Intraperitoneal irinotecan with concomitant FOLFOX and bevacizumab for patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of the multicentre, open-label, phase II, INTERACT-II trial.

INTRODUCTION: The peritoneum is the second most affected organ for the dissemination of colorectal cancer (CRC). Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) face a poor prognosis, despite the majority of patients being treated with palliative systemic therapy. The efficacy of palliative systemic therapy is limited due to the plasma-peritoneum barrier. The poor prognosis of unresectable CPM patients has resulted in the development of new treatment strategies where systemic therapy is combined with local, intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In the recently published phase I study, the maximum tolerated dose and thus the recommended phase II dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was investigated and determined to be 75 mg. In the present study, the overall survival after treatment with 75 mg irinotecan with concomitant mFOLFOX4 and bevacizumab will be investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-arm phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 85 patients are enrolled. Eligibility criteria are an adequate performance status and organ function, histologically confirmed microsatellite stable and unresectable CPM, no previous palliative therapy for CRC, no systemic therapy<6 months for CRC prior to enrolment and no previous cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS and HIPEC). Patients will undergo a diagnostic laparoscopy as standard work-up for CPM and if the peritoneal disease is considered unresectable (eg, Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI)>20, too extensive small bowel involvement), a peritoneal access port and a port-a-cath are placed for administration of intraperitoneal and intravenous chemotherapy, respectively. Patients may undergo up to 12 cycles of study treatment. Each cycle consists of intravenous mFOLFOX4 with bevacizumab and concomitant intraperitoneal irinotecan (75 mg), which is repeated every 2 weeks, with a maximum of 12 cycles. Modified FOLFOX-4 regimen consists of 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin plus 200 mg/m2 LV and 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus on day 1 followed by 1600 mg/m2 5-FU as a 46 hours infusion. Study treatment ends after the 12th cycle, or earlier in case of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome is overall survival and key secondary outcomes are progression-free survival, safety (measured by the amount of grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0)), patient-reported outcomes and pharmacokinetics of irinotecan. It is hypothesised that the trial treatment will lead to a 4 month increase in overall survival; from a median of 12.2 to 16.2 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by the Dutch Authority (CCMO, the Hague, the Netherlands), by a central medical ethics committee (MEC-U, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands) and by the institutional research boards of both research centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06003998.

The views of cancer patients of Turkish, Moroccan, Surinamese, and Dutch-Caribbean descent on diagnosis, treatment and prognosis: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: The number of international migrants is increasing worldwide. The four major non-western ethnic groups in the Netherlands are Turkish, Moroccan, Surinamese, and Dutch-Caribbean. This review examined the scientific literature on the views of cancer patients from these four ethnic groups on cancer diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using the databases EMBASE, Medline Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register. Studies with patients who were of Turkish, Moroccan, Surinamese, and Dutch-Caribbean descent were included. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included, and thematic analysis was performed. The methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were conducted in Turkey on Turkish cancer patients, while three were conducted in the Netherlands on Turkish and Moroccan cancer patients. Four themes emerged from the included studies: disclosure of diagnosis, communication, information provision, and decision-making. The majority of cancer patients in Turkey wanted information regarding their diagnosis and treatment. However, disclosure of a cancer diagnosis was rarely discussed with cancer patients in Turkey, whereas in the Netherlands it was provided directly. Family members in both the host and native countries had a strong influence on communication and decision-making. No literature on this topic for Surinamese or Dutch-Caribbean cancer patients was found. CONCLUSION: Although major ethnic groups live in host countries, there is a lack of knowledge on optimal communication and information disclosure on cancer to patients and their families. POLICY SUMMARY: Further research into the views of ethnic groups on how to communicate about cancer is essential to ensuring that every patient receives optimal care and treatment.

Accounting for fractionation and heterogeneous dose distributions in the modelling of osteoradionecrosis in oropharyngeal carcinoma treatment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the mandible is a severe complication following radiotherapy (RT). With a renewed interest in hypofractionation for head and neck radiotherapy, more information concerning ORN development after high fraction doses is important. The aim of this explorative study was to develop a model for ORN risk prediction applicable across different fractionation schemes using Equivalent Uniform Doses (EUD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in 334 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) patients treated with either a hypofractionated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (HF-SBRT) boost or conventional Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). ORN was scored with the CTCAE v5.0. HF-SBRT and IMRT dose distributions were converted into equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (α/ß = 0.85 Gy) and analyzed using EUD. The parameter a that led to an EUD that best discriminated patients with and without grade ≥ 2 ORN was selected. Patient and treatment-related risk factors of ORN were analyzed with uni- and multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients (9.6%) developed ORN grade ≥ 2. An EUD(a = 8) best discriminated between ORN and non-ORN (AUC = 0.71). In multivariable regression, pre-RT extractions (SHR = 2.34; p = 0.012), mandibular volume (SHR = 1.04; p = 0.003), and the EUD(a = 8) (SHR = 1.14; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with ORN. CONCLUSION: Risk models for ORN based on conventional DVH parameters cannot be directly applied to HF-SBRT fractionation schemes and dose distributions. However, after correcting for fractionation and non-uniform dose distributions using EUD, a single model can distinguish between ORN and non-ORN after conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and hypofractionated boost treatments.

Irinotecan-Induced Toxicity: A Pharmacogenetic Study Beyond UGT1A1.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Side effects of irinotecan treatment can be dose limiting and may impair quality of life. In this study, we investigated the correlation between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding enzymes involved in the irinotecan metabolism and transport, outside UGT1A1, and irinotecan-related toxicity. We focused on carboxylesterases, which are involved in formation of the active metabolite SN-38 and on drug transporters. METHODS: Patients who provided written informed consent at the Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute to the Code Geno study (local protocol: MEC02-1002) or the IRI28-study (NTR-6612) were enrolled in the study and were genotyped for 15 SNPs in the genes CES1, CES2, SLCO1B1, ABCB1, ABCC2, and ABCG2. RESULTS: From 299 evaluable patients, 86 patients (28.8%) developed severe irinotecan-related toxicity. A significantly higher risk of toxicity was seen in ABCG2 c.421C>A variant allele carriers (P = 0.030, OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.06-3.34). Higher age was associated with all grade diarrhea (P = 0.041, OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.06). In addition, CES1 c.1165-41C>T and CES1 n.95346T>C variant allele carriers had a lower risk of all-grade thrombocytopenia (P = 0.024, OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20-0.90 and P = 0.018, OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08-0.79, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that ABCG2 and CES1 SNPs might be used as predictive markers for irinotecan-induced toxicity.

Phase I study of intraperitoneal irinotecan combined with palliative systemic chemotherapy in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases.

BACKGROUND: Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who are not eligible for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) owing to extensive peritoneal disease have a poor prognosis. It was hypothesized that these patients may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal irinotecan to standard palliative systemic chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a classical 3 + 3 phase I dose-escalation trial in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who were not eligible for CRS-HIPEC. Intraperitoneal irinotecan was administered every 2 weeks, concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin)-bevacizumab. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary objectives were to elucidate the systemic and intraperitoneal pharmacokinetics, safety profile, and efficacy. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed with 50 mg (4 patients) and 75 mg (9 patients) intraperitoneal irinotecan. Two dose-limiting toxicities occurred with 100 mg irinotecan among five patients. The maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was established to be 75 mg, and it was well tolerated. Intraperitoneal exposure to SN-38 (active metabolite of irinotecan) was high compared with systemic exposure (median intraperitoneal area under the curve (AUC) to systemic AUC ratio 4.6). Thirteen patients had a partial radiological response and five had stable disease. Four patients showed a complete response during post-treatment diagnostic laparoscopy. Five patients underwent salvage resection or CRS-HIPEC. Median overall survival was 23.9 months. CONCLUSION: Administration of 75 mg intraperitoneal irinotecan concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX-bevacizumab was safe and well tolerated. Intraperitoneal SN-38 exposure was high and prolonged. As oncological outcomes were promising, intraperitoneal administration of irinotecan may be a good alternative to other, more invasive and costly treatment options. A phase II study is currently accruing.

Patients with extensive colorectal peritoneal metastases who are not eligible for surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy have poor survival. The authors tried to improve the survival of these patients by adding intraperitoneal (inside the abdominal cavity) chemotherapy to standard palliative chemotherapy which is administered into the bloodstream. In this trial, irinotecan (a type of chemotherapy) was administered into the abdomen of patients with extensive colorectal peritoneal metastases. The authors investigated which dose could be administered safely in combination with standard palliative chemotherapy. They also looked into toxicity, safety, benefit, and movement of the drug in the body. Eighteen patients were treated in this study. The maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was 75 mg. It was well tolerated and could be administered safely. The intra-abdominal amount of irinotecan was high, whereas the amount of irinotecan in the blood remained low. The benefits of intra-abdominal irinotecan were promising. Because of this, a new study has been started to further investigate this new combination chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

HYpofractionated, dose-redistributed RAdiotherapy with protons and photons to combat radiation-induced immunosuppression in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: study protocol of the phase I HYDRA trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) is the standard of care for most advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and results in an unfavorable 5-year overall survival of 40%. Despite strong biological rationale, combining RT with immune checkpoint inhibitors does not result in a survival benefit. Our hypothesis is that the combination of these individually effective treatments fails because of radiation-induced immunosuppression and lymphodepletion. By integrating modern radiobiology and innovative radiotherapy concepts, the patient's immune system could be maximally retained by (1) increasing the dose per fraction so that the total dose and number of fractions can be reduced (HYpofractionation), (2) redistributing the radiation dose towards a higher peak dose within the tumor center and a lowered elective lymphatic field dose (Dose-redistribution), and (3) using RAdiotherapy with protons instead of photons (HYDRA). METHODS: The primary aim of this multicenter study is to determine the safety of HYDRA proton- and photon radiotherapy by conducting two parallel phase I trials. Both HYDRA arms are randomized with the standard of care for longitudinal immune profiling. There will be a specific focus on actionable immune targets and their temporal patterns that can be tested in future hypofractionated immunoradiotherapy trials. The HYDRA dose prescriptions (in 20 fractions) are 40 Gy elective dose and 55 Gy simultaneous integrated boost on the clinical target volume with a 59 Gy focal boost on the tumor center. A total of 100 patients (25 per treatment group) will be recruited, and the final analysis will be performed one year after the last patient has been included. DISCUSSION: In the context of HNSCC, hypofractionation has historically only been reserved for small tumors out of fear for late normal tissue toxicity. To date, hypofractionated radiotherapy may also be safe for larger tumors, as both the radiation dose and volume can be reduced by the combination of advanced imaging for better target definition, novel accelerated repopulation models and high-precision radiation treatment planning and dose delivery. HYDRA's expected immune-sparing effect may lead to improved outcomes by allowing for future effective combination treatment with immunotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT05364411 (registered on May 6th, 2022).

Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Unresectable Peritoneal Surface Malignancies.

Malignancies of the peritoneal cavity are associated with a dismal prognosis. Systemic chemotherapy is the gold standard for patients with unresectable peritoneal disease, but its intraperitoneal effect is hampered by the peritoneal-plasma barrier. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, which is administered repeatedly into the peritoneal cavity through a peritoneal implanted port, could provide a novel treatment modality for this patient population. This review provides a systematic overview of intraperitoneal used drugs, the performed clinical studies so far, and the complications of the peritoneal implemental ports. Several anticancer drugs have been studied for intraperitoneal application, with the taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel as the most commonly used drug. Repeated intraperitoneal chemotherapy, mostly in combination with systemic chemotherapy, has shown promising results in Phase I and Phase II studies for several tumor types, such as gastric cancer, ovarian cancer, colorectal cancer, and pancreatic cancer. Two Phase III studies for intraperitoneal chemotherapy in gastric cancer have been performed so far, but the results regarding the superiority over standard systemic chemotherapy alone, are contradictory. Pressurized intraperitoneal administration, known as PIPAC, is an alternative way of administering intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and the first prospective studies have shown a tolerable safety profile. Although intraperitoneal chemotherapy might be a standard treatment option for patients with unresectable peritoneal disease, more Phase II and Phase III studies focusing on tolerability profiles, survival rates, and quality of life are warranted in order to establish optimal treatment schedules and to establish a potential role for intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the approach to unresectable peritoneal disease.

Treatment and Survival Outcomes for Patients with Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Deemed Ineligible for Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): Results of a Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a treatment option for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM). This report provides an overview of treatment and survival outcomes for patients deemed ineligible for CRS-HIPEC. METHODS: Colorectal PM patients referred to a tertiary center from 2014 to 2020 that were ineligible for CRS-HIPEC were included. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were provided. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Of 476 patients referred for CRS-HIPEC, 227 (48%) were deemed ineligible. Median follow-up was 15 months [IQR 10-22]. Data on follow-up treatment was available for 198 patients, of which 73% received systemic therapy. These patients had a median overall survival (OS) of 17 months [IQR 9-25]. For patients receiving best supportive care (BSC) median OS was 4 months [IQR 2-9]. The main reason for ineligibility was extensive PM (42%), with a median OS of 11 months [IQR 5-18]. Patients deemed ineligible due to (extensive) liver (9%) or lung metastases (8%) showed longer OS (median 22 months, IQR 8-27, and 24 months, IQR 12-29, respectively) than patients with extensive PM (median 11 months, IQR 5-18) or distant lymph node metastases (median 14 months, IQR 4-25). CONCLUSION: The main reason for CRS-HIPEC ineligibility was extensive PM. The majority of patients received systemic therapy. Patients deemed ineligible due to extra-peritoneal metastases had better survival outcomes than patients deemed ineligible due to extensive PM.

Post radiation mucosal ulcer risk after a hypofractionated stereotactic boost and conventional fractionated radiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Post radiation mucosal ulcers (PRMU) after treatment for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) can have a huge negative impact on patients' quality of life, but little is known concerning risk factors and the impact of fraction size. Therefore, the goal of this study was to determine the pattern of PRMU development and to identify risk factors after a hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy boost (SBRT) compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for OPSCC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study (N = 332) of OPSCC patients with ≥ 1-year disease-free survival, treated with 46 Gy Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) (2 Gy fractions) followed by either an SBRT boost of 16.5 Gy (5.5 Gy fractions) (N = 180), or 24 Gy IMRT (2 Gy fractions) (N = 152). PRMU (grade ≥ 2) was scored when observed > three months after the last radiotherapy (RT) fraction (CTCAE v5.0). Potential risk factors were analyzed with Cox regression models using death as competing risk. Dose at the PRMU site was calculated by projecting delineated PRMU on the planning CT. RESULTS: All cases of PRMU (N = 64) occurred within 24 months; all were grade 2. The cumulative incidence at 2 years in the SBRT boost group was 26% (N = 46) vs. 12% (N = 18) for conventional fractionation (p = 0.003). Most PRMU developed within nine months (N = 48). PRMU occurring > nine months (N = 16) were mainly observed in the SBRT boost group (N = 15). Sex (p = 0.048), acute tube feeding (p = < 0.001), tumor subsite tonsil (p = 0.001), and N stage (p = 0.017) were associated with PRMU risk at multivariable regression in the hypofractionated SBRT boost group. All 25 delineated PRMU were located within the high dose regions. CONCLUSION: The risk of PRMU should be included in the cost benefit analysis when considering future research using a hypofractionated SBRT boost for OPSCC patients.

Genome-Wide Analyses of Nephrotoxicity in Platinum-Treated Cancer Patients Identify Association with Genetic Variant in RBMS3 and Acute Kidney Injury.

Nephrotoxicity is a common and dose-limiting side effect of platinum compounds, which often manifests as acute kidney injury or hypomagnesemia. This study aimed to investigate the genetic risk loci for platinum-induced nephrotoxicity. Platinum-treated brain tumor and head-neck tumor patients were genotyped with genome-wide coverage. The data regarding the patient and treatment characteristics and the laboratory results reflecting the nephrotoxicity during and after the platinum treatment were collected from the medical records. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the associations between the genetic variants and the acute kidney injury and hypomagnesemia phenotypes. A cohort of 195 platinum-treated patients was included, and 9,799,032 DNA variants passed the quality control. An association was identified between RBMS3 rs10663797 and acute kidney injury (coefficient -0.10 (95% confidence interval -0.13--0.06), p-value 2.72 × 10-8). The patients who carried an AC deletion at this locus had statistically significantly lower glomerular filtration rates after platinum treatment. Previously reported associations, such as BACH2 rs4388268, could not be replicated in this study's cohort. No statistically significant associations were identified for platinum-induced hypomagnesemia. The genetic variant in RBMS3 was not previously linked to nephrotoxicity or related traits. The validation of this study's results in independent cohorts is needed to confirm this novel association.

Fewer head and neck cancer diagnoses and faster treatment initiation during COVID-19 in 2020: A nationwide population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inevitably, the emergence of COVID-19 has impacted non-COVID care. Because timely diagnosis and treatment are essential, especially for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) with fast-growing tumours in a functionally and aesthetically important area, we wished to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HNC care in the Netherlands. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This population-based study covered all, in total 8468, newly diagnosed primary HNC cases in the Netherlands in 2018, 2019 and 2020. We compared incidence, patient and tumour characteristics, primary treatment characteristics, and time-to-treatment in the first COVID-19 year 2020 with corresponding periods in 2018 and 2019 (i.e. pre-COVID). RESULTS: The incidence of HNC was nearly 25% less during the first wave (n = 433) than in 2019 (n = 595) and 2018 (n = 598). In April and May 2020, the incidence of oral cavity and laryngeal carcinomas was significantly lower than in pre-COVID years. There were no shifts in tumour stage or alterations in initial treatment modalities. Regardless of the first treatment modality and specific period, the median number of days between first visit to a HNC centre and start of treatment was significantly shorter during the COVID-19 year (26-28 days) than pre-COVID (31-32 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The incidence of HNC during the Netherlands' first COVID-19 wave was significantly lower than expected. The expected increase in incidence during the remainder of 2020 was not observed. Despite the overloaded healthcare system, the standard treatment for HNC patients could be delivered within a shorter time interval.

Dissemination patterns and chronology of distant metastasis affect survival of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To define metastatic categories based on their prognostic significance. We hypothesized that oligometastasis in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is associated with better post-distant metastasis disease specific survival (post-DM DSS) compared to patients with polymetastasis. Furthermore, the impact on survival of synchronous versus metachronous distant metastasis (DM) occurrence was assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study in which patients with DM were stratified into three groups: oligometastasis (maximum of 3 metastatic foci in ≤2 anatomic sites), explosive metastasis (≥4 metastatic foci at one anatomic site) and explosive-disseminating metastasis (spread to ≥3 anatomic sites or >3 metastatic foci in 2 anatomic sites). In addition, patients were divided into synchronous versus metachronous DM. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2013, a total of 2687 patients with HNSCC were identified, of which 324 patients developed DM. In this group, 115 (35.5%) patients had oligometastasis, 64 (19.8%) patients had explosive metastasis and 145 (44.8%) patients had explosive-disseminating metastasis. Their median post-DM DSS were 4.7 months, 4.1 months and 1.7 months respectively (p < .001). Synchronous DM was associated with more favorable survival rates in univariable and multivariable analyses than metachronous DM with recurrence of the index tumor (6-month post-DM DSS probability of 0.51 vs 0.17, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Oligometastasis in HNSCC signifies a better prognosis than a polymetastatic pattern. Metachronous DM occurrence with recurrence of the primary index tumor is associated with an unfavorable prognosis.

Perioperative Systemic Therapy vs Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Alone for Resectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To date, no randomized clinical trials have investigated perioperative systemic therapy relative to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone for resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). Objective: To assess the feasibility and safety of perioperative systemic therapy in patients with resectable CPM and the response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label, parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial in all 9 Dutch tertiary centers for the surgical treatment of CPM enrolled participants between June 15, 2017, and January 9, 2019. Participants were patients with pathologically proven isolated resectable CPM who did not receive systemic therapy within 6 months before enrollment. Interventions: Randomization to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone. Perioperative systemic therapy comprised either four 3-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin), six 2-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin), or six 2-week neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) and either four 3-week adjuvant cycles of capecitabine or six 2-week adjuvant cycles of fluorouracil with leucovorin. Bevacizumab was added to the first 3 (CAPOX) or 4 (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity. Key secondary outcomes were centrally assessed rates of objective radiologic and major pathologic response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Analyses were done modified intention-to-treat in patients starting neoadjuvant treatment (experimental arm) or undergoing upfront surgery (control arm). Results: In 79 patients included in the analysis (43 [54%] men; mean [SD] age, 62 [10] years), experimental (n = 37) and control (n = 42) arms did not differ significantly regarding the proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC (33 of 37 [89%] vs 36 of 42 [86%] patients; risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.23; P = .74) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity (8 of 37 [22%] vs 14 of 42 [33%] patients; risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31-1.37; P = .25). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Objective radiologic and major pathologic response rates of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment were 28% (9 of 32 evaluable patients) and 38% (13 of 34 evaluable patients), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized phase 2 trial in patients diagnosed with resectable CPM, perioperative systemic therapy seemed feasible, safe, and able to induce response of CPM, justifying a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02758951.

Safety and Feasibility of Additional Tumor Debulking to First-Line Palliative Combination Chemotherapy for Patients with Multiorgan Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Local treatment of metastases is frequently performed in patients with multiorgan metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) analogous to selected patients with oligometastatic disease for whom this is standard of care. The ORCHESTRA trial (NCT01792934) was designed to prospectively evaluate overall survival benefit from tumor debulking in addition to chemotherapy in patients with multiorgan mCRC. Here, we report the preplanned safety and feasibility evaluation after inclusion of the first 100 patients. METHODS: Patients were eligible if at least 80% tumor debulking was deemed feasible by resection, radiotherapy and/or thermal ablative therapy. In case of clinical benefit after three or four cycles of respectively 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin or capecitabine and oxaliplatin ± bevacizumab patients were randomized to tumor debulking followed by chemotherapy in the intervention arm, or standard treatment with chemotherapy. RESULTS: Twelve patients dropped out prior to randomization for various reasons. Eighty-eight patients were randomized to the standard (n = 43) or intervention arm (n = 45). No patients withdrew after randomization. Debulking was performed in 82% (n = 37). Two patients had no lesions left to treat, five had progressive disease, and one patient died prior to local treatment. In 15 patients (40%) 21 serious adverse events related to debulking were reported. Postoperative mortality was 2.7% (n = 1). After debulking chemotherapy was resumed in 89% of patients. CONCLUSION: Tumor debulking is feasible and does not prohibit administration of palliative chemotherapy in the majority of patients with multiorgan mCRC, despite the occurrence of serious adverse events related to local treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This first prospective randomized trial on tumor debulking in addition to chemotherapy shows that local treatment of metastases is feasible in patients with multiorgan metastatic colorectal cancer and does not prohibit administration of palliative systemic therapy, despite the occurrence of serious adverse events related to local treatment. The trial continues accrual, and overall survival (OS) data and quality of life assessment are collected to determine whether the primary aim of >6 months OS benefit with preserved quality of life will be met. This will support evidence-based decision making in multidisciplinary colorectal cancer care and can be readily implemented in daily practice.

Methotrexate plus or minus cetuximab as first-line treatment in a recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma population of the head and neck (SCCHN), unfit for cisplatin combination treatment, a phase Ib-randomized phase II study Commence.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) has limited progression-free survival (PFS) benefit. We hypothesized that adding cetuximab to methotrexate improves PFS. METHODS: In the phase-Ib-study, patients with R/M SCCHN received methotrexate and cetuximab as first-line treatment. The primary objective was feasibility. In the phase-II-study patients were randomized to this combination or methotrexate alone (2:1). The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: In six patients in the phase-Ib-study, no dose limiting toxicities were observed. In the phase II study, 30 patients received the combination and 15 patients methotrexate. In the phase-II-study median PFS was 4.5 months in the combination group vs 2.0 months in the methotrexate group (HR 0.37; P = .002). OS, toxicity, and QoL were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab with methotrexate improved PFS without increased toxicity in R/M SCCHN-patients.

Concomitant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy for extensive peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin: protocol of the multicentre, open-label, phase I, dose-escalation INTERACT trial.

INTRODUCTION: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) has become standard of care for patients with peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin with a low/moderate abdominal disease load. In case of a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) score >20, CRS-HIPEC is not considered to be beneficial. Patients with a PCI >20 are currently offered palliative systemic chemotherapy. Previous studies have shown that systemic chemotherapy is less effective against peritoneal metastases than it is against haematogenous spread of colorectal cancer. It is suggested that patients with peritoneal metastases may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to systemic chemotherapy. Aim of this study is to establish the maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan, added to standard of care systemic therapy for colorectal cancer. Secondary endpoints are to determine the safety and feasibility of this treatment and to establish the pharmacokinetic profile of intraperitoneally administered irinotecan. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This phase I, '3+3' dose-escalation, study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral centres. The study population consists of adult patients with extensive peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin who have a good performance status and no extra-abdominal metastases. According to standard work-up for CRS-HIPEC, patients will undergo a diagnostic laparoscopy to score the PCI. In case of a PCI >20, a peritoneal access port will be placed in the abdomen of the patient. Through this port we will administer intraperitoneal irinotecan, in combination with standard systemic treatment consisting of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin and the targeted agent bevacizumab. Therapy consists of a maximum of 12 cycles 2-weekly. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol is approved by a research medical ethics committee (Rotterdam, Netherlands) and the Dutch Competent Authority (CCMO, The Hague, Netherlands). The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL6988 and NL2018-000479-33; Pre-results.

Genetic Variants as Predictive Markers for Ototoxicity and Nephrotoxicity in Patients with Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer Treated with Cisplatin-Containing Chemoradiotherapy (The PRONE Study).

Ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity are potentially irreversible side effects of chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin in locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) patients. Several predictive genetic variants have been described, but as yet none in LAHNC patients. The aim of this study is to investigate genetic variants as predictors for ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity in LAHNC patients treated with cisplatin-containing chemoradiotherapy. Our prospective cohort of 92 patients was genotyped for 10 genetic variants and evaluated for their association with cisplatin-induced ototoxicity (ACYP2, COMT, TPMT and WFS1) and nephrotoxicity (OCT2, MATE and XPD). Ototoxicity was determined by patient-reported complaints as well as tone audiometrical assessments. Nephrotoxicity was defined as a decrease of ≥25% in creatinine clearance during treatment compared to baseline. A significant association was observed between carriership of the A allele for rs1872328 in the ACYP2 gene and cisplatin-induced clinically determined ototoxicity (p = 0.019), and not for ototoxicity measured by tone audiometrical assessments (p = 0.449). Carriership of a T allele for rs316019 in the OCT2 gene was significantly associated with nephrotoxicity at any time during chemoradiotherapy (p = 0.022), but not with nephrotoxicity at the end of the chemoradiotherapy. In conclusion, we showed prospectively that in LAHNC patients genetic variants in ACYP2 are significantly associated with clinically determined ototoxicity. Validation studies are necessary to prove the added value for individualized treatments plans in these patients.