Weekly dose-dense chemotherapy in first-line epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer treatment (ICON8): overall survival results from an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard-of-care first-line chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer is carboplatin and paclitaxel administered once every 3 weeks. The JGOG 3016 trial reported significant improvement in progression-free and overall survival with dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and 3-weekly (ie, once every 3 weeks) carboplatin. However, this benefit was not observed in the previously reported progression-free survival results of ICON8. Here, we present the final coprimary outcomes of overall survival and updated progression-free survival analyses of ICON8. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial (ICON8), women aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed stage IC-IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma (here collectively termed ovarian cancer, as defined by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] 1988 criteria) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited from 117 hospitals with oncology departments in the UK, Australia and New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Ireland. Patients could enter the trial after immediate primary surgery (IPS) or with planned delayed primary surgery (DPS) during chemotherapy, or could have no planned surgery. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London randomisation line with stratification by Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup group, FIGO disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery, to either 3-weekly carboplatin area under the curve (AUC)5 or AUC6 and 3-weekly paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (control; group 1), 3-weekly carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (group 2), or weekly carboplatin AUC2 and weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (group 3), all administered via intravenous infusion for a total of six 21-day cycles. Coprimary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival, with comparisons done between group 2 and group 1, and group 3 and group 1, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who started at least one chemotherapy cycle. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146, and ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=522), group 2 (n=523), or group 3 (n=521). The median age was 62 years (IQR 54-68), 1073 (69%) of 1566 patients had high-grade serous carcinoma, 1119 (71%) had stage IIIC-IV disease, and 745 (48%) had IPS. As of data cutoff (March 31, 2020), with a median follow-up of 69 months (IQR 61-75), no significant difference in overall survival was observed in either comparison: median overall survival of 47·4 months (95% CI 43·1-54·8) in group 1, 54·8 months (46·6-61·6) in group 2, and 53·4 months (49·2-59·6) in group 3 (group 2 vs group 1: hazard ratio 0·87 [97·5% CI 0·73-1·05]; group 3 vs group 1: 0·91 [0·76-1·09]). No significant difference was observed for progression-free survival in either comparison and evidence of non-proportional hazards was seen (p=0·037), with restricted mean survival time of 23·9 months (97·5% CI 22·1-25·6) in group 1, 25·3 months (23·6-27·1) in group 2, and 24·8 months (23·0-26·5) in group 3. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were reduced neutrophil count (78 [15%] of 511 patients in group 1, 183 [36%] of 514 in group 2, and 154 [30%] of 513 in group 3), reduced white blood cell count (22 [4%] in group 1, 80 [16%] in group 2, and 71 [14%] in group 3), and anaemia (26 [5%] in group 1, 66 [13%] in group 2, and 24 [5%] in group 3). No new serious adverse events were reported. Seven treatment-related deaths were reported (two in group 1, four in group 2, and one in group 3). INTERPRETATION: In our cohort of predominantly European women with epithelial ovarian cancer, we found that first-line weekly dose-dense chemotherapy did not improve overall or progression-free survival compared with standard 3-weekly chemotherapy and should not be used as part of standard multimodality front-line therapy in this patient group. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

Objective responses to first-line neoadjuvant carboplatin-paclitaxel regimens for ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma (ICON8): post-hoc exploratory analysis of a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by delayed primary surgery (DPS) is an established strategy for women with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Although this therapeutic approach has been validated in randomised, phase 3 trials, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST), and cancer antigen 125 (CA125) has not been reported. We describe RECIST and Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 responses in patients receiving platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS in the ICON8 trial. METHODS: ICON8 was an international, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial done across 117 hospitals in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Ireland. The trial included women aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, life expectancy of more than 12 weeks, and newly diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO; 1988) stage IC-IIA high-grade serous, clear cell, or any poorly differentiated or grade 3 histological subtype, or any FIGO (1988) stage IIB-IV epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive intravenous carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6) and intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 by body surface area) on day 1 of every 21-day cycle (control group; group 1); intravenous carboplatin (AUC5 or AUC6) on day 1 and intravenous dose-fractionated paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 by body surface area) on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 21-day cycle (group 2); or intravenous dose-fractionated carboplatin (AUC2) and intravenous dose-fractionated paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 by body surface area) on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 21-day cycle (group 3). The maximum number of cycles of chemotherapy permitted was six. Randomisation was done with a minimisation method, and patients were stratified according to GCIG group, disease stage, and timing and outcome of cytoreductive surgery. Patients and clinicians were not masked to group allocation. The scheduling of surgery and use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were determined by local multidisciplinary case review. In this post-hoc exploratory analysis of ICON8, progression-free survival was analysed using the landmark method and defined as the time interval between the date of pre-surgical planning radiological tumour assessment to the date of investigator-assessed clinical or radiological progression or death, whichever occurred first. This definition is different from the intention-to-treat primary progression-free survival analysis of ICON8, which defined progression-free survival as the time from randomisation to the date of first clinical or radiological progression or death, whichever occurred first. We also compared the extent of surgical cytoreduction with RECIST and GCIG CA125 responses. This post-hoc exploratory analysis includes only women recruited to ICON8 who were planned for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS and had RECIST and/or GCIG CA125-evaluable disease. ICON8 is closed for enrolment and follow-up, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 women were enrolled in ICON8, of whom 779 (50%) were planned for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS. Median follow-up was 29·5 months (IQR 15·6-54·3) for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by DPS population. Of 564 women who had RECIST-evaluable disease at trial entry, 348 (62%) had a complete or partial response. Of 727 women who were evaluable by GCIG CA125 criteria at the time of diagnosis, 610 (84%) had a CA125 response. Median progression-free survival was 14·4 months (95% CI 9·2-28·0; 297 events) for patients with a RECIST complete or partial response and 13·3 months (8·1-20·1; 171 events) for those with RECIST stable disease. Median progression-free survival for women with a GCIG CA125 response was 13·8 months (95% CI 8·8-23·4; 544 events) and 9·7 months (5·8-14·5; 111 events) for those without a GCIG CA125 response. Complete cytoreduction (R0) was achieved in 187 (56%) of 335 women with a RECIST complete or partial response and 73 (42%) of 172 women with RECIST stable disease. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 290 (50%) of 576 women with a GCIG CA125 response and 30 (30%) of 101 women without a GCIG CA125 response. INTERPRETATION: The RECIST-defined radiological response rate was lower than that frequently quoted to patients in the clinic. RECIST and GCIG CA125 responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer should not be used as individual predictive markers to stratify patients who are likely to benefit from DPS, but instead used in conjunction with the patient's clinical capacity to undergo cytoreductive surgery. A patient should not be denied surgery based solely on the lack of a RECIST or GCIG CA125 response. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Health Research Board in Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

3 versus 6 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine combination therapy for colorectal cancer (SCOT): an international, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: 6 months of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy is usually given as adjuvant treatment for stage 3 colorectal cancer. We investigated whether 3 months of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy would be non-inferior to the usual 6 months of treatment. METHODS: The SCOT study was an international, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 244 centres. Patients aged 18 years or older with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer underwent central randomisation with minimisation for centre, choice of regimen, sex, disease site, N stage, T stage, and the starting dose of capecitabine. Patients were assigned (1:1) to receive 3 months or 6 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimens could consist of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX (bolus and infused fluorouracil with oxaliplatin). The regimen was selected before randomisation in accordance with choices of the patient and treating physician. The primary study endpoint was disease-free survival and the non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio of 1·13. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in patients who started study treatment. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN59757862, and follow-up is continuing. FINDINGS: 6088 patients underwent randomisation between March 27, 2008, and Nov 29, 2013. The intended treatment was FOLFOX in 1981 patients and CAPOX in 4107 patients. 3044 patients were assigned to 3 month group and 3044 were assigned to 6 month group. Nine patients in the 3 month group and 14 patients in the 6 month group did not consent for their data to be used, leaving 3035 patients in the 3 month group and 3030 patients in the 6 month group for the intention-to-treat analyses. At the cutoff date for analysis, there had been 1482 disease-free survival events, with 740 in the 3 month group and 742 in the 6 month group. 3 year disease-free survival was 76·7% (95% CI 75·1-78·2) for the 3 month group and 77·1% (75·6-78·6) for the 6 month group, giving a hazard ratio of 1·006 (0·909-1·114, test for non-inferiority p=0·012), significantly below the non-inferiority margin. Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or worse was more common in the 6 month group (237 [58%] of 409 patients for the subset with safety data) than in the 3 month group (103 [25%] of 420) and was long-lasting and associated with worse quality of life. 1098 serious adverse events were reported (492 reports in the 3 month group and 606 reports in the 6 month group) and 32 treatment-related deaths occurred (16 in each group). INTERPRETATION: In the whole study population, 3 months of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy was non-inferior to 6 months of the same therapy for patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer and was associated with reduced toxicity and improved quality of life. Despite the fact the study was underpowered, these data suggest that a shorter duration leads to similar survival outcomes with better quality of life and thus might represent a new standard of care. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, Swedish Cancer Society, NETSCC, and Cancer Research UK.

SCOT: a comparison of cost-effectiveness from a large randomised phase III trial of two durations of adjuvant Oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study is an international, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial assessing the efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness of 3 months (3 M) versus the usually given 6 months (6 M) of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer. METHODS: In total, 6088 patients with fully resected high-risk stage II or stage III colorectal cancer were randomised and followed up for 3-8 years. The within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis from a UK health-care perspective is presented using the resource use data, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), time on treatment (ToT), disease-free survival after treatment (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data. Quality-adjusted partitioned survival analysis and Kaplan-Meier Sample Average Estimator estimated QALYs and costs. Probabilistic sensitivity and subgroup analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: The 3 M arm is less costly (-£4881; 95% CI: -£6269; -£3492) and entails (non-significant) QALY gains (0.08; 95% CI: -0.086; 0.230) due to a better significant quality of life. The net monetary benefit was significantly higher in 3 M under a wide range of monetary values of a QALY. The subgroup analysis found similar results for patients in the CAPOX regimen. However, for the FOLFOX regimen, 3 M had lower QALYs than 6 M (not statistically significant). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 3 M dominates 6 M with no significant detrimental impact on QALYs. The results provide the economic case that a 3 M treatment strategy should be considered a new standard of care.

Preoperative chemoradiation with capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab in rectal cancer: significance of pre-treatment and post-resection RAS mutations.

BACKGROUND: The influence of EGFR pathway mutations on cetuximab-containing rectal cancer preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is uncertain. METHODS: In a prospective phase II trial (EXCITE), patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined non-metastatic rectal adenocarinoma threatening/involving the surgical resection plane received pelvic radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab. Resection was recommended 8 weeks later. The primary endpoint was histopathologically clear (R0) resection margin. Pre-planned retrospective DNA pyrosequencing (PS) and next generation sequencing (NGS) of KRAS, NRAS, PIK3CA and BRAF was performed on the pre-treatment biopsy and resected specimen. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were recruited and 76 underwent surgery, with R0 resection in 67 (82%, 90%CI: 73-88%) (four patients with clinical complete response declined surgery). Twenty-four patients (30%) had an excellent clinical or pathological response (ECPR). Using NGS 24 (46%) of 52 matched biopsies/resections were discrepant: ten patients (19%) gained 13 new resection mutations compared to biopsy (12 KRAS, one PIK3CA) and 18 (35%) lost 22 mutations (15 KRAS, 7 PIK3CA). Tumours only ever testing RAS wild-type had significantly greater ECPR than tumours with either biopsy or resection RAS mutations (14/29 [48%] vs 10/51 [20%], P=0.008), with a trend towards increased overall survival (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05-1.03, P=0.055). CONCLUSIONS: This regimen was feasible and the primary study endpoint was met. For the first time using pre-operative rectal CRT, emergence of clinically important new resection mutations is described, likely reflecting intratumoural heterogeneity manifesting either as treatment-driven selective clonal expansion or a geographical biopsy sampling miss.

Primary chemotherapy versus primary surgery for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (CHORUS): an open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The international standard of care for women with suspected advanced ovarian cancer is surgical debulking followed by platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to establish whether use of platinum-based primary chemotherapy followed by delayed surgery was an effective and safe alternative treatment regimen. METHODS: In this phase 3, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled trial (CHORUS) undertaken in 87 hospitals in the UK and New Zealand, we enrolled women with suspected stage III or IV ovarian cancer. We randomly assigned women (1:1) either to undergo primary surgery followed by six cycles of chemotherapy, or to three cycles of primary chemotherapy, then surgery, followed by three more cycles of completion chemotherapy. Each 3-week cycle consisted of carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2), or an alternative carboplatin combination regimen, or carboplatin monotherapy. We did the random assignment by use of a minimisation method with a random element, and stratified participants according to the randomising centre, largest radiological tumour size, clinical stage, and prespecified chemotherapy regimen. Patients and investigators were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Primary analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. To establish non-inferiority, the upper bound of a one-sided 90% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) had to be less than 1.18. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN74802813, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2004, and Aug 30, 2010, we randomly assigned 552 women to treatment. Of the 550 women who were eligible, 276 were assigned to primary surgery and 274 to primary chemotherapy. All were included in the intention-to-treat analysis; 251 assigned to primary surgery and 253 to primary chemotherapy were included in the per-protocol analysis. As of May 31, 2014, 451 deaths had occurred: 231 in the primary-surgery group versus 220 in the primary-chemotherapy group. Median overall survival was 22.6 months in the primary-surgery group versus 24.1 months in primary chemotherapy. The HR for death was 0.87 in favour of primary chemotherapy, with the upper bound of the one-sided 90% CI 0.98 (95% CI 0.72-1.05). Grade 3 or 4 postoperative adverse events and deaths within 28 days after surgery were more common in the primary-surgery group than in the primary-chemotherapy group (60 [24%] of 252 women vs 30 [14%] of 209, p=0.0007, and 14 women [6%] vs 1 woman [<1%], p=0.001). The most common grade 3 or 4 postoperative adverse event was haemorrhage in both groups (8 women [3%] in the primary-surgery group vs 14 [6%] in the primary-chemotherapy group). 110 (49%) of 225 women receiving primary surgery and 102 (40%) of 253 receiving primary chemotherapy had a grade 3 or 4 chemotherapy related toxic effect (p=0.0654), mostly uncomplicated neutropenia (20% and 16%, respectively). One fatal toxic effect, neutropenic sepsis, occurred in the primary-chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: In women with stage III or IV ovarian cancer, survival with primary chemotherapy is non-inferior to primary surgery. In this study population, giving primary chemotherapy before surgery is an acceptable standard of care for women with advanced ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

Acquired resistance to anti-EGFR mAb ICR62 in cancer cells is accompanied by an increased EGFR expression, HER-2/HER-3 signalling and sensitivity to pan HER blockers.

BACKGROUND: The human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is an important target for cancer treatment. Currently, only the EGFR antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab are approved for the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. However, a major clinical challenge is a short-term response owing to development of acquired resistance during the course of the treatment. METHODS: In this study, we investigated the molecular mechanisms underlying development of acquired resistance in DiFi colorectal cancer cells to the anti-EGFR mAb ICR62 (termed DiFi62) and to the small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) gefitinib (termed DiFiG) using a range of techniques. RESULTS: Compared with the findings from parental DiFi and DiFiG cells, development of acquired resistance to anti-EGFR mAb ICR62 in DiFi62 cells was accompanied by an increase in cell surface EGFR and increased phosphorylation of HER-2 and HER-3. Interestingly, DiFi62 cells also acquired resistance to treatment with anti-EGFR mAbs cetuximab and ICR61, which bind to other distinct epitopes on the extracellular domain of EGFR, but these cells remained equally sensitive as the parental cells to treatment with pan-HER inhibitors such as afatinib. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide a novel mechanistic insight into the development of acquired resistance to EGFR antibody-based therapy in colorectal cancer cells and justify further investigations on the therapeutic benefits of pan-HER family inhibitors in the treatment of colorectal cancer patients once acquired resistance to EGFR antibody-based therapy is developed.

A phase 3 trial of bevacizumab in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis plays a role in the biology of ovarian cancer. We examined the effect of bevacizumab, the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, on survival in women with this disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned women with ovarian cancer to carboplatin (area under the curve, 5 or 6) and paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter of body-surface area), given every 3 weeks for 6 cycles, or to this regimen plus bevacizumab (7.5 mg per kilogram of body weight), given concurrently every 3 weeks for 5 or 6 cycles and continued for 12 additional cycles or until progression of disease. Outcome measures included progression-free survival, first analyzed per protocol and then updated, and interim overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 1528 women from 11 countries were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment regimens. Their median age was 57 years; 90% had epithelial ovarian cancer, 69% had a serous histologic type, 9% had high-risk early-stage disease, 30% were at high risk for progression, and 70% had stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. Progression-free survival (restricted mean) at 36 months was 20.3 months with standard therapy, as compared with 21.8 months with standard therapy plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio for progression or death with bevacizumab added, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.70 to 0.94; P=0.004 by the log-rank test). Nonproportional hazards were detected (i.e., the treatment effect was not consistent over time on the hazard function scale) (P<0.001), with a maximum effect at 12 months, coinciding with the end of planned bevacizumab treatment and diminishing by 24 months. Bevacizumab was associated with more toxic effects (most often hypertension of grade 2 or higher) (18%, vs. 2% with chemotherapy alone). In the updated analyses, progression-free survival (restricted mean) at 42 months was 22.4 months without bevacizumab versus 24.1 months with bevacizumab (P=0.04 by log-rank test); in patients at high risk for progression, the benefit was greater with bevacizumab than without it, with progression-free survival (restricted mean) at 42 months of 14.5 months with standard therapy alone and 18.1 months with bevacizumab added, with respective median overall survival of 28.8 and 36.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab improved progression-free survival in women with ovarian cancer. The benefits with respect to both progression-free and overall survival were greater among those at high risk for disease progression. (Funded by Roche and others; ICON7 Controlled-Trials.com number, ISRCTN91273375.).

Mitomycin or cisplatin chemoradiation with or without maintenance chemotherapy for treatment of squamous-cell carcinoma of the anus (ACT II): a randomised, phase 3, open-label, 2 × 2 factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiation became the standard of care for anal cancer after the ACT I trial. However, only two-thirds of patients achieved local control, with 5-year survival of 50%; therefore, better treatments are needed. We investigated whether replacing mitomycin with cisplatin in chemoradiation improves response, and whether maintenance chemotherapy after chemoradiation improves survival. METHODS: In this 2 × 2 factorial trial, we enrolled patients with histologically confirmed squamous-cell carcinoma of the anus without metastatic disease from 59 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups, to receive either mitomycin (12 mg/m(2) on day 1) or cisplatin (60 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29), with fluorouracil (1000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-4 and 29-32) and radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 daily fractions); with or without two courses of maintenance chemotherapy (fluorouracil and cisplatin at weeks 11 and 14). The random allocation was generated by computer and patients assigned by telephone. Randomisation was done by minimisation and stratified by tumour site, T and N stage, sex, age, and renal function. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to assignment. Primary endpoints were complete response at 26 weeks and acute toxic effects (for chemoradiation), and progression-free survival (for maintenance). The primary analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com, number 26715889. FINDINGS: We enrolled 940 patients: 472 were assigned to mitomycin, of whom 246 were assigned to no maintenance, 226 to maintenance; 468 were assigned to cisplatin, of whom 246 were assigned to no maintenance, 222 to maintenance. Median follow-up was 5.1 years (IQR 3.9-6.9). 391 of 432 (90.5%) patients in the mitomycin group versus 386 of 431 (89.6%) in the cisplatin group had a complete response at 26 weeks (difference -0.9%, 95% CI -4.9 to 3.1; p=0.64). Overall, toxic effects were similar in each group (334/472 [71%] for mitomycin vs 337/468 [72%] for cisplatin). The most common grade 3-4 toxic effects were skin (228/472 [48%] vs 222/468 [47%]), pain (122/472 [26%] vs 135/468 [29%]), haematological (124/472 [26%] vs 73/468 [16%]), and gastrointestinal (75/472 [16%] vs 85/468 [18%]). 3-year progression-free survival was 74% (95% CI 69-77; maintenance) versus 73% (95% CI 68-77; no maintenance; hazard ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.21; p=0.70). INTERPRETATION: The results of our trial--the largest in anal cancer to date--show that fluorouracil and mitomycin with 50.4 Gy radiotherapy in 28 daily fractions should remain standard practice in the UK. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Therapeutic application of monoclonal antibodies in cancer: advances and challenges.

INTRODUCTION: Monoclonal antibody (mAb)-based products are highly specific for a particular antigen. This characteristic feature of the molecules makes them an ideal tool for many applications including cancer diagnosis and therapy. SOURCES OF DATA: We performed comprehensive searches of PubMed, Medline and the Food and Drug Administration website using keywords such as 'therapeutic antibodies' and 'anti-cancer antibodies'. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Treatment of cancer patients with antibodies when used alone or in combination with chemotherapy and radiotherapy, or conjugated to drugs or radioisotopes, prolongs overall survival in cancer patients. Currently, there are 14 mAb-based drugs that have been approved for the treatment of cancer patients. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: The response of cancer patients to antibody therapy can be of short duration. Therapeutic antibodies are expensive and may have side effects. There are no reliable predictive biomarkers for sensitivity or resistance to certain therapeutic antibodies. FUTURE FOCUS: There should be additional studies to discover novel therapeutic targets, to develop more effective antibody-based drugs with fewer side effects, to identify more reliable predictive biomarker(s) for response to therapy with antibody-based drugs and to develop alternative strategies (e.g. transgenic plants, transgenic farm animals) for production of large quantities and more affordable batches of therapeutic antibodies. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: A better understanding of cancer biology, the hallmarks of human cancers and the immune system would lead to identification of additional cell surface biomarkers. These in turn would facilitate the development of novel and biosimilar antibody-based drugs and their routine use as 'magic bullets' for the targeted therapy of human cancers.

Treating patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency with fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy since the onset of routine prospective testing-The experience of a large oncology center in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy is used across many tumor types and settings. The incidence of severe adverse events (SAEs) is around 20%. Mortality is 0.5%-1%. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) plays a key role in fluoropyrimidine inactivation. Key DPYD mutations are linked to a high risk of SAEs. Pretreatment DPD screening was mandated by EMA guidelines in April 2020 and widely adopted thereafter. Uncertainty remains regarding optimal dosing practice. METHODS: We retrospectively examined records of all 23 patients with DPYD mutation who started chemotherapy between April and November 2020. Our center tests for the mutations considered clinically actionable by Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium and uses the Gene Activity Score (GAS) to guide dose reduction. RESULTS: Most patients started on a 50% dose. One started on 100% and experienced mild diarrhea after cycle 2; DPD was tested belatedly, subsequent cycles were reduced to 50% and he remained well. Three patients receiving chemo-radiotherapy started on 76% dose; 50% was felt to be subtherapeutic. One of them had no toxicities; another had grade 2 nausea and a hospital attendance with non-neutropenic fever; the third was admitted for 6 weeks with pancolitis. Seven patients did not have toxicities above grade 1 and no hospital attendances. Five patients had further dose reductions. None had dose escalation. CONCLUSION: As our experience shows, patients with DPD deficiency are heterogeneous. Worryingly, SAEs occur despite dose reduction according to GAS. Others had minimal toxicity and may be under-dosed by GAS. There are clearly many factors at play other than the 4 DPYD variants. The DPD result must be available and inform first cycle dosing. Dose should be cautiously titrated up if tolerated; this was not done at our center due to clinician caution. Further research is needed to guide this. Patients should be reviewed frequently, counselled regarding their DPD status, and empowered to seek advice promptly when they feel unwell.

Long Term Real-World Outcomes of Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-A Single UK Centre Experience.

In the UK, Trifluridine-tipiracil (Lonsurf) is used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer in the third-line setting, after prior exposure to fluoropyrimidine-based regimes. Current data on the real-world use of Lonsurf lack long-term follow-up data. A retrospective evaluation of patients receiving Lonsurf at our Cancer Centre in 2016-2017 was performed, all with a minimum of two-year follow-up. Fifty-six patients were included in the review. The median number of cycles of Lonsurf administered was 3. Median follow-up was 6.0 months, with all patients deceased at the time of analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.2 months, and overall survival (OS) was 5.8 months. The median interval from Lonsurf discontinuation to death was two months, but seven patients received further systemic treatment and median OS gained was 12 months. Lonsurf offered a slightly better PFS but inferior OS to that of the RECOURSE trial, with PFS similar to real-world data previously presented. Interestingly, 12.5% had a PFS > 9 months, and this cohort had primarily left-sided and RAS wild-type disease. A subset received further systemic treatment on Lonsurf discontinuation with good additional OS benefit. Lonsurf may alter the course of disease for a subset of patients, and further treatment on progression can be considered in carefully selected patients.

HER2 Expression Is Predictive of Survival in Cetuximab Treated Patients with RAS Wild Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

The overexpressed HER2 is an important target for treatment with monoclonal antibody (mAb) trastuzumab, only in patients with breast and gastric cancers, and is an emerging therapeutic biomarker in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mAbs cetuximab and panitumumab. In this study, we investigated the relative expression and predictive value of all human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) family members in 144 cetuximab-treated patients with wild type RAS mCRC. The relative expression of EGFR and HER2 have also been examined in 21-paired primary tumours and their metastatic sites by immunohistochemistry. Of the 144 cases examined, 25%, 97%, 79%, 48%, and 10% were positive for EGFR, HER2, HER3, and HER4 and all four HER family members, respectively. The expression of EGFR was an indicator of poorer overall survival and the membranous expression of HER2 and HER3 3+ intensity was associated with a shorter progression free survival (PFS). In contrast, the cytoplasmic expression of HER2 was associated with better PFS. In 48% and 71% of the cases, there were discordance in the expression of EGFR or one or more HER family members in paired primary and related metastatic tumours, respectively. Our results implicate the importance of a large prospective investigation of the expression level and predictive value of not only the therapeutic target (i.e., EGFR protein) but also HER2 and other HER family members as therapeutic targets, or for response to therapy with anti-EGFR mAbs and other forms of HER inhibitors, in both the primary tumours and metastatic sites in mCRC.

Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in cancer treatment: advances, challenges and opportunities.

Aberrant expression of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) system has been reported in a wide range of epithelial cancers. In some studies, this has also been associated with a poor prognosis and resistance to the conventional forms of therapies. These discoveries have led to the strategic development of several kinds of EGFR inhibitors, five of which have gained US Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (gefitinib and erlotinib), metastatic colorectal cancer (cetuximab and panitumumab), head and neck (cetuximab), pancreatic cancer (erlotinib) and breast (lapatinib) cancer. Despite these advances and recent studies on the predictive value of activating EGFR mutation and KRAS mutations with response in non-small-cell lung cancer and colon cancer patients, there is currently no reliable predictive marker for response to therapy with the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab or the small molecule EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib. In particular, there has been no clear association between the expression of EGFR, determined by the US Food and Drug Administration-approved EGFR PharmDX kit, and response to the EGFR inhibitors. Here, we discuss some of the controversial data and explanatory factors as well as future studies for the establishment of more reliable markers for response to therapy with EGFR inhibitors. Such investigations should lead to the selection of a more specific subpopulation of cancer patients who benefit from therapy with EGFR inhibitors, but equally to spare those who will receive no benefit or a detrimental effect from such biological agents.

Co-expression and prognostic significance of putative CSC markers CD44, CD133, wild-type EGFR and EGFRvIII in metastatic colorectal cancer.

The presence of colorectal cancer stem cells (CSCs) have been associated with tumour initiation and resistance to therapy. This study investigated the co-expression and prognostic significance of the CSCs biomarkers CD44 and CD133 with wild-type EGFR (wtEGFR) and EGFRvIII in colorectal cancer (CRC). The expression of these biomarkers were determined in tumours from 70 patients with metastatic CRC by immunohistochemistry, and in a panel of human CRC cell lines, and their variants with acquired-resistance to EGFR inhibitors, by flow cytometry. The expression of CD44, CD133, wtEGFR and EGFRvIII were present in 17%, 23%, 26% and 13% of cases and the co-expression of CD44/CD133 with wtEGFR and EGFRvIII were present in 9% and 3% of the cases respectively. Only co-expression of CSCs/EGFRvIII (P = 0.037), and amphiregulin (P = 0.017) were associated with worse overall survival. Interestingly, disease-free survival was improved in BTC expressing patients (P = 0.025). In vitro CD133 expression and its co-expression with CD44 were associated with primary-resistance to irinotecan and acquired-resistance to anti-EGFR inhibitors respectively. Our results suggest co-expression of CSCs and EGFRvIII could be potential biomarkers of worse overall survival and resistance to therapy in patients with mCRC and warrants further validation in a larger cohort.

3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk stage II and III colorectal cancer: 3-year follow-up of the SCOT non-inferiority RCT.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy administered over 6 months is the standard adjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colorectal cancer. However, the regimen is associated with cumulative toxicity, characterised by chronic and often irreversible neuropathy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of 3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and to compare the toxicity, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the durations. DESIGN: An international, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, Phase III, parallel-group trial. SETTING: A total of 244 oncology clinics from six countries: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years who had undergone curative resection for high-risk stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum. INTERVENTIONS: The adjuvant treatment regimen was either oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin and capecitabine, randomised to be administered over 3 or 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Overall survival, adverse events, neuropathy and health-related quality of life were also assessed. The main cost categories were chemotherapy treatment and hospitalisation. Cost-effectiveness was assessed through incremental cost comparisons and quality-adjusted life-year gains between the options and was reported as net monetary benefit using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year per patient. RESULTS: Recruitment is closed. In total, 6088 patients were randomised (3044 per group) between 27 March 2008 and 29 November 2013, with 6065 included in the intention-to-treat analyses (3-month analysis, n = 3035; 6-month analysis, n = 3030). Follow-up for the primary analysis is complete. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in the 3-month treatment group was 76.7% (standard error 0.8%) and in the 6-month treatment group was 77.1% (standard error 0.8%), equating to a hazard ratio of 1.006 (95% confidence interval 0.909 to 1.114; p-value for non-inferiority = 0.012), confirming non-inferiority for 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy. Frequent adverse events (alopecia, anaemia, anorexia, diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, sensory neuropathy, neutropenia, pain, rash, altered taste, thrombocytopenia and watery eye) showed a significant increase in grade with 6-month duration; the greatest difference was for sensory neuropathy (grade ≥ 3 was 4% for 3-month vs.16% for 6-month duration), for which a higher rate of neuropathy was seen for the 6-month treatment group from month 4 to ≥ 5 years (p < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores were better in the 3-month treatment group over months 4-6. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed 3-month treatment to cost £4881 less over the 8-year analysis period, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £7246 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The study achieved its primary end point, showing that 3-month oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is non-inferior to 6 months of the same regimen; 3-month treatment showed a better safety profile and cost less. For future work, further follow-up will refine long-term estimates of the duration effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. The health economic analysis will be updated to include long-term extrapolation for subgroups. We expect these analyses to be available in 2019-20. The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study translational samples may allow the identification of patients who would benefit from longer treatment based on the molecular characteristics of their disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59757862 and EudraCT 2007-003957-10. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (transferred to NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre - Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; grant reference G0601705), the Swedish Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK Core Clinical Trials Unit Funding (funding reference C6716/A9894).

Patients diagnosed with bowel cancer are likely to have surgery to remove the tumour. Patients diagnosed with a more advanced stage of the disease are then likely to be offered what is known as adjuvant chemotherapy ­ chemotherapy to kill any cancer cells that have already spread but cannot be seen. Adjuvant chemotherapy is usually given over 6 months using two medicines known as oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine. This chemotherapy has side effects of diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, and it reduces the numbers of cells in the blood. It can also damage nerves, which causes discomfort, numbness and tingling; in some cases, this can go on for years. These side effects are more likely to develop with longer treatment. This study looked at whether or not shortening the time over which patients were given oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy reduced its effectiveness. In this large study of over 6000 patients, half of the patients were allocated by chance to be treated for 3 months and the other half to be treated for 6 months. Reducing the time that patients had chemotherapy from 6 months to 3 months did not make the treatment less effective. When patients treated with chemotherapy over 3 months were compared with those treated over 6 months, 77% of patients in both groups were well with no detectable disease 3 years after surgery. Patients were less likely to get side effects with 3-month chemotherapy. In particular, the chance of persistent long-term nerve damage was lower, resulting in patients with 3-month chemotherapy having better health-related quality of life. Overall, the study showed that 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with bowel cancer is as effective as 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy and causes fewer side effects.

Co-expression and prognostic significance of the HER family members, EGFRvIII, c-MET, CD44 in patients with ovarian cancer.

EGFR and HER-2 are important targets but none of the monoclonal antibodies or small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors specific for the HER members has been approved for the treatment of patients with ovarian cancers. In some studies, co-expression of other growth factor receptors has been associated with resistance to therapy with the HER inhibitors. The aim of the present study was to determine the relative expression, cellular location, and prognostic significance of HER-family members, the EGFR mutant (EGFRvIII) c-MET, IGF-1R and the cancer stem cell biomarker CD44 in 60 patients with FIGO stage III and IV ovarian cancer. At cut off >5% of tumour cells with positive staining, 62%, 59%, 65% and 45% of the cases were EGFR, HER-2, HER-3 and HER-4 positive, and 3%, 22% and 48.3% of the cases were positive for EGFRvIII, c-MET, and CD44 respectively. Interestingly, 23% co-expressed all four members of the HER family. On univariate analysis, only EGFR staining at >50% of tumour cells (HR = 3.57, p = 0.038) and CD44 staining at 3+ intensity (HR = 7.99, p = 0.004) were associated with a poorer overall survival. EGFR expression (HR = 2.83, p = 0.019) and its co-expression with HER-2, HER-3, HER-2/HER-3, and c-MET were all associated with poorer disease-free survival. Our results suggest co-expression of the HER-family members is common in Stage III and IV ovarian cancer patients. Further studies on the prognostic significance and predictive value of all HER family member proteins for the response to treatment with various forms of the HER inhibitors are warranted.

The impact of co-expression of wild-type EGFR and its ligands determined by immunohistochemistry for response to treatment with cetuximab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Anti-EGFR mAbs cetuximab and panitumumab are routinely used for the treatment of patients with KRAS-wild type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, in some patients their efficacy remains modest and with no clear association between the EGFR protein expression determined by PharmDx™ kit, and response to anti-EGFR therapies. Therefore, we investigated the relative expression and predictive value of wild-type EGFR (wtEGFR), mutated EGFRvIII and EGFR ligand proteins in mCRC patients treated with cetuximab. The expression levels of wtEGFR, EGFRvIII, and EGFR ligand were determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in 60 tumour specimens using specific antibodies. Sections were scored according to the percentage of positive tumour cells, intensity and cellular location of staining, and these were associated with response, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). At cut-off value > 5%, wtEGFR, and EGFRvIII were present in 44%, and 41%, betacellulin (BTC) in 72%, followed by epigen (67%), TGFα (58%), amphiregulin (34%), EGF (31%) of the cases, respectively and 96% of the wtEGFR positive cases had co-expression of at least one ligand. We found a significant association between the expression of wtEGFR and poor response to cetuximab. In addition, the co-expression of wtEGFR with one ligand at a cut-off value of > 5% and > 10% was associated with worse response to cetuximab (P = 0.021, and P = 0.005 respectively). We found a 3-fold and 5-fold increased risk of shorter OS with expression of BTC and epigen. Interestingly, the expression of wtEGFR and its co-expression with one or two ligands was associated with shorter PFS but not with OS. The relative expression of wtEGFR and its competing ligands, which is the target for therapeutic interventions with anti-EGFR antibodies, could serve as a more reliable predictive biomarker of response to therapy with anti-EGFR mAbs in mCRC patients and warrants further investigation in large prospective studies.

Randomized controlled trial of dietary fiber for the prevention of radiation-induced gastrointestinal toxicity during pelvic radiotherapy.

Background: Therapeutic radiotherapy is an important treatment of pelvic cancers. Historically, low-fiber diets have been recommended despite a lack of evidence and potentially beneficial mechanisms of fiber.Objective: This randomized controlled trial compared low-, habitual-, and high-fiber diets for the prevention of gastrointestinal toxicity in patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy.Design: Patients were randomly assigned to low-fiber [≤10 g nonstarch polysaccharide (NSP)/d], habitual-fiber (control), or high-fiber (≥18 g NSP/d) diets and received individualized counseling at the start of radiotherapy to achieve these targets. The primary endpoint was the difference between groups in the change in the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire-Bowel Subset (IBDQ-B) score between the starting and nadir (worst) score during treatment. Other measures included macronutrient intake, stool diaries, and fecal short-chain fatty acid concentrations.Results: Patients were randomly assigned to low-fiber (n = 55), habitual-fiber (n = 55), or high-fiber (n = 56) dietary advice. Fiber intakes were significantly different between groups (P < 0.001). The difference between groups in the change in IBDQ-B scores between the start and nadir was not significant (P = 0.093). However, the change in score between the start and end of radiotherapy was smaller in the high-fiber group (mean ± SD: -3.7 ± 12.8) than in the habitual-fiber group (-10.8 ± 13.5; P = 0.011). At 1-y postradiotherapy (n = 126) the difference in IBDQ-B scores between the high-fiber (+0.1 ± 14.5) and the habitual-fiber (-8.4 ± 13.3) groups was significant (P = 0.004). No significant differences were observed in stool frequency or form or in short-chain fatty acid concentrations. Significant reductions in energy, protein, and fat intake occurred in the low- and habitual-fiber groups only.Conclusions: Dietary advice to follow a high-fiber diet during pelvic radiotherapy resulted in reduced gastrointestinal toxicity both acutely and at 1 y compared with habitual-fiber intake. Restrictive, non-evidence-based advice to reduce fiber intake in this setting should be abandoned. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT 01170299.

Coexpression of the IGF-IR, EGFR and HER-2 is common in colorectal cancer patients.

Signalling via the insulin-like growth factor-I receptor (IGF-IR) has been associated with resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2)-based therapies in the experimental system, but the coexpression and clinical significance of the IGF-IR, EGFR and HER-2 in cancer patients remains unclear. IGF-IR, EGFR, and HER-2 status was assessed retrospectively in tumour specimens from 87 Dukes' C colorectal cancer patients using immunohistochemistry. Sections were scored by the percentage of positive cells (membrane and cytoplasmic) and intensity of staining. The association between receptor coexpression and clinicopathological parameters and overall survival were evaluated using univariate and multivariate (Cox) analysis. Overall, 93, 83 and 89% of the cases expressed IGF-IR, EGFR and HER-2, respectively. While 60% of the cases expressed membranous IGF-IR, the expression of EGFR and HER-2 was predominantly cytoplasmic. Coexpression of the IGF-IR, EGFR and HER-2 was present in tumours from 75% of the patients. No significant association was found between the expression or coexpression of total IGF-IR, EGFR and HER-2 and clinicopathological parameters or overall survival. Our results indicate that coexpression of IGF-IR, EGFR and HER-2 is common in Dukes' C colorectal cancer, warranting further investigation on the co-targeting of such receptors in colorectal cancer patients.