FOLFIRI Plus Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric or gastrooesphageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains limited. Ojectives: To determine the efficacy of 1 or 2 immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) in the treatment of advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST trial is a randomized, multicenter, noncomparative, phase 2 trial, conducted from August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, at 37 centers in France that included patients with advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma who had disease progression after platinum-based first-line chemotherapy. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive FOLFIRI plus durvalumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-L1]) (FD arm) or FOLFIRI plus durvalumab and tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 [CTLA-4]) (FDT arm). The efficacy analyses used a clinical cutoff date of January 9, 2023. Main outcome and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 4 months according to RECIST 1.1 criteria evaluated by investigators. Results: Overall, between August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, 96 patients were randomized (48 in each arm). The median age was 59.7 years, 28 patients (30.4%) were women and 49 (53.3%) had GEJ tumors. Four month PFS was 44.7% (90% CI, 32.3-57.7) and 55.6% (90% CI, 42.3-68.3) in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. The primary end point was not met. Median PFS was 3.8 and 5.4 months, objective response rates were 34.7% and 37.7%, and median overall survival was 13.2 and 9.5 months in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. Disease control beyond 1 year was 14.9% in the FD arm and 24.4% in the FDT arm. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 22 (47.8%) patients in each arm. A combined positive score (CPS) PD-L1 of 5 or higher was observed in 18 tumors (34.0%) and a tumor proportion score (TPS) PD-L1 of 1% or higher in 13 tumors (24.5%). Median PFS according to CPS PD-L1 was similar (3.6 months for PD-L1 CPS ≥5 vs 5.4 months for PD-L1 CPS <5) by contrast for TPS PD-L1 (6.0 months for PD-L1 TPS ≥1% vs 3.8 months for PD-L1 TPS <1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with FOLFIRI in second-line treatment for advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma showed an acceptable safety profile but antitumor activity only in a subgroup of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959293.

Atezolizumab plus modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as first-line treatment for advanced anal cancer (SCARCE C17-02 PRODIGE 60): a randomised, non-comparative, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen has shown efficacy and safety as first-line treatment for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, making it a standard regimen. Inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand, such as pembrolizumab, nivolumab, retifanlimab, avelumab, and atezolizumab, have shown some antitumour activity as monotherapy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus that is refractory to chemotherapy. This phase 2 study evaluated the combination of mDCF and atezolizumab as first-line treatment in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, non-comparative, phase 2 study, participants from 21 centres (academic, private, and community hospitals and cancer research centres) across France with chemo-naive, metastatic, or unresectable locally advanced recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, aged 18 years or older, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly allocated (2:1) to receive either atezolizumab (800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks up to 1 year) plus mDCF (eight cycles of 40 mg per m2 docetaxel and 40 mg per m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1200 mg per m2 per day of fluorouracil for 2 days, every 2 weeks intravenously; group A) or mDCF alone (group B). Randomisation was done centrally using a minimisation technique and was stratified by age (<65 years vs ≥65 years) and disease status. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 12-month progression-free survival in the modified intention-to-treat population in group A (35% for the null hypothesis and 50% for the alternative hypothesis). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03519295, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: 97 evaluable participants (64 in group A and 33 in group B) were enrolled between July 3, 2018, and Aug 19, 2020. The median follow-up was 26·5 months (95% CI 24·8-28·4). The median age of participants was 64·1 years (IQR 56·2-71·6), and 71 (73%) were female. 12-month progression-free survival was 45% (90% CI 35-55) in group A and 43% (29-58) in group B. In participants with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater, 12-month progression-free survival was 70% (95% CI 47-100) in group A and 40% (19-85) in group B (interaction p=0·051) Both groups showed high compliance. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 39 (61%) participants in group A and 14 (42%) in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [14%] participants in group A vs five [15%] in group B), anaemia (nine [14%] vs one [3%]), fatigue (three [5%] vs four [12%]), and diarrhoea (seven [11%] vs one [3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 16 (25%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B, and these were mDCF-related in seven (11%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B. Atezolizumab-related serious adverse events occurred in nine (14%) participants in group A, including grade 2 infusion-related reaction in three (5%), grade 3 infection in two (3%), and grade 2 colitis, grade 3 acute kidney injury, grade 3 sarcoidosis, and a grade 4 platelet count decrease each in one participant (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Despite a higher incidence of adverse events, combining atezolizumab with mDCF is feasible, with similar dose intensity in both groups, although the primary efficacy endpoint was not met. The predictive value of a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater now needs to be confirmed in future studies. FUNDING: GERCOR, Roche.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer with microsatellite instability in second or latter line using synthetic control arms: A non-randomised evaluation.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) appeared active in single-arm trials for patients with chemoresistant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) harboring microsatellite instability (MSI). Given the paucity of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this setting, we evaluated the effect size of ICIs using intra-patients comparison and ARCAD database as historical controls. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual-patient data from NIPICOL and CheckMate 142 phase II trials that evaluated a combination of ICIs for MSI mCRC patients (N = 176) and from five non-ICI mCRC historical RCTs in second-line or latter (N = 4026) were analyzed. Firstly, promising of ICIs was identified using intra-patient comparison based on growth modulation index (GMI) defined the ratio of progression-free survivals (PFS) on ICIs and previous line of therapy. Survival outcomes of ICIs-treated patients were then compared with those matched non-ICIs treated from ARCAD database historical RCTs. RESULTS: Among ICIs-treated patients, median PFS on ICIs was 32.66 (range 0.10-74.25) versus 4.07 months (range 0.7-49.87) on prior therapy, resulting on median GMI of 4.97 (range 0.07-59.51; hazard-ratio (HR)= 0.16 (95 %CI=0.11-0.22, P < 0.001)). Compared to matched non-ICI patients, in third-line, median overall survival (OS) was not reached with ICIs versus 3.52 months with placebo (HR=0.20, 95 %CI=0.10-0.41, P < 0.001), and 6.51 months with active drugs (HR=0.30, 95 %CI=0.15-0.60, P = 0.001). In second-line, median OS was not reached with ICIs versus 11.7 months with chemotherapy+placebo (HR=0.12, 95 %CI=0.07-0.22, P < 0.001), and 16.3 months with chemotherapy+targeted therapy (HR=0.10, 95 %CI=0.05-0.19, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ICIs demonstrates high effect size for MSI mCRC patients in second-line and later. This work might be useful as an example of methodology to avoid RCTs when benefit from experimental therapy is likely to be high.

Effect of Adapted Physical Activity in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The APACaP GERCOR Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of adapted physical activity (APA) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC) is unknown. This study evaluated whether APA in addition to standard care improved HRQoL in patients who have aPDAC who are receiving first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic PDAC and an ECOG performance status of 0 to 2 were randomized (1:1) to receive standard care (standard arm) or standard care plus a home-based 16-week APA program (APA arm). The primary objective was the effect of the APA program on 3 dimensions of the EORTC QLQ-C30: global health status, physical function, and fatigue at week 16 (W16), with a one-sided type I error of 0.017 for each dimension. The primary HRQoL analysis was performed in patients with available baseline and W16 scores for the dimensions (ie, the modified intention-to-treat population 1 [mITT1]), and secondary longitudinal HRQoL analyses using the mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) methods were performed in the mITT1 population and in patients with baseline and at least one follow-up questionnaire (mITT2 population). A difference of ≥5 points was considered to be clinically relevant. RESULTS: Of 326 included patients, 313 were randomized to the standard (n=157) or APA (n=156) arms. In the mITT1 population (n=172), the mean differences in global health status, physical function, and fatigue at W16 adjusted from baseline were -0.98 (SD, 23.9; P=.39), -2.08 (SD, 21.3; P=.26), and 4.16 (SD, 29.2; P=.17), respectively, showing a non-statistically significant benefit with APA. In the mITT2 population (n=259), APA was associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in 5 and 8 dimensions of the HRQoL in the longitudinal MMRM and TUDD analyses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: APA improved several dimensions of HRQoL in patients with aPDAC receiving first-line chemotherapy and standard care.

First-line durvalumab and tremelimumab with chemotherapy in RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase 1b/2 trial.

Although patients with microsatellite instable metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) benefit from immune checkpoint blockade, chemotherapy with targeted therapies remains the only therapeutic option for microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors. The single-arm, phase 1b/2 MEDITREME trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of durvalumab plus tremelimumab combined with mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy in first line, in 57 patients with RAS-mutant unresectable metastatic CRC. Safety was the primary objective of phase Ib; no safety issue was observed. The phase 2 primary objective of efficacy in terms of 3-month progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with MSS tumors was met, with 3-month PFS of 90.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 79.2-96%). For secondary objectives, response rate was 64.5%; median PFS was 8.2 months (95% CI: 5.9-8.6); and overall survival was not reached in patients with MSS tumors. We observed higher tumor mutational burden and lower genomic instability in responders. Integrated transcriptomic analysis underlined that high immune signature and low epithelial-mesenchymal transition were associated with better outcome. Immunomonitoring showed induction of neoantigen and NY-ESO1 and TERT blood tumor-specific T cell response associated with better PFS. The combination of durvalumab-tremelimumab with mFOLFOX6 was tolerable with promising clinical activity in MSS mCRC. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03202758 .

Evaluation of Intratumoral Response Heterogeneity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Its Impact on Patient Overall Survival: Findings from 10,551 Patients in the ARCAD Database.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. RESULTS: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in microsatellite unstable/mismatch repair-deficient advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an AGEO European Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) improve oncological outcomes in patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI) or mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) advanced solid tumours. Nevertheless, based on limited published data, the outcome of patients with MSI/dMMR pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) seems poorer when compared to other malignancies. This multi-institutional analysis sought to assess the efficacy and tolerability of ICIs in a large real-world cohort of patients with MSI/dMMR PDAC. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from patients with MSI/dMMR advanced PDAC treated with ICIs in 16 centers. Progression-free survival and overall survival were calculated from the start of treatment, and we report objective response and disease control rates according to RECIST V1.1. RESULTS: Thirty-one MSI/dMMR advanced PDAC patients were identified. Twenty-five patients received single-agent anti-PD-1 antibodies, three patients received the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab and three patients received immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy. Among 31 evaluable patients, 15 (48.4%) had an objective response (three complete responses and 12 partial responses), and six (19.4%) had stable disease. With a median follow-up of 18 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 26.7 months and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Disease control rates (DCRs) among patients with only one line of prior therapy (N = 17) was 76.5%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were not observed. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis suggests that ICIs are effective and well tolerated in patients with MSI/dMMR advanced PDAC. Hence, our work supports the use of PD-1 inhibition in this group of patients with high unmet medical need.

Evaluating sex as a predictive marker for response to bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal carcinoma: Pooled analysis of 3,369 patients in the ARCAD database.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest a possible sex-specific response to bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC), showing a benefit in males, while the effect in females is less significant. METHODS: Data from 3369 patients with mCRC enrolled on four first-line randomised trials testing chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (2000-2007) were pooled. Association between sex and progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) was evaluated by stratified Cox regression model, adjusted for potential confounders. Predictive value was evaluated by interaction effect between sex and treatment. In a pre-planned secondary analysis, analyses were stratified using an age cut point of 60 years to evaluate the possible role of menopausal-related effects. RESULTS: Bevacizumab was associated with an improved median OS in males and females, with a 2.3- and 0.6-months benefit, respectively. Stratified by age, bevacizumab resulted in improved OS in males at both age categories. In females at or above the age of 60 (n = 731), bevacizumab resulted in improved OS. However, in females below the age of 60 (n = 634), OS benefit did not reach statistical significance (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirmed the OS benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in mCRC in both sexes. Among females, the benefit was less than 1 month. For females under the age of 60, there was no survival benefit. These findings could be used to relieve financial toxicity or be redistributed within healthcare systems for other health-related purposes.

Impact of Preoperative Chemotherapy Features on Patient Outcomes after Hepatectomy for Initially Unresectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: A LiverMetSurvey Analysis.

Background: Prognostic factors have been extensively reported after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM); however, specific analyses of the impact of preoperative systemic anticancer therapy (PO-SACT) features on outcomes is lacking. Methods: For this real-world evidence study, we used prospectively collected data within the international surgical LiverMetSurvey database from all patients with initially-irresectable CLM. The main outcome was Overall Survival (OS) after surgery. Disease-free (DFS) and hepatic-specific relapse-free survival (HS-RFS) were secondary outcomes. PO-SACT features included duration (cumulative number of cycles), choice of the cytotoxic backbone (oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based), fluoropyrimidine (infusional or oral) and addition or not of targeted monoclonal antibodies (anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF). Results: A total of 2793 patients in the database had received PO-SACT for initially irresectable diseases. Short (<7 or <13 cycles in 1st or 2nd line) PO-SACT duration was independently associated with longer OS (HR: 0.85 p = 0.046), DFS (HR: 0.81; p = 0.016) and HS-RFS (HR: 0.80; p = 0.05). All other PO-SACT features yielded basically comparable results. Conclusions: In this international cohort, provided that PO-SACT allowed conversion to resectability in initially irresectable CLM, surgery performed as soon as technically feasible resulted in the best outcomes. When resection was achieved, our findings indicate that the choice of PO-SACT regimen had a marginal if any, impact on outcomes.

Targeting the Tumor Microenvironment through mTOR Inhibition and Chemotherapy as Induction Therapy for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The CAPRA Study.

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) regulates cellular functions by integrating intracellular signals and signals from the tumor microenvironment (TME). The PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathway is activated in 70% of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and associated with poor prognosis. This phase I-II study investigated the effect of mTOR inhibition using weekly everolimus (30 mg for dose level 1, 50 mg for dose level 2) combined with weekly induction chemotherapy (AUC2 carboplatin and 60 mg/m2 paclitaxel) in treatment-naïve patients with locally advanced T3-4/N0-3 HNSCC. Patients received 9 weekly cycles before chemoradiotherapy. Objectives were safety and antitumor activity along with tissue and blood molecular biomarkers. A total of 50 patients were enrolled. Among 41 evaluable patients treated at the recommended dose of 50 mg everolimus weekly, tolerance was good and overall response rate was 75.6%, including 20 major responses (≥50% reduction in tumor size). A significant decrease in expression of p-S6K (p-value: 0.007) and Ki67 (p-value: 0.01) was observed in post-treatment tumor tissue. Pro-immunogenic cytokine release (Th1 cytokines IFN-γ, IL-2, and TNF-ß) was observed in the peripheral blood. The combination of everolimus and chemotherapy in HNSCC was safe and achieved major tumor responses. This strategy favorably impacts the TME and might be combined with immunotherapeutic agents.

Phase II INTERACT-ION study: ezabenlimab (BI 754091) and mDCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil) followed by chemoradiotherapy in patients with Stage III squamous cell anal carcinoma.

Background: Chemoradiotherapy alone is the standard treatment for locally advanced squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC). However, up to 50% of patients will experience recurrence; thus, there is a need for new treatments to improve outcomes. Modified docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (mDCF) is a treatment option for first-line metastatic SCAC, having shown efficacy in the Epitopes-HPV01 and -02 trials (NCT01845779 and NCT02402842). mDCF treatment also plays a role in the modulation of anti-tumor immunity, suggesting it may be a good combination partner for immunotherapy in patients with SCAC. Anti-programmed death protein-1 (PD-1) immunotherapy has been shown to be effective in metastatic SCAC. We therefore designed the INTERACT-ION study to assess the combination of mDCF with ezabenlimab (BI 754091), an anti-PD-1 antibody, followed by chemoradiotherapy, in patients with Stage III SCAC. Methods: INTERACT-ION is a pivotal, open-label, single-arm phase II study in patients with treatment-naïve Stage III SCAC. Patients will receive induction treatment with mDCF (docetaxel 40 mg/m2 and cisplatin 40 mg/m2 on Day 1, 5-fluorouracil 1200 mg/m2/day for 2 days) every 2 weeks for 4 cycles and ezabenlimab (240 mg given intravenously) every 3 weeks for 3 cycles. In the absence of disease progression at 2 months, two additional cycles of mDCF and one additional cycle of ezabenlimab will be administered. Patients with radiological objective response, pathological complete/near-complete response and biological complete response will then receive an involved-node radiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and concurrent chemotherapy, followed by ezabenlimab alone for seven cycles. All other patients will receive standard chemoradiotherapy. The primary endpoint is the clinical complete response rate 10 months after the first cycle of mDCF plus ezabenlimab. Major secondary endpoints are major pathological response and biological complete response after induction treatment. An extensive ancillary biomarker study in tumor tissue and peripheral blood will also be conducted. Discussion: The addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy is an area of active interest in metastatic anal cancer. This pivotal study will evaluate this combination in the locally advanced setting. Ancillary biomarker studies will contribute to the understanding of predictors of response or resistance to treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04719988, identifier NCT04719988.

Trajectories of body weight change and survival among patients with mCRC treated with systemic therapy: Pooled analysis from the ARCAD database.

BACKGROUND: Higher body mass index is associated with a higher incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) but also with improved survival in metastatic CRC (mCRC). Whether weight change after mCRC diagnosis is associated with survival remains largely unknown. METHODS: We analysed individual patient data for previously untreated patients enrolled in five phase 3 randomised trials conducted between 1998 and 2006. Weight measurements were prospectively collected at baseline and up to 59.4 months after diagnosis. We used stratified multivariable Cox models to assess the prognostic associations of weight loss with overall and progression-free survival, adjusting for other factors. The primary end-point was a difference in overall survival (OS) between populations with weight loss and stable or increasing weight. FINDINGS: Data were available for 3504 patients. The median weight change at 3 months was -0.54% (IQR -3.9 … +1.5%). We identified a linear trend of increasing risk of death associated with progressive weight loss. Unstratified median OS was 20.5, 18.0, and 11.9 months (p < 0.001) for stable weight or gain, <5% weight loss, and ≥5% weight loss at 3 months, respectively. Weight loss was associated with a higher risk of death (<5% loss: aHR 1.18 [1.06-1.30], p < 0.002; ≥5% loss: aHR 1.87 [1.67-2.1], p < 0.001) as compared to stable or increasing weight at 3 months post-baseline (reference), while adjusting for age, sex, performance, and a number of metastatic sites. INTERPRETATION: Patients losing weight during systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer have significantly shorter OS. The degree of weight loss is proportional to the observed increased risk of death and remains evident among underweight, normal weight, and obese individuals. On-treatment weight change could be used as an intermediate end-point. FUNDING: The creation and management of the database containing the individual patient data from the original randomised trials is supported by the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive Foundation.

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Outcomes by Age Among ARCAD First- and Second-Line Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the time to progression (TTP) and survival outcomes of second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer among adults aged 70 years and older compared with younger adults following progression on first-line clinical trials. METHODS: Associations between clinical and disease characteristics, time to initial progression, and rate of receipt of second-line therapy were evaluated. TTP and overall survival (OS) were compared between older and younger adults in first- and second-line trials by Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, number of metastatic sites and presence of metastasis in the lung, liver, or peritoneum. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Older adults comprised 16.4% of patients on first-line trials (870 total older adults aged >70 years; 4419 total younger adults aged ≤70 years, on first-line trials). Older adults and those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status >0 were less likely to receive second-line therapy than younger adults. Odds of receiving second-line therapy decreased by 11% for each additional decade of life in multivariable analysis (odds ratio = 1.11, 95% confidence interval = 1.02 to 1.21, P = .01). Older and younger adults enrolled in second-line trials experienced similar median TTP and median OS (median TTP = 5.1 vs 5.2 months, respectively; median OS = 11.6 vs 12.4 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults were less likely to receive second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, though we did not observe a statistical difference in survival outcomes vs younger adults following second-line therapy. Further study should examine factors affecting decisions to treat older adults with second-line therapy. Inclusion of geriatric assessment may provide better criteria regarding the risks and benefits of second-line therapy.

Impact of trough concentrations of regorafenib and its major metabolites M-2 and M-5 on overall survival of chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients: Results from a multicentre GERCOR TEXCAN phase II study.

PURPOSE: This prospective pharmacokinetic (PK) ancillary study of the TEXCAN phase II GERCOR trial of patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer and treated with regorafenib (REGO) investigated correlations between overall survival (OS) and concentrations (C) of REGO and its active metabolites, M-2 and M-5. METHODS: 55 patients received REGO 160 mg/day for 21 days of a 28-day cycle (NCT02699073). REGO, M-2, M-5 were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assay on day 15 of cycle 1 (C1) and 2 (C2). We studied the association between OS and Cmin of REGO, M-2 and M-5 at C1 and their accumulations between C1 and C2. RESULTS: Medians of C2/C1 M-2 and M-5 ratios were 0.82 (interquartile range 0.50-1.78) and 0.75 (interquartile range 0.41-1.93), respectively. Patients with C2/C1 M-2 ratio ≥ median had improved survival compared to those < median (12.6 versus 4.0 months, P = 0.023), corresponding to a 66% mortality risk reduction in multivariate analysis. The C2/C1 M-2 ratio correlated with C1 REGO+M-2+M-5 (Csum; P = 0.006). Restricted cubic spline analysis showed an increased OS benefit as the C2/C1 M-2 ratio raises and when C1 Csum ranged between 2.5 and 5.5 mg/L. Patients within the Csum range had a reduced incidence of serious adverse events and improved OS. CONCLUSIONS: We identified PK parameters associated with a survival benefit in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated by REGO. OS and safety were favourable when C1 REGO+M-2+M-5 Csum ranged between 2.5 and 5.5 mg/L. These results pave the way for individual REGO dose modification strategies based on PK monitoring. CLINICAL TRIAL REFERENCE: NCT02699073.

Efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer ≥ 70 years.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) affects many older adults. We investigated the efficacy and safety of adding anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents to doublet chemotherapy (DC) in older patients. METHODS: Patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic CRC (mCRC) receiving first-line DC + anti-EGFR (n = 1191) or DC alone (n = 729) from seven trials in the Aide de Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database were included. The prognostic and predictive effects of age were investigated. Progression-free and overall survival (OS) were evaluated between age groups (≥70 vs <70) for DC + anti-EGFR. In addition, outcomes were compared between DC+/-anti-EGFR within age groups in three trials with a DC alone arm. Subsequently, the same analysis was conducted for left-sided tumours. Adverse events grade ≥3 (G3+) were compared between age groups. RESULTS: Older (vs younger) patients receiving DC + anti-EGFR had similar progression-free survival (PFS) (8.7 vs 10.3 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.20 [0.96-1.49];p = 0.107) but inferior OS (21.3 vs 26.3; HR = 1.36 [1.08-1.72];p = 0.011). DC + anti-EGFR (vs DC alone) improved OS (23.9 vs 20.3; HR = 0.82 [0.70-0.95];p = 0.008) and PFS (11.2 vs 8.9; HR = 0.70 [0.60-0.82];p < 0.001) in younger but not older patients: OS (24.7 vs 17.6; HR [95% confidence interval {CI}] = 0.77 [0.58-1.04];p = 0.092) and PFS (9.1 vs 8.7; HR [95% CI] = 0.85[0.63-1.15];p = 0.287). In left-sided 'only' tumours, the following outcomes for older (vs younger) patients were observed. For DC + anti-EGFR, PFS 9 versus 11.2 months; HR1.10 (95% CI 0.83-1.46); p = 0.52, OS 25.6 vs 30.3 HR 1.32 (95% CI 0.97-1.79), p = 0.086. For DC + anti-EGFR (vs DC alone), PFS and OS for younger patients were 11.9 vs 9.2 months HR 0.60 (95% CI 0.47-0.78) p < 0.001 and 24.1 versus 23.3 months HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.67-1.04), respectively. For older patients, PFS and OS were 13.1 versus 8.5 months, HR 0.51 (95% CI, 0.28-0.93), P = 0.027 and 26.3 versus 16.5 months HR 0.49 (95% CI, 0.28-0.85), respectively. There was no significant difference in toxicity among different age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Older (vs younger) patients with mCRC RAS WT patients had comparable toxicity and efficacy with the addition of anti-EGFR agents to chemotherapy.

Clinical Trial Endpoints in Metastatic Cancer: Using Individual Participant Data to Inform Future Trials Methodology.

Meta-analysis based on individual participant data (IPD) is a powerful methodology for synthesizing evidence by combining information drawn from multiple trials. Hitherto, its principal application has been in questions of clinical management, but an increasingly important use is in clarifying trials methodology, for instance in the selection of endpoints, as discussed in this review. In oncology, the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive (ARCAD) Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Database is a leader in the use of IPD-based meta-analysis in methodological research. The ARCAD database contains IPD from more than 38 000 patients enrolled in 46 studies and continues to collect phase III trial data. Here, we review the principal findings of the ARCAD project in respect of endpoint selection and examine their implications for cancer trials. Analysis of the database has confirmed that progression-free survival (PFS) is no longer a valid surrogate endpoint predictive of overall survival in the first-line treatment of colorectal cancer. Nonetheless, PFS remains an endpoint of choice for most first-line trials in metastatic colorectal cancer and other solid tumors. Only substantial PFS effects are likely to translate into clinically meaningful benefits, and accordingly, we advocate an oncology research model designed to identify highly effective treatments in carefully defined patient groups. We also review the use of the ARCAD database in assessing clinical response including novel response metrics and prognostic markers. These studies demonstrate the value of IPD as a tool for methodological studies and provide a reference point for the expansion of this approach within clinical cancer research.

Impact of geography on prognostic outcomes of 21,509 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer enrolled in clinical trials: an ARCAD database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking international cancer survival differences is necessary to evaluate and improve healthcare systems. Our aim was to assess the potential regional differences in outcomes among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) participating in international randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Countries were grouped into 11 regions according to the World Health Organization and the EUROCARE model. Meta-analyses based on individual patient data were used to synthesize data across studies and regions and to conduct comparisons for outcomes in a two-stage random-effects model after adjusting for age, sex, performance status, and time period. We used mCRC patients enrolled in the first-line RCTs from the ARCAD database, which provided enrolling country information. There were 21,509 patients in 27 RCTs included across the 11 regions. RESULTS: Main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Compared with other regions, patients from the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland were proportionaly over-represented, older, with higher performance status, more frequently male, and more commonly not treated with biological therapies. Cohorts from central Europe and the United States (USA) had significantly longer OS compared with those from UK and Ireland (p = 0.0034 and p < 0.001, respectively), with median difference of 3-4 months. The survival deficits in the UK and Ireland cohorts were, at most, 15% at 1 year. No evidence of a regional disparity was observed for PFS. Among those treated without biological therapies, patients from the UK and Ireland had shorter OS than central Europe patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Significant international disparities in the OS of cohorts of mCRC patients enrolled in RCTs were found. Survival of mCRC patients included in RCTs was consistently lower in the UK and Ireland regions than in central Europe, southern Europe, and the USA, potentially attributed to greater overall population representation, delayed diagnosis, and reduced availability of therapies.

Prognostic and Predictive Impact of Primary Tumor Sidedness for Previously Untreated Advanced Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned subgroup analyses from several studies have suggested primary tumor sidedness (PTS) as a potential prognostic and predictive parameter in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to investigate the impact of PTS on outcomes of mCRC patients. METHODS: PTS data of 9277 mCRC patients from 12 first-line randomized trials in the ARCAD database were pooled. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusting for age, sex, performance status, prior radiation/chemotherapy, and stratified by treatment arm. Predictive value was tested by interaction term between PTS and treatment (cetuximab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone). All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Compared with right-sided metastatic colorectal cancer patients (n = 2421, 26.1%), left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer patients (n = 6856, 73.9%) had better OS (median = 21.6 vs 15.9 months; adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.67 to 0.76; P < .001) and PFS (median = 8.6 vs 7.5 months; HRadj = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.84; P < .001). Interaction between PTS and KRAS mutation was statistically significant (Pinteraction < .001); left-sidedness was associated with better prognosis among KRAS wild-type (WT) (OS HRadj = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.66; PFS HRadj =0.68, 95% CI = 0.61 to 0.75) but not among KRAS mutated tumors. Among KRAS-WT tumors, survival benefit from anti-EGFR was confirmed for left-sidedness (OS HRadj = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.97; P = .01; PFS HRadj = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.88; P < .001) but not for right-sidedness. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic value of PTS is restricted to the KRAS-WT population. PTS is predictive of anti-EGFR efficacy, with a statistically significant improvement of survival for left-sidedness mCRC patients. These results suggest treatment choice in mCRC should be based on both PTS and KRAS status.

Treatment breaks in first line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) may improve quality of life without compromising overall survival (OS). We aimed to use individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) from multiple randomised controlled trials evaluating intermittent strategies to inform clinical practice. We also aimed to validate whether thrombocytosis as a predictive biomarker identified patients with significantly reduced OS receiving a complete treatment break. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An IPDMA of intermittent strategy impact on survival was undertaken, including all relevant trials in which data were available. Intermittent strategies were classified into two groups: a planned stopping of all therapy ("treatment break strategy"; 6 trials; 2,907 patients) or to the same treatment omitting oxaliplatin ("maintenance strategy"; 3 trials; 1,271 patients). The primary analysis sample was of patients successfully completing induction therapy. Additionally, a pre-planned analysis of the predictive value of thrombocytosis on survival under a continuous versus an intermittent strategy was undertaken. RESULTS: All trials had comparable inclusion criteria. The overall IPDMA of intermittent therapy versus continuous therapy demonstrated no detriment in OS (HR = 1.03 [95% CI 0.93-1.14]), whether from complete break (HR 1.04 [95% CI 0.87-1.26]) or maintenance strategies (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.87-1.13]). Thrombocytosis was confirmed as a marker of poor prognosis in aCRC, but did not predict for OS detriment from treatment break strategies (interaction HR = 0.97 [95% CI 0.66-1.40] compared to continuous therapy). CONCLUSION: The highest levels of evidence from this IPDMA indicate no detriment in survival for patients receiving an intermittent therapy strategy, either for maintenance or complete break strategies. Although, thrombocytosis is confirmed as a marker of poor prognosis, it is not predictive of poor outcome for patients treated with intermittent therapy. An intermittent chemotherapy strategy can therefore be applied irrespective of baseline platelet count and does not result in inferior OS compared to continuous chemotherapy.