Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of 3 Months of CAPOX Followed by 3 Months of Capecitabine and 6 Months of CAPOX/FOLFOX in the Adjuvant Treatment of Low-Risk Stage III Colon Cancer Treated Surgically.

INTRODUCTION: In the adjuvant treatment of low-risk stage III colon cancer treated surgically, 3 months of CAPOX followed by 3 months of capecitabine is not a common clinical practice. Since there are no data on this practice in the literature, we have no idea how often it is used. However, it should be noted that this application is used in some centers due to the cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin but there are insufficient data in the literature on its efficacy. METHODS: The data of patients with colon cancer treated surgically who were followed up in 12 different oncology centers in Turkey between November 2004 and June 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The study included 194 patients. The treatment arms were as follows: 3 months of CAPOX followed by 3 months of capecitabine = arm A and CAPOX/FOLFOX (6 months) = arm B. There were 78 patients (40.2%) in arm A and 116 patients (59.8%) in arm B. The median age and sex distribution were similar between the treatment arms. The median follow-up period of all patients was 34.4 months (95% confidence interval, 29.1-39.7). When arm A was compared with arm B, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 75.3% versus 88.4% and 5-year DFS was 75.3% versus 82.8%, respectively. There were similar DFS outcomes between the treatment arms (p = 0.09). Rates of any grade of neuropathy were numerically lower in arm A, but the difference between the treatment arms was not statistically significant (51.3% vs. 56.9%; p = 0.44). The frequency of neutropenia was similar between the treatment arms. CONCLUSION: In this study, the efficacy and safety of the 3 months of CAPOX followed by 3 months of capecitabine chemotherapy regimen in the adjuvant treatment of low-risk stage III colon cancer treated surgically were proven. This result may also support the discontinuation of oxaliplatin at 3 months while continuing fluoropyrimidines, which is a common clinical practice but lacks sufficient data.

Does statin suppress oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with colorectal cancer? A single-center observational study.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy (OIPN) is a common and dose-limiting toxicity that markedly limits the use of oxaliplatin and affects quality of life. Statins have been shown to exert neuroprotective effects in preclinical settings. The aim of the present study was to clarify whether statins prevented OIPN in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) receiving adjuvant CAPOX therapy. METHODS: We examined 224 patients who received adjuvant CAPOX therapy for CRC between July 2010 and December 2021 at our hospital. Patients were divided into "Statin" and "Non-statin" groups based on statin use. Details on and the adverse events of adjuvant CAPOX therapy were examined in association with statin use. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients (14%) were treated with statins. There were no intergroup differences in the relative dose intensity or number of CAPOX cycles between the Statin and Non-statin groups. In total, 94% of patients in the Statin group and 95% of those in the Non-statin group developed OIPN (p=0.67). The severity of OIPN was similar between the two groups (p=0.89). The frequency of treatment delays in CAPOX did not significantly differ between the Statin and Non-statin groups (16% vs. 11%, p=0.45). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of statins to attenuate OIPN during adjuvant CAPOX therapy was not apparent in the current study. Further studies are needed to confirm the present results.

Adjuvant Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin for Elderly Patients with Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant chemotherapy improves the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) following radical resection. However, the safety and efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapeutic regimens for elderly patients remains to be elucidated. The aim of the present study was to examine the tolerability and efficacy of adjuvant CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) therapy for elderly patients in comparison with young patients. METHODS: We examined 138 Japanese patients who received adjuvant CAPOX therapy for high-risk stage II or III CRC between July 2010 and June 2021 at our hospital. Patients were divided according to an age of 70 years. Treatment details of CAPOX therapy were analyzed in association with age. Moreover, prognosis of stage III CRC was compared between the patient groups. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients (17%) were ≥70 years old. Male patients were predominant in the ≥70 years group (p = 0.006). Patients ≥70 years old had more comorbidities (diabetes, p = 0.014; cardiovascular disease, p < 0.001; renal disease, p = 0.042) than patients <70 years old. There were no age-dependent differences in dose intensity, the number of cycles, or DLTs of CAPOX therapy. CSS and RFS were also similar between the ≥70 and <70 years old patients with stage III CRC. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant CAPOX therapy was tolerable in elderly Japanese patients. The prognosis of elderly patients with stage III CRC was similar to that of their younger counterparts. Advanced age itself may not be a contraindication for adjuvant chemotherapy in CRC. Future studies with a larger patient cohort are required to confirm the present results.

Diverting ileostomy is a risk factor for renal impairment during CAPOX therapy.

PURPOSE: Temporary ileostomy is sometimes created after colorectal surgery and may cause renal impairment. However, the impact of ileostomy on renal function during adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer (CRC) remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of ileostomy on renal function during adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: We examined 184 patients who received adjuvant CAPOX therapy (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) for CRC with or without ileostomy between January 2011 and December 2020 at the University of Tokyo Hospital. Clinicopathological factors, including renal function, were retrospectively reviewed in association with temporary ileostomy. Factors associated with reductions in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) during CAPOX therapy were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (10%) underwent temporary ileostomy. The maximum decrease in eGFR during CAPOX therapy was significantly higher in patients with than in those without ileostomy (- 16.1 vs. - 5.6 mL/min/1.73m2, p = 0.003). A multivariate analysis identified ileostomy as one of factors independently associated with reductions in eGFR during CAPOX therapy (p = 0.003). The cumulative number of readmission due to dehydration was also higher in patients with ileostomy (33% vs. 1%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ileostomy significantly reduced eGFR during adjuvant CAPOX therapy. Therefore, renal function needs to be monitored during CAPOX therapy, particularly in patients with ileostomy.

Hepatectomy Followed by Adjuvant Chemotherapy with 3-Month Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.

LESSONS LEARNED: Three-month adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin in combination (CAPOX) appeared to reduce recurrence, with mild toxicity in postcurative resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CLM). Recurrence in patients who underwent the 3-month adjuvant CAPOX after resection of CLM was most commonly at extrahepatic sites. BACKGROUND: The role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in the management of initially resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CLM) is still unclear. We evaluated the feasibility of 3-month adjuvant treatment with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin in combination (CAPOX) for postcurative resection of CLM. METHODS: Patients received one cycle of capecitabine followed by four cycles of CAPOX as adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection of CLM. Oral capecitabine was given as 1,000 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks in a 3-week cycle, and CAPOX consisted of oral capecitabine plus oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 in a 3-week cycle. Primary endpoint was the completion rate of adjuvant chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), dose intensity, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled. Median age was 69.5 years, 54% of patients had synchronous metastases, and 29% were bilobar. Mean number of lesions resected was two, and mean size of the largest lesion was 31 mm. Among patients, 20 (71.4%; 95% confidence interval, 53.6%-89.3%) completed the protocol treatment and met its primary endpoint. The most common grade 3 or higher toxicity was neutropenia (29%). Five-year recurrence-free survival and overall survival were 65.2% and 87.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Three-month adjuvant treatment with CAPOX is tolerable and might be a promising strategy for postcurative resection of CLM.

Multicenter phase II clinical study of the efficiency and safety of capecitabine plus intermittent oxaliplatin with bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (VOICE trial).

PURPOSE: The aim of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with five-cycle CAPOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) plus bevacizumab, followed by five-cycle maintenance therapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab and reintroduction of CAPOX plus bevacizumab for five cycles, with a preplanned intermittent oxaliplatin strategy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Patients with untreated mCRC were administered CAPOX (130 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1, 2000 mg/m2/day capecitabine on days 1-14, every 21 days) + bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for five cycles, maintenance treatment without oxaliplatin for five cycles, and CAPOX + bevacizumab reintroduction for five cycles or upon tumor progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were the time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival, response rate (RR), and safety. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the evaluation of efficacy and safety. Median PFS was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.6-19.5), and median TTF was 12.3 months (95% CI, 10.3-14.3). The objective RRs were 51.1% (24/47) during induction therapy, 58.3% (21/36) during maintenance therapy, and 63.6% (14/22) during reintroduction therapy. The frequency of patients with neutropenia, diarrhea, peripheral sensory neuropathy, venous thromboembolism, or grade ≥ 3 allergic reactions was 2.1%. CONCLUSION: CAPOX plus bevacizumab therapy with a preplanned intermittent oxaliplatin strategy consisting of brief five-cycle induction therapy, five-cycle maintenance therapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab, and five-cycle reintroduction therapy consisting of CAPOX plus bevacizumab is safe and effective for mCRC patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN ID: 000,005,732, date of registration: June 7, 2011.  https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000006695.

The updated five-year overall survival and long-term oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity assessment of the FACOS study.

PURPOSE: We previously reported the first evidence of oncological benefits from a Japanese phase II trial of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer (the FACOS study). We herein report the long-term survival and persistent oxaliplatin-related peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN) for patients enrolled in this trial. METHODS: Patients were scheduled to receive the mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX regimen in the adjuvant setting. The five-year overall survival (OS) rate and persistent PSN were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients (mFOLFOX6, n = 73; CAPOX, n = 57) were eligible. The 5-year OS rate was 91.4%. No significant difference in the OS rate was observed between regimens (mFOLFOX6, 94.4%; CAPOX, 87.4%; P = 0.25). The incidence of PSN during adjuvant treatment was 55.4% in grade 1 (G1), 30.0% in G2, and 4.6% in G3. No patients showed G3 PSN at 12 months, but G1 or G2 residual PSN after 5 years was observed in 21.8% (G1, 20%; G2, 1.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Updated results from the FACOS study support the benefits of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of the long-term survival among Japanese patients with stage III colon cancer. However, long-term persistent PSN occurs in about 20% of survivors, counterbalancing the favorable OS.

Evaluation of FOLFOX or CAPOX reintroduction with or without bevacizumab in relapsed colorectal cancer patients treated with oxaliplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy (REACT study).

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy in relapsed colorectal cancer patients treated with oxaliplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy is under debate. REACT study aimed to investigate the efficacy of reintroducing modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) or CAPOX with or without bevacizumab in recurrent colorectal cancer patients after oxaliplatin adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients that participated in this trial had a medical history of adjuvant chemotherapy, including oxaliplatin with a cumulative dose greater than 400 mg/m2, and recurrence that was diagnosed more six months post adjuvant chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were response rate (RR) and disease control rate (DCR), while key secondary endpoints were time to treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients were enrolled between October 2012 and October 2016. Of the 29 eligible patients, 7 received mFOLFOX6 and 22 received CAPOX. The RR was 62.1% (95% confidence interval 42.3-79.3) and the DCR was 82.8% (95% confidence interval 64.2-94.2). The RR for oxaliplatin-free interval was 100.0% in months 6-12 and 56.0% after 12 months. Median TTF, PFS, and OS were 6.3, 10.8, and 28.7 months, respectively. Grade 3 or worse peripheral sensory neuropathy developed in 6.5%. Allergic reactions occurred in 12.9% of the patients, with one (3.2%) grade 3 episode. There were no other severe treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Reintroduction of oxaliplatin was feasible and achieved high RR or DCR in patients after more than 6 months post oxaliplatin adjuvant chemotherapy.

Influence of ABCB-1, ERCC-1 and ERCC-2 gene polymorphisms on response to capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) treatment in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients of South India.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: High interindividual response variability was reported with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) regimen in colorectal cancer (CRC). The single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the genes related to drug efflux transport (ABCB1) and DNA repair (ERCC) could result in altered tumour response. Hence, this study was designed to assess the influence of ABCB1, ERCC-1 and ERCC-2 gene polymorphisms on tumour response to CAPOX treatment in CRC patients of South Indian origin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 145 newly diagnosed CRC patients were included in the final analysis. Response to CAPOX treatment in the adjuvant setting was assessed in terms of disease-free survival rate (DFSR) and overall survival rate (OSR) at 3 years, whereas in the palliative setting, the response was assessed as progression-free survival rate (PFSR) and OSR at 3 years. Five millilitres of the venous blood sample was collected from each patient for genomic DNA extraction by the manual phenol-chloroform method. Genotyping and allelic discrimination analysis were done using real-time PCR (RT-PCR). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: With ABCB1 gene polymorphism rs1045642 (A > G), patients with AG/GG genotype showed better DFSR [P value = .02, OR = 2 (CI: 1.5-3)] and PFSR [P value = .02, OR = 1.6 (CI: 1.1-2.5)] when compared to AA genotype in the adjuvant and palliative settings, respectively. Similarly with rs1128503 (A > G) polymorphism, patients with AG/GG genotype were found to have better DFSR [P value = .02, OR = 1.9 (CI: 1.3-3)] and PFSR [P value = .01, OR = 2 (CI: 1.1-3.7)] when compared to AA genotype. However, we did not find any association between CAPOX response and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms in a binary logistic regression when non-genetic predictors were considered for analysis. We did not find any association with ERCC1 (rs11615 A > G) and ERCC2 (rs13181 T > G) gene polymorphisms with respect to CAPOX response in either of the treatment settings. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The response to CAPOX treatment was found to be influenced by the ABCB1 gene variants (rs1128503 and rs1045642), thereby strengthening their predictive role. No association was found between ERCC1 (rs11615 A > G), ERCC2 (rs13181 T > G) gene polymorphisms and tumour response to CAPOX treatment in CRC patients of South Indian origin.

Randomized phase III trial of post-operative chemotherapy for patients with stage I/II/III small bowel adenocarcinoma (JCOG1502C, J-BALLAD).

A randomized phase III trial was initiated in May 2017 to confirm the superiority of post-operative therapy with capecitabine and oxaliplatin over observation in terms of relapse-free survival in patients with curatively resected small bowel adenocarcinoma. Total 150 patients will be enrolled from 20 Japanese institutions over a period of 6.5 years. Relapse-free survival is the primary endpoint, while the secondary endpoints are overall survival, disease-free survival as defined by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG), disease-free survival as defined by the International Rare Cancer Initiative (IRCI), and adverse events. Global phase III trial of IRCI to confirm the superiority of post-operative chemotherapy for small bowel adenocarcinoma was started in the UK in August 2015 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02502370). An integrated analysis of the IRCI trial and our study are planned. Our trial has been registered in the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN000027280 (http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm).

A Japanese multicenter phase II study of adjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6/CAPOX for stage III colon cancer treatment after D2/D3 lymphadenectomy.

PURPOSE: A phase II trial was conducted to investigate the benefit of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in Japanese stage III colon cancer patients. METHODS: Eligible patients were scheduled to receive 12 cycles of mFOLFOX6 or 8 cycles of CAPOX in adjuvant settings. The primary endpoint was the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify risk factors for a worse DFS. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients, including 73 patients receiving mFOLFOX6 and 57 patients receiving CAPOX, were enrolled from 16 institutions between April 2010 and April 2014. The 3-year DFS was 82.2%, exceeding the expected primary endpoint of 81.7%. The 3-year DFS tended to be higher in patients receiving mFOLOFOX6 than in those receiving CAPOX (mFOLFOX6, 86.3%; CAPOX, 76.9%; P = 0.06). The 3-year DFS rates did not differ markedly based on the risk stratification (T1/T2/T3 N1 vs. T4 or N2) indicated by the IDEA COLLABORATION study (P = 0.22). In the multivariate analysis, stage IIIC (P = 0.046) and early discontinuation (P < 0.01) were identified as independent significant risk factors for a worse DFS. CONCLUSION: Our findings represent the first positive results in a Japanese phase II trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6/CAPOX. Early discontinuation within 2 months was an independent risk factor for a shorter DFS.

Bevacizumab combined with capecitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the small bowel or ampulla of vater: A single-center, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) has previously demonstrated clinical activity in patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) and ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC). Herein, the authors conducted a phase 2 trial to evaluate the benefit of adding bevacizumab to CAPOX. METHODS: In this phase 2, single-arm, single-center, open-label study, patients aged ≥18 years with untreated, advanced SBA or AAC were recruited. Patients received capecitabine at a dose of 750 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1 to 14, oxaliplatin at a dose of 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1, and bevacizumab at a dose of 7.5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months. Secondary objectives included response rate, overall PFS, overall survival, and toxicity. RESULTS: Between August 2011 and November 2014, a total of 30 patients were enrolled into the study (male/female ratio of 13/17; median age of 63 years [range, 33-78 years]; and 7 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status [ECOG PS] of 0, 20 patients with an ECOG PS of 1, and 3 patients with an ECOG PS of 2). Of the 30 patients, 23 (77%) had SBA (18 of duodenal origin and 5 of jejunal/ileal origin) and 7 patients (23%) had AAC (5 of pancreaticobiliary subtype, 1 of mixed subtype, and 1 of intestinal subtype). The most common grade 3 toxicities observed were fatigue and hypertension (7 patients each [23%]), neutropenia (6 patients [20%]), and diarrhea (3 patients [10%]) (toxicity was graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]). The probability of PFS at 6 months was 68% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 52% to 88%). The response rate was 48.3%, with 1 complete response and 13 partial responses; 10 patients achieved stable disease. At a median follow-up of 25.9 months, the median PFS was 8.7 months (95% CI, 4.9-10.5 months) and the median overall survival was 12.9 months (95% CI, 9.2-19.7 months). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study indicate that CAPOX with bevacizumab is an active and well-tolerated regimen for patients with SBA and AAC. These findings support the need for further investigation into the clinical benefit of targeting angiogenesis in patients with SBA and AAC. Cancer 2017;123:1011-17. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Retrospective analysis of the effect of CAPOX and mFOLFOX6 dose intensity on survival in colorectal patients in the adjuvant setting.

BACKGROUND: Despite lack of a true comparative study, the folfox (5-fluorouracil-leucovorin-oxaliplatin) and capox (capecitabine-oxaliplatin) regimens are believed to be similar in their efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of stage iii colorectal cancer. However, that belief has been disputed, because real-life data suggest that the capox regimen is more toxic, leading to more frequent reductions in the delivered dose intensity-thus raising questions about the effect of dose intensity on clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective data review for two Canadian institutions, the Segal Cancer Centre and the Tom Baker Cancer Centre, considered patients diagnosed with stage iii colorectal cancer during 2006-2013. Primary endpoints were dose intensity and toxicity, with a secondary endpoint of disease-free survival. RESULTS: The study enrolled 180 eligible patients (80 at the Segal Cancer Centre, 100 at the Tom Baker Cancer Centre). Of those 180 patients, 75 received capox, and 105 received mfolfox6. In the capox group, a significant dose reduction was identified for capecitabine compared with 5-fluorouracil in mfolfox6 group (p = 0.0014). Similarly, a significant dose reduction was observed for oxaliplatin in mfolfox6 compared with oxaliplatin in capox (p = 0.0001). Compared with the patients receiving capox, those receiving mfolfox6 were twice as likely to experience a treatment delay of more than 1 cycle-length (p = 0.03855). Toxicity was more frequent in patients receiving mfolfox6 (nausea: 30% vs. 18%; diarrhea: 47% vs. 24%; peripheral sensory neuropathy: 32% vs. 3%). At a median follow-up of 40 months, preliminary data showed no difference in disease-free survival (p = 0.598). Pooled data from both institutions were also separately analyzed, and no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of capox despite a lack of head-to-head randomized trial data.

Real-world tolerance and outcomes of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer-Does dose intensity matter?

INTRODUCTION: Fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy delivered as 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) is the standard of care for resected stage III colon cancer. Without randomized trial data, we compared real-world dose intensity, survival outcomes, and tolerability of these regimens. METHODS: Records of patients treated with FOLFOX or CAPOX in the adjuvant setting for stage III colon cancer across four institutions in Sydney during 2006-2016 were reviewed. The relative dose intensity (RDI) of fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin of each regimen, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of grade ≥2 toxicities were compared. RESULTS: Characteristics of patients receiving FOLFOX (n = 195) and CAPOX (n = 62) were evenly matched. FOLFOX patients had a higher mean RDI for both fluoropyrimidine (85% vs. 78%, p < 0.01) and oxaliplatin (72% vs. 66%, p = 0.06). In spite of a lower RDI, CAPOX patients trended toward a better 5-year DFS (84% vs. 78%, HR = 0.53, p = 0.068) and similar OS (89% vs. 89%, HR = 0.53, p = 0.21) compared to the FOLFOX group. This difference was most pronounced in the high-risk (T4 or N2) group where 5-year DFS was 78% versus 67% (HR = 0.41, p = 0.042). Patients receiving CAPOX experienced more grade ≥2 diarrhea (p = 0.017) and hand-foot syndrome (p < 0.001) but not peripheral neuropathy or myelosuppression. CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, patients who received CAPOX had similar OS rates when compared to those receiving FOLFOX in the adjuvant setting in spite of lower RDI. In the high-risk population, CAPOX appears to demonstrate a superior 5-year DFS over FOLFOX.

Sex differences in recovery from postoperative sarcopenia during adjuvant CAPOX therapy for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Women are predisposed to develop intolerance to cancer chemotherapy. Sarcopenia and chemotherapy are mutually related. Women are generally intolerable to chemotherapeutics such as 5-fluorouracil. Although adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, e.g. CAPOX is commonly used to treat colorectal cancer, its effects on patients in terms of sarcopenia and sex remain unknown. We investigated sex disparities in the impacts of CAPOX on body composition in this study. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study on diagnostic metrics used for sarcopenia in colorectal cancer patients receiving adjuvant CAPOX. Evaluations of the nutritional status by the Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA), gait speed, grip strength, skeletal muscle mass, fat mass, and bone mineral content using a body composition analyzer were performed in the first, fourth, and eighth cycles of CAPOX (first, second, and third measurements, respectively). RESULTS: Among 80 eligible patients, 61 completed four CAPOX cycles. The median differences in MNA, gait, grip strength, muscle mass, fat mass, and bone mineral content between the first and second measurements for men (n = 35) and women (n = 26) were + 10.5% and + 2.9% (p = 0.067), + 4.5% and - 2.6% (p = 0.16), + 1.8% and + 2.8% (p = 0.66), + 2.7% and + 1.3% (p = 0.021), + 4.5% and + 3.5% (p = 0.59), and + 3.3% and + 0.0% (p = 0.006), There were no sex differences in comparisons of the above metrics between the first and third measurements in 34 patients who completed eight CAPOX cycles (19 wen and 15 women). CONCLUSIONS: Early cycles of adjuvant CAPOX may have a negative impact on the postoperative recovery of several metrics for diagnosing sarcopenia in women.

Risks and Outcomes of Early Dose Reduction in Adjuvant CAPOX Therapy for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) therapy is standard strategy for colorectal cancer with risk of recurrence. Early dose reduction (EDR) of CAPOX therapy is commonly used in real-world practice. However, there is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of CAPOX for patients who had EDR. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the risks of EDR and its effect on long-term outcomes and body composition factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received CAPOX therapy after radical surgery for colorectal cancer between June 2013 and December 2021 were included. EDR was defined as dose reduction within four courses of CAPOX therapy. Body composition factors were measured for 1 year following surgery to determine the EDR effects. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included; 35 (42%) of them had EDR. The multivariate analysis revealed that underweight [odds ratio (OR)=4.95, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.13-21.7, p=0.03] was a risk factor for EDR. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was significantly better in the non-EDR group (p=0.01). The 5-year RFS rates for the non-EDR and EDR groups were 88.7% and 65.4%, respectively. The multivariate analysis revealed that age >65 years [hazard ratio (HR)=3.97; 95% CI=1.16-13.62, p=0.03] and EDR (HR=7.62; 95% CI=1.71-33.91, p=0.005) were associated with poorer RFS. The 1-year body composition analysis revealed decreases in all factors in the EDR group. CONCLUSION: Preoperative underweight status was associated with EDR, which resulted in decreased RFS and body composition factors when compared with the non-EDR group. Therefore, avoiding EDR and early nutritional intervention after EDR may improve outcomes.

Induction treatment with FOLFIRINOX or oxaliplatin-based doublet followed by long-course chemoradiotherapy and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. A systematic review and pooled analysis from phase II and III trials.

BACKGROUND: The PRODIGE-23 study showed a higher benefit for FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin) as induction chemotherapy followed by long-course chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) respect to neoadjuvant CTRT alone both followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The added value of treatment intensification with irinotecan, over the doublet induction with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin is still debated. OBJECTIVE: To assess survival, pathological complete response (pCR) rate, and safety from phase II-III trials comparing triplet and doublet induction both followed by CTRT and TME in LARC. METHODS: After a systematic literature review of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings' libraries, data from Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves were extracted from phase II-III clinical trials. Phase II-III trials including at least one treatment arm with doublet or triplet induction chemotherapy without biological agents administered for a minimum of 3 months followed by long-course CTRT and TME and with at least 48 months of follow-up were selected. When available, the neoadjuvant CTRT alone arms of the selected studies were included as a comparator reference treatment. Individual patient DFS and OS data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier plots of original trials through graphical reconstruction between April 10th and May 19th, 2024. A pooled analysis was conducted, and results were validated in a subsequent network meta-analysis (NMA). pCR rates and grade ≥ 3 adverse events rates were also collected. Primary endpoints were DFS and OS between triplet and doublet induction. Secondary endpoints were DFS and OS between neoadjuvant CTRT alone and triplet or doublet induction as well as pCR rates and safety profile among different arms. RESULTS: Out of 674 patients enrolled in 3 trials, 231, 161 and 282 were treated with FOLFIRINOX or CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) followed by CTRT or neoadjuvant CTRT alone, respectively. 5-year DFS rates were 73.1 % [95 %CI: 67.2 % - 79.0 %], 61.7 % [95 %CI: 53.9 % - 69.5 %] and 65.1 % [95 %CI: 59.4 % - 70.8 %] for triplet induction, doublet induction, and neoadjuvant CTRT alone, respectively. 5-year OS rates were 86.8 % [95 %CI: 82.3 % - 91.3 %], 74.7 % [95 %CI: 67.6 % - 81.8 %], and 79.6 % [95 %CI: 74.9 % - 84.3 %] for FOLFIRINOX, CAPOX, and neoadjuvant CTRT alone, respectively. Triplet induction showed longer DFS and OS respect to doublet induction (HR for DFS: 0.67 [95 % CI 0.47 - 0.96], p = 0.03; HR for OS: 0.49 [95 % CI 0.31 - 0.78], p = 0.003) with a trend for superiority when compared with neoadjuvant CTRT alone (HR for DFS: 0.77 [95 % CI 0.57 - 1.05], p = 0.10; HR for OS: 0.67 [95 % CI 0.45 - 1.01], p = 0.06). No difference was observed between the doublet induction and neoadjuvant CTRT groups. pCR rates were higher for patients treated with FOLFIRINOX (27.7 %) respect to subjects receiving CAPOX (19.7 %, p = 0.02) or neoadjuvant CTRT alone (12.5 %, p < 0.0001). Triplet was associated with higher rates of severe neutropenia (17 % vs 1 %, p < 0.0001) and nausea-vomiting (11 % vs 3 %, p = 0.02) respect to doublet induction. CONCLUSIONS: Induction with FOLFIRINOX showed better survival outcomes and pCR rates respect to CAPOX at the price of increased G3-4 neutropenia and nausea/vomiting. A randomized study comparing triplet and doublet chemotherapy in the frame of a total neoadjuvant treatment strategy is widely warranted.

Immune modulation of the liver metastatic colorectal cancer microenvironment via the oral CAPOX-mediated cGAS-STING pathway.

We evaluated modulation of the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in both local and liver metastatic colorectal cancer (LMCC), focusing on tumor-associated macrophages, which are the predominant immunosuppressive cells in LMCC. We developed an orally administered metronomic chemotherapy regimen, oral CAPOX. This regimen combines capecitabine and a nano-micelle encapsulated, lysine-linked deoxycholate and oxaliplatin complex (OPt/LDC-NM). The treatment effectively modulated immune cells within the tumor microenvironment by activating the cGAS-STING pathway and inducing immunogenic cell death. This therapy modulated immune cells more effectively than did capecitabine monotherapy, the current standard maintenance chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. The macrophage-modifying effect of oral CAPOX was mediated via the cGAS-STING pathway. This is a newly identified mode of immune cell activation induced by metronomic chemotherapy. Moreover, oral CAPOX synergized with anti-PD-1 antibody (αPD-1) to enhance the T-cell-mediated antitumor immune response. In the CT26. CL25 subcutaneous model, combination therapy achieved a 91 % complete response rate with a confirmed memory effect against the tumor. This combination also altered the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in LMCC, which αPD-1 monotherapy could not achieve. Oral CAPOX and αPD-1 combination therapy outperformed the maximum tolerated dose for treating LMCC, suggesting metronomic therapy as a promising strategy.

Capecitabine/irinotecan or capecitabine/oxaliplatin in combination with bevacizumab is effective and safe as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II study of the AIO colorectal study group.

BACKGROUND: This randomized phase II trial investigated the efficacy and safety of capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CapOx) plus bevacizumab and dose-modified capecitabine/irinotecan (mCapIri) plus bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2)/day 1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) bid/days 1-14 or with irinotecan 200 mg/m(2)/day 1 plus capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) bid/days 1-14 both every 21 days. The primary end point was 6 months progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 255 patients were enrolled. The intent-to-treat population comprised 247 patients (CapOx-bevacizumab: n = 127; mCapIri-bevacizumab: n = 120). The six-month PFS rates were 76% (95% CI, 69%-84%) and 84% (95% CI, 77%-90%). Median PFS and OS were 10.4 months (95% CI, 9.0-12.0) and 24.4 months (95% CI, 19.3-30.7) with CapOx-bevacizumab, and 12.1 months (95% CI, 10.8-13.2) and 25.5 months (95% CI, 21.0-31.0) with mCapIri-bevacizumab. Grade 3/4 diarrhea as predominant toxic effect occurred in 22% of patients with CapOx-bevacizumab and in 16% with mCapIri-bevacizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Both, CapOx-bevacizumab and mCapIri-bevacizumab, show promising activity and an excellent toxic effect profile. Efficacy is in the range of other bevacizumab-containing combination regimen although lower doses of irinotecan and capecitabine were selected for mCapIri.

Comparison of the pathological response to 2 or 4 cycles of neoadjuvant CAPOX in II/III rectal cancer patients with low/intermediate risks: study protocol for a prospective, non-inferior, randomized control trial (COPEC trial).

BACKGROUND: For patients with low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer, current studies have reached a consensus that preoperative radiotherapy may be dispensed with, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) alone might achieve an accepted local control. Our previous phase II study has evidenced that the morphological response of NCT could be better judged at a relatively early stage. Low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer patients could achieve a high rate of tumor shrinkage and downgrade after only 4 cycles of NCT and obvious tumor morphological changes could be observed after 2 cycles of NCT. However, there is still a lack of more detailed stratification and evidence for pathological criteria. The aim of the present study (comparison of the pathological response to 2 or 4 cycles of neoadjuvant CAPOX in II/III rectal cancer patients with low/intermediate risks, COPEC trial) is to determine the pathological tumor regression grade (pTRG) rate of 2 or 4 cycles of NCT in low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer and verify the feasibility of early identification of chemotherapy-insensitive population. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicenter, prospective, non-inferior, randomized controlled trial (RCT) initiated by West China Hospital of Sichuan University and designed to be conducted in fourteen hospitals around China. Eligible patients will be centrally randomized into 2 or 4 cycles of CAPOX in a 1:1 ratio using the central automated randomization system offered by the O-trial online system ( https://plus.o-trial.com/ ) and accept total mesorectal excision after 2 or 4 cycles of CAPOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2, once daily on day 1, every 21 days and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2, twice daily on days 1 to 14, every 21 days). The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with pathological no-tumor regression (pTRG 3), which is determined postoperatively by each sub-center and verified by the primary center. DISCUSSION: COPEC trial is designed to verify that the preoperative CAPOX chemotherapy for low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer could achieve a good response judgment after 2 cycles and obtain the tumor pathological response rate after 2 cycles of CAPOX. We hope the COPEC trial could help in establishing a consensus standard of low- and intermediate-risk rectal cancer and the early identification of stage II/III rectal patients with low- and intermediate-risk who are poorly responding to NCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov NCT04922853. Registered on June 4, 2021.