Efficacy of immunotherapy in mismatch repair-deficient advanced colorectal cancer in routine clinical practice. An AGEO study.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy demonstrated remarkable efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) with mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd)/microsatellite instability (MSI). However, data regarding efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in the routine clinical practice are scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter study aiming to evaluate efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in routine clinical practice and to identify predictive markers for long-term benefit. Long-term benefit was defined as progression-free survival (PFS) exceeding 24 months. All patients who received immunotherapy for an MMRd/MSI mCRC were included. Patients who received immunotherapy in combination with another known effective therapeutic class agent (chemotherapy or tailored therapy) were excluded. RESULTS: Overall, 284 patients across 19 tertiary cancer centers were included. After a median follow-up of 26.8 months, the median overall survival (mOS) was 65.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 53.8 months-not reached (NR)] and the median PFS (mPFS) was 37.9 months (95% CI 30.9 months-NR). There was no difference in terms of efficacy or toxicity between patients treated in the real-world or as part of a clinical trial. Overall, 46.6% of patients had long-term benefit. Independent markers associated with long-term benefit were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (ECOG-PS) 0 (P = 0.025) and absence of peritoneal metastases (P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in patients with advanced MMRd/MSI CRC in the routine clinical practice. ECOG-PS score and absence of peritoneal metastases provide simple markers that could help identify patients who benefit the most from this treatment.

Real-world first-line treatment of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: the CAPSTAN CRC study.

BACKGROUND: BRAFV600E mutations occur in 8%-12% of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) cases and are associated with poor survival. European guidelines recommend combination (doublet or triplet) chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in first line. However, an unmet need remains for more effective treatments for these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CAPSTAN CRC is a European, retrospective, multicenter, observational study evaluating real-world treatment practices for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC treated between 1 January 2016 and 31 January 2020. The primary objective was to describe first-line treatment patterns. Secondary objectives included describing baseline demographics, mutational testing procedures, treatment effectiveness, and safety. RESULTS: In total, 255 patients (median age 66.0 years; 58.4% female) with BRAFV600E-mutant unresectable mCRC from seven countries were included. Most had right-sided tumors (52.5%) and presented with synchronous disease at diagnosis (66.4%). Chemotherapy plus targeted therapy (68.7%) was preferred at first line over chemotherapy alone (31.3%). The main first-line treatments were FOLFOX plus bevacizumab (27.1%) and FOLFOXIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan) with/without bevacizumab (27.1%/19.2%). Median duration of first-line treatment was 4.9 months. Overall, 52.5% received second-line treatment. Across all first-line regimens, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 6.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.3-6.7] months and 12.9 (95% CI 11.6-14.1) months, respectively. Triplet plus targeted therapy was associated with more adverse events (75.0%) compared with triplet chemotherapy alone (50.0%) and doublet chemotherapy alone (36.1%). Multivariate analysis identified low body mass index and presence of three or more metastatic sites as significant prognostic factors for PFS. CONCLUSIONS: This study is, to date, the largest real-world analysis of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC, providing valuable insights into routine first-line treatment practices for these patients. The data highlight the intrinsic aggressiveness of this disease subgroup, confirming results from previous real-world studies and clinical trials, and stressing the urgent need for more effective treatment options in this setting.

Pravastatin may improve neurological outcome following low-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Statins may improve outcome in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) but randomized controlled trials, including all patients with aSAH whatever their clinical severity, were negative. We studied whether pravastatin improved neurologic outcome in patients with early good neurological status, whose prognosis is related to secondary lesions as delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI). We conducted a single-center study of cases and historical controls in a neurocritical care unit. We included consecutive patients with aSAH from 2011 to 2016 with early good neurological status defined by a WFNS score ≤ 3 on the third day. Patients treated before 2014 with oral pravastatin (40 mg/day for 14 days) as a standard of care were matched using propensity score to patients treated after 2014 without pravastatin. Good neurologic outcome was defined by a Glasgow Outcome Scale ≥ 4 at neurocritical care unit discharge. We included 270 patients (135 patients with pravastatin), mostly treated with coiling (94.1%). Demographic, initial and subacute features were the same in the 2 groups. More patients experienced good outcome in the pravastatin group than in the control group (94.8% vs 74.2%; OR 7.16 95% CI [3.07 - 16.72], p < 0.001). There was no difference in the occurrence of DCI in the 2 groups. In our study, outcome on neurocritical care discharge was better in patients with early good neurological status treated with pravastatin. Another randomized controlled trial should be conducted on this subtype of population.

Sequential first-line treatment with nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: GABRINOX phase Ib-II controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (AG) and FOLFIRINOX (FFX) are promising drugs in metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). This study evaluated a new first-line sequential treatment (AG followed by FFX) in MPC that might overcome resistance to primary therapy and delay tumor progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed MPC were included in a multicentric trial receiving AG (day 1, 8 and 15) followed by FFX (day 29 and 43). In phase Ib, three dose-levels were tested for maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose. In phase II, the main outcome was the objective response rate (ORR) and secondarily safety, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In phase Ib, we included 33 patients (31 assessable) of median age 61.0 years (range 42-75 years) and represented by 54.8% males. Five dose-limiting toxicities were reported without any death. The main grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia with spontaneous resolution (35.5%/32.3%), venous thromboembolism (grade 3: 22.6%) and thrombopenia (grade 3: 29.0%), while the MTD was not reached. In phase II, we included 58 patients of median age 60 years (range 34-72 years), 50% males and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group stage score 0 and 1 of 37.9% and 62.1%, respectively. They received a median of 4 (1-9) cycles in 8.5 months (0.5-19.8 months). The ORR was 64.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 51.1% to 77.1%], and neurotoxicity was remarkably low. The main grade 3-4 toxicities were venous thromboembolism, thrombopenia, neutropenia/febrile neutropenia, nausea, diarrhea, weight loss and asthenia without any death. Tumor response was complete in 3.5% and partial in 61.4%, while disease was stable in 19.3% and progressive in 15.8% of patients. The median PFS was 10.5 months (95% CI 6.0-12.5 months) and median OS was 15.1 months (95% CI 10.6-20.1 months). CONCLUSION: Sequential AG and FFX showed acceptable toxicity as first-line treatment with no limiting neurotoxicity, while high response rate and survival justify randomized trials.

[Liver stereotactic body radiotherapy: Clinical features and technical consequences, results. Which treatment machine in which situation?] / Radiothérapie stéréotaxique hépatique : particularités cliniques et implications techniques, résultats. Quelle machine pour quelle situation ?

Liver stereotactic body radiotherapy is a developing technique for the treatment of primary tumours and metastases. Its implementation is complex because of the particularities of the treated organ and the comorbidities of the patients. However, this technique is a treatment opportunity for patients otherwise in therapeutic impasse. The scientific evidence of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy has been considered by the French health authority as insufficient for its widespread use outside specialized and experienced centers, despite a growing and important number of retrospective and prospective studies, but few comparative data. This article focuses on the specific features of stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver treatments and the results of published studies of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy performed with classic linear accelerators and dedicated radiosurgery units.

Utility of a molecular prescreening program in advanced colorectal cancer for enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Incorporation of multiple enrichment biomarkers into prospective clinical trials is an active area of investigation, but the factors that determine clinical trial enrollment following a molecular prescreening program have not been assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with 5-fluorouracil-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer at the MD Anderson Cancer Center were offered screening in the Assessment of Targeted Therapies Against Colorectal Cancer (ATTACC) program to identify eligibility for companion phase I or II clinical trials with a therapy targeted to an aberration detected in the patient, based on testing by immunohistochemistry, targeted gene sequencing panels, and CpG island methylation phenotype assays. RESULTS: Between August 2010 and December 2013, 484 patients were enrolled, 458 (95%) had a biomarker result, and 157 (32%) were enrolled on a clinical trial (92 on biomarker-selected and 65 on nonbiomarker selected). Of the 458 patients with a biomarker result, enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials was ninefold higher for predefined ATTACC-companion clinical trials as opposed to nonpredefined biomarker-selected clinical trials, 17.9% versus 2%, P < 0.001. Factors that correlated positively with trial enrollment in multivariate analysis were higher performance status, older age, lack of standard of care therapy, established patient at MD Anderson, and the presence of an eligible biomarker for an ATTACC-companion study. Early molecular screening did result in a higher rate of patients with remaining standard of care therapy enrolling on ATTACC-companion clinical trials, 45.1%, in contrast to nonpredefined clinical trials, 22.7%; odds ratio 3.1, P = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: Though early molecular prescreening for predefined clinical trials resulted in an increase rate of trial enrollment of nonrefractory patients, the majority of patients enrolled on clinical trials were refractory to standard of care therapy. Within molecular prescreening programs, tailoring screening for preidentified and open clinical trials, temporally linking screening to treatment and optimizing both patient and physician engagement are efforts likely to improve enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: The study NCT number is NCT01196130.

Characterizing the patterns of clonal selection in circulating tumor DNA from patients with colorectal cancer refractory to anti-EGFR treatment.

INTRODUCTION: KRAS and EGFR ectodomain-acquired mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have been correlated with acquired resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). We investigated the frequency, co-occurrence, and distribution of acquired KRAS and EGFR mutations in patients with mCRC refractory to anti-EGFR mAbs using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-two post-treatment plasma and 20 matching pretreatment archival tissue samples from KRAS (wt) mCRC patients refractory to anti-EGFR mAbs were evaluated by high-sensitivity emulsion polymerase chain reaction for KRAS codon 12, 13, 61, and 146 and EGFR 492 mutations. RESULTS: Plasma analyses showed newly detectable EGFR and KRAS mutations in 5/62 [8%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-0.18] and 27/62 (44%; 95% CI 0.3-0.56) samples, respectively. KRAS codon 61 and 146 mutations were predominant (33% and 11%, respectively), and multiple EGFR and/or KRAS mutations were detected in 11/27 (41%) cases. The percentage of mutant allele reads was inversely correlated with time since last treatment with EGFR mAbs (P = 0.038). In the matching archival tissue, these mutations were detectable as low-allele-frequency clones in 35% of patients with plasma mutations after treatment with anti-EGFR mAbs and correlated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS) compared with the cases with no new mutations (3.0 versus 8.0 months, P = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: Newly detected KRAS and/or EGFR mutations in plasma ctDNA from patients refractory to anti-EGFR treatment appear to derive from rare, pre-existing clones in the primary tumors. These rare clones were associated with shorter PFS in patients receiving anti-EGFR treatment. Multiple simultaneous mutations in KRAS and EGFR in the ctDNA and the decline in allele frequency after discontinuation of anti-EGFR therapy in a subset of patients suggest that several resistance mechanisms can co-exist and that relative clonal burdens may change over time. Monitoring treatment-induced genetic alterations by sequencing ctDNA could identify biomarkers for treatment screening in anti-EGFR-refractory patients.

Sorafenib and irinotecan (NEXIRI) as second- or later-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and KRAS-mutated tumours: a multicentre Phase I/II trial.

BACKGROUND: This trial evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of combined sorafenib and irinotecan (NEXIRI) as second- or later-line treatment of patients with KRAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), who had progressed after irinotecan-based chemotherapy. METHODS: In Phase I, in a 3+3 dose escalation schedule, patients received irinotecan (125, 150 or 180 mg m(-2) every 2 weeks), in combination with 400 mg sorafenib b.d. The primary end point was the maximum-tolerated dose of irinotecan. In Phase II, the primary end point was disease control rate (DCR). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: Phase I included 10 patients (median age 63 (49-73)); no dose-limiting toxicity was seen. In Phase II, 54 patients (median age 60 (43-80) years) received irinotecan 180 mg m(-)(2) every 2 weeks with sorafenib 400 mg b.d. Nine patients (17%) remained on full-dose sorafenib. The DCR was 64.9% (95% CI, 51-77). Median PFS and OS were 3.7 (95% CI, 3.2-4.7) and 8.0 (95% CI, 4.8-9.7) months, respectively. Toxicities included Grade 3 diarrhoea (37%), neutropenia (18%), hand-foot syndrome (13%) and Grade 4 neutropenia (17%). CONCLUSION: The NEXIRI regimen showed promising activity as second- or later-line treatment in this heavily pretreated mCRC population (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00989469).

Feasibility of biweekly combination chemotherapy with capecitabine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin in patients with metastatic solid tumors: results of a two-step phase I trial: XELIRI and XELIRINOX.

BACKGROUND: Biweekly schedule of capecitabine combined with irinotecan (XELIRI), consecutively with irinotecan and oxaliplatin (XELIRINOX), was evaluated in patients with metastatic cancer from any solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this two-step phase I trial, seventeen and eleven patients were enrolled in the XELIRI and XELIRINOX stages, respectively. RESULTS: In XELIRI, a total of 136 chemotherapy cycles were administered with a median number of 8 cycles per patient (2-16). Main dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were grade 3-4 neutropenia, with one toxicity-related death. Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for capecitabine combined with 180 mg/m(2) of irinotecan was 3,500 mg/m(2)/day. In XELIRINOX, capecitabine starting dose was 2,500 mg/m(2)/day. Fifty-eight chemotherapy cycles were administered with a median of 4 cycles per patient (1-16). DLT included 3 grade 4 neutropenia, associated with 1 grade 3 diarrhea, and 1 grade 4 pneumopathy leading to patient death. MTD for capecitabine with 180 mg/m(2) of irinotecan and 85 mg/m(2) of oxaliplatin was 3,000 mg/m(2)/day. The recommended doses for capecitabine were 3,000 and 2,500 mg/m(2)/day D1-D7 in combination with 180 mg/m(2) of irinotecan in XELIRI, plus 85 mg/m(2) of oxaliplatin in XELIRINOX (D1 = D14), respectively. CONCLUSION: XELIRI and XELIRINOX regimens are feasible and warrant further investigation in combination with targeted therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients.