Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus on Safety of Combining Transarterial Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Microspheres with Systemic Anticancer Agents for the Treatment of Liver Malignancy.

PURPOSE: To provide guidance, via multidisciplinary consensus statements, on the safety interactions between systemic anticancer agents (such as radiosensitizing chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with yttrium-90 (90Y)-labeled microspheres in the treatment of primary and metastatic liver malignancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search identified 59 references that informed 26 statements on the safety of 90Y TARE combined with systemic therapies. Modified Delphi method was used to develop consensus on statements through online anonymous surveys of the 12 panel members representing the fields of interventional radiology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, hepatology, and pharmacy, focusing on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), neuroendocrine tumors, metastatic breast cancer, and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. RESULTS: High-level evidence was limited. Level 1 data in patients with mCRC suggest that some radiosensitizing chemotherapies (eg, oxaliplatin) require temporary dose reduction when used concomitantly with 90Y TARE, and some targeted therapies (eg, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors and antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors) should be avoided for at least 4 weeks before 90Y TARE. In patients with HCC, the feasibility of 90Y TARE and immunotherapy has been demonstrated with Level 4 evidence. Data are more limited for other primary and secondary liver malignancies, and consensus statements were driven by expert opinion (Level 5). CONCLUSIONS: Given the absence of evidence-based guidelines on the safety of 90Y TARE in combination with systemic anticancer therapy, these consensus statements provide expert guidance on the potential risks when considering specific combinations.

Transcription factor POU4F2 promotes colorectal cancer cell migration and invasion through hedgehog-mediated epithelial-mesenchymal transition.

As a POU homeodomain transcription factor, POU4F2 has been implicated in regulating tumorigenic processes in various cancers. However, the role of POU4F2 in colorectal cancer (CRC) remains unclear. Here, we revealed that POU4F2 functions as a tumor promotor in CRC. Bioinformatics analysis in specimens from CRC patients and expression analysis in CRC cell lines showed that POU4F2 was upregulated at the mRNA and protein levels in CRC. Depletion of POU4F2 suppressed the metastatic phenotypes of CRC cells, including cell migration, invasion, and the expression of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers. Moreover, depletion of POU4F2 decreased the number of lung metastatic nodes in nude mice. Mechanistically, POU4F2 positively regulated the Hedgehog signaling pathway, as inferred from the downregulation of the expression of sonic Hedgehog homolog, patched 1, Smoothened, and GLI family zinc finger 1 in vitro and vivo following silencing of POU4F2. Furthermore, the SMO agonist SAG reversed the effects of POU4F2 knockdown in CRC. Functionally, POU4F2 contributed to the Hedgehog signaling-regulated activation of the EMT process and promotion of CRC cell migration and invasion. Collectively, these findings elucidated the role of POU4F2 as a tumor promotor in CRC through the regulation of Hedgehog signaling-mediated EMT and suggested that POU4F2 suppression might be a promising therapeutic target in inhibiting CRC metastasis.

Quality of life in the FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-global randomised trials of selective internal radiotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) is a liver-directed treatment involving the injection of yttrium-90 microspheres into the blood supply of liver tumours. There are very few studies assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients treated with SIRT. Patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC) were randomised in the FOXFIRE (FFr; ISRCTN83867919), SIRFLOX (SF; NCT00724503) and FOXFIRE-Global (FFrG; NCT01721954) trials of first-line oxaliplatin-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) chemotherapy combined with SIRT versus FOLFOX alone. HRQOL was assessed using the three-level EQ-5D, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EORTC Colorectal Liver Metastases cancer module (EORTC QLQ-LMC21) at baseline, ≤3 months, 6 months, 12 months and annually thereafter from randomisation, and at disease progression. Analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. In total, 554 patients were randomised to SIRT + FOLFOX and 549 patients to FOLFOX alone. HRQOL was statistically significant lower in SIRT + FOLFOX patients ≤3 months after SIRT administration in all three instruments, particularly global health, physical and role functioning and symptoms of fatigue, nausea/vomiting and appetite loss. By accepted thresholds, these differences were deemed not clinically important. Differences between SIRT + FOLFOX and FOLFOX alone over the 2-year follow up and at disease progression were also not clinically important. Although there is some decrease in HRQOL for up to 3 months following SIRT, the addition of SIRT to FOLFOX chemotherapy does not change HRQOL to a clinically important degree in metastatic CRC patients.

Value of tumor size as a prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer patients after chemotherapy: a population-based study.

Aim: To evaluate the relationship between tumor size and survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who received chemotherapy. Materials & methods: SEER database was accessed for eligible patients. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to compare the effect of tumor size on overall survival (OS) and CRC-specific survival (CCSS). Results: Tumor size ≥5 cm was an independent risk factor for OS and CCSS in mCRC patients treated with chemotherapy. Tumor size <5 cm did not show a survival advantage in patients whose primary tumor site was rectosigmoid junction, while tumor size ≥5 cm was associated with poor OS and CCSS in left-and right-sided colorectal cancer. Conclusion: Tumor size ≥5 cm was associated with poor prognosis after receiving chemotherapy treatment and a risk factor for survival of mCRC.

Radioembolisation with 90Y microspheres for neuroendocrine liver metastases: an institutional case series, systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine liver metastases are clinically challenging due to their frequent disseminated distribution. This study aims to present a British experience with an emerging modality, radioembolisation with yttrium-90 labelled microspheres, and embed this within a meta-analysis of response and survival outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective case series of patients treated with SIR-Spheres (radiolabelled resin microspheres) was performed. Results were included in a systematic review and meta-analysis of published results with glass or resin microspheres. Objective response rate (ORR) was defined as complete or partial response. Disease control rate (DCR) was defined as complete/partial response or stable disease. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were identified. ORR and DCR in the institutional series was 14/24 and 21/24 at 3 months. Overall survival and progression-free survival at 3-years was 77.6% and 50.4%, respectively. There were no grade 3/4 toxicities post-procedure. A fixed-effects pooled estimate of ORR of 51% (95% CI: 47%-54%) was identified from meta-analysis of 27 studies. The fixed-effects weighted average DCR was 88% (95% CI: 85%-90%, 27 studies). CONCLUSION: Current data demonstrate evidence of the clinical effectiveness and safety of radioembolisation for neuroendocrine liver metastases. Prospective randomised studies to compare radioembolisation with other liver directed treatment modalities are needed.

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.

First-line selective internal radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global): a combined analysis of three multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) in third-line or subsequent therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer has clinical benefit in patients with colorectal liver metastases with liver-dominant disease after chemotherapy. The FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global randomised studies evaluated the efficacy of combining first-line chemotherapy with SIRT using yttrium-90 resin microspheres in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with liver metastases. The studies were designed for combined analysis of overall survival. METHODS: FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global were randomised, phase 3 trials done in hospitals and specialist liver centres in 14 countries worldwide (Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Portugal, South Korea, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WHO performance status 0 or 1) with liver metastases not suitable for curative resection or ablation were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (FOLFOX: leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX plus single treatment SIRT concurrent with cycle 1 or 2 of chemotherapy. In FOXFIRE, FOLFOX chemotherapy was OxMdG (oxaliplatin modified de Gramont chemotherapy; 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, L-leucovorin 175 mg or D,L-leucovorin 350 mg infusion over 2 h, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). In SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global, FOLFOX chemotherapy was modified FOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, 200 mg leucovorin, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). Randomisation was done by central minimisation with four factors: presence of extrahepatic metastases, tumour involvement of the liver, planned use of a biological agent, and investigational centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, using a two-stage meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data. All three trials have completed 2 years of follow-up. FOXFIRE is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83867919. SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00724503 (SIRFLOX) and NCT01721954 (FOXFIRE-Global). FINDINGS: Between Oct 11, 2006, and Dec 23, 2014, 549 patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOX alone and 554 patients were assigned FOLFOX plus SIRT. Median follow-up was 43·3 months (IQR 31·6-58·4). There were 411 (75%) deaths in 549 patients in the FOLFOX alone group and 433 (78%) deaths in 554 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group. There was no difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·90-1·19; p=0·61). The median survival time in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group was 22·6 months (95% CI 21·0-24·5) compared with 23·3 months (21·8-24·7) in the FOLFOX alone group. In the safety population containing patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, as treated, the most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (137 [24%] of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone vs 186 (37%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 244 (43%) of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone and 274 (54%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT. 10 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and 11 patients in the FOLFOX alone group died due to an adverse event; eight treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and three treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX alone group. INTERPRETATION: Addition of SIRT to first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for patients with liver-only and liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve overall survival compared with that for FOLFOX alone. Therefore, early use of SIRT in combination with chemotherapy in unselected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer cannot be recommended. To further define the role of SIRT in metastatic colorectal cancer, careful patient selection and studies investigating the role of SIRT as consolidation therapy after chemotherapy are needed. FUNDING: Bobby Moore Fund of Cancer Research UK, Sirtex Medical.

Opportunities for translation: targeting DNA repair pathways in pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains one of the poorest prognosis neoplasms. It is typified by high levels of genomic aberrations and copy-number variation, intra-tumoural heterogeneity and resistance to conventional chemotherapy. Improved therapeutic options, ideally targeted against cancer-specific biological mechanisms, are urgently needed. Although induction of DNA damage and/or modulation of DNA damage response pathways are associated with the activity of a number of conventional PDAC chemotherapies, the effectiveness of this approach in the treatment of PDAC has not been comprehensively reviewed. Here, we review chemotherapeutic agents that have shown anti-cancer activity in PDAC and whose mechanisms of action involve modulation of DNA repair pathways. In addition, we highlight novel potential targets within these pathways based on the emerging understanding of PDAC biology and their exploitation as targets in other cancers.

FOXFIRE protocol: an open-label, randomised, phase III trial of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and folinic acid (OxMdG) with or without interventional Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT) as first-line treatment for patients with unresectable liver-only or liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common malignancy in Europe and a leading cause of cancer-related death. Almost 50% of patients with CRC develop liver metastases, which heralds a poor prognosis unless metastases can be downsized to surgical resection or ablation. The FOXFIRE trial examines the hypothesis that combining radiosensitising chemotherapy (OxMdG: oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and folic acid) with Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT or radioembolisation) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres (SIR-Spheres®; Sirtex Medical Limited, North Sydney, Australia) as a first-line treatment for liver-dominant metastatic CRC will improve clinical outcomes when compared to OxMdG chemotherapy alone. METHODS/DESIGN: FOXFIRE is an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of OxMdG with or without the addition of SIRT (1:1 randomisation). Eligible adult patients have histologically confirmed colorectal adenocarcinoma, liver metastases measurable on computed tomography scan and untreatable by either surgical resection or local ablation, and they may have limited extra-hepatic disease, defined as ≤5 nodules in the lung and/or one other metastatic site which is amenable to future definitive treatment. Eligible patients may have received adjuvant chemotherapy following resection of the primary tumour, but are not permitted to have previously received chemotherapy for metastatic disease, and must have a life expectancy of ≥3 months and a WHO performance status of 0-1. The primary outcome is overall survival. Secondary outcomes include progression free survival (PFS), liver-specific PFS, patient-reported outcomes, safety, response rate, resection rate and cost-effectiveness. FOXFIRE shares a combined statistical analysis plan with an international sister trial called SIRFLOX. DISCUSSION: This trial is establishing a network of SIRT centres and 'feeder' chemotherapy-only centres to standardise the delivery of SIRT across the whole of the UK and to provide greater equity of access to this highly specialised liver-directed therapy. The FOXFIRE trial will establish the potential role of adding SIRT to first-line chemotherapy for unresectable liver metastatic colorectal cancer, and the impact on current treatment paradigms for metastatic CRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN83867919.

Standard or high dose chemoradiotherapy, with or without the protease inhibitor nelfinavir, in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: The phase 1/randomised phase 2 SCALOP-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The multi-centre two-stage SCALOP-2 trial (ISRCTN50083238) assessed whether dose escalation of consolidative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or concurrent sensitization using the protease inhibitor nelfinavir improve outcomes in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) following four cycles of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. METHODS: In stage 1, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of nelfinavir concurrent with standard-dose CRT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) was identified from a cohort of 27 patients. In stage 2, 159 patients were enrolled in an open-label randomized controlled comparison of standard versus high dose (60 Gy in 30 fractions) CRT, with or without nelfinavir at MTD. Primary outcomes following dose escalation and nelfinavir use were respectively overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS: High dose CRT did not improve OS (16.9 (60 % confidence interval, CI 16.2-17.7) vs. 15.6 (60 %CI 14.3-18.2) months; adjusted hazard ratio, HR 1.13 (60 %CI 0.91-1.40; p = 0.68)). Similarly, median PFS was not improved by nelfinavir (10.0 (60 %CI 9.9-10.2) vs. 11.1 (60 %CI 10.3-12.8) months; adjusted HR 1.71 (60 %CI 1.38-2.12; p = 0.98)). Local progression at 12 months was numerically lower with high-dose CRT than with standard dose CRT (n = 11/46 (23.9 %) vs. n = 15/45 (33.3 %)). Neither nelfinavir nor radiotherapy dose escalation impacted on treatment compliance or grade 3/4 adverse event rate. There were no sustained differences in HRQoL scores between treatment groups over 28 weeks post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-escalated CRT may improve local tumour control and is well tolerated when used as consolidative treatment in LAPC but does not impact OS. Nelfinavir use does not improve PFS.

Time From Colorectal Cancer Surgery to Adjuvant Chemotherapy: Post Hoc Analysis of the SCOT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for colorectal cancer and its association with long-term outcomes have been investigated in national cohort studies, with no consensus on the optimal time from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy. Objective: To analyze the association between the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for colorectal cancer and disease-free survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 SCOT randomized clinical trial, from 244 centers in 6 countries, investigating the noninferiority of 3 vs 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with high-risk stage II or stage III nonmetastatic colorectal cancer who underwent curative-intended surgery were randomized to either 3 or 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin regimens. Those with complete information on the date of surgery, treatment type, and long-term follow-up were investigated for the primary and secondary end points. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to February 2024. Intervention: In the post hoc analysis, patients were grouped according to the start of adjuvant chemotherapy being less than 6 weeks vs greater than 6 weeks after surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease-free survival. The secondary end points were adverse events in the total treatment period or the first cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: A total of 5719 patients (2251 [39.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 63.4 [9.3] years) were included in the primary analysis after data curation; among them, 914 were in the early-start group and 4805 were in the late-start group. Median (IQR) follow-up was 72.0 (47.3-88.1) months, with a median (IQR) of 56 (41-66) days from surgery to chemotherapy. Five-year disease-free survival was 78.0% (95% CI, 75.3%-80.8%) in the early-start group and 73.2% (95% CI, 72.0%-74.5%) in the late-start group. In an adjusted Cox regression analysis, the start of adjuvant chemotherapy greater than 6 weeks after surgery was associated with worse disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.46; P = .01). In adjusted logistic regression models, there was no association with adverse events in the total treatment period (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.04; P = .09) or adverse events in the first cycle of treatment (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.09; P = .13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this international population of patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer, starting adjuvant chemotherapy more than 6 weeks after surgery was associated with worse disease-free survival, with no difference in adverse events between the groups. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN59757862.

Optimal maintenance strategy following FOLFOX plus anti-EGFR induction therapy in patients with RAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer: An individual patient data pooled analysis of randomised clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Anti-EGFR antibodies plus doublet chemotherapy is the standard of care in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No phase-3 level of evidence is available to guide treatment de-escalation after anti-EGFR-based first-line. Several randomised clinical trials investigated de-intensification strategies with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) and/or anti-EGFR. METHODS: We performed an individual patient data pooled analysis of Valentino, Panama, MACRO-2, COIN-B trials including RAS wild-type mCRC patients who received first-line therapy with FOLFOX plus panitumumab or cetuximab followed by pre-specified maintenance strategy. Only patients who started maintenance according to the assigned arm were included. Patients were categorised by type of maintenance (i.e. 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR or 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the start of maintenance; toxicity was evaluated for the maintenance treatment period. RESULTS: A total of 518 patients were included in the pooled analysis. Overall, 123, 185 and 210 patients received maintenance with 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR, 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR, respectively. Median PFS was 5.6, 6.0 and 9.0 (P = 0.009) and OS was 25.7, 24.0 and 28.0 months (P = 0.134) in 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR and 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR arms, respectively. Monotherapy maintenance (either 5-FU/LV or anti-EGFR) was inferior to combination in terms of PFS (hazard ratios [HR] 1.26, P = 0.016) and non-significantly trending also in OS (HR 1.20, P = 0.111). An increase of overall any grade and grade ≥ 3 AEs and selected AEs was reported in combination compared to either 5-FU/LV or anti-EGFR arms. CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis including four randomised phase II supports the use of 5-FU/LV plus anti-EGFR as the preferred maintenance regimen. Data provide rational for a more individualised maintenance treatment approach based on tumour and patients features.

Immediate surgery compared with short-course neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine, FOLFIRINOX, or chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (ESPAC5): a four-arm, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have relatively low resection rates and poor survival despite the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to establish the feasibility and efficacy of three different types of short-course neoadjuvant therapy compared with immediate surgery. METHODS: ESPAC5 (formerly known as ESPAC-5f) was a multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial done in 16 pancreatic centres in two countries (UK and Germany). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, biopsy proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic head, and were staged as having a borderline resectable tumour by contrast-enhanced CT criteria following central review. Participants were randomly assigned by means of minimisation to one of four groups: immediate surgery; neoadjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, and oral capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice a day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for two cycles); neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, folinic acid given according to local practice, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus injection on days 1 and 15 followed by 2400 mg/m2 46 h intravenous infusion given on days 1 and 15, repeated every 2 weeks for four cycles); or neoadjuvant capecitabine-based chemoradiation (total dose 50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions over 5·5 weeks [1·8 Gy per fraction, Monday to Friday] with capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily [Monday to Friday] throughout radiotherapy). Patients underwent restaging contrast-enhanced CT at 4-6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgical exploration if the tumour was still at least borderline resectable. All patients who had their tumour resected received adjuvant therapy at the oncologist's discretion. Primary endpoints were recruitment rate and resection rate. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 89500674, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2014, and Dec 20, 2018, from 478 patients screened, 90 were randomly assigned to a group (33 to immediate surgery, 20 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 20 to FOLFIRINOX, and 17 to capecitabine-based chemoradiation); four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis (one in the capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy withdrew consent before starting therapy and three [two in the immediate surgery group and one in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group] were found to be ineligible after randomisation). 44 (80%) of 55 patients completed neoadjuvant therapy. The recruitment rate was 25·92 patients per year from 16 sites; 21 (68%) of 31 patients in the immediate surgery and 30 (55%) of 55 patients in the combined neoadjuvant therapy groups underwent resection (p=0·33). R0 resection was achieved in three (14%) of 21 patients in the immediate surgery group and seven (23%) of 30 in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined (p=0·49). Surgical complications were observed in 29 (43%) of 68 patients who underwent surgery; no patients died within 30 days. 46 (84%) of 55 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were available for restaging. Six (13%) of 46 had a partial response. Median follow-up time was 12·2 months (95% CI 12·0-12·4). 1-year overall survival was 39% (95% CI 24-61) for immediate surgery, 78% (60-100) for gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 84% (70-100) for FOLFIRINOX, and 60% (37-97) for capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (p=0·0028). 1-year disease-free survival from surgery was 33% (95% CI 19-58) for immediate surgery and 59% (46-74) for the combined neoadjuvant therapies (hazard ratio 0·53 [95% CI 0·28-0·98], p=0·016). Three patients reported local disease recurrence (two in the immediate surgery group and one in the FOLFIRINOX group). 78 (91%) patients were included in the safety set and assessed for toxicity events. 19 (24%) of 78 patients reported a grade 3 or worse adverse event (two [7%] of 28 patients in the immediate surgery group and 17 [34%] of 50 patients in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined), the most common of which were neutropenia, infection, and hyperglycaemia. INTERPRETATION: Recruitment was challenging. There was no significant difference in resection rates between patients who underwent immediate surgery and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Short-course (8 week) neoadjuvant therapy had a significant survival benefit compared with immediate surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with either gemcitabine plus capecitabine or FOLFIRINOX had the best survival compared with immediate surgery. These findings support the use of short-course neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

A novel and validated prognostic index in hepatocellular carcinoma: the inflammation based index (IBI).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Outcome prediction is uniquely different in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as the progressive functional impairment of the liver impacts patient survival independently of tumour stage. As chronic inflammation is associated with the pathogenesis of HCC, we explored the prognostic impact of a panel of inflammatory based scores, including the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), in independent cohorts. METHODS: Inflammatory markers, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) scores were studied in a training set of 112 patients with predominantly unresectable HCC (75%). Independent predictors of survival identified in multivariate analysis were validated in an independent cohort of 466 patients with an overall lower tumour burden (BCLC-A, 56%). RESULTS: In both training and validation sets, mGPS and CLIP scores emerged as independent predictors of overall survival. The predictive accuracy of the combined mGPS and CLIP score (c score 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.8) appeared superior to that of the CLIP score alone (c score 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inflammation as measured by the mGPS, independently predicts overall survival in HCC. We have validated a novel, easy to use inflammatory score that can be used to stratify individuals. These data enable formulation of a new prognostic system, the inflammation based index in HCC (IBI). Further validation of the IBI considering treatment allocation and survival is warranted in an independent patient cohort.

Chemotherapy options in elderly and frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS2): an open-label, randomised factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Elderly and frail patients with cancer, although often treated with chemotherapy, are under-represented in clinical trials. We designed FOCUS2 to investigate reduced-dose chemotherapy options and to seek objective predictors of outcome in frail patients with advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS: We undertook an open, 2 × 2 factorial trial in 61 UK centres for patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer who were considered unfit for full-dose chemotherapy. After comprehensive health assessment (CHA), patients were randomly assigned by minimisation to: 48-h intravenous fluorouracil with levofolinate (group A); oxaliplatin and fluorouracil (group B); capecitabine (group C); or oxaliplatin and capecitabine (group D). Treatment allocation was not masked. Starting doses were 80% of standard doses, with discretionary escalation to full dose after 6 weeks. The two primary outcome measures were: addition of oxaliplatin ([A vs B] + [C vs D]), assessed with progression-free survival (PFS); and substitution of fluorouracil with capecitabine ([A vs C] + [B vs D]), assessed by change from baseline to 12 weeks in global quality of life (QoL). Analysis was by intention to treat. Baseline clinical and CHA data were modelled against outcomes with a novel composite measure, overall treatment utility (OTU). This study is registered, number ISRCTN21221452. FINDINGS: 459 patients were randomly assigned (115 to each of groups A-C, 114 to group D). Factorial comparison of addition of oxaliplatin versus no addition suggested some improvement in PFS, but the finding was not significant (median 5·8 months [IQR 3·3-7·5] vs 4·5 months [2·8-6·4]; hazard ratio 0·84, 95% CI 0·69-1·01, p=0·07). Replacement of fluorouracil with capecitabine did not improve global QoL: 69 of 124 (56%) patients receiving fluorouracil reported improvement in global QoL compared with 69 of 123 (56%) receiving capecitabine. The risk of having any grade 3 or worse toxic effect was not significantly increased with oxaliplatin (83/219 [38%] vs 70/221 [32%]; p=0·17), but was higher with capecitabine than with fluorouracil (88/222 [40%] vs 65/218 [30%]; p=0·03). In multivariable analysis, fewer baseline symptoms (odds ratio 1·32, 95% CI 1·14-1·52), less widespread disease (1·51, 1·05-2·19), and use of oxaliplatin (0·57, 0·39-0·82) were predictive of better OTU. INTERPRETATION: FOCUS2 shows that with an appropriate design, including reduced starting doses of chemotherapy, frail and elderly patients can participate in a randomised controlled trial. On balance, a combination including oxaliplatin was preferable to single-agent fluoropyrimidines, although the primary endpoint of PFS was not met. Capecitabine did not improve QoL compared with fluorouracil. Comprehensive baseline assessment holds promise as an objective predictor of treatment benefit. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council.

Reproducibility of quantitative assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the reproducibility of quantitative assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. METHODS: Fifteen patients with colorectal liver metastases and 5 volunteers were studied. The hepatic artery proper and the portal vein were imaged simultaneously with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. The examination was repeated with 2 different contrast bolus volumes (1.2 and 2.4 mL), and time-intensity curves were formed from dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound image loops. The rise time, peak intensity, and wash-in slope were derived from hepatic artery and portal vein time-intensity curves. Inter-reader, intra-reader, and inter-scan agreement was assessed by 2 independent readers. Quantitative (intraclass correlation coefficients and coefficients of variation [CVs]) and qualitative (Landis and Koch classification) analyses were performed. RESULTS: Intra-reader and inter-reader agreement was "almost perfect" for the hepatic artery (CV, 10%-15% and 8%-9%, respectively), portal vein (CV, 5%-8% and 6%-12%), and hepatic artery/portal vein ratio (CV, 8%-14% and 10%-15%) measurements of 3 all studied parameters. In contrast, inter-scan agreement was only "slight" to "moderate" (CV, 25%-27%) and "fair" to "moderate" (CV, 19%-24%) for rise time and peak intensity measurements in the hepatic artery and portal vein, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative assessment of altered hepatic hemodynamics with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound is reproducible provided that measurements in the hepatic artery are normalized by those in the portal vein.

Axitinib plus gemcitabine versus placebo plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a double-blind randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Axitinib is a potent, selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1, 2, and 3. A randomised phase 2 trial of gemcitabine with or without axitinib in advanced pancreatic cancer suggested increased overall survival in axitinib-treated patients. On the basis of these results, we aimed to assess the effect of treatment with gemcitabine plus axitinib on overall survival in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, no uncontrolled hypertension or venous thrombosis, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1. Patients, stratified by disease extent (metastatic vs locally advanced), were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days plus either axitinib or placebo. Axitinib or placebo were administered orally with food at a starting dose of 5 mg twice a day, which could be dose-titrated up to 10 mg twice daily if well tolerated. A centralised randomisation procedure was used to assign patients to each treatment group, with randomised permuted blocks within strata. Patients, investigators, and the trial sponsor were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All efficacy analyses were done in all patients assigned to treatment groups for whom data were available; safety and treatment administration and compliance assessments were based on treatment received. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00471146. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2007, and Oct 31, 2008, 632 patients were enrolled and assigned to treatment groups (316 axitinib, 316 placebo). At an interim analysis in January, 2009, the independent data monitoring committee concluded that the futility boundary had been crossed. Median overall survival was 8·5 months (95% CI 6·9-9·5) for gemcitabine plus axitinib (n=314, data missing for two patients) and 8·3 months (6·9-10·3) for gemcitabine plus placebo (n=316; hazard ratio 1·014, 95% CI 0·786-1·309; one-sided p=0·5436). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events for gemcitabine plus axitinib and gemcitabine plus placebo were hypertension (20 [7%] and 5 [2%] events, respectively), abdominal pain (20 [7%] and 17 [6%]), fatigue (27 [9%] and 21 [7%]), and anorexia (19 [6%] and 11 [4%]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of axitinib to gemcitabine does not improve overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. These results add to increasing evidence that targeting of VEGF signalling is an ineffective strategy in this disease. FUNDING: Pfizer.