Results of a randomized, double-blind phase II clinical trial of NY-ESO-1 vaccine with ISCOMATRIX adjuvant versus ISCOMATRIX alone in participants with high-risk resected melanoma.

BACKGROUND: To compare the clinical efficacy of New York Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma-1 (NY-ESO-1) vaccine with ISCOMATRIX adjuvant versus ISCOMATRIX alone in a randomized, double-blind phase II study in participants with fully resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence. METHODS: Participants with resected stage IIc, IIIb, IIIc and IV melanoma expressing NY-ESO-1 were randomized to treatment with three doses of NY-ESO-1/ISCOMATRIX or ISCOMATRIX adjuvant administered intramuscularly at 4-week intervals, followed by a further dose at 6 months. Primary endpoint was the proportion free of relapse at 18 months in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and two per-protocol populations. Secondary endpoints included relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), safety and NY-ESO-1 immunity. RESULTS: The ITT population comprised 110 participants, with 56 randomized to NY-ESO-1/ISCOMATRIX and 54 to ISCOMATRIX alone. No significant toxicities were observed. There were no differences between the study arms in relapses at 18 months or for median time to relapse; 139 vs 176 days (p=0.296), or relapse rate, 27 (48.2%) vs 26 (48.1%) (HR 0.913; 95% CI 0.402 to 2.231), respectively. RFS and OS were similar between the study arms. Vaccine recipients developed strong positive antibody responses to NY-ESO-1 (p≤0.0001) and NY-ESO-1-specific CD4+ and CD8+ responses. Biopsies following relapse did not demonstrate differences in NY-ESO-1 expression between the study populations although an exploratory study demonstrated reduced (NY-ESO-1)+/Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) class I+ double-positive cells in biopsies from vaccine recipients performed on relapse in 19 participants. CONCLUSIONS: The vaccine was well tolerated, however, despite inducing antigen-specific immunity, it did not affect survival endpoints. Immune escape through the downregulation of NY-ESO-1 and/or HLA class I molecules on tumor may have contributed to relapse.

SIRFLOX: Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing First-Line mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Versus mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Plus Selective Internal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: SIRFLOX was a randomized, multicenter trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres to standard fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with liver metastases plus or minus limited extrahepatic metastases were randomly assigned to receive either modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX6; control) or mFOLFOX6 plus SIRT (SIRT) plus or minus bevacizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at any site as assessed by independent centralized radiology review blinded to study arm. RESULTS: Between October 2006 and April 2013, 530 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (control, 263; SIRT, 267). Median PFS at any site was 10.2 v 10.7 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12; P = .43). Median PFS in the liver by competing risk analysis was 12.6 v 20.5 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P = .002). Objective response rates (ORRs) at any site were similar (68.1% v 76.4% in control v SIRT; P = .113). ORR in the liver was improved with the addition of SIRT (68.8% v 78.7% in control v SIRT; P = .042). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events, including recognized SIRT-related effects, were reported in 73.4% and 85.4% of patients in control versus SIRT. CONCLUSION: The addition of SIRT to FOLFOX-based first-line chemotherapy in patients with liver-dominant or liver-only metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve PFS at any site but significantly delayed disease progression in the liver. The safety profile was as expected and was consistent with previous studies.

Everolimus and zoledronic acid in patients with renal cell carcinoma with bone metastases: a randomized first-line phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are a major cause of morbidity. Post hoc analysis has suggested that bone turnover markers can identify patients at risk of skeletal-related events (SREs) among those receiving zoledronic acid. This study sought to evaluate the effect on bone metastases of everolimus alone compared with everolimus plus zoledronic acid. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty treatment-naive patients with RCC and ≥ 1 bone metastases were randomized 1:1 to everolimus (10 mg daily) versus everolimus plus zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously 4-weekly). Bone-specific assessments were performed at baseline and at weeks 1, 4, 8, and 12. Treatment was continued on allocated arm until progression per RECIST 1.1 (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1). The primary outcome measure was urine N-telopeptide (uNTX) level, with secondary measures of plasma C-telopeptide (CTX), quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Pain [FACT-BP], Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]), progression-free survival (PFS), SREs, and safety. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, reduction in mean uNTX and CTX on everolimus plus zoledronic acid relative to everolimus was 68.4% (95% CI, 60.1%-74.9%; P < .0001) and 76.2% (95% CI, 67.3%-82.7%; P < .0001), respectively. There was no evidence of a difference for FACT-BP (P = .5), but evidence was favorable for BPI Severity (P = .05) and BPI Interference (P = .06). Median PFS was 7.5 months (95% CI, 3.4-11.2) on everolimus plus zoledronic acid and 5.4 months (95% CI, 3.2-6.3) on everolimus (P = .009). Median time to first SRE was 9.6 months (95% CI, 4.3-15.5) on everolimus plus zoledronic acid and 5.2 months (95% CI, 1.6-8.2) on everolimus (P = .03). CONCLUSION: In this RCC population, the addition of zoledronic acid to everolimus significantly reduced bone resorption markers and may prolong tumor control.

Evidence-based update of chemotherapy options for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Colorectal carcinoma is one of the most common malignancies in the Western world. Although fluorouracil (5-FU) has been used for over 40 years, only in the last decade has its value been recognized in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. Early randomized studies explored the best possible doses and schedules of 5-FU and its modulators such as folinic acid or leucovorin (LV) in combination with respect to efficacy and side-effects. The development of oral fluoropyrimidines, in particular capecitabine, has made chemotherapy further accessible and acceptable. The introduction of newer cytotoxics irinotecan and oxaliplatin has achieved a significant improvement in survival rates with manageable toxicity. With appropriate selection of patients and proper sequencing of currently most efficient regimens, median survival durations of around 20 months can now be reached. Novel targeted therapies (bevacizumab, cetuximab and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors) in combination with most efficient chemotherapy regimens will probably push the median survival beyond the 2-year mark. The present article is an overview of most important studies that have substantially changed the approach to metastatic colorectal cancer and have given the patients and clinicians a wider range of options for treating this illness.

Dietary patterns and information needs of colorectal cancer patients post-surgery in Auckland.

AIM: To test the feasibility of collecting dietary data from colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in Auckland, New Zealand and to investigate their dietary information needs post-surgery, in terms of current information sources and satisfaction. METHODS: A food frequency questionnaire was used to collect information on the dietary intake and patterns of patients who had undergone surgical resection of CRC in the Auckland region. Dietary intakes were compared to the Ministry of Health Food and Nutrition Guidelines for Adult New Zealanders (FNG-MoH) along with other publications of dietary patterns in patients with CRC. Participants were also asked to report on what dietary information they received and their satisfaction with this information. RESULTS: Thirty participants completed the survey. Sixty-seven percent and 50% of participants met the recommended daily servings of fruit and vegetables respectively in the FNG-MoH. Four distinct dietary patterns were described for the study population. Over 50% of participants indicated that they did not receive any dietary information after surgery. CONCLUSION: We were able to collect dietary information from this patient group, and this demonstrated that a significant proportion of the study population did not meet the FNG-MoH guidelines for recommended daily fruit and vegetable servings, and that there is an unmet information need in this patient group.