Chemotherapy after nivolumab for advanced gastric cancer (REVIVE): a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab therapy is a standard-of-care treatment for heavily pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Previous studies have reported improvement in the objective response rate to chemotherapy after nivolumab therapy for other types of cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy after nivolumab therapy in AGC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, observational study in pretreated patients with nivolumab-refractory or -intolerant AGC. Patients received irinotecan, oxaliplatin-containing regimens, or trifluridine/tipiracil. The primary endpoint was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients were included (median age: 69 years; male: 70%; female: 30%). Median overall survival and progression-free survival were 7.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.7-9.7 months] and 2.9 months (95% CI: 2.2-3.5 months), respectively. Objective response and disease control rates were 16.8% (95% CI: 11.6% to 23.6%) and 18.9% (95% CI: 38.9% to 54.6%), respectively. A prognostic index using alkaline phosphatase and the Glasgow Prognostic Score was generated to classify patients into three risk groups (good, moderate, and poor). The hazard ratios of the moderate and poor groups to the good group were 1.88 (95% CI: 1.22-2.92) and 3.29 (95% CI: 1.92-5.63), respectively. At the initiation of chemotherapy, 42 patients had experienced immune-related adverse events due to prior nivolumab therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (7.5%), anemia (8.0%), and anorexia (7.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The administration of cytotoxic chemotherapy after nivolumab therapy may give rise to a synergistic antitumor effect in AGC. Further investigation is warranted to confirm these findings.

The management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Current expert opinion and recommendations derived from the 24th ESMO/World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2022.

This article summarises expert discussion on the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which took place during the 24th World Gastrointestinal Cancer Congress (WGICC) in Barcelona, July 2022. A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory to ensure an optimal diagnosis and staging of HCC, planning of curative and therapeutic options, including surgical, embolisation, ablative strategies, or systemic therapy. Furthermore, in many patients with HCC, underlying liver cirrhosis represents a challenge and influences the therapeutic options.

A phase II study to explore biomarkers for the use of mFOLFOX6/XELOX plus bevacizumab as a first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG7612GTR).

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the ability of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor-A short isoforms (pVEGF-Asi) to predict bevacizumab (BV) efficacy and to explore other circulating biomarkers in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with modified FOLFOX6/XELOX plus BV (mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pre-treatment plasma samples were collected from 100 mCRC patients receiving first-line chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV. The plasma levels of 11 angiogenesis-associated molecules, including pVEGF-Asi and 22 cancer-associated gene mutations in circulating tumor DNA, were analyzed. For the primary endpoint, we assumed that the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model was <1.15, comparing patients with a high versus those with a low pVEGF-Asi level divided according to the median pVEGF-Asi value. RESULTS: The median value of pVEGF-Asi was 37 (range 6.5-262) pg/ml. The HR for PFS between the high and low pVEGF-Asi patient groups was 1.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-2.1; log rank, P = 0.25], which was larger than the predefined threshold of 1.15. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that PFS was significantly associated with plasma intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (pICAM-1) (≥190.0 versus <190.0 ng/ml; HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.3-3.5), RAS (mutant versus wild; HR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5-4.3), and FBXW7 (mutant versus wild; HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.2-6.8), whereas overall survival was significantly associated with pICAM-1 (HR 2.0; 95% CI 1.1-3.7) and RAS (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.5-4.6). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of BV was unable to compensate for the poor PFS associated with a high pVEGF-Asi level, suggesting that pVEGF-Asi is unlikely to be a good predictive biomarker of the efficacy of mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV therapy. The clinical significance of circulating ICAM-1, mutant RAS, and mutant FBXW7 levels should be studied further.

Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma enrolled in the randomized KEYNOTE-181 trial in Asia.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized phase III KEYNOTE-181 study, pembrolizumab prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with chemotherapy as second-line therapy in patients with advanced esophageal cancer and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥10. We report a post hoc subgroup analysis of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) enrolled in KEYNOTE-181 in Asia, including patients from the KEYNOTE-181 China extension study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred and forty Asian patients with advanced/metastatic ESCC were enrolled in KEYNOTE-181, including the China cohort. Patients were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for ≤2 years or investigator's choice of paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan. OS, progression-free survival, response, and safety were analyzed without formal comparisons. OS was evaluated based on PD-L1 CPS expression level. RESULTS: In Asian patients with ESCC, median OS was 10.0 months with pembrolizumab and 6.5 months with chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR), 0.63; 95% CI 0.50-0.80; nominal P < 0.0001]. Median progression-free survival was 2.3 months with pembrolizumab and 3.1 months with chemotherapy (HR, 0.79; 95% CI 0.63-0.99; nominal P = 0.020). Objective response rate was 17.1% with pembrolizumab and 7.1% with chemotherapy; median duration of response was 10.5 months and 7.7 months, respectively. In patients with PD-L1 CPS <1 tumors (pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy), the HR was 0.99 (95% CI 0.56-1.72); the HR (95% CI) for death was better for patients with PD-L1 CPS cut-offs >1 [CPS ≥1, 0.57 (0.44-0.75); CPS ≥5, 0.56 (0.41-0.76); CPS ≥10, 0.53 (0.37-0.75)]. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 71.8% of patients in the pembrolizumab group and 89.8% in the chemotherapy group; grade 3-5 events were reported in 20.0% and 44.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrated promising efficacy in Asian patients with ESCC, with fewer treatment-related adverse events than chemotherapy. PD-L1 CPS ≥1 is an appropriate cut-off and a predictive marker of pembrolizumab efficacy in Asian patients with ESCC.

Molecular determinants of clinical outcomes with pembrolizumab versus paclitaxel in a randomized, open-label, phase III trial in patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III KEYNOTE-061 trial (NCT02370498), pembrolizumab did not significantly improve overall survival versus paclitaxel as second-line therapy for gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 tumors. The association of tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB) status and clinical outcomes was determined, including the relationship with CPS and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In patients with whole exome sequencing (WES) data [420/592 (71%); pembrolizumab, 218; paclitaxel, 202], the association of tTMB with objective response rate (ORR; logistic regression), progression-free survival (PFS; Cox proportional hazards regression), and overall survival (OS; Cox proportional hazards regression) were measured using one-sided (pembrolizumab) and two-sided [paclitaxel] P values. tTMB was also evaluated using FoundationOne®CDx [205/592 (35%)]. Prespecified equivalent cut-offs of 175 mut/exome for WES and 10 mut/Mb for FoundationOne®CDx were used. RESULTS: WES-tTMB was significantly associated with ORR, PFS, and OS in pembrolizumab-treated (all P < 0.001) but not paclitaxel-treated patients (all P > 0.6) in univariate analysis. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for WES-tTMB and response was 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-0.81] for pembrolizumab and 0.51 (95% CI 0.39-0.63) for paclitaxel in univariate analysis. There was low correlation between WES-tTMB and CPS in both treatment groups (r ≤ 0.16). WES-tTMB remained significantly associated with all clinical endpoints with pembrolizumab after adjusting for CPS and with PFS and OS after excluding known MSI-H tumors (n = 26). FoundationOne®CDx-tTMB demonstrated a positive association with ORR, PFS, and OS in pembrolizumab-treated patients (all P ≤ 0.003) but not PFS or OS in paclitaxel-treated patients (P > 0.1). CONCLUSION: This exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-061 is the first to demonstrate a strong association between tTMB and efficacy with pembrolizumab but not paclitaxel in patients with gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma in a randomized setting. Data further suggest tTMB is a significant and independent predictor beyond PD-L1 status.

Impact of tumor growth rate during preceding treatment on tumor response to nivolumab or irinotecan in advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab (NIVO) and irinotecan (IRI) are standard treatments for refractory advanced gastric cancer (AGC); however, it is unclear which drug should be administered first or in which cases. The tumor growth rate (TGR) during preceding treatment is reported to be associated with tumor response in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil, suggesting that TGR may be useful for drug selection. Therefore, we evaluated the association between TGR during preceding treatment and the tumor response to NIVO or IRI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated consecutive AGC patients treated with NIVO or IRI and divided them into slow-growing (Slow) and rapid-growing (Rapid) groups according to TGR and the presence or absence of new lesions (NL+/NL-, respectively) during preceding treatment (Slow group: NL- with low TGR <0.30%/day; Rapid group: NL+ or high TGR ≥0.30%/day). RESULTS: A total of 117 patients (Rapid/Slow groups, 72/45; NIVO/IRI groups, 32/85) were eligible. All baseline characteristics except peritoneal metastases were similar between patients treated with NIVO and IRI in the Rapid and Slow groups. The response rate was significantly higher in patients treated with NIVO compared with IRI [31%/3%; odds ratio (OR), 13.8; P = 0.01; adjusted OR, 52; P = 0.002] in the Slow group, but there was no difference between patients treated with NIVO and IRI (5%/8%; OR, 0.68; P = 0.73; adjusted OR, 0.94; P = 0.96) in the Rapid group. Disease control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were consistent with these results. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that NIVO treatment is a more favorable option for patients with slow-growing tumors, and NIVO and IRI are similarly recommended for patients with rapid-growing tumors in refractory AGC. TGR and NL emergence during preceding treatment may be helpful for drug selection and warrant further investigation.

Biomarker analyses of second-line ramucirumab in patients with advanced gastric cancer from RAINBOW, a global, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The RAINBOW trial showed that second-line ramucirumab with paclitaxel prolongs overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus paclitaxel for treatment of advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer. Plasma samples were collected from patients during the trial and tested to identify predictive and prognostic biomarkers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Circulating factors in plasma samples from mutually exclusive subsets of RAINBOW patients were assayed using: Intertek assays (24 markers, 380 samples, 57% of patients) and Lilly-developed assay (LDA) platform (5 markers, 257 samples, 39% of patients). Time-trend plots were generated for each marker from the Intertek assays. Baseline patient data were dichotomized into low- and high-marker subgroups. Markers were analyzed for predictive effects using interaction models and for prognostic effects using main-effects models. RESULTS: The Intertek and LDA populations were representative of the full trial population. Plasma levels of VEGF-D and PlGF increased from baseline levels during treatment, then declined after treatment discontinued. Angiopoietin-2 exhibited a decrease during treatment, then increased after treatment discontinuation. No clear time trend was evident with the other markers. Analyses of baseline biomarker expression and its relationship with efficacy variables found no biomarker was predictive for efficacy outcomes, including VEGF-D. However, CRP, HGF, ICAM-3, IL-8, SAA, and VCAM-1 were identified as potential prognostic markers with low baseline levels corresponding to longer OS and PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacodynamic and prognostic relationships were found from the exploratory biomarker analyses in RAINBOW; however, no predictive markers for ramucirumab in gastric cancer were identified in this trial.

Neutropenia and survival outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with trifluridine/tipiracil in the RECOURSE and J003 trials.

BACKGROUND: The phase II J003 (N = 169) and phase III RECOURSE (N = 800) trials demonstrated a significant improvement in survival with trifluridine (FTD)/tipiracil (TPI) versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. This post hoc analysis investigated pharmacokinetic data of FTD/TPI exposure and pharmacodynamic markers, such as chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 210 patients from RECOURSE were enrolled in this substudy. A limited sampling approach was used, with three pharmacokinetic samples drawn on day 12 of cycle 1. Patients were categorized as being above or below the median area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) for FTD and TPI. We conducted a post hoc analysis using the entire RECOURSE population to determine the correlations between CIN and clinical outcome. We then carried out a similar analysis on the J003 trial to validate the results. RESULTS: In the RECOURSE subset, patients in the high FTD AUC group had a significantly increased CIN risk. Analyses of the entire population demonstrated that FTD/TPI-treated patients with CIN of any grade in cycles 1 and 2 had significantly longer median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) than patients who did not develop CIN and patients in the placebo group. Patients who required an FTD/TPI treatment delay had increased OS and PFS versus those in the placebo group and those who did not develop CIN. Similar results were obtained in the J003 cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In RECOURSE, patients with higher FTD drug exposure had an increased CIN risk. FTD/TPI-treated patients who developed CIN had improved OS and PFS versus those in the placebo group and those who did not develop CIN. Similar findings were reported in the J003 cohort, thus validating the RECOURSE results. The occurrence of CIN may be a useful predictor of treatment outcomes for FTD/TPI-treated patients. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01607957 (RECOURSE). JAPAN PHARMACEUTICAL INFORMATION CENTER NUMBER: JapicCTI-090880 (J003).

Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis Caused by Cytomegalovirus, Herpes Simplex Virus, and Candida Species in a Kidney Transplant Recipient: A Case Report.

Recipients of organ transplants are immunosuppressed and at high risk of oral infection. Oral diseases are often neglected compared with infections of other organs that typically confer higher morbidity. However, severe local symptoms hinder oral intake, decrease quality of life, and are sometimes lethal. Here we describe a case of a 57-year-old woman who developed recurrent aphthous stomatitis after kidney transplantation; the cause of the infection was complex and included cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex virus, and Candida species. Since misdiagnosis of oral diseases impairs patient quality of life and increases morbidity, clinicians should be aware of possible etiologies of oral infections in renal transplant recipients.

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic oesophageal cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KSMO, MOS, SSO and TOS.

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of oesophageal cancer was published in 2016, and covered the management and treatment of local/locoregional disease, limited disease, locally advanced disease and the management of advanced/metastatic disease. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the JSMO Annual Meeting in 2018. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic oesophageal cancer in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic oesophageal cancer representing the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (CSCO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic gastric cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KSMO, MOS, SSO and TOS.

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of gastric cancer (GC) was published in 2016, and covered the management and treatment of local, locoregional, locally advanced and metastatic disease. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and The Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the JSMO Annual Meeting in 2018. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic GC in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic GC representing the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (CSCO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.

Biomarker analysis beyond angiogenesis: RAS/RAF mutation status, tumour sidedness, and second-line ramucirumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma from RAISE-a global phase III study.

Background: : Second-line treatment with ramucirumab+FOLFIRI improved overall survival (OS) versus placebo+FOLFIRI for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (CRC) [hazard ratio (HR)=0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.98, P = 0.022]. Post hoc analyses of RAISE patient data examined the association of RAS/RAF mutation status and the anatomical location of the primary CRC tumour (left versus right) with efficacy parameters. Patients and methods: Patient tumour tissue was classified as BRAF mutant, KRAS/NRAS (RAS) mutant, or RAS/BRAF wild-type. Left-CRC was defined as the splenic flexure, descending and sigmoid colon, and rectum; right-CRC included transverse, ascending colon, and cecum. Results: RAS/RAF mutation status was available for 85% of patients (912/1072) and primary tumour location was known for 94.4% of patients (1012/1072). A favourable and comparable ramucirumab treatment effect was observed for patients with RAS mutations (OS HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.04) and patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours (OS HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.14). Among the 41 patients with BRAF-mutated tumours, the ramucirumab benefit was more notable (OS HR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.25-1.13), although, as with the other genetic sub-group analyses, differences were not statistically significant. Progression-free survival (PFS) data followed the same trend. Treatment-by-mutation status interaction tests (OS P = 0.523, PFS P = 0.655) indicated that the ramucirumab benefit was not statistically different among the mutation sub-groups, although the small sample size of the BRAF group limited the analysis. Addition of ramucirumab to FOLFIRI improved left-CRC median OS by 2.5 month over placebo (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97); median OS for ramucirumab-treated patients with right-CRC was 1.1 month over placebo (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.26). The treatment-by-sub-group interaction was not statistically significant for tumour sidedness (P = 0.276). Conclusions: In the RAISE study, the addition of ramucirumab to FOLFIRI improved patient outcomes, regardless of RAS/RAF mutation status, and tumour sidedness. Ramucirumab treatment provided a numerically substantial benefit in BRAF-mutated tumours, although the P-values were not statistically significant. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01183780.

Site-specific Chemotherapy Based on Predicted Primary Site by Pathological Profile for Carcinoma of Unknown Primary Site.

AIMS: Although platinum-based combination chemotherapies are commonly used for unfavourable subsets of cancer of unknown primary (CUP), the prognosis remains poor. Several studies have suggested that gene expression profiling or immunohistochemistry was useful for the prediction of primary sites in CUP, and site-specific therapy based on predicted primary sites might improve overall outcomes. In Japan, to identify primary sites, immunohistochemical tests were commonly used for CUP in clinical practice. However, it is unclear whether site-specific therapy based on predicted primary sites by pathological examination contributes survival benefit for unfavourable CUP subsets. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, 122 patients with unfavourable subsets of CUP were retrospectively reviewed. Ninety patients assigned to cohort A after July 2012 had received chemotherapy according to predicted primary sites; 32 patients assigned to cohort B before June 2012 had received platinum-based empiric chemotherapy. RESULTS: In cohort A, 56 patients (62.2%) with predicted primary sites by pathological examination received site-specific therapy; 34 patients (37.8%) with unpredictable primary sites received platinum-based empiric chemotherapy, the same as cohort B. The median overall survival was 20.3 months in patients with predictable primary sites in cohort A and 10.7 months in those of cohort B, with a significant difference between these cohorts (P = 0.03, adjusted hazard ratio = 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.34-0.94). CONCLUSION: Site-specific therapy based on predicted primary sites by pathological examination could improve prognosis in patients with an unfavourable subset of CUP.

Phase II trial of combination treatment with paclitaxel, carboplatin and cetuximab (PCE) as first-line treatment in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (CSPOR-HN02).

Background: The standard of care for first-line treatment of recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) is combination treatment with platinum, 5-FU and cetuximab (PFE). However, this regimen requires hospitalization to ensure proper hydration and continuous infusion of 5-FU, and causes severe nausea and anorexia. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel, carboplatin and cetuximab (PCE) as first-line treatment in patients with R/M SCCHN. Patients and methods: Eligibility criteria included recurrent and/or metastatic, histologically proven SCC of the oropharynx, oral cavity, hypopharynx or larynx; PS 0-1; adequate organ function; no suitable local therapy for R/M SCCHN; and no prior systemic chemotherapy for R/M SCCHN. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 8; carboplatin area under the blood concentration-time curve 2.5 on days 1, 8, repeated every 3 weeks for up to 6 cycles; and cetuximab at an initial dose of 400 mg/m2, followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly until disease progression or unacceptable toxicities. Primary end point was overall response rate. Secondary end points were safety, treatment completion rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and clinical benefit rate. Planned sample size was 45 patients. Results: Forty-seven subjects were accrued from July 2013 to October 2014. Of 45 evaluable, 40 were male; median age was 63 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status was 0/1 in 23/22 cases; site was the hypopharynx/oropharynx/oral cavity/larynx in 17/11/10/7 cases; and 36/9 cases were smokers/nonsmokers, respectively. Overall response rate, the primary end point, was 40%. Median overall survival was 14.7 months and progression-free survival was 5.2 months. Grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (68%), skin reaction (15%), fatigue (9%) and febrile neutropenia (9%). A potentially treatment-related death occurred in one patient with intestinal pneumonia. Conclusions: The PCE regimen shows promising activity with acceptable toxicity in the outpatient clinic. Further studies are needed to compare PCE with PFE in this population. Registered clinical trial number: UMIN000010507.

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KACO, MOS, SSO and TOS.

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) consensus guidelines for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was published in 2016, identifying both a more strategic approach to the administration of the available systemic therapy choices, and a greater emphasis on the use of ablative techniques, including surgery. At the 2016 ESMO Asia Meeting, in December 2016, it was decided by both ESMO and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting, endorsed by both ESMO and JSMO, immediately after the JSMO 2017 Annual Meeting. The aim was to adapt the ESMO consensus guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences relating to the toxicity as well as other aspects of certain systemic treatments in patients of Asian ethnicity. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with mCRC identified by the Presidents of the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology), Korea (Korean Association for Clinical Oncology), Malaysia (Malaysian Oncological Society), Singapore (Singapore Society of Oncology) and Taiwan (Taiwan Oncology Society). The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.

Analysis of angiogenesis biomarkers for ramucirumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from RAISE, a global, randomized, double-blind, phase III study.

Background: The phase III RAISE trial (NCT01183780) demonstrated that the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor (VEGFR)-2 binding monoclonal antibody ramucirumab plus 5-fluororuracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo + FOLFIRI as second-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment. To identify patients who benefit the most from VEGFR-2 blockade, the RAISE trial design included a prospective and comprehensive biomarker program that assessed the association of biomarkers with ramucirumab efficacy outcomes. Patients and methods: Plasma and tumor tissue collection was mandatory. Overall, 1072 patients were randomized 1 : 1 to the addition of ramucirumab or placebo to FOLFIRI chemotherapy. Patients were then randomized 1 : 2, for the biomarker program, to marker exploratory (ME) and marker confirmatory (MC) groups. Analyses were carried out using exploratory assays to assess the correlations of baseline marker levels [VEGF-C, VEGF-D, sVEGFR-1, sVEGFR-2, sVEGFR-3 (plasma), and VEGFR-2 (tumor tissue)] with clinical outcomes. Cox regression analyses were carried out for each candidate biomarker with stratification factor adjustment. Results: Biomarker results were available from >80% (n = 894) of patients. Analysis of the ME subset determined a VEGF-D level of 115 pg/ml was appropriate for high/low subgroup analyses. Evaluation of the combined ME + MC populations found that the median OS in the ramucirumab + FOLFIRI arm compared with placebo + FOLFIRI showed an improvement of 2.4 months in the high VEGF-D subgroup [13.9 months (95% CI 12.5-15.6) versus 11.5 months (95% CI 10.1-12.4), respectively], and a decrease of 0.5 month in the low VEGF-D subgroup [12.6 months (95% CI 10.7-14.0) versus 13.1 months (95% CI 11.8-17.0), respectively]. PFS results were consistent with OS. No trends were evident with the other antiangiogenic candidate biomarkers. Conclusions: The RAISE biomarker program identified VEGF-D as a potential predictive biomarker for ramucirumab efficacy in second-line mCRC. Development of an assay appropriate for testing in clinical practice is currently ongoing. Clinical trials registration: NCT01183780.

ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in Western countries. Over the last 20 years, and the last decade in particular, the clinical outcome for patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) has improved greatly due not only to an increase in the number of patients being referred for and undergoing surgical resection of their localised metastatic disease but also to a more strategic approach to the delivery of systemic therapy and an expansion in the use of ablative techniques. This reflects the increase in the number of patients that are being managed within a multidisciplinary team environment and specialist cancer centres, and the emergence over the same time period not only of improved imaging techniques but also prognostic and predictive molecular markers. Treatment decisions for patients with mCRC must be evidence-based. Thus, these ESMO consensus guidelines have been developed based on the current available evidence to provide a series of evidence-based recommendations to assist in the treatment and management of patients with mCRC in this rapidly evolving treatment setting.

Randomized phase III study of bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI and bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG4407G).

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRI and FOLFOX have shown equivalent efficacy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but their comparative effectiveness is unknown when combined with bevacizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: WJOG4407G was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial conducted in Japan. Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1 to receive either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI + Bev) or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (mFOLFOX6 + Bev), stratified by institution, adjuvant chemotherapy, and liver-limited disease. The primary end point was non-inferiority of FOLFIRI + Bev to mFOLFOX6 + Bev in progression-free survival (PFS), with an expected hazard ratio (HR) of 0.9 and non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 0.85, one-sided α-error 0.025). The secondary end points were response rate (RR), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL) during 18 months. This trial is registered to the University Hospital Medical Information Network, number UMIN000001396. RESULTS: Among 402 patients enrolled from September 2008 to January 2012, 395 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. The median PFS for FOLFIRI + Bev (n = 197) and mFOLFOX6 + Bev (n = 198) were 12.1 and 10.7 months, respectively [HR, 0.905; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.723-1.133; P = 0.003 for non-inferiority]. The median OS for FOLFIRI + Bev and mFOLFOX6 + Bev were 31.4 and 30.1 months, respectively (HR, 0.990; 95% CI 0.785-1.249). The best overall RRs were 64% for FOLFIRI + Bev and 62% for mFOLFOX6 + Bev. The common grade 3 or higher adverse events were leukopenia (11% in FOLFIRI + Bev/5% in mFOLFOX6 + Bev), neutropenia (46%/35%), diarrhea (9%/5%), febrile neutropenia (5%/2%), peripheral neuropathy (0%/22%), and venous thromboembolism (6%/2%). The QoL assessed by FACT-C (TOI-PFC) and FACT/GOG-Ntx was favorable for FOLFIRI + Bev during 18 months. CONCLUSION: FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab was non-inferior for PFS, compared with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab, as the first-line systemic treatment for mCRC. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: UMIN000001396.

Quality-of-life and performance status results from the phase III RAINBOW study of ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The phase III RAINBOW trial demonstrated that the addition of ramucirumab to paclitaxel improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response rate in fluoropyrimidine-platinum previously treated patients with advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Here, we present results from quality-of-life (QoL) and performance status (PS) analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 0/1 were randomized to receive ramucirumab (8 mg/kg i.v.) or placebo on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle, with both arms receiving paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 8, and 15. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed with the QoL/health status questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D at baseline and 6-week intervals. PS was assessed at baseline and day 1 of every cycle. Time to deterioration (TtD) in each QLQ-C30 scale was defined as randomization to first worsening of ≥10 points (on 100-point scale) and TtD in PS was defined as first worsening to ≥2. Hazard ratios (HRs) for treatment effect were estimated using stratified Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of the 665 patients randomized, 650 (98%) provided baseline QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D data, and 560 (84%) also provided data from ≥1 postbaseline time point. Baseline scores for both instruments were similar between arms. Of the 15 QLQ-C30 scales, 14 had HR < 1, indicating similar or longer TtD in QoL for ramucirumab + paclitaxel. Treatment with ramucirumab + paclitaxel was also associated with a delay in TtD in PS to ≥2 (HR = 0.798, P = 0.0941). Alternate definitions of PS deterioration yielded similar results: PS ≥ 3 (HR = 0.656, P = 0.0508), deterioration by ≥1 PS level (HR = 0.802, P = 0.0444), and deterioration by ≥2 PS levels (HR = 0.608, P = 0.0063). EQ-5D scores were comparable between treatment arms, stable during treatment, and worsened at discontinuation. CONCLUSION: In patients with previously treated advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma, addition of ramucirumab to paclitaxel prolonged overall survival while maintaining patient QoL with delayed symptom worsening and functional status deterioration. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT01170663.