2 weekly for the first four doses and was increased to 70 mg/m2 for the subsequent administrations if there was no grade 4 neutropenia or no more than one episode of grade 3 neutropenia. Therapy was continued until progression or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included and evaluable for analysis. One patient (4%) achieved a partial response (PR) that lasted for more than 13 months. Two additional patients remained stable for at least 6 months for a clinical benefit rate (PR + stable disease) of 12%. The 1-year survival rate was estimated to be 48% (95% CI 30% to 74.5%). Median time to progression was estimated to be 4.7 months (95% CI 2.0-5.5 months) and the 9-month disease progression-free rate was estimated to be 8% (95% CI 30.9% to 74.5%). The treatment was fairly well tolerated with grade 3 neutropenia in 12.5%, fatigue in 12.5% of the patients, and grade 2 neuromotor and neurosensory toxicities in 12.5% and 8.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Oral vinorelbine as a single agent at these dose and schedule in this population of women > or = 65 years is well tolerated but has a low level of objective efficacy for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

Docetaxel and capecitabine in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction: a phase II study from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that the combination of docetaxel and capecitabine are worthy of further testing in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction. We therefore undertook this phase II study to test this combination in a multi-institutional, first-line clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-four eligible patients with histologic or cytologic confirmation of the above malignancy were recruited. The cohort had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance scores of 0, 1 and 2 in 59%, 39% and 2% of patients, respectively. Median age was 57 years (range 32-77 years). Adequate organ function was a requirement for study entry. All patients were prescribed docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and capecitabine 825 mg/m2 orally twice a day on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle. RESULTS: The tumor response rate was 39% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23% to 55%]. There were two complete responses and the rest were partial. Median survival was 9.4 months (95% CI 6.3-10.7 months) and median time-to-tumor progression was 4.2 months (95% CI 3.6-5.6 months). There was one treatment-related death from a myocardial infarction and dysrhythmia. Commonly occurring grade 3 adverse events included neutropenia (11 patients), infection (five patients), constipation (three patients), thrombosis (three patients), dyspnea (three patients) and hand-foot syndrome (three patients). In addition, 24/45 patients developed grade 4 neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: The regimen docetaxel and capecitabine shows activity in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction. This regimen merits further study.

Oxaliplatin and capecitabine in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia: a phase II study from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group.

PURPOSE: The synergic combination of oxaliplatin and capecitabine has demonstrated activity against various gastrointestinal cancers, including colon cancer. We therefore undertook this phase II study to test this first-line combination in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-three patients with histologic or cytologic confirmation of the above malignancy were recruited. The cohort had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance statuses of 0, 1 and 2 in 47%, 51%, and 2%, respectively. Median age was 61 years (range 32-80). All had adequate organ function. Initially, patients were prescribed 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally twice a day, on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle. Four treatment-related deaths in the first 24 patients led to a reduction in capecitabine to 850 mg/m2 orally twice a day, days 1-14, for the remainder of the cohort. RESULTS: The tumor response rate was 35% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 23% to 50%]. All responses were partial; seven of 24 occurred before the capecitabine dose reduction, and eight of 19 after. Median time to tumor progression was 4 months (95% CI 3.1-4.6), and median survival 6.4 months (95% CI 4.6-10). To date, there have been 36 deaths. Four were treatment-related (one infection, two myocardial infarctions, one respiratory failure), and all occurred before the capecitabine dose reduction. Notable grade 4 events from the entire cohort included diarrhea (two patients), vomiting (three), dyspnea (one), thrombosis (two) and anorexia (two). Grade 3 events included nausea (12 patients), diarrhea (12), fatigue (10), abdominal pain (seven), vomiting (six), dyspnea (six), hypokalemia (six), dehydration (five), hypokalemia (five) and infection (four). CONCLUSIONS: Oxaliplatin and capecitabine in combination demonstrates activity in metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia. The lower dose (capecitabine 850 mg/m2 orally twice a day, days 1-14, and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1) yielded an acceptable toxicity profile and merits further study.

PS-341 and gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: PS-341 is a proteasome inhibitor with preclinical activity in pancreatic cancer tumor models and synergistic activity with gemcitabine. This randomized phase II study determined the tumor response rate (RR) for PS-341 alone and the 6-month survival and RR for the combination of gemcitabine and PS-341 in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive 3-week cycles of either arm A: PS-341 1.5 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus (over 3--5 s) on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 or arm B: PS-341 1.0 mg/m(2) (same as arm A otherwise) plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 and 8. Patients progressing on arm A were allowed to receive arm B treatment. RESULTS: Arm A: 42 evaluable patients were enrolled with a confirmed RR of 0% (95% CI 0% to 8%), median survival of 2.5 months (95% CI 2.0-3.3), and median time to progression (TTP) of 1.2 months (95% CI 1.1--1.3). Twelve of 43 evaluable patients (28%) experienced at least one grade 4+ AE. Arm B: 39 evaluable patients yielded a 6-month survival rate of 41% (16/39, 95% CI 29.8% to 67.0%), median survival of 4.8 months (95% CI 2.4--7.4), median TTP of 2.4 months (95% CI 1.5--3.1), and confirmed RR of 10% (4 partial responses/0 complete responses, 95% CI 3% to 24%). Eleven of 43 evaluable patients (26%) experienced at least one grade 4+ AE. One patient had grade 5 hypotension. CONCLUSION: The use of PS-341 alone or in combination with gemcitabine did not result in an overall survival and RR better than that expected for gemcitabine alone. Based on the lack of efficacy and the toxicity seen in our trial, there does not appear to be a role for PS-341 in pancreatic adenocarcinoma with either of the schedules used in this trial.

Chemotherapy permits resection of metastatic colorectal cancer: experience from Intergroup N9741.

BACKGROUND: Fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin and irinotecan combinations improve time to tumor progression (TTP), objective response and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). Here we identify and describe patients treated on Intergroup study N9741 who initially had inoperable MCRC, but who obtained sufficient chemotherapeutic benefit to allow removal of their metastatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient research records in study arms (A) irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (LV) (IFL, n = 264), (F) oxaliplatin/5-FU/LV (FOLFOX4, n = 267) and (G) oxaliplatin/irinotecan (IROX, n = 265) were reviewed. TTP and median OS were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-four (3.3%) of 795 randomized patients underwent curative metastatic disease resection [hepatectomy, 16; radiofrequency-ablation (RFA), six; lung resection, two]. Twenty-two out of 24 (92%) resected patients received an oxaliplatin-based regimen (FOLFOX4, 11; IROX, 11). Seven patients (29.2%) remain disease-free; relapses occurred mainly in the resected organ. Median OS in resected patients is 42.4 months, and median TTP is 18.4 months. All six patients treated with RFA have recurred. Four out of five (80%) patients who received chemotherapy following resection are disease-free. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of metastatic disease after chemotherapy is possible in a small but important subset of patients with MCRC, particularly after receiving an oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy regimen, with encouraging OS and TTP observed in these highly selected patients.

Gastric cancer: epidemiology, pathology and treatment.

Gastric cancer incidence and mortality has fallen dramatically over the last 50 years in many regions, but remains the second most common cancer worldwide. Despite a marked decline in fundic and distal tumors, there is a rising incidence of adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction and gastric cardia, particularly in Western nations. This may imply that there are in fact two diseases differing from each other in epidemiology, etiology, pathology and clinical expression. While surgical resection remains the cornerstone of gastric cancer treatment, the optimum extent of nodal resection remains controversial, with randomized studies failing to show that the D2 procedure improves survival when compared with D1 dissection. The high rate of recurrence and poor survival following surgery provides a rationale for the early use of adjuvant treatment. Adjuvant chemotherapy or adjuvant radiotherapy, when used alone, do not improve survival following resection. However, the results of the recent Intergroup 0116 study are promising in showing that the combination of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy with radiotherapy significantly prolongs disease-free and overall survival when compared with no adjuvant treatment. In advanced gastric cancer, chemotherapy enhances quality of life and prolongs survival when compared with best supportive care. There is no agreed standard of treatment in this setting. Of the commonly used regimens, epirubicin plus cisplatin and 5-FU (ECF) probably has the strongest claim to this role. However, there is a pressing need for new agents, both cytotoxic and molecularly targeted, to be assessed in both the advanced and adjuvant settings.

Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase II study.

BACKGROUND: This study was performed to determine the efficacy of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (ACA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pancreatic ACA patients with previously untreated advanced or metastatic disease were enrolled in a phase II study of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin. Oxaliplatin was given i.v. on day 1 and gemcitabine i.v. on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle. The primary end point of the trial was 6-month survival. Secondary end points included response rate, overall survival, median time to progression and toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were enrolled, 46 of whom were evaluable. Of those patients assessed for the primary end point 50% lived for > or =6 months. The median time to progression was 4.53 months. Five confirmed responses were seen with a median duration of response of 2.7 months. Overall, the treatment was well tolerated. However, one patient died as a result of treatment-related hemolytic uremic syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin, at doses of 1000 mg/m(2) and 100 mg/m(2), respectively, showed moderate activity in patients with pancreatic ACA. Based on the results of this study further evaluation of this combination is warranted.

A phase I study of sequential irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin.

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan (CPT-11) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin are active agents in colorectal cancer. A sequence-dependent synergism of SN-38 followed by 5-FU/leucovorin in vitro led us to conduct a phase I trial of CPT-11 followed by 5-FU/leucovorin to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and toxicities of this regimen and to obtain preliminary indications of its activity in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-six patients were enrolled in sequential cohorts to receive escalating doses of CPT-11 (90 min infusion) on day 1, followed by leucovorin 20 mg/m(2) (intravenous push) and 5-FU (90 min infusion) on days 2-5 of each 21-day cycle. RESULTS: A total of 347 treatment cycles (median 4, range 1-25) were administered. Dose-limiting toxicities were diarrhea, neutropenia and fatigue. Nine patients with colorectal cancer and one with gastric cancer had partial or minor responses. Eight of the 10 had prior chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: CPT-11 and 5-FU/leucovorin, as constituents of this novel mechanism-based schedule, have promising activity in patients who have received prior chemotherapy. The recommended phase II/III starting doses are CPT-11 275 mg/m(2) over 90 min on day 1, and 5-FU 400 mg/m(2) plus leucovorin 20 mg/m(2) on days 2-5 every 21 days. This combination can be administered safely to this schedule if there is strict adherence to the 90 min infusion time for both CPT-11 and 5-FU.