A Bayesian approach for two-stage multivariate Mendelian randomization with mixed outcomes.

Many research studies have investigated the relationship between baseline factors or exposures, such as patient demographic and disease characteristics, and study outcomes such as toxicities or quality of life, but results from most of these studies may be problematic because of potential confounding effects (eg, the imbalance in baseline factors or exposures). It is important to study whether the baseline factors or exposures have causal effects on the clinical outcomes, so that clinicians can have better understanding of the diseases and develop personalized medicine. Mendelian randomization (MR) provides an efficient way to estimate the causal effects using genetic instrumental variables to handle confounders, but most of the existing studies focus on a single outcome at a time and ignores the correlation structure of multiple outcomes. Given that clinical outcomes like toxicities and quality of life are usually a mixture of different types of variables, and multiple datasets may be available for such outcomes, it may be much more beneficial to analyze them jointly instead of separately. Some well-established methods are available for building multivariate models on mixed outcomes, but they do not incorporate MR mechanism to deal with the confounders. To overcome these challenges, we propose a Bayesian-based two-stage multivariate MR method for mixed outcomes on multiple datasets, called BMRMO. Using simulation studies and clinical applications on the CO.17 and CO.20 studies, we demonstrate better performance of our approach compared to the commonly used univariate two-stage method.

Complementary Medicine Use Amongst Patients with Metastatic Cancer Enrolled in Phase III Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicines (CM) are frequently used by patients with cancer. Controversy exists over the effectiveness and risk that CM may add to conventional cancer therapy. The incidence of CM use among patients enrolled in phase III clinical trials is unknown. METHODS: Medication lists from 6 international phase III clinical trials were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients using CM. Patients had metastatic breast, colorectal, or lung cancers. Quality of life, adverse events, overall survival, and progression-free survival were compared between CM users and non-users. Baseline differences between groups were adjusted with propensity score matching groups. RESULTS: Seven hundred and six of 3446 patients (20.5%) used at least one CM. CM use was highest among patients with breast cancer (35.6%). CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors (ECOG 0-1, non-smoking status, younger age, and fewer metastases). CM use was associated with lower rates of adverse events (50% vs. 62%, P = .002) and quality of life was similar between both groups. After adjustment with propensity score matching, CM use was also associated with longer overall survival in patients with lung cancer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95%CI, 0.68-0.94, P =.0054). However, several key control variables like EGFR status were not available. CONCLUSION: One in 5 patients in phase III clinical trials report using CM. CM was not associated with worse cancer-specific outcomes. However, CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors, and likely other confounders that may have contributed to improved outcomes observed in the lung cohort. Physicians should monitor for CM use and potential interactions with clinical trial drugs.

A phase I study of high-dose rosuvastatin with standard dose erlotinib in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Synergistic cytotoxicity with high-dose statins and erlotinib has been demonstrated in preclinical models across a number of tumour types. In this phase I study, we evaluated the safety and potential anti-tumour activity of escalating doses of rosuvastatin in combination with the standard clinical dose of erlotinib in heavily pretreated patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: This was a single-center, phase I open-label study to determine the safety and recommended phase two dose (RPTD) of rosuvastatin in combination with 150 mg/day standard dose of erlotinib. Using a 3 + 3 study design and 28-day cycle, escalating doses of rosuvastatin from 1 to 8 mg/kg/day × 2 weeks (cycle 1) and 3 weeks (subsequent cycles) given concurrently with erlotinib were evaluated. In order to expand the experience and to gain additional safety and pharmacokinetic data, two expansions cohorts using concurrent or alternating weekly dosing regimens at the RPTD were also evaluated. RESULTS: All 24 patients enrolled were evaluable for toxicity, and 22 for response. The dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of reversible muscle toxicity was seen at the 2 mg/kg/day dose level. Maximal tolerated dose (MTD) was determined to be 1 mg/kg/day. Thirty-three percent of patients developed at least 1 ≥ grade 2 muscle toxicity (rhabdomyolysis: 1/24, myalgia: 7/24) resulting in one study-related death. Durable stable disease for more than 170 days was seen in 25 % of patients that received concurrent treatment and were evaluable for response (n = 16). Plasma erlotinib levels on study were unaffected by the addition of rosuvastatin. CONCLUSIONS: The observed disease stabilization rate of 25 % with combination therapy in this heavily pretreated population is encouraging, however, the high levels of muscle toxicities observed limited this combination strategy.

A Phase I study of olaparib and irinotecan in patients with colorectal cancer: Canadian Cancer Trials Group IND 187.

Background Olaparib is an orally available inhibitor of PARP-1. In pre-clinical studies, olaparib was shown to potentiate anti-tumor effects of irinotecan in colon cancer cell lines. This phase I study was conducted to evaluate the safety and tolerability of olaparib in combination with irinotecan. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced colorectal cancer whose disease progressed after at least one systemic therapy regimen were enrolled. Dose escalation and de-escalation were based on toxicity assessment. Pharmacokinetic samples were collected in Cycle 1 for olaparib, irinotecan and SN-38. Results Twenty-five patients were enrolled, 11 patients on a schedule of continuous olaparib and irinotecan every 3 weeks (Part A) and 14 patients on a schedule of intermittent olaparib and irinotecan every 2 weeks (Part B). Continuous olaparib administration was associated with higher than expected toxicities and was not considered to be tolerable. Intermittent olaparib administration was better tolerated, and the recommended phase 2 doses were olaparib 50 mg p.o twice daily days 1-5 and irinotecan 125 mg/m(2) i.v. every 2 weeks. Common toxicities included fatigue, anorexia, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and abdominal pain. Nine patients had stable disease as the best response, 2 from Part A (3 and 9 months respectively), and 7 from Part B (median duration: 7.4 months; range: 4 to 13 months). There was no pharmacokinetic interaction between olaparib and irinotecan. Conclusions Olaparib can be combined with irinotecan if administered intermittently. Both olaparib and irinotecan required significant dose reductions. The lack of anti-tumor efficacy observed in this trial makes this combination of little interest for further clinical development. Trial Registration ID NCT00535353.

Quality of life in patients with K-RAS wild-type colorectal cancer: the CO.20 phase 3 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The CO.20 trial randomized patients with K-RAS wild-type, chemotherapy-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer to receive cetuximab (CET) plus brivanib alaninate (BRIV) or CET plus placebo (CET/placebo). METHODS: Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 at baseline and at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 weeks until disease progression. Predefined coprimary QoL endpoints were time to deterioration (first worsening from baseline of ≥ 10 points) on the Physical Function (PF) and Global (GHS) scales. RESULTS: Of 750 randomized patients, 721 (358 of whom received CET/BRIV) were assessable for QoL. QoL compliance and baseline PF and GHS scores did not differ by treatment arm. The median time to deterioration was 1.6 months versus 1.1 months for GHS (P =.02) and 5.6 months versus 1.7 months for PF (P <.0001) favoring CET/placebo. Secondary analysis favored CET/placebo for QOL response on the PF, Cognitive Function, Fatigue, Nausea, Appetite, and Diarrhea scales. A greater percentage of patients on the CET/BRIV arm had PF worsening at 6 weeks (31% vs 17%). Clinical adverse events of ≥ grade 3 were more common with CET/BRIV than with CET/placebo, including fatigue (25% vs 11%), hypertension, rash, diarrhea, abdominal pain, dehydration, and anorexia. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CET/placebo, the combination of CET/BRIV worsened time to QoL deterioration for patients with K-RAS wild-type, chemotherapy-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer on the PF and GHS scales of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30. This result may be due to higher rates of fatigue and gastrointestinal adverse events.

Chemotherapy regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Advanced pancreatic cancer confers poor prognosis and treatment advancement has been slow. Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated survival benefits for combination therapy compared to gemcitabine alone. However, the comparative benefits and harms of available combination chemotherapy treatments are not clear. We therefore conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to assess the comparative safety and efficacy of chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Registry of Clinical trials and abstracts from major scientific meetings were searched for RCTs published from 2002 to 2013. Key outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and safety including grade 3-4 febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, vomiting, diarrhea, fatigue and sensory neuropathy. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted to calculate survival and safety outcomes using gemcitabine (GEM) as the reference comparator. Effect estimates and 95% credible intervals were calculated for each comparison. Mean ranks and the probability of being best were obtained for each treatment analyzed in the network meta-analysis. RESULTS: The search identified 23 studies involving 19 different treatment regimens and 9,989 patients. FOLFIRINOX, GEM/cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU (PEFG), GEM/NAB-paclitaxel (NAB-P), GEM/erlotinib+/-bevacizumab, GEM/capecitabine, and GEM/oxaliplatin were associated with statistically significant improvements in OS and PFS relative to gemcitabine alone and several other treatments. They were amongst the top ranked for survival outcomes amongst other treatments included. No significant differences were found for other combination chemotherapy treatments. Effect estimates from indirect comparisons matched closely to estimates derived from pairwise comparisons. Overall, combination therapies had greater risk for evaluated grade 3-4 toxicities over gemcitabine alone. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of head-to-head comparisons, we performed a mixed-treatment analysis to achieve high-quality information on the effectiveness and safety of each treatment. This study suggests that some combination therapies may offer greater benefits in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer than others. To more fully elucidate the comparative benefits and harms of different combination chemotherapy regimens, rigorously conducted comparative studies, or network meta-analysis of patient-level data are required.

Patterns of recurrence following selective intraoperative radiofrequency ablation as an adjunct to hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to analyze the patterns of recurrence following intraoperative radiofrequency ablation (RFA) combined with hepatic resection for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). METHODS: Patients undergoing liver resection (with or without RFA) for CLM were examined. Rates and patterns of disease recurrence, as well as overall survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox analyses. RESULTS: A total of 174 patients underwent liver resection for CLM (150 without and 24 with intraoperative RFA). RFA was used to treat 41 tumors (median 1.6 cm). The 3-year overall survival was 65.5% and 61.4% (adjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.55-1.88). Median recurrence-free survival was 7.4 versus 12.7 months with RFA versus non-RFA, respectively (adjusted HR 1.51, 95% CI 0.94-4.42). On multivariate analysis, neither survival nor recurrence-free survival was significantly associated with RFA. In total, there were two RFA ablation zone local failures. An ablation site recurrence was the sole site in one patient (4.2%). CONCLUSION: RFA was used as an adjunct to resection in patients with greater disease burden. Despite this, RFA was not significantly associated with a higher risk of local failure and was not associated with worse survival, when compared with liver resection alone.

The relationship between rash, tumour KRAS mutation status and clinical and quality of life outcomes in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab in the NCIC CTG/AGITG CO.17.

BACKGROUND: The NCIC CTG/AGITG CO.17 trial demonstrated that cetuximab monotherapy improved overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS) in patients previously treated for advanced colorectal cancer. A strong relationship was observed between benefit from cetuximab and development of rash. In this analysis, the association of rash and benefit from cetuximab is explored and presented by KRAS mutation status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Rash was graded by NCI CTC 2.0 criteria. Landmark analysis was performed by excluding patients who died or dropped out within 28 days and then grouping by worst grade of rash experienced by day 28. Multivariate Cox models were conducted separately for patients with KRAS wild-type (WT) tumours and KRAS mutated (MUT) tumours. CO.17 primary outcome was OS. RESULTS: Development of grade 2 + rash on cetuximab was associated with a trend towards increased OS (HR 0.61 with 95% CI 0.36-1.02 and p = 0.06) and PFS (HR 0.68 with 95% CI 0.45-1.03 and p = 0.07) as compared to grade 0/1 rash in patients with WT tumours. In patients with WT tumours on cetuximab both grade 0/1 and grade 2 + rash were associated with increased PFS (HR 0.57 95% CI 0.38-0.86; p = 0.008; and HR 0.32 95% CI 0.21-0.49; p < 0.0001) respectively, in comparison with best supportive care (BSC). Only development of grade 2 + rash on cetuximab was associated with increased OS (HR 0.52 with 95% CI 0.34-0.80 and p = 0.003) in comparison with BSC. No significant difference was found in OS or PFS among patients on cetuximab with MUT tumours with either rash grade as compared to BSC. No consistent trend was observed for the association of severity of rash and quality of life (QoL). CONCLUSION: As all patients with WT tumours benefitted to some extent from cetuximab regardless of the grade of rash, grade of rash was not a useful predictive marker.

A Randomized Phase III Study of Arfolitixorin versus Leucovorin with 5-Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, and Bevacizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The AGENT Trial.

PURPOSE: Suboptimal treatment outcomes with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folate, the standard of care for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), have generated interest in optimizing the folate. Arfolitixorin ([6R]-5,10-methylene-tetrahydrofolate) is an immediately active folate and may improve outcomes over the existing standard of care (leucovorin). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: AGENT was a randomized, phase III study (NCT03750786). Patients with mCRC were randomized to arfolitixorin (120 mg/m2 given as two intravenous bolus doses of 60 mg/m2) or leucovorin (400 mg/m2 given as a single intravenous infusion) plus 5-FU, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab. Assessments were performed every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the superiority of arfolitixorin for overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Between February 2019 and April 2021, 490 patients were randomized (245 to each arm). After a median follow-up of 266 days, the primary endpoint of superiority for ORR was not achieved (48.2% for arfolitixorin vs. 49.4% for leucovorin, Psuperiority = 0.57). Outcomes were not achieved for median progression-free survival (PFS; 12.8 and 11.6 months, P = 0.38), median duration of response (12.2 and 12.9 months, P = 0.40), and median overall survival (23.8 and 28.0 months, P = 0.78). The proportion of patients with an adverse event of grade ≥3 severity was similar between arms (68.7% and 67.2%, respectively), as was quality of life. BRAF mutations and MTHFD2 expression were both associated with a lower PFS with arfolitixorin. CONCLUSIONS: The study failed to demonstrate clinical benefit of arfolitixorin (120 mg/m2) over leucovorin. However, it provides some useful insights from the first-line treatment setting, including the effect of gene expression on outcomes. SIGNIFICANCE: This phase III study compared arfolitixorin, a direct-acting folate, with leucovorin in FOLFOX plus bevacizumab in mCRC. Arfolitixorin (120 mg/m2) did not improve the ORR, potentially indicating a suboptimal dose.

The association of healthcare contact days with physical function and survival in CCTG/AGITG CO.17.

INTRODUCTION: While contact days-days with healthcare contact outside home-are increasingly adopted as a measure of time toxicity and treatment burden, they could also serve as a surrogate of treatment-related harm. We sought to assess the association between contact days and patient-reported outcomes, and the prognostic ability of contact days. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of CO.17 that evaluated cetuximab vs supportive care in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. CO.17 collected EORTC-QLQ-C30 instrument data. We assessed the association between number of contact days in a window and changes in physical function and global health status, and the association between number of contact days in the first 4 weeks with overall survival (OS). RESULTS: There was a negative association between the number of contact days and change in physical function (per each additional contact day at 4 weeks, 1.50 point decrease; and 8 weeks, 1.06 point decrease, p < .0001 for both), but not with global health status. This negative association was seen in patients receiving cetuximab, but not supportive care. More contact days in the first 4 weeks was associated with worse OS for all comers and patients receiving cetuximab (per each additional contact day; all comers, aHR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.05- 1.10; and cetuximab, aHR 1.08, 95%CI 1.05- 1.11, p < .0001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of a clinical trial, more contact days early in the course was associated with declines in physical function and worse survival in all-comers and in participants receiving cancer-directed treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00079066.

Plasma versus tissue tumor mutational burden as biomarkers of durvalumab plus tremelimumab response in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in the CO.26 trial.

PURPOSE: Tissue derived tumor mutation burden (TMB) of ≥10 mutations/Mb is a histology agnostic biomarker for the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab. However, the dataset on which this was validated lacked colorectal cancers (CRCs), and there is limited evidence for immunotherapy benefit in CRC using this threshold. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CO.26 was a randomized phase II study of 180 patients comparing durvalumab and tremelimumab (D+T, n=119 patients) versus best supportive care (BSC, n=61 patients). ctDNA sequencing was available for 168 patients (n=118 D+T, n=50), of which 165 had evaluable plasma TMB (pTMB). Tissue sequencing was available for 108 patients. Optimal thresholds for stratifying patients based on overall survival were determined using a minimal p-value approach. This report includes the final overall survival analysis. RESULTS: Tissue TMB ≥10 mutations/Mb was not predictive of benefit from D+T compared to BSC in microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic CRC (HR 0.71 [95% CI:0.28-1.80], p=0.47). No tissue TMB threshold could identify a high TMB group that benefited from ICI. In contrast, plasma TMB (pTMB) ≥28 mutations/Mb was predictive of benefit from D+T (HR=0.34 [95%CI:0.13-0.85], p=0.022), as was clonal pTMB ≥10.6 mutations/Mb (HR=0.10 [95%CI:0.014-0.79], p=0.029) and subclonal pTMB ≥25.9/Mb (HR=0.20 [95% CI:0.061-0.69], p=0.010). Higher pTMB was associated with length of time on cytotoxic agents (p=0.021) and prior anti-EGFR exposure (p=2.44x10-06). CONCLUSION: pTMB derived from either clonal or subclonal mutations may identify a group more likely to benefit from immunotherapy, though validation is required. Tissue TMB provided no predictive utility for immunotherapy in this trial.

Transverse Colon Primary Tumor Location as a Biomarker in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of CCTG/AGITG CO.17 and CO.20 Randomized Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: Sidedness is prognostic and predictive of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Transverse colon has been historically excluded from several analyses of sidedness and the optimal division between left- and right-sided colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated transverse colon primary tumor location as a biomarker in mCRC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Pooled analysis of CCTG/AGITG CO.17 and CO.20 trials of cetuximab in chemotherapy-refractory mCRC. Outcomes of patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type (WT) mCRC from CO.17 and KRAS WT mCRC from CO.20 were analyzed according to location. RESULTS: A total of 553 patients were analyzed, 32 (5.8%) with cancers from the transverse, 101 (18.3%) from right, and 420 from (75.9%) left colon. Transverse mCRC failed to reach significant benefit from cetuximab versus best supportive care (BSC) for overall survival [OS; median, 5.9 vs. 2.1 months; HR, 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-1.42; P=0.26] and progression-free survival (PFS; median, 1.8 vs. 1.3 months; HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.26-1.28; P=0.16). Analyzing exclusively patients randomized to cetuximab, right-sided and transverse had comparable outcomes for OS (median, 5.6 vs. 5.9 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50-1.34; P=0.43) and PFS (median, 1.9 vs. 1.8 months; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49-1.26; P=0.31). Patients with left-sided mCRC had superior outcomes with cetuximab compared with transverse for OS (median, 9.7 vs. 5.9 months; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.67; P=0.0002) and PFS (median, 3.8 vs. 1.8 months; HR, 0,49; 95% CI, 0.31-0.76; P=0.001). Location was not prognostic in patients treated with BSC alone. CONCLUSIONS: Transverse mCRC has comparable prognostic and predictive features with right-sided mCRC.

Sunitinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin in patients with advanced solid malignancies--results of a phase I dose-escalation study.

OBJECTIVES: The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and overall safety of sunitinib plus pemetrexed and carboplatin was determined in patients with advanced solid malignancies. METHODS: In this phase I dose-escalation study, patients received oral sunitinib on a continuous daily dosing (CDD) schedule (37.5 mg/day) or Schedule 2/1 (2 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment; 37.5 or 50 mg/day). Pemetrexed (400-500 mg/m(2) IV) and carboplatin (AUC = 5 mg·min/ml IV) were administered q3w. At the MTD for the chosen schedule, a cohort of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or mesothelioma was further evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled on Schedule 2/1 (expansion cohort included) and 3 patients on the CDD schedule. The MTD on Schedule 2/1 was sunitinib 37.5 mg/day with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC = 5 mg·min/ml; MTD on the CDD schedule was not established. Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 3/4 neutropenia, grade 3 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3 hand-foot syndrome. The most common grade 3/4 drug-related non-hematologic adverse events at Schedule 2/1 MTD were fatigue/asthenia and diarrhea (both n = 4). Grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities included neutropenia (83%) and leukopenia (83%). Pharmacokinetic data revealed no clinically significant drug-drug interactions. Best response at the Schedule 2/1 MTD was stable disease ≥8 weeks in 3/5 evaluable patients (60%). CONCLUSIONS: With this combination, in patients with advanced solid malignancies, sunitinib MTD on Schedule 2/1 was 37.5 mg/day. Sunitinib plus pemetrexed and carboplatin were tolerable at the MTD, although sunitinib dose delays and reductions were often required due to myelosuppression.

Evaluating the Time Toxicity of Cancer Treatment in the CCTG CO.17 Trial.

PURPOSE: The time spent in pursuing treatments for advanced cancer can be substantial. We have previously proposed a pragmatic and patient-centered metric of these time costs-which we term time toxicity-as any day with physical health care system contact. This includes outpatient visits (eg, bloodwork, scans, etc), emergency department visits, and overnight stays in a health care facility. Herein, we sought to assess time toxicity in a completed randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO.17 RCT that evaluated weekly cetuximab infusions versus supportive care alone in 572 patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Initial results reported a 6-week improvement in median overall survival (OS) with cetuximab (6.1 v 4.6 months). Subsequent analyses reported that benefit was restricted to patients with K-ras wild-type tumors. We calculated patient-level time toxicity by analyzing trial forms. We considered days without health care contact as home days. We compared medians of time measures across arms and stratified results by K-ras status. RESULTS: In the overall population, median time toxic days were higher in the cetuximab arm (28 v 10, P < .001) although median home days were not statistically different between arms (140 v 121, P = .09). In patients with K-ras-mutated tumors, cetuximab was associated with almost numerically equal home days (114 days v 112 days, P = .571) and higher time toxicity (23 days v 11 days, P < .001). In patients with K-ras wild-type tumors, cetuximab was associated with more home days (186 v 132, P < .001). CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept feasibility study demonstrates that measures of time toxicity can be extracted through secondary analyses of RCTs. In CO.17, despite an overall OS benefit with cetuximab, home days were statistically similar across arms. Such data can supplement traditional survival end points in RCTs. Further work should refine and validate the measure prospectively.[Media: see text].

Circulating Tumor DNA Identifies Diverse Landscape of Acquired Resistance to Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies are effective treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer. Improved understanding of acquired resistance mechanisms may facilitate circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) monitoring, anti-EGFR rechallenge, and combinatorial strategies to delay resistance. METHODS: Patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (n = 169) enrolled on the CO.26 trial had pre-anti-EGFR tissue whole-exome sequencing (WES) compared with baseline and week 8 ctDNA assessments with the GuardantOMNI assay. Acquired alterations were compared between patients with prior anti-EGFR therapy (n = 66) and those without. Anti-EGFR therapy occurred a median of 111 days before ctDNA assessment. RESULTS: ctDNA identified 12 genes with increased mutation frequency after anti-EGFR therapy, including EGFR (P = .0007), KRAS (P = .0017), LRP1B (P = .0046), ZNF217 (P = .0086), MAP2K1 (P = .018), PIK3CG (P = .018), BRAF (P = .048), and NRAS (P = .048). Acquired mutations appeared as multiple concurrent subclonal alterations, with most showing decay over time. Significant increases in copy-gain frequency were noted in 29 genes after anti-EGFR exposure, with notable alterations including EGFR (P < .0001), SMO (P < .0001), BRAF (P < .0001), MET (P = .0002), FLT3 (P = .0002), NOTCH4 (P = .0006), ERBB2 (P = .004), and FGFR1 (P = .006). Copy gains appeared stable without decay 8 weeks later. There were 13 gene fusions noted among 11 patients, all but one of which was associated with prior anti-EGFR therapy. Polyclonal resistance was common with acquisition of ≥ 10 resistance related alterations noted in 21% of patients with previous anti-EGFR therapy compared with 5% in those without (P = .010). Although tumor mutation burden (TMB) did not differ pretreatment (P = .63), anti-EGFR exposure increased TMB (P = .028), whereas lack of anti-EGFR exposure resulted in declining TMB (P = .014). CONCLUSION: Paired tissue and ctDNA sequencing identified multiple novel mutations, copy gains, and fusions associated with anti-EGFR therapy that frequently co-occur as subclonal alterations in the same patient.

Clinical and metabolomic characterization of Brivanib-Induced hypertension in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trials of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have not demonstrated dramatic benefits in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), and this may be a function of poor patient selection. TKI-induced hypertension is reportedly a surrogate marker for treatment benefit for some tumor types. Our objective was to determine whether hypertension was associated with benefit in the context of CRC treatment, and also to gain insight on the pathogenesis of TKI-induced hypertension by monitoring associated changes in the circulating metabolome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data were acquired from clinical trial patients with metastatic CRC randomized to cetuximab ± the TKI brivanib (N = 750). Outcomes were evaluated as a function of treatment-induced hypertension. For metabolomic studies, plasma samples were taken at baseline, as well as at 1, 4, and 12 weeks after treatment initiation. Samples were submitted to gas chromatography-mass spectrometry to identify treatment-related metabolomic changes associated with TKI-induced hypertension, compared to pre-treatment baseline. A model based on changes in metabolite concentrations was generated using orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA). RESULTS: In the brivanib treated group, 95 patients had treatment-related hypertension within 12 weeks of initiating treatment. TKI-induced hypertension was not associated with a significantly higher response rate, nor was it associated with improved progression-free or overall survival. In metabolomic studies, 386 metabolites were identified. There were 29 metabolites that changed with treatment and distinguished patients with and without TKI-induced hypertension. The OPLS-DA model for brivanib-induced hypertension was significant and robust (R2 Y score = 0.89, Q2 Y score = 0.70, CV-ANOVA = 2.01 e-7). Notable metabolomic features previously reported in pre-eclampsia and associated with vasoconstriction were found. CONCLUSION: TKI-induced hypertension was not associated with clinical benefit in metastatic CRC. We have identified changes in the metabolome that are associated with the development of worsening brivanib-induced hypertension that may be useful in future efforts of characterizing this toxicity.

Optimizing the number of variants tracked to follow disease burden with circulating tumor DNA assays in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Background: The number of somatic mutations detectable in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is highly heterogeneous in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The optimal number of mutations required to assess disease kinetics is relevant and remains poorly understood. Objectives: To determine whether increasing panel breadth (the number of tracked variants in a ctDNA assay) would alter the sensitivity in detecting ctDNA in patients with mCRC. Design: We used archival tissue sequencing to perform an in silico assessment of the optimal number of tracked mutations to detect and monitor disease kinetics in mCRC using sequencing data from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO.26 trial. Methods: For each patient, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, or 16 of the most clonal (highest variant allele frequency) somatic variants were selected from archival tissue-based whole-exome sequencing and assessed for the proportion of variants detected in matched ctDNA at baseline, week 8, and progression timepoints. Results: Data from 110 patients were analyzed. Genes most frequently encountered among the top four highest VAF variants in archival tissue were TP53 (51.9% of patients), APC (43.3%), KRAS (42.3%), and SMAD4 (9.6%). While the frequency of detecting at least one tracked variant increased when expanding beyond variant pool sizes of 1 and 2 in baseline (p = 0.0030) and progression (p = 0.0030) ctDNA samples, we observed no significant benefit to increases in variant pool size past four variants in any of the ctDNA timepoints (p < 0.05). Conclusion: While increasing panel breadth beyond two tracked variants improved variant re-detection in ctDNA samples from patients with treatment refractory mCRC, increases beyond four tracked variants yielded no significant improvement in variant re-detection.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Excision, and Observation for Early Rectal Cancer: The Phase II NEO Trial (CCTG CO.28) Primary End Point Results.

PURPOSE: Organ-sparing therapy for early-stage I/IIA rectal cancer is intended to avoid functional disturbances or a permanent ostomy associated with total mesorectal excision (TME). The objective of this phase II trial was to determine the outcomes and organ-sparing rate of patients with early-stage rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by transanal excision surgery (TES). METHODS: This phase II trial included patients with clinical T1-T3abN0 low- or mid-rectal adenocarcinoma eligible for endoscopic resection who were treated with 3 months of chemotherapy (modified folinic acid-fluorouracil-oxaliplatin 6 or capecitabine-oxaliplatin). Those with evidence of response proceeded to transanal endoscopic surgery 2-6 weeks later. The primary end point was protocol-specified organ preservation rate, defined as the proportion of patients with tumor downstaging to ypT0/T1N0/X and who avoided radical surgery. RESULTS: Of 58 patients enrolled, all commenced chemotherapy and 56 proceeded to surgery. A total of 33/58 patients had tumor downstaging to ypT0/1N0/X on the surgery specimen, resulting in an intention-to-treat protocol-specified organ preservation rate of 57% (90% CI, 45 to 68). Of 23 remaining patients recommended for TME surgery on the basis of protocol requirements, 13 declined and elected to proceed directly to observation resulting in 79% (90% CI, 69 to 88) achieving organ preservation. The remaining 10/23 patients proceeded to recommended TME of whom seven had no histopathologic residual disease. The 1-year and 2-year locoregional relapse-free survival was, respectively, 98% (95% CI, 86 to 100) and 90% (95% CI, 58 to 98), and there were no distant recurrences or deaths. Minimal change in quality of life and rectal function scores was observed. CONCLUSION: Three months of induction chemotherapy may successfully downstage a significant proportion of patients with early-stage rectal cancer, allowing well-tolerated organ-preserving surgery.

Plasma Cetuximab Concentrations Correlate With Survival in Patients With Advanced KRAS Wild Type Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cetuximab is a standard of care therapy for patients with RAS wild-type (WT) advanced colorectal cancer. Limited data suggest a wide variation in cetuximab plasma concentrations after standard dosing regimens. We correlated cetuximab plasma concentrations with survival and toxicity. METHODS: The CO. 20 study randomized patients with RAS WT advanced colorectal cancer in a 1:1 ratio to cetuximab 400 mg/m2 intravenously followed by weekly maintenance of 250 mg/m2, plus brivanib 800 mg orally daily or placebo. Blood samples obtained at week 5 precetuximab treatment were analyzed by ELISA. Patients were grouped into tertiles based on plasma cetuximab concentrations. Cetuximab concentration tertiles were correlated with survival outcomes and toxicity. Patient demographic and biochemical parameters were evaluated as co-variables. RESULTS: Week 5 plasma cetuximab concentrations were available for 591 patients (78.8%). The median overall survival (OS) was 11.4 months and 7.8 months for patients in the highest (T3) and lowest tertiles (T1) respectively. On multivariable analysis, plasma cetuximab concentration was associated with OS (HR 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.83, P < .001, T3 vs. T1), and a trend towards progression-free survival (HR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66-1.02, P = .07, T3 vs. T1). There was no association between cetuximab concentration and skin toxicity or diarrhea. CONCLUSION: The standard cetuximab dosing regimen may not be optimal for all patients. Further pharmacokinetic studies are needed to optimize cetuximab dosing given the potential improvement in OS.

Liver Metastases and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Efficacy in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have limited activity in microsatellite-stable (MSS) or mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer. Recent findings suggest the efficacy of ICIs may be modulated by the presence of liver metastases (LM). Objective: To investigate the association between the presence of LM and ICI activity in advanced MSS colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this secondary analysis of the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO26 (CCTG CO.26) randomized clinical trial, patients with treatment-refractory colorectal cancer were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to durvalumab plus tremelimumab or best supportive care alone between August 10, 2016, and June 15, 2017. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) with 80% power and 2-sided α = .10. The median follow-up was 15.2 (0.2-22.0) months. In this post hoc analysis performed from February 11 to 14, 2022, subgroups were defined based on the presence or absence of LM and study treatments. Intervention: Durvalumab plus tremelimumab or best supportive care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hazard ratios (HRs) and 90% CIs were calculated based on a stratified Cox proportional hazards regression model. Plasma tumor mutation burden at study entry was determined using a circulating tumor DNA assay. The primary end point of the study was OS, defined as the time from randomization to death due to any cause; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR). Results: Of 180 patients enrolled (median age, 65 [IQR, 36-87] years; 121 [67.2%] men; 19 [10.6%] Asian, 151 [83.9%] White, and 10 [5.6%] other race or ethnicity), LM were present in 127 (70.6%). For patients with LM, there was a higher proportion of male patients (94 of 127 [74.0%] vs 27 of 53 [50.9%]; P = .005), and the time from initial cancer diagnosis to study entry was shorter (median, 40 [range, 8-153] vs 56 [range, 14-181] months; P = .001). Plasma tumor mutation burden was significantly higher in patients with LM. Patients without LM had significantly improved PFS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR, 0.54 [90% CI, 0.35-0.96]; P = .08; P = .02 for interaction). Disease control rate was 49% (90% CI, 36%-62%) in patients without LM treated with durvalumab plus tremelimumab, compared with 14% (90% CI, 6%-38%) in those with LM (odds ratio, 5.70 [90% CI, 1.46-22.25]; P = .03). On multivariable analysis, patients without LM had significantly improved OS and PFS compared with patients with LM. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the CCTG CO.26 study, the presence of LM was associated with worse outcomes for patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Patients without LM had improved PFS and higher DCR with durvalumab plus tremelimumab. Liver metastases may be associated with poor outcomes of ICI treatment in advanced colorectal cancer and should be considered in the design and interpretation of future clinical studies evaluating this therapy.