Plasma Tie2 trajectories identify vascular response criteria for VEGF inhibitors across advanced biliary tract, colorectal and ovarian cancers.

BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFi) are compromised by a lack of validated biomarkers. Previously we showed that changes in the concentration of plasma Tie2 (pTie2) was a response biomarker for bevacizumab. Here, we investigated whether pTie2 can predict response and progression cross-tumour for generic VEGFi treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 124) with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) received cisplatin/gemcitabine with cediranib or placebo (ABC-03 trial). Concentrations of pTie2 were measured longitudinally from before treatment until disease progression. Data from patients with ovarian cancer (n = 92, ICON7 trial) and patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) (n = 70, Travastin trial) were also included. RESULTS: Cediranib-treated ABC patients were deconvoluted into distinct groups where in one group pTie2 trajectories resembled those seen in placebo-treated patients and in another pTie2 significantly reduced (t-test P = 2.7 × 10-14). Using the 95% confidence interval for these two groups, we defined a vascular complete response (vCR) as a 24% reduction in pTie2 within 9 weeks; vascular no response (vNR) as a 7% increase in pTie2, and a vascular partial response (between these limits). vCR cediranib-treated patients had significantly improved progression-free survival (8.8 versus 7.5 months, restricted mean ratio 0.73, P = 0.012) and overall survival (18.8 versus 12.1 months, hazard ratio 0.49, P = 0.02). By integrating data across ovarian cancer, CRC and ABC, we show that (i) patients with vNR do not benefit from VEGFi and (ii) Tie2-defined vascular progression occurs sufficiently in advance of radiological progressive disease that changes in treatment could be offered to prevent clinical deterioration. CONCLUSION: pTie2 is the first cross-tumour, generic VEGFi, vascular response biomarker to guide optimum use of VEGFi in clinical practice.

Practical considerations in screening for genetic alterations in cholangiocarcinoma.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) encompasses diverse epithelial tumors historically associated with poor outcomes due to an aggressive disease course, late diagnosis, and limited benefit of standard chemotherapy for advanced disease. Comprehensive molecular profiling has revealed a diverse landscape of genomic alterations as oncogenic drivers in CCA. TP53 mutations, CDKN2A/B loss, and KRAS mutations are the most common genetic alterations in CCA. However, intrahepatic CCA (iCCA) and extrahepatic CCA (eCCA) differ substantially in the frequency of many alterations. This includes actionable alterations, such as isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations and a large variety of FGFR2 rearrangements, which are found in up to 29% and ∼10% of patients with iCCA, respectively, but are rare in eCCA. FGFR2 rearrangements are currently the only genetic alteration in CCA for which a targeted therapy, the fibroblast growth factor receptor 1-3 inhibitor pemigatinib, has been approved. However, favorable phase III results for IDH1-targeted therapy with ivosidenib in iCCA have been published, and numerous other alterations are actionable by targeted therapies approved in other indications. Recent advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) have led to the development of assays that allow comprehensive genomic profiling of large gene panels within 2-3 weeks, including in vitro diagnostic tests approved in the United States. These assays vary regarding acceptable source material (tumor tissue or peripheral whole blood), genetic source for library construction (DNA or RNA), target selection technology, gene panel size, and type of detectable genomic alterations. While some large commercial laboratories offer rapid and comprehensive genomic profiling services based on proprietary assay platforms, clinical centers may use commercial genomic profiling kits designed for clinical research to develop their own customized laboratory-developed tests. Large-scale genomic profiling based on NGS allows for a detailed and precise molecular diagnosis of CCA and provides an important opportunity for improved targeted treatment plans tailored to the individual patient's genetic signature.

Scheduling nab-paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine as first-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nabP+gemcitabine) offers modest survival gains for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Sequential scheduling of nabP+gemcitabine in a PDAC mouse model improved efficacy; this hypothesis was tested in a clinical trial. METHODS: Patients with previously untreated metastatic PDAC were randomised to receive nabP+gemcitabine administered either concomitantly on the same day, or sequentially, with gemcitabine administered 24 h after nabP. The primary outcome measure was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcome measures were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), safety, quality of life (QoL) and predictive biomarkers. RESULTS: In total, 71 patients received sequential (SEQ) and 75 concomitant (CON) treatment. Six-month PFS was 46% with SEQ and 32% with CON scheduling. Median PFS (5.6 versus 4.0 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.47-0.95, p = 0.022) and ORR (52% versus 31%, p = 0.023) favoured the SEQ arm; median OS was 10.2 versus 8.2 months (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65-1.33, p = 0.70). CTCAE Grade ≥3 neutropaenia incidence doubled with SEQ therapy but was not detrimental to QoL. Strongly positive tumour epithelial cytidine deaminase (CDA) expression favoured benefit from SEQ therapy (PFS HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.70). CONCLUSIONS: SEQ delivery of nabP+gemcitabine improved PFS and ORR, with manageable toxicity, but did not significantly improve OS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN71070888; ClinialTrials.gov (NCT03529175).

BACCHUS: A randomised non-comparative phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiation (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) are standard treatments for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We evaluated the efficacy/safety of two neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) regimens as an alternative prior to total mesorectal excision (TME). METHODS/DESIGN: This multi-centre, phase II trial in patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defined high-risk LARC (>cT3b, cN2+ or extramural venous invasion) randomised patients (1:1) to FOLFOX + Bevacizumab (Arm 1) or FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab (Arm 2) every 14 days for 6 cycles prior to surgery. Patients were withdrawn if positron emission tomography (PET) standardised uptake value (SUV) after 3 cycles failed to decrease by >30% or increased compared to baseline. Primary endpoint was pathological complete response rate (pCR). Secondary endpoints included adverse events (AE) and toxicity. Neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) scores based on "T" and "N" downstaging were calculated. FINDINGS: Twenty patients aged 18-75 years were randomised. The trial stopped early because of poor accrual. Seventeen patients completed all 6 cycles of NACT. One stopped due to myocardial infarction, 1 poor response on PET (both received CRT) and 1 committed suicide. 11 patients had G3 AE, 1 G4 AE (neutropenia), and 1 G5 (suicide). pCR (the primary endpoint) was 0/10 for Arm 1 and 2/10 for Arm 2 i.e. 2/20 (10%) overall. Median NAR score was 14·9 with 5 (28%), 7 (39%), and 6 (33%) having low, intermediate, or high scores. Surgical morbidity was acceptable (1/18 wound infection, no anastomotic leak/pelvic sepsis/fistulae). The 24-month progression-free survival rate was 75% (95% CI: 60%-85%). INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint (pCR rate) was not met. However, FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab achieved promising pCR rates, low NAR scores and was well-tolerated. This regimen is suitable for testing as the novel arm against current standards of SCRT and/or CRT in a future trial.

Challenges in the implementation of EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: A global perspective on the regulation of allergen products.

Regulatory approaches for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products and the availability of high-quality AIT products are inherently linked to each other. While allergen products are available in many countries across the globe, their regulation is very heterogeneous. First, we describe the regulatory systems applicable for AIT products in the European Union (EU) and in the United States (US). For Europe, a depiction of the different types of relevant procedures, as well as the committees involved, is provided and the fundamental role of national agencies of the EU member states in this complex and unique network is highlighted. Furthermore, the regulatory agencies from Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia, and Switzerland provided information on the system implemented in their countries for the regulation of allergen products. While AIT products are commonly classified as biological medicinal products, they are made available by varying types of procedures, most commonly either by obtaining a marketing authorization or by being distributed as named patient products. Exemptions from marketing authorizations in exceptional cases, as well as import of allergen products from other countries, are additional tools applied by countries to ensure availability of needed AIT products. Several challenges for AIT products are apparent from this analysis and will require further consideration.

Allergen manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy in Europe and the United States: An analysis from the EAACI AIT Guidelines Project.

Adequate quality is essential for any medicinal product to be eligible for marketing. Quality includes verification of the identity, content and purity of a medicinal product in combination with a specified production process and its control. Allergen products derived from natural sources require particular considerations to ensure adequate quality. Here, we describe key aspects of the documentation on manufacturing and quality aspects for allergen immunotherapy products in the European Union and the United States. In some key parts, requirements in these areas are harmonized while other fields are regulated separately between both regions. Essential differences are found in the use of Reference Preparations, or the requirement to apply standardized assays for potency determination. As the types of products available are different in specific regions, regulatory guidance for such products may also be available in one specific region only, such as for allergoids in the European Union. Region-specific issues and priorities are a result of this. As allergen products derived from natural sources are inherently variable in their qualitative and quantitative composition, these products present special challenges to balance the variability and ensuring batch-to-batch consistency. Advancements in scientific knowledge on specific allergens and their role in allergic disease will consequentially find representation in future regulatory guidelines.

Time to endoscopic intervention in patients with upper gastrointestinal patients can be improved with pathway provision.

BACKGROUND: Patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancy often require admission to hospital with dysphagia or jaundice requiring therapeutic endoscopy. Endoscopic intervention is often effective permitting rapid discharge. An efficient service would permit rapid discharge for patients who are often at the end of life. We noted that a majority of patients in hospital under the gastroenterological oncology were admitted with symptoms requiring therapeutic endoscopy. METHODS: We conducted an audit cycle of the inpatient days before and after pathway implementation. A wait of 1 day was set as acceptable for patients with bleeding as defined by NICE guidance and we set an arbitrary standard of 2 days for patients without bleeding but requiring therapeutic endoscopy. Between the audit cycles, a pathway was built to accommodate these patients. RESULTS: Inpatient waits improved from a median of 3 days to 1 day. There was no difference in outcome between those presenting with bleeding and other symptoms or any difference in patients requiring different procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Waiting times for endoscopy can be improved with the introduction of a targeted pathway of cancer patients. Further issues including cost, quality of life and nutrition require further intervention.

Long-term results and recurrence patterns from SCOPE-1: a phase II/III randomised trial of definitive chemoradiotherapy +/- cetuximab in oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The SCOPE-1 study tested the role of adding cetuximab to conventional definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), and demonstrated greater toxicity and worse survival outcomes. We present the long-term outcomes and patterns of recurrence. METHODS: SCOPE-1 was a phase II/III trial in which patients were randomised to cisplatin 60 mg m-2 (day 1) and capecitabine 625 mg m-2 bd (days 1-21) for four cycles +/- cetuximab 400 mg m-2 day 1 then by 250 mg m-2 weekly. Radiotherapy consisted of 50 Gy/25# given concurrently with cycles 3 and 4. Recruitment was between February 2008 and February 2012, when the IDMC recommended closure on the basis of futility. RESULTS: About 258 patients (dCRT=129; dCRT+cetuximab (dCRT+C)=129) were recruited from 36 centres. About 72.9% (n=188) had squamous cell histology. The median follow-up (IQR) was 46.2 (35.9-48.3) months for surviving patients. The median overall survival (OS; months; 95% CI) was 34.5 (24.7-42.3) in dCRT and 24.7 (18.6-31.3) in dCRT+C (hazard ratio (HR)=1.25, 95% CIs: 0.93-1.69, P=0.137). Median progression-free survival (PFS; months; 95% CI) was 24.1 (15.3-29.9) and 15.9 (10.7-20.8) months, respectively (HR=1.28, 95% CIs: 0.94-1.75; P=0.114). On multivariable analysis only earlier stage, full-dose RT, and higher cisplatin dose intensity were associated with improved OS. CONCLUSIONS: The mature analysis demonstrates that the dCRT regimen used in the study provided useful survival outcomes despite its use in patients who were largely unfit for surgery or who had inoperable disease. Given the competing risk of systemic and local failure, future studies should continue to focus on enhancing local control as well as optimising systemic therapy.

Adjuvant FOLFOX +/- cetuximab in full RAS and BRAF wildtype stage III colon cancer patients.

Background: RAS mutations have been shown to confer resistance to anti- epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment. We analysed the results of the PETACC8 trial (cetuximab + FOLFOX vs FOLFOX) in full RAS and BRAF wildtype (WT) patients (pts) with resected stage III colon cancer. Patients and methods: Exons 2, 3 and 4 of KRAS and NRAS, and BRAF exons 11 and 15, were sequenced using the Ampliseq colon-lung cancer panel version 2, in PETACC8 trial pts who consented to translational research. The impact of cetuximab on time to recurrence (TTR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was investigated in pts with tumours harbouring RAS and BRAF WT, and RAS mutations. The prognostic value of each individual mutation was also tested. Results: Among the 2559 pts analysed, 745 pts (29%) were known to have KRAS exon 2 mutations and 163 pts (6.4%) the BRAF V600E mutation. Of the remaining 1651 pts, 1054 were assessed by NGS, showing that a further 227 pts (21%) had KRAS exon 2, 3, 4 or NRAS exon 2, 3, 4 mutations, and that 46 pts (4.4%) had a newly diagnosed BRAF mutation. Cetuximab added to FOLFOX did not significantly improve TTR, DFS or OS in pts with RAS WT or RAS and BRAF WT tumours (HR 0.77-1.03, all P > 0.05). Cetuximab addition was not either significantly deleterious in RAS mutant pts or in pts with rare RAS or BRAF mutations. In the overall trial population, NRAS and KRAS codon 61 mutations were the only rare mutations with the same pejorative prognostic value as KRAS exon 2 or BRAF V600E mutations. Conclusion: Though not significant, the clinically relevant 0.76 adjusted HR observed for DFS in favour of adding cetuximab to FOLFOX, in full RAS and BRAF WT stage III colon cancer pts, may justify a new randomized controlled trial testing EGFR inhibitors in this setting. Clinical trial number: This is an ancillary study of the PETACC8 trial: EUDRACT 2005-003463-23.

Prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in advanced oesophago-gastric cancer: exploratory analysis of the REAL-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The REAL-2 trial demonstrated that capecitabine and oxaliplatin were effective alternatives to fluorouracil and cisplatin, respectively, when used in triplet chemotherapy regimens for previously untreated oesophago-gastric cancer. The aim of the current analysis was to evaluate the prognostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in the REAL-2 cohort. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A post hoc exploratory analysis was carried out on REAL-2 patients with the available absolute neutrophil count and absolute lymphocyte count. A high NLR was defined using a cut-off value of >3.0. The NLR was then correlated with clinical outcomes including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and comparison between groups was carried out using Cox regression. RESULTS: Data were available in 908 of the 1002 REAL-2 participants. Of these, 516 (56.8%) were deemed to have a high NLR. In univariate analysis, high NLR was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) for OS of 1.73 (1.50-2.00), P < 0.001, compared with low NLR, equating to median OS values of 9.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.0-9.6] and 12.7 months (95% CI 10.8-14.4), respectively. The NLR remained highly significant for OS (P < 0.001) in a multivariate model including performance status, age, disease extent, presence of liver metastases and presence of peritoneal metastases. For PFS, high NLR was associated with an HR of 1.63 (1.41-1.87), P < 0.001, compared with low NLR in univariate analysis. No significant interaction was found between NLR status and treatment arm, 13% of all patients with low NLR achieving survival beyond 24 months compared with only 6% of patients with high NLR (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that high NLR status had a significant negative prognostic effect in the REAL-2 trial population. Based on the multivariate analysis, this effect was independent of other known prognostic factors.

Prognostic factors for progression-free and overall survival in advanced biliary tract cancer.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancer is an uncommon cancer with a poor outcome. We assembled data from the National Cancer Research Institute (UK) ABC-02 study and 10 international studies to determine prognostic outcome characteristics for patients with advanced disease. METHODS: Multivariable analyses of the final dataset from the ABC-02 study were carried out. All variables were simultaneously included in a Cox proportional hazards model, and backward elimination was used to produce the final model (using a significance level of 10%), in which the selected variables were associated independently with outcome. This score was validated externally by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis using the independent international dataset. RESULTS: A total of 410 patients were included from the ABC-02 study and 753 from the international dataset. An overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) Cox model was derived from the ABC-02 study. White blood cells, haemoglobin, disease status, bilirubin, neutrophils, gender, and performance status were considered prognostic for survival (all with P < 0.10). Patients with metastatic disease {hazard ratio (HR) 1.56 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20-2.02]} and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 2 had worse survival [HR 2.24 (95% CI 1.53-3.28)]. In a dataset restricted to patients who received cisplatin and gemcitabine with ECOG PS 0 and 1, only haemoglobin, disease status, bilirubin, and neutrophils were associated with PFS and OS. ROC analysis suggested the models generated from the ABC-02 study had a limited prognostic value [6-month PFS: area under the curve (AUC) 62% (95% CI 57-68); 1-year OS: AUC 64% (95% CI 58-69)]. CONCLUSION: These data propose a set of prognostic criteria for outcome in advanced biliary tract cancer derived from the ABC-02 study that are validated in an international dataset. Although these findings establish the benchmark for the prognostic evaluation of patients with ABC and confirm the value of longheld clinical observations, the ability of the model to correctly predict prognosis is limited and needs to be improved through identification of additional clinical and molecular markers.

Bevacizumab and Combination Chemotherapy in rectal cancer Until Surgery (BACCHUS): a phase II, multicentre, open-label, randomised study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with high-risk cancer of the rectum.

BACKGROUND: In locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is the standard of care, but the risk of local recurrence is low with good quality total mesorectal excision (TME), although many still develop metastatic disease. Current challenges in treating rectal cancer include the development of effective organ-preserving approaches and the prevention of subsequent metastatic disease. Neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy (NACT) alone may reduce local and systemic recurrences, and may be more effective than postoperative treatments which often have poor compliance. Investigation of intensified NACT is warranted to improve outcomes for patients with LARC. The objective is to evaluate feasibility and efficacy of a four-drug regimen containing bevacizumab prior to surgical resection. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, randomized phase II trial. Eligible patients must have histologically confirmed LARC with distal part of the tumour 4-12 cm from anal verge, no metastases, and poor prognostic features on pelvic MRI. Sixty patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive folinic acid + flurourcil + oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) + bevacizumab (BVZ) or FOLFOX + irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) + BVZ, given in 2 weekly cycles for up to 6 cycles prior to TME. Patients stop treatment if they fail to respond after 3 cycles (defined as ≥ 30 % decrease in Standardised Uptake Value (SUV) compared to baseline PET/CT). The primary endpoint is pathological complete response rate. Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, MRI tumour regression grade, involved circumferential resection margin rate, T and N stage downstaging, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, local control, 1-year colostomy rate, acute toxicity, compliance to chemotherapy. DISCUSSION: In LARC, a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen - if feasible, effective and tolerable would be suitable for testing as the novel arm against the current standards of short course preoperative radiotherapy (SCPRT) and/or fluorouracil (5FU)-based CRT in a future randomised phase III trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial identifier BACCHUS: NCT01650428.

Patient-reported outcomes during and after definitive chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Limited data describe patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of localised oesophageal cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy(CRT). The phase 2/3 SCOPE-1 trial assessed the effectiveness of CRT±cetuximab. The trial for the first time provided an opportunity to describe PROs from a multi-centre group of patients treated with CRT that are presented here. METHODS: Patients undergoing CRT±cetuximab within the SCOPE-1 trial (258 patients from 36 UK centres) completed generic-, disease- and treatment-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-OES18, Dermatology Life-Quality Index (DLQI)) at baseline and at 7, 13, 24, 52 and 104 weeks. Mean EORTC functional scale scores (>15 point change significant), DLQI scores (>4 point change significant) and proportions of patients (>15% significant) with 'minimal' or 'severe' symptoms are presented. RESULTS: Questionnaire response rates were good. At baseline, EORTC functional scores were high (>75%) and few symptoms were reported except for severe problems with fatigue, insomnia and eating-related symptoms (e.g., appetite loss, dysphagia, dry mouth) in both groups(>15%). Functional aspects of health deteriorated and symptoms increased with treatment and by week 13 global quality of life, physical, role and social function significantly deteriorated and more problems with fatigue, dyspnoea, appetite loss and trouble with taste were reported. Recovery occurred by 6 months (except severe fatigue and insomnia in >15% of patients) and maintained at follow-up with no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: CRT for localised oesophageal cancer has a significant detrimental impact on many aspects of HRQL; however, recovery is achieved by 6 months and maintained with the exception of persisting problems with severe fatigue and insomnia. The data suggest that the HRQL recovery after definitive CRT is quicker, and there is little lasting deficit compared with treatment including surgery. These data need to be compared with HRQL data from studies evaluating treatments including surgery for oesophageal cancer.

Derived neutrophil lymphocyte ratio may predict benefit from cisplatin in the advanced biliary cancer: the ABC-02 and BT-22 studies.

BACKGROUND: The superiority of cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) chemotherapy over gemcitabine (Gem) alone in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) has been demonstrated in two randomised trials; ABC02 and the Biliary Tract (BT) 22 study. We used a combined dataset from these two trials to investigate the derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), which is thought to be a prognostic factor associated with clinical outcomes in several solid tumours, including ABC. METHODS: White blood cell (WBC) and absolute neutrophil count (ANC) were available for 379 of 410 patients from ABC-02 and all 83 patients in BT-22. The dNLR was calculated as ANC/(WBC-ANC), as previously specified. We examined the association between dNLR and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), as well as comparing the treatment effect in two patient groups defined by their dNLR level. A high dNLR was defined as ≥3.0, which was approximately the upper tertile value. RESULTS: A total of 462 individual patient records were analysed, 328 with baseline dNLR <3 and 134 with dNLR ≥3. There were 443 deaths in the cohort, and all surviving patients had a dNLR <3. There was strong evidence that dNLR was closely associated with both OS [hazard ratio (HR), 1.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-2.01] and PFS (HR, 1.40; 95% CI 1.13-1.72). There was limited evidence (P = 0.10) of a differential effect of CisGem on OS between the two dNLR groups, but this was clearest in the ABC-02 dataset (P = 0.06). There was good evidence (P = 0.008) of an association between low baseline dNLR and long-term survival on a CisGem regimen. There was also good evidence of an association between ECOG performance status (split at 0 and 1 versus 2) on both OS (P < 0.001) and PFS (P = 0.01), but no evidence of a differential treatment effect, with both groups receiving benefit from the addition of cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm that high dNLR is associated with worse OS and PFS, and suggests it may also be predictive of benefit for the addition of cisplatin to gemcitabine in European patients with ABC. Incorporating dNLR into the clinical context may better inform prognosis and chemotherapy decisions in ABC patients.

Bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 or FOLFOXIRI in patients with initially unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer: the OLIVIA multinational randomised phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with initially unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer, chemotherapy can downsize metastases and facilitate secondary resection. We assessed the efficacy of bevacizumab plus modified FOLFOX-6 (5-fluorouracil/folinic acid, oxaliplatin) or FOLFOXIRI (5-fluorouracil/folinic acid, oxaliplatin, irinotecan) in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: OLIVIA was a multinational open-label phase II study conducted at 16 centres in Austria, France, Spain, and the UK. Patients with unresectable liver metastases were randomised to bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) plus mFOLFOX-6 [oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), folinic acid 400 mg/m(2), 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) (bolus) then 2400 mg/m(2) (46-h infusion)] or FOLFOXIRI [oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), irinotecan 165 mg/m(2), folinic acid 200 mg/m(2), 5-fluorouracil 3200 mg/m(2) (46-h infusion)] every 2 weeks. Unresectability was defined as ≥1 of the following criteria: no possibility of upfront R0/R1 resection of all lesions; <30% residual liver volume after resection; metastases in contact with major vessels of the remnant liver. Resectability was evaluated by multidisciplinary review. The primary end point was overall resection rate (R0/R1/R2). Efficacy end points were analysed by intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: In patients assigned to bevacizumab-FOLFOXIRI (n = 41) or bevacizumab-mFOLFOX-6 (n = 39), the overall resection rate was 61% [95% confidence interval (CI) 45% to 76%] and 49% (95% CI 32% to 65%), respectively (difference 12%; 95% CI -11% to 36%). R0 resection rates were 49% and 23%, respectively. Overall tumour response rates were 81% (95% CI 65% to 91%) with bevacizumab-FOLFOXIRI and 62% (95% CI 45% to 77%) with bevacizumab-mFOLFOX-6. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18·6 (95% CI 12.9-22.3) months and 11·5 (95% CI 9.6-13.6) months, respectively. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were neutropenia (bevacizumab-FOLFOXIRI, 50%; bevacizumab-mFOLFOX-6, 35%) and diarrhoea (30% and 14%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab-FOLFOXIRI was associated with higher response and resection rates and prolonged PFS versus bevacizumab-mFOLFOX-6 in patients with initially unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Toxicity was increased but manageable with bevacizumab-FOLFOXIRI. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00778102.

Prognostic value of KRAS mutations in stage III colon cancer: post hoc analysis of the PETACC8 phase III trial dataset.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of KRAS mutations in colon adenocarcinoma is controversial. We examined this question as an ancillary study of the PETACC8 phase III trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the prognostic impact of KRAS exon 2 mutations in stage III colon cancer patients (n = 1657) receiving adjuvant FOLFOX ± cetuximab therapy included in the PETACC8 trial. Patients with BRAF-mutated cancers were excluded and, as no difference was found for time to recurrence (TTR) and disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms, both were pooled for analysis. Associations with TTR and DFS were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: KRAS mutations were found in 638 of 1657 tumors and linked to shorter TTR (P < 0.001). However, when specific mutations were compared with wild-type, codon 12 mutations [hazard ratio (HR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35-2.04; P < 0.001] but not codon 13 (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.85-1.79; P = 0.26) were significantly associated with shorter TTR, independently of other covariates. The interaction test showed that, regarding tumor location (distal versus proximal), KRAS genotype affects differently on recurrence (P = 0.02) and DFS (P = 0.042). Subgroup analysis showed that KRAS only affected TTR and DFS in distal tumors (n = 1043; 692 wild type; 351 mutated), with an increased risk of relapse (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.51-2.56; P < 0.0001) for KRAS codon 12 mutations and a borderline significance for codon 13 mutations (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.00-2.56; P = 0.051). CONCLUSION: KRAS exon 2 mutations are independent predictors of shorter TTR in patients with resected stage III distal colon cancers receiving adjuvant therapy. Future clinical trials in the adjuvant setting should consider both the tumor location and KRAS mutations as important stratification factors. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: This is an ancillary study of the PETACC8 trial: EUDRACT 2005-003463-23.

Phase II, randomized, biomarker identification trial (MARK) for erlotinib in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A prospective, randomized phase II study, with mandatory tumor sampling at current disease stage, aimed to identify biomarkers predictive of improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with erlotinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed, unresectable, locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer, who had failed on or were unsuitable for first-line chemotherapy, underwent a tumor biopsy and were then randomized to receive once-daily erlotinib 150 mg or placebo. The primary end point was identification of biomarkers predicting improved PFS with erlotinib. Secondary end points included PFS, overall survival, response and toxicity. RESULTS: At data cut-off, 207 patients were enrolled and analyzed. Prespecified biomarker analyses of EGFR protein expression, EGFR gene copy number/mutations/polymorphisms and KRAS mutations did not identify any subgroups with a detrimental effect or a strong benefit for PFS with erlotinib. In the primary analysis, the median PFS was 6.1 versus 5.9 weeks in the erlotinib and placebo arms, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.10; P = 0.1909]. However, observed baseline imbalances indicated worse prognosis in the erlotinib arm. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, a significant PFS benefit for erlotinib was observed (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50-0.91; P = 0.0102). Exploratory biomarker analyses showed patients with high baseline serum amphiregulin levels might benefit from erlotinib. CONCLUSION: This study in patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer did not identify any prespecified biomarkers predictive of PFS benefit with erlotinib. Exploratory analyses suggested high amphiregulin might predict PFS benefit from erlotinib. CLINICALTRIALSGOV NUMBER: NCT00674973.

A feasibility study testing four hypotheses with phase II outcomes in advanced colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS3): a model for randomised controlled trials in the era of personalised medicine?

BACKGROUND: Molecular characteristics of cancer vary between individuals. In future, most trials will require assessment of biomarkers to allocate patients into enriched populations in which targeted therapies are more likely to be effective. The MRC FOCUS3 trial is a feasibility study to assess key elements in the planning of such studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced colorectal cancer were registered from 24 centres between February 2010 and April 2011. With their consent, patients' tumour samples were analysed for KRAS/BRAF oncogene mutation status and topoisomerase 1 (topo-1) immunohistochemistry. Patients were then classified into one of four molecular strata; within each strata patients were randomised to one of two hypothesis-driven experimental therapies or a common control arm (FOLFIRI chemotherapy). A 4-stage suite of patient information sheets (PISs) was developed to avoid patient overload. RESULTS: A total of 332 patients were registered, 244 randomised. Among randomised patients, biomarker results were provided within 10 working days (w.d.) in 71%, 15 w.d. in 91% and 20 w.d. in 99%. DNA mutation analysis was 100% concordant between two laboratories. Over 90% of participants reported excellent understanding of all aspects of the trial. In this randomised phase II setting, omission of irinotecan in the low topo-1 group was associated with increased response rate and addition of cetuximab in the KRAS, BRAF wild-type cohort was associated with longer progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patient samples can be collected and analysed within workable time frames and with reproducible mutation results. Complex multi-arm designs are acceptable to patients with good PIS. Randomisation within each cohort provides outcome data that can inform clinical practice.