Dynamics in treatment response and disease progression of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with focus on BRAF status and primary tumor location: analysis of untreated RAS-wild-type mCRC patients receiving FOLFOXIRI either with or without panitumumab in the VOLFI trial (AIO KRK0109).

PURPOSE: In mCRC, disease dynamics may play a critical role in the understanding of long-term outcome. We evaluated depth of response (DpR), time to DpR, and post-DpR survival as relevant endpoints. METHODS: We analyzed DpR by central review of computer tomography images (change from baseline to smallest tumor diameter), early tumor shrinkage (≥ 20% reduction in tumor diameter at first reassessment), time to DpR (study randomization to DpR-image), post-DpR progression-free survival (pPFS = DpR-image to tumor progression or death), and post-DpR overall survival (pOS = DpR-image to death) with special focus on BRAF status in 66 patients and primary tumor site in 86 patients treated within the VOLFI-trial, respectively. RESULTS: BRAF wild-type (BRAF-WT) compared to BRAF mutant (BRAF-MT) patients had greater DpR (- 57.6% vs. - 40.8%, p = 0.013) with a comparable time to DpR [4.0 (95% CI 3.1-4.4) vs. 3.9 (95% CI 2.5-5.5) months; p = 0.8852]. pPFS was 6.5 (95% CI 4.9-8.0) versus 2.6 (95% CI 1.2-4.0) months in favor of BRAF-WT patients (HR 0.24 (95% CI 0.11-0.53); p < 0.001). This transferred into a significant difference in pOS [33.6 (95% CI 26.0-41.3) vs. 5.4 (95% CI 5.0-5.9) months; HR 0.27 (95% CI 0.13-0.55); p < 0.001]. Similar observations were made for patients stratified for primary tumor site. CONCLUSIONS: BRAF-MT patients derive a less profound treatment response compared to BRAF-WT patients. The difference in outcome according to BRAF status is evident after achievement of DpR with BRAF-MT patients hardly deriving any further disease control beyond DpR. Our observations hint towards an aggressive tumor evolution in BRAF-MT tumors, which may already be molecularly detectable at the time of DpR.

Gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and 5-FU in advanced bile duct and gallbladder carcinoma: two parallel, multicentre phase-II trials.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) are active in biliary tract cancer and have a potentially synergistic mode of action and non-overlapping toxicity. The objective of these trials was to determine response, survival and toxicity separately in patients with bile duct cancer (BDC) and gallbladder cancer (GBC) treated with gemcitabine/oxaliplatin/5-FU chemotherapy. METHODS: Eligible patients with histologically proven, advanced or metastatic BDC (n=37) or GBC (n=35) were treated with gemcitabine (900 mg m(-2) over 30 min), oxaliplatin (65 mg m(-2)) and 5-FU (1500 mg m(-2) over 24 h) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Tumour response was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Response rates were 19% (95% CI: 6-32%) and 23% (95% CI: 9-37%) for BDC and GBC, respectively. Median survivals were 10.0 months (95% CI: 8.6-12.4) and 9.9 months (95% CI: 7.5-12.2) for BDC and GBC, respectively, and 1- and 2-year survival rates were 40 and 23% in BDC and 34 and 6% in GBC (intention-to-treat analysis). Major grade III and IV adverse events were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, elevated bilirubin and anorexia. CONCLUSION: Triple-drug chemotherapy achieves comparable results for response and survival to previously reported regimens, but with more toxicity.

Gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and weekly high-dose 5-FU as 24-h infusion in chemonaive patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multicenter phase II trial of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO).

BACKGROUND: Combinations of gemcitabine-oxaliplatin, gemcitabine-5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and 5-FU-oxaliplatin have synergistic activity and nonoverlapping adverse effect profiles. This trial assessed efficacy and safety of the triple combination gemcitabine-oxaliplatin and infusional 5-FU in patients with locally advanced (n=11) or metastatic (n=32) pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 43 eligible patients were treated with intravenous infusions of gemcitabine (900 mg/m2 over 30 min), followed by oxaliplatin (65 mg/m2 over 2 h) and 5-FU (1500 mg/m2 over 24 h) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. RESULTS: Among all 43 patients, the tumor response rate was 19% [95% confidence interval 7% to 30%]. Nine patients were nonassessable for response because they did not complete the first two cycles of chemotherapy due to rapid disease progression, early death or treatment refusal. One patient was lost to follow-up. Median time to progression and overall survival were 5.7 and 7.5 months. Principal grade III/IV toxic effects were leucopenia in 11 (2%), thrombocytopenia in 13 (2%), nausea in 13 (0%), anorexia 16 (7%) and sensory neuropathy in 18 (0%) of patients. Unexpected cardiotoxicity was observed in this trial. CONCLUSION: Response rates and survival of the three-drug combination compare favorably with single-agent gemcitabine, but do not exceed results for doublets.