Predictive significance of FGFR4 p.G388R polymorphism in metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) treatment.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 (Lonsurf®) is an oral fluoropyrimidine consisting of a combination of trifluridine (a thymidine analog) and tipiracil (a thymidine phosphorylation inhibitor). The drug is effective in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients refractory to fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. This study is a real-world analysis, investigating the interplay of genotype/phenotype in relation to TAS-102 sensitivity. METHODS: Forty-seven consecutive mCRC patients were treated with TAS-102 at the National Cancer Institute of Naples from March 2019 to March 2021, at a dosage of 35 mg/m2, twice a day, in cycles of 28 days (from day 1 to 5 and from day 8 to 12). Clinical-pathological parameters were described. Activity was evaluated with RECIST criteria (v1.1) and toxicity with NCI-CTC (v5.0). Survival was depicted through the Kaplan-Meyer curves. Genetic features of patients were evaluated with Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) through the Illumina NovaSeq 6000 platform and TruSigt™Oncology 500 kit. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 65 years (range: 46-77). Forty-one patients had 2 or more metastatic sites and 38 patients underwent to more than 2 previous lines of therapies. ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) Performance Status (PS) was 2 in 19 patients. The median number of TAS-102 cycles was 4 (range: 2-12). The most frequent toxic event was neutropenia (G3/G4 in 16 patients). There were no severe (> 3) non-haematological toxicities or treatment-related deaths. Twenty-six patients experienced progressive disease (PD), 21 stable disease (SD). Three patients with long-lasting disease control (DC: complete, partial responses or stable disease) shared an FGFR4 (p.Gly388Arg) mutation. Patients experiencing DC had more frequently a low tumour growth rate (P = 0.0306) and an FGFR4 p.G388R variant (P < 0.0001). The FGFR4 Arg388 genotype was associated with better survival (median: 6.4 months) compared to the Gly388 genotype (median: 4 months); the HR was 0.25 (95% CI 0.12- 0.51; P = 0.0001 at Log-Rank test). CONCLUSIONS: This phenotype/genotype investigation suggests that the FGFR4 p.G388R variant may serve as a new marker for identifying patients who are responsive to TAS-102. A mechanistic hypothesis is proposed to interpret these findings.

Phase I study of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) plus irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab as a second-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I trial is to determine the recommended dose of the TAS-102, irinotecan plus bevacizumab regimen and assess its safety and efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin treatment. METHODS: A 3 + 3 designed dose escalation was performed. Patients were administered TAS-102 (30-35 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-5) and irinotecan (150-165 mg/m2 on day 1) combined with a fixed dose of bevacizumab (5 mg/kg on day 1) every two weeks. The primary endpoint was the determination of the recommended phase II dose. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled: 6 at the Level 1 (TAS-102 30 mg/m2 twice daily, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg), six at the Level 2 (TAS-102 35 mg/m2 twice daily, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg), and six at the Level 3 (TAS-102 30 mg/m2 twice daily, irinotecan 165 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg). Five dose-limiting toxicities occurred: one observed at Level 1 (thrombocytopenia), two at Level 2 (neutropenia and diarrhea), and two at Level 3 (fatigue and neutropenia). The RP2D was established as TAS-102 30 mg/m2 twice daily and irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg. The most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (33.3%), diarrhea (16.7%), and thrombocytopenia (11.1%). No treatment-related death occurred. Two patients (11.1%) experienced partial responses and 14 (77.8%) had stable disease. CONCLUSION: The regimen of TAS-102, irinotecan, and bevacizumab is tolerable with antitumor activity for metastatic colorectal cancer patients refractory to first-line fluoropyrimidines and oxaliplatin treatment.

Ramucirumab beyond progression plus TAS-102 in patients with advanced or metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma, after treatment failure on a ramucirumab-based therapy.

Based on results of prior trials (TAGS, REGARD, RAINBOW), the combination of ramucirumab beyond progression with TAS-102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) seems to be promising in advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGA). In this multicenter, non-randomized, open-label, investigator-initiated pilot trial, ramucirumab-pretreated patients with metastatic EGA received a maximum of 4 cycles of ramucirumab (8 mg/kg i.v. on day 1 and 15, Q2W) plus TAS-102 (35 mg/m2 p.o. bid on day 1-5 and day 8-12; Q2W). Primary endpoint was tolerability and toxicity, defining a positive trial if the SAE rate according to CTCAE 5.0 will increase <30% (up to 55%) compared to historical results from TAGS trial (SAE rate 43%). Secondary endpoints were further evaluation of safety and assessment of efficacy according to tumor response and overall and progression-free survival (OS/PFS). Twenty patients, 20% gastric and 80% GEJ cancers and 55% with ECOG 0 were enrolled. In total, nine SAEs were reported in 25% [95% CI: 8.7-49.1] of the patients, all without relationship to the systemic therapy. The median OS and PFS were 9.1 months [5.4-10.1] and 2.9 months [1.7-4.8], respectively. In addition, a disease control rate of 45% was obtained. The trial showed a favorable safety profile with a numerically lower incidence of SAEs for the combination of ramucirumab with TAS-102 compared to historical TAGS trial. Furthermore, the combination demonstrated efficacy in the beyond progression setting and therefore warrants further evaluation in a randomized trial compared to TAS-102 alone.

A Real-World Comparison of Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Trifluridine/Tipiracil (TAS-102) and regorafenib are FDA-approved in the United States for treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). FDA approvals of these agents were based on modest improvements in overall survival (OS) compared with best supportive care + placebo in the RECOURSE and CORRECT trials, respectively. This study compared real-world clinical outcomes with the use of these agents. METHODS: A nationwide deidentified electronic health record-derived database was reviewed for patients diagnosed with mCRC between 2015 and 2020. Patients who received at least 2 lines of standard systemic therapy followed by treatment with either TAS-102 or regorafenib were included for analysis. Kaplan-Meier and propensity score-weighted proportional hazards models were used to compare survival outcomes between groups. RESULTS: The records of 22,078 patients with mCRC were reviewed. Of these, 1,937 patients received at least 2 lines of standard therapy followed by regorafenib and/or TAS-102. Median OS for the TAS-102 alone or prior regorafenib group (n=1,016) was 6.66 months (95% CI, 6.16-7.18 months) compared with 6.30 months (95% CI, 5.80-6.79 months) for regorafenib alone or prior to TAS-102 (n=921; P=.36). A propensity score-weighted analysis controlling for potential confounders did not demonstrate a significant difference in survival between groups (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90-1.09; P=.82). A subgroup analysis did not identify any significant differences in outcomes regarding age, performance status, tumor sidedness, microsatellite instability status, or RAS/RAF status. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of real-world data found that OS was similar for patients with mCRC who were treated with TAS-102 compared with regorafenib. Median OS with both agents in a real-world setting was similar to that shown in the clinical trials that led to their approvals. A prospective trial comparing TAS-102 and regorafenib would unlikely change current management of patients with refractory mCRC.

Effects and risk factors of TAS-102 in real-world patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, EROTAS-R study.

BACKGROUND: Trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) is an anticancer drug for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to analyze the effects and risk factors about effects of TAS-102 in real-world patients with metastatic CRC (the EROTAS-R study). METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed 271 patients aged ≥ 20 years who underwent TAS-102 for metastatic CRC at nine related institutions from 2014 to 2021. Therapeutic results of TAS-102 + bevacizumab (Bev) and TAS-102, effect predictors, adverse events (AE), and AE predictors were examined. RESULTS: The backgrounds of all cases were as follows: average age, 66.7 ± 10.9 years; male ratio, 59.5%; performance status (PS) 0/1/2, 43.5%/50.6%/5.9%; and tumor site right/left, 25.5%/74.5%. The therapeutic results of 109 cases receiving TAS-102 + Bev and 162 cases receiving TAS-102 were as follows: disease control rate, 53.2% vs. 28.0% (p < 0.01); progressive free survival (PFS), 6.2 vs. 4.2 months (p < 0.01); and overall survival (S), 11.8 vs. 9.3 months (p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis for effect-related factors (odds ratio (OR), 95%confidence interval (CI)) showed the following: PS1 + 2 (0.257, 0.134-0.494, p < 0.01) and a combination of Bev (3.052, 1.598-5.827, p < 0.01). The rates of grade 3 AE for TAS-102 + Bev and TAS-102 were 53.2% and 48.8%, respectively (p = 0.47). Various AE predictors were as follows: male sex (p = 0.69), age ≥ 75 years (p = 0.59), PS1 + 2 (p = 0.20), body surface area < 1.53 m2 (p = 0.26), eGFR < 50 ml/min (p = 0.02), and AST ≥ 50 IU/L (p = 0.64). CONCLUSION: A better OS and PFS comparing TAS-102 + Bev to TAS-102 for CRC was achieved in a large number of real-world patients.

An exploration of trifluridine/tipiracil in combination with irinotecan in patients with pretreated advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) and irinotecan are treatment options for heavily pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer, but their efficacies are limited. We investigated the combination of FTD/TPI and irinotecan for such patients. METHODS: Patients who were refractory to fluoropyrimidine, platinum and taxane were enrolled into four cohorts (Level 1A/1B/2A/2B) and treated with irinotecan (100 [Level 1] or 125 [Level 2] mg/m2 on days 1 and 15) and FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2/dose, twice daily, on days 1-5 and 8-12 [Level A] or on days 1-5 and days 15-19 [Level B]) of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoints were the maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and recommended phase II dose (RP2D); the secondary endpoint was the disease control rate (DCR). RESULTS: Eleven patients were enrolled: 2 at Level 1A, 3 at Level 1B, and 6 at Level 2B. DLTs occurred in 2/2 patients at Level 1A and 2/6 patients at Level 2B. Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (90.9%), leukopenia (54.5%), anemia (45.5%) and febrile neutropenia (18.2%). One patient at Level 2B achieved a partial response, and the DCR was 72.7% (95% CI, 39.0%-94.0%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival periods were 3.0 months (95% CI, 0.92-not reached) and 10.2 months (95% CI, 2.2-not reached), respectively. CONCLUSION: The RP2D of FTD/TPI combined with irinotecan was determined to be Level 1B; this level was associated with manageable hematologic toxicities and feasible non-hematologic toxicities. Further evaluation of the efficacy of RP2D treatment is necessary.

Phase I prospective trial of TAS-102 (trifluridine and tipiracil) and radioembolization with 90Y resin microspheres for chemo-refractory colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Extrahepatic disease progression limits clinical efficacy of Yttrium-90 (90Y) radioembolization (TARE) for patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Trifluridine and tipiracil (TAS-102) has overall survival benefit for patients with refractory mCRC and may be a radiosensitizer. METHODS: Sequential lobar TARE using 90Y resin microspheres in combination with TAS-102 in 28-day cycles were used to treat adult patients with bilobar liver-dominant chemo-refractory mCRC according to 3 + 3 dose escalation design with a 12-patient dose expansion cohort. Study objectives were to establish safety and determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of TAS-102 in combination with TARE. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients (14 women, 7 men) with median age of 60 years were enrolled. No dose limiting toxicities were observed. Treatment related severe adverse events included cytopenias (10 patients, 48%) and radioembolization-induced liver disease (2 patients, 10%). Disease control rate in the liver lobes treated with TARE was 100%. Best observed radiographic responses were partial response for 4 patients (19%) and stable disease for 12 patients (57%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of TAS-102 and TARE for patients with liver-dominant mCRC is safe and consistently achieves disease control within the liver. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02602327 (first posted 11/11/2015).

Biweekly TAS-102 and bevacizumab as third-line chemotherapy for advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer: a phase II, multicenter, clinical trial (TAS-CC4 study).

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 improves overall survival (OS) of patients with refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), resulting in median progression-free survival (PFS) of 2.0 months (RECOURSE trial). Subsequently, a combination of TAS-102 and bevacizumab was shown to extend median PFS by 3.7 months. However, approximately half of these patients experience grade 3/4 neutropenia. In this study, we evaluated whether biweekly TAS-102 and bevacizumab therapy has efficacy equal to that of conventional TAS-102 and bevacizumab therapy and whether it reduces adverse hematological effects. METHODS: This phase II, investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study was conducted in Japan. Eligible patients had previously received first- and second-line chemotherapy for metastatic CRC. TAS-102 (35 mg/m2) was given twice daily on days 1-5 and days 15-19 in a 4-week cycle, and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) was administered by intravenous infusion for 30 min every 2 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary end points were time-to-treatment failure (TTF), response rate (RR), OS, and safety. RESULTS: 44 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were enrolled in this study. Median PFS was 4.6 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 3.6-5.3) and median OS was 10.5 months (95% CI 9.6-11.4). A partial response was observed in 2 patients (4.5%, 95% CI 0.4-16.0%). The most common adverse event above grade 3 was neutropenia (7 patients, 15.9%, 95% CI 7.6-29.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Biweekly TAS-102 and bevacizumab therapy as third-line chemotherapy appears as effective as conventional TAS-102 and bevacizumab therapy, and this approach reduces adverse hematological effects.

A phase 1b expansion study of TAS-102 with oxaliplatin for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102, a novel antimetabolite, is approved for treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study sought to determine whether the addition of TAS-102 to oxaliplatin (TAS-OX) was safe and effective in metastatic CRC previously treated with oxaliplatin. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm phase 1b study enrolled patients with metastatic CRC previously treated with 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin. In dose escalation, TAS-102 was given at 3 dose levels: 25, 30, and 35 mg/m2 twice daily on day 1 to day 5 with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint of dose escalation was the recommended dose for expansion, and in dose expansion, the primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1). RESULTS: Forty-one patients were treated with TAS-OX. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the 11 patients treated in escalation. The recommended dose for expansion was 35 mg/m2 TAS-102 twice daily on day 1 to day 5 in combination with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 in 14-day cycles. In the intention-to-treat population, the ORR was 2.4% (95% CI, 0%-12.9%) with 1 of 41 patients having a partial response, although 12 (29%) had tumor shrinkage. The median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 2.4-4.8 months) and median overall survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.7-10 months). CONCLUSIONS: TAS-OX is safe with no unexpected toxicities at standard doses of each agent. The combination did not result in a clinically meaningful ORR, although progression-free survival and overall survival were encouraging in this heavily pretreated population. LAY SUMMARY: For metastatic colorectal cancer, the treatment combination of TAS-102 and oxaliplatin was found to be well-tolerated and revealed no unexpected side effects. Twelve of 41 patients had reductions in the size of their tumor, and the study treatment delayed the time to tumor growth as opposed to what would be expected.

Cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab versus TAS-102 monotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 plus bevacizumab is an anticipated combination regimen for patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer. However, evidence supporting its use for this indication is limited. We compared the cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab combination therapy with TAS-102 monotherapy for patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer. METHOD: Markov decision modeling using treatment costs, disease-free survival, and overall survival was performed to examine the cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab combination therapy and TAS-102 monotherapy. The Japanese health care payer's perspective was adopted. The outcomes were modeled on the basis of published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two treatment regimens was the primary outcome. Sensitivity analysis was performed and the effect of uncertainty on the model parameters were investigated. RESULTS: TAS-102 plus bevacizumab had an ICER of $21,534 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained compared with TAS-102 monotherapy. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that TAS-102 monotherapy was more cost-effective than TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy at a willingness-to-pay of under $50,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy is a cost-effective option for patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer in the Japanese health care system.

A Phase I dose-escalation study of third-line regorafenib with trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Aim: To determine a recommended Phase II dose of the oral fluoropyrimidine trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) combined with the multi-kinase inhibitor regorafenib (REG) in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Materials & methods: A conventional 3 + 3 dose finding design was used. FTD/TPI was administered on days 1-5 and 8-12 of a 28-day cycle, REG on days 2-22. Two dose levels were used: FTD/TPI 25 mg/m2 b.i.d. + REG 120 mg/d, then escalated to FTD/TPI 35 mg/m2 b.i.d. + REG 120 mg/d. Results: In total, 12 patients were treated at two dose levels. Three dose-limiting toxicities were observed; all were grade 3 hypertension causally attributed to REG. Recommended Phase II dose is FTD/TPI 25 mg/m2 b.i.d. + REG 120 mg/d. Median progression-free survival was 3.81 months (95% CI: 1.51-5.29), median OS 11.1 months (95% CI: 2.3-18.2). Conclusion: The combination of REG and FTD/TPI is feasible and safe. Efficacy signals exceed that of the single agents at acceptable toxicity levels and are clinically meaningful.

Lay abstract Many patients with metastatic colorectal cancer need a sequence of different treatments over time. Regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil (also called TAS-102) are two drugs which are both used late in this sequence of treatments, but there is no rule as to which should be used first. Both drugs have very different mechanisms of action, and it might be beneficial to patients to administer them both at the same time as a combination treatment, instead of sequential treatment. We therefore conducted a Phase Ib study with a small number of patients to investigate whether this combined treatment would be feasible and safe. The study was designed to test the drug combination at different doses, and we found that treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil at 25 mg/m² twice daily combined with regorafenib at 120 mg daily had acceptable side effects and is likely to be safe for use in future clinical trials. Efficacy results suggest that combined treatment with both drugs may extend patient's life span. However, these observations are preliminary and need testing in further clinical trials. Clinical trial registration: EudraCT 2016-001968-11; NCT03305913 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Post-marketing surveillance study of trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The novel oral nucleoside antineoplastic agent trifluridine/tipiracil was approved for metastatic colorectal cancer in Japan in March 2014. In this post-marketing surveillance study, we investigated the safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil in a real-world setting, particularly haematological drug reactions classified according to the baseline renal and hepatic functions. METHODS: We investigated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who received trifluridine/tipiracil during the first four treatment cycles prospectively. The patients typically received 35 mg/m2 trifluridine/tipiracil twice daily on days 1-5 and 8-12 every 28 days. The primary objective was to assess the safety of trifluridine/tipiracil, but its efficacy was also evaluated. RESULTS: Between July 2014 and June 2016, 860 patients were enrolled in the study, and the safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil were evaluated in 823 patients. Adverse drug reactions occurred in 89.7% of the patients. The most common adverse drug reactions were decreased white blood cell count (67.0%) and neutrophil count (63.9%). Haematological drug reactions of grade ≥3 were observed in 41.7% of the patients with normal renal function; 50.3, 65.6 and 78.9% of the patients had mild, moderate and severe renal impairments, respectively. Hepatic impairment was not associated with a higher incidence of haematological drug reactions. The median overall survival was 8.4 months, with a 1-year survival rate of 33.7%. CONCLUSION: This post-marketing surveillance study further confirmed the safety and tolerability profile of trifluridine/tipiracil observed in a clinical study setting.

Cost-effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil against nivolumab for heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: Nivolumab and trifluridine/tipiracil have significantly improved the overall survival of patients with heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer in different placebo-controlled phase III trials. Accordingly, nivolumab and trifluridine/tipiracil have been approved and recommended for patients with heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer in Japan. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil against nivolumab. METHODS: A partitioned survival model, which consisted of three health states, namely, 'pre-progression,' 'post-progression,' and 'death,' was constructed. Efficacy and safety data were derived from the TAGS and ATTRACTION-2 trials. Costs were estimated based on the standard clinical pathway and national insurance fee schedules. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The threshold value was set to JPY 7 500 000 (USD 68 182) for each quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: The expected median overall survival and progression-free survival were 5.59 and 1.99 months for trifluridine/tipiracil and 5.26 and 1.55 months for nivolumab, respectively. The quality-adjusted life-year and expected costs per patient were 0.4379 and JPY 2 054 625 (USD 18 678) for trifluridine/tipiracil and 0.5295 and JPY 5 018 148 (USD 45 620) for nivolumab, respectively. The expected median progression-free survival and overall survival were equivalent with trifluridine/tipiracil and nivolumab, whereas the expected quality-adjusted life-year with trifluridine/tipiracil was slightly lower than that with nivolumab. However, trifluridine/tipiracil reduced the total treatment cost by JPY 2 963 523 (USD 26 996) compared with that of nivolumab. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of nivolumab versus trifluridine/tipiracil was JPY 32 352 489 (USD 294 113) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Trifluridine/tipiracil was more cost-effective than nivolumab for patients with heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer.

Combination of TAS-102 and bevacizumab as third-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: TAS-CC3 study.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 improved the overall survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with a median progression-free survival (PFS) in the RECOURSE trial. Subsequently, the combination of TAS-102 and bevacizumab was shown to extend the median PFS (C-TASK FORCE study). However, the study included patients who received second- and third-line treatment. Our study exclusively examined patients receiving this combination as a third-line treatment to investigate the clinical impact beyond cytotoxic doublets. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm, multi-centered phase II study was conducted in Japan. Eligible CRC patients were refractory or intolerant to fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin in first- and second-line therapy. TAS-102 (35 mg/m2) was given orally twice daily on days 1-5 and 8-12 in a 4-week cycle, and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) was administered by intravenous infusion every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was PFS and the secondary endpoints were time-to-treatment failure, response rate, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Between June 2016 and August 2017, 32 patients were enrolled. All patients previously received bevacizumab. The median PFS was 4.5 months; the median overall survival was 9.3 months. Partial response was observed in two patients. The most common adverse events above grade 3 were neutropenia followed by thrombocytopenia. There were no non-hematological adverse events above grade 3 and no treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This study met its primary endpoint of PFS, which is comparable to the results of the C-TASK FORCE study. The TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination has the potential to be a therapeutic option for third-line treatment of metastatic CRC.

Phase 1 dose escalation trial of TAS-102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) and temozolomide in the treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumors.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are understudied and have limited systemic treatment options. Prior studies for patients with advanced NETs have demonstrated promising results when antimetabolite agents, including fluoropyrimidines, were combined with temozolomide TMZ. TAS-102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) is an antineoplastic agent that is non-cross resistant with 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine and that has a different toxicity profile. This study evaluated the safety of TAS-102 in combination with TMZ in patients in neuroendocrine tumors. Escalating doses of TMZ (100, 150 and 200 mg/m2) on days 8-12 were given in combination with TAS-102 (35 mg/m2 twice a day) on days 1-5 and 8-12 of a 28 day cycle in subjects with advanced NETs. Primary endpoints were safety and determination of maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Growth factor support was mandated starting with level 2 to avoid treatment delays. Fifteen evaluable subjects were enrolled in the phase 1 study. No dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed on level 1. One DLT was observed on level 2 (grade 3 fatigue and inability to resume treatment), and 1 on level 3 (grade 4 thrombocytopenia). The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events included neutropenia (33%), lymphopenia (27%), and thrombocytopenia (27%). Disease control rate of 92% and partial response rate of 8% were observed in 13 evaluable subjects. This study established MTD of TAS-102 (35 mg/m2 twice daily) and TMZ (200 mg/m2 daily). This regimen was well tolerated. Early signs of clinically meaningful activity were observed. Further evaluation of the efficacy of this regimen is warranted.

Pharmacological effects of the simultaneous and sequential combinations of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) and 5-fluorouracil in fluoropyrimidine-sensitive colon cancer cells.

The aim of this study was to investigate possible synergistic effects in vitro of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) and 5-fluoruracil (5-FU) on fluoropyrimidine-sensitive colon cancer cell lines of different mutational status in order to build a rational basis for the future use of this combination therapy in adjuvant settings or as a first-line treatment for metastatic disease. Proliferation assays were performed on HT-29 (B-raf mutated), SW-620 (ras mutated), and Caco-2 (wild type) colon cancer cell lines exposed to 120-h treatments of 5-FU, TAS-102 and their different combination schedules (simultaneous, sequential and reverse) at equimolar and non-equimolar ratios. The synergistic, additive and antagonistic effects of 5-FU and TAS-102 were determined by the combination index (CI) and dose reduction index (DRI). Our preclinical in vitro results may suggest an apparently counterintuitive but strongly synergistic combination of 5-FU and TAS-102 in fluoropyrimidine-sensitive colon cancer cells allowing a marked theoretical reduction in the administered doses of both drugs. In particular, this association seems to be highly effective in wild-type colon cancer cells, both in sequential and simultaneous schedules. Together, these data may build a rational basis for the future use of TAS-102 combined with 5-FU in adjuvant settings, or as a first-line treatment for metastatic disease.

Regorafenib, TAS-102, or fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer: any difference in randomized trials?

PURPOSE: Direct randomized comparisons of regorafenib, TAS-102, and fruquintinib for treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are lacking. Here, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of three agents by a systematic review and a network meta-analysis. METHODS: We included phase III randomized controlled trials in the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov registry from initiation until January 2019. Data from randomized controlled trials including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) were extracted. Direct meta-analysis and indirect meta-analysis using network meta-analysis were assessed. RESULTS: Five trials comprising a total of 2586 patients were included. For efficacy analysis of OS, no statistically significant differences were observed between regorafenib and TAS-102 (HR 0.945, 95% CI [0.677, 1.320], P = 0.753), regorafenib and fruquintinib (HR 1.056, 95% CI [0.690, 1.621], P = 0.814), or TAS-102 and fruquintinib (HR 1.117, 95% CI [0.740, 1.685], P = 0.610). However, fruquintinib was superior in PFS compared with TAS-102 (HR 1.756, 95% CI [1.079, 2.857], P = 0.023). Regorafenib and TAS-102 appeared to have a similar effect on PFS (HR 0.907, 95% CI [0.611, 1.346], P = 0.641), as did regorafenib and fruquintinib (HR 1.592, 95% CI [0.968, 2.618], P = 0.067). None of the three agents were better in terms of all grade AEs or any grade of 3-5 AEs. However, subgroup analysis of AEs exhibited different toxicity profiles between the three drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect comparison suggested that the three agents had similar OS but that fruquintinib was superior in terms of PFS compared with that of TAS-102. These three agents had different toxicity profiles.

Prognostic scores for evaluating the survival benefit of regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an exploratory analysis of the REGOTAS study.

BACKGROUND: Although regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) has been recognized as a later-line standard treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), not all patients have beneficial outcomes. This study aimed to develop a prognostic scoring system for evaluating the overall survival (OS) benefit. METHODS: Patients included in the REGOTAS study, which comprised 489 patients (regorafenib group: 199; FTD/TPI group: 290 patients), were evaluated. OS was analyzed using multivariate Cox proportional model. The prognostic score was calculated using the worst four individual factors weighted by hazard ratio, and the total scores were categorized as low-, moderate-, and high-OS benefit. RESULTS: The worst four factors in the regorafenib group were AST > 40 IU/dL (point, + 3), CRP ≥ 1.0 mg/dL (+ 2), number of metastatic organ site ≥ 3 (+ 2), and duration from initiation of 1st-line chemotherapy < 18 months (+ 2), while they were AST (+ 2), CRP (+ 2), CA19-9 > 37.0 U/mL (+ 2), and ECOG PS ≥ 1 (+ 2) in the FTD/TPI group. These corresponded to a total prognostic score of > 5, 2-4, and 0 points in the regorafenib group and 8, 2-6, and 0 points in the FTD/TPI group. The median OS in the low, moderate, and high OS benefit group was 3.3 (95% CI 3.0-3.7), 8.1 (95% CI 6.4-9.7), and 12.6 months (95% CI 10.6-14.6) in the regorafenib group and 2.8 (95% CI 2.0-3.5), 7.5 (95% CI 6.6-8.3), and 15.4 months (95% CI 9.7-21.2) in the FTD/TPI group. CONCLUSION: These prognostic scores are useful for identifying patients with mCRC who will obtain survival benefits from these drugs.

A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Regorafenib and TAS-102 in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib at different dosing strategies and TAS-102 are treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness evidence supporting these different strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched different databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating TAS-102 or regorafenib in patients with refractory mCRC who failed prior oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidine. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian random effects model. We conducted network meta-analysis based on White's multivariate meta-regression to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. RESULTS: Six trials at low risk of bias (2,445 patients) were included. Direct comparisons showed that Rego 160 and TAS-102 as monotherapy were superior to best-supportive care (BSC) in terms of PFS (Rego 160: hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; 95% confidence ratio [CI], 0.26-0.63; TAS-102: HR, 0.46 CI, 0.40-0.52) and OS (Rego 160: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.48-0.93; TAS-102: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.57-0.80). Network analysis showed no statistically difference in PFS or OS between Rego 160 and TAS-102. Rego 80+ was superior to BSC in terms of OS (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.23-0.84) and PFS (HR, 0.37; CI, 0.21-0.66). Rego 80+ was associated with statistically nonsignificant improvement in OS and PFS compared with TAS-102 and Rego 160. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib 160 and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy. Rego 80+ is shown to be superior to BSC. A trend for improved OS was observed with Rego 80+ versus Rego 160 or TAS 102. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib at a dose of 160 mg and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Regorafenib with a dose escalation strategy is superior to best-supportive care. Given its tolerability and the observed trend in survival benefit compared with regorafenib 160, dose escalation strategy of regorafenib (80+) may be the preferred option in this setting.

Retrospective cohort study of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) plus bevacizumab versus trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: A previous phase I/II C-TASK FORCE study of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab for patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) showed promising activity with an acceptable toxicity profile. This retrospective study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab compared with trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy in patients with heavily pretreated mCRC in clinical settings. METHODS: Records of patients with mCRC refractory to standard therapies who initiated trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab from January 2016 to March 2018 or trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy from June 2014 to December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed at our institution. RESULTS: Totally, 60 patients received trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab and 66 received trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy. All patients had previously received standard chemotherapy. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.3-5.1] in the trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab group and 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.6) in the trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy group [hazards ratio (HR) 0.69; 95% CI 0.48-0.99]. PFS rate at 16 weeks was 46.6% for the trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab group and 33.9% for the trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy group. Although a relatively higher incidence of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was observed in the trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab group than that in the other group (50.0% vs. 40.9%, p = 0.371), the incidence of febrile neutropenia was not high (3.3% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.444). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world settings, trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab prolonged PFS and helped achieve higher 16-week PFS rate compared with trifluridine/tipiracil monotherapy in patients with heavily pretreated mCRC with manageable toxicities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered.