Survival outcomes among older adults (OA) receiving second-line therapy for metastatic CRC (mCRC): 5,289 patients (pts) from the ARCAD Clinical Trials Program

7009

Background: Survival outcomes of 2nd line mCRC therapy for OA are poorly understood. We evaluated the rates and survival outcomes of 2nd line therapy among OA age 70+ compared to younger adults (YA) age < 70 following progression on 1st line clinical trials. Methods: Associations between clinical characteristics of pts with available treatment data after progression on 10 of 23 1st line ARCAD trials, time to initial progression (TTiP) and 2nd line therapy were evaluated. Time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were compared between OA and YA enrolled on 2nd line trials by Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites, presence of metastasis in lung/liver/peritoneum. Results: Sixteen percent of 1st line ARCAD trial participants were age 70+ (n = 870). Data for 2nd line therapy was available for 60.6% pts (3206/5289). Each additional decade of life was associated with 11% lower odds of receiving 2nd line therapy in multivariate analysis (p = 0.0117). OA participating in 2nd line trials (7.9% age 75+ of 7921) experience similar TTP and OS to YA (mTTP: 5.1 vs. 5.2mos; mOS 11.6 vs 12.4mos, respectively). Conclusions: We did not observe a statistical difference in survival outcomes by age following 2nd line mCRC therapy. Further study is needed to examine unmeasured comorbidity and use of geriatric assessment to select OA likely to benefit from 2nd line therapy. [Table: see text]

Sex differences in efficacy and toxicity of first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC): An analysis of 18,399 patients in the ARCAD database

4029

Background: The clearance of 5-FU differs significantly between men (M) and women (W). Adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) for CRC has a higher toxicity in W. The impact of sex on efficacy and toxicity in first-line trials of metastatic CRC (mCRC) is unknown. Methods: We analyzed patient (pt) and tumor characteristics, toxicities (nausea (AE1), vomiting (AE2), diarrhea, neutropenia (AE3)) and efficacy (overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS)) according to sex in the following treatment groups: A: CT alone, B: CT + bevacizumab, C: CT + EGFR-antibodies, with subgroup analyses in the CT alone group for single-agent, doublets and triplets, as well as irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-based regimens. Pts from trials with treatments still used today and all relevant data available were eligible. OS and PFS were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusted for primary tumor location and performance status (PS). Results: We included 28 trials with 18.399 pts (11.352 M and 7.047 W). W were younger (61 vs. 63 years), had more often a PS of 1 (49 vs 45%), BRAF mutations (10 vs. 7%), right-sided tumors (42 vs. 35%) and less often rectal tumors (26 vs. 32%). Significant differences in toxicity are reported in table. Rates of diarrhea were similar. There was no sex disparity in OS in the predefined subgroups except for pts receiving triplets where OS was better in M (HRadj=1.39 (1.05 - 1.85)). Median (interquartile range) OS in months for M and W was 16.7 (9.2-27.4) and 16.2 (8.9-27.2) in group 1, 21.9 (12.7-37.5) and 22.3 (12.9 – 39.0) in group 2, and 26.8 (14.6-45.3) and 24.8 (12.3-49.2) in group 3. HRsadj (W vs M) (95% CI), p values for OS were 1.02 (0.96-1.09), .557, 0.92 (0.83-1.03), .142, 0.99 (0.85-1.14), .866. Conclusions: M and W with mCRC differ significantly regarding patient and tumor characteristics. The significant higher toxicity in W does not translate in a higher treatment efficacy. Apart from known sex differences in pharmacokinetics of 5-FU, differences in pharmacodynamics must be postulated. [Table: see text]

Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in adjuvant randomised trials for patients with localised colon cancer: Results of the DATECAN initiative

BACKGROUND

The variability of definitions for time-to-event (TTE) end-points impacts the conclusions of randomised clinical trials (RCTs). The Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer (DATECAN) initiative aims to provide consensus definitions for TTE end-points used in RCTs. Here, we formulate guidelines for adjuvant colon cancer RCTs.

METHODS

We performed a literature review to identify TTE end-points and events included in their definition in RCT publications. Then, a consensus was reached among a panel of international experts, using a formal modified Delphi method, with 2 rounds of questionnaires and an in-person meeting.

RESULTS

Twenty-four experts scored 72 events involved in 6 TTE end-points. Consensus was reached for 24%, 57% and 100% events after the first round, second round and in-person meeting. For RCTs not using overall survival as their primary end-point, the experts recommend using disease-free survival (DFS) rather than recurrence-free survival (RFS) or time to recurrence (TTR) as the primary end-point. The consensus definition of DFS includes all causes of death, second primary colorectal cancers (CRCs), anastomotic relapse and metastatic relapse as an event, but not second primary non-CRCs. Events included in the RFS definition are the same as for DFS with the exception of second primary CRCs. The consensus definition of TTR includes anastomotic or metastatic relapse, death with evidence of recurrence and death from CC cause.

CONCLUSION

Standardised definitions of TTE end-points ensure the reproducibility of the end-points between RCTs and facilitate cross-trial comparisons. These definitions should be integrated in standard practice for the design, reporting and interpretation of adjuvant CC RCTs.

Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size-Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS).

OBJECTIVE

To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Pooled analysis of 20 randomized clinical trials within the Aide et Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database, which contains academic and industry-sponsored trials, was conducted. Three sets of comparisons were performed: chemotherapy alone, antiangiogenic agents, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Surrogacy of time to nadir and depth of nadir was assessed at the trial level based on joint modeling of relative tumor-size change vs baseline and OS. Treatment effects on time to nadir and on depth of nadir were defined in terms of between-arm differences in time to nadir and in depth of nadir, and both were assessed in linear regressions for their correlation with treatment effects (hazard ratios) on OS within each set. The strengths of association were quantified using sample-size-weighted coefficients of determination (R2), with values closer to 1.00 indicating stronger association. At the patient level, the correlation was assessed between modeled relative tumor-size change and OS.

RESULTS

For 14 chemotherapy comparisons in 4289 patients, the R2 value was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.96) for the association between treatment effects on time to nadir and OS and 0.08 (95% CI, 0-0.37) for depth of nadir and OS. For 11 antiangiogenic agent comparisons (4854 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.25 (95% CI, 0-0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0-0.35). For 8 anti-epidermal growth factor receptor comparisons (2684 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.24 (95% CI, 0-0.83) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0-0.78).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In contrast with early reports favoring depth of response as a surrogate, these results suggest that neither time to nadir nor depth of nadir is an acceptable surrogate for OS in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Consensus statement on essential patient characteristics in systemic treatment trials for metastatic colorectal cancer: Supported by the ARCAD Group

BACKGROUND

Patient characteristics and stratification factors are key features influencing trial outcomes. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in reporting of patient characteristics and use of stratification factors in phase 3 trials investigating systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to develop a minimum set of essential baseline characteristics and stratification factors to include in such trials.

METHODS

We performed a modified, two-round Delphi survey among international experts with wide experience in the conduct and methodology of phase 3 trials of systemic treatment of mCRC.

RESULTS

Thirty mCRC experts from 15 different countries completed both consensus rounds. A total of 14 patient characteristics were included in the recommended set: age, performance status, primary tumour location, primary tumour resection, prior chemotherapy, number of metastatic sites, liver-only disease, liver involvement, surgical resection of metastases, synchronous versus metachronous metastases, (K)RAS and BRAF mutation status, microsatellite instability/mismatch repair status and number of prior treatment lines. A total of five patient characteristics were considered the most relevant stratification factors: RAS/BRAF mutation status, performance status, primary tumour sidedness and liver-only disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides a minimum set of essential baseline patient characteristics and stratification factors to include in phase 3 trials of systemic treatment of mCRC. Inclusion of these patient characteristics and strata in study protocols and final study reports will improve interpretation of trial results and facilitate cross-study comparisons.

Personalizing Survival Predictions in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: The ARCAD Nomogram Project

Background

Estimating prognosis on the basis of clinicopathologic factors can inform clinical practice and improve risk stratification for clinical trials. We constructed prognostic nomograms for one-year overall survival and six-month progression-free survival in metastatic colorectal carcinoma by using the ARCAD database.

Methods

Data from 22 674 patients in 26 randomized phase III clinical trials since 1997 were used to construct and validate Cox models, stratified by treatment arm within each study. Candidate variables included baseline age, sex, body mass index, performance status, colon vs rectal cancer, prior chemotherapy, number and location of metastatic sites, tumor mutation status (BRAF, KRAS), bilirubin, albumin, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, platelets, absolute neutrophil count, and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Missing data (<11%) were imputed, continuous variables modeled with splines, and clinically relevant pairwise interactions tested if P values were less than .001. Final models were internally validated via bootstrapping to obtain optimism-corrected calibration and discrimination C-indices, and externally validated on a 10% holdout sample from each trial (n = 2257).

Results

In final models, all included variables were associated with overall survival except for lung metastases, and all but total white cell count associated with progression-free survival. No clinically relevant pairwise interactions were identified. Final nomogram calibration was good (C = 0.68 for overall and C = 0.62 for progression-free survival), as was external validity (concordance between predicted >50% vs < 50% probability) and actual (yes/no) survival (72.8% and 68.2% concordance, respectively, for one-year overall and six-month progression-free survival, between predicted [>50% vs < 50% probability] and actual [yes/no] overall and progression-free survival). Median survival predictions fell within the actual 95% Kaplan-Meier confidence intervals.

Conclusions

The nomograms are well calibrated and internally and externally valid. They have the potential to aid prognostication and patient-physician communication and balance risk in colorectal cancer trials.

Evaluation of lesion-based response at 12 weeks (LBR12) of treatment (Rx) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Findings from 9,092 patients (pts) in the ARCAD database

612

Background: mCRC is a heterogeneous disease leading to possible disparate responses among lesions in a single pt. This study assesses the heterogeneity of lesion responses and evaluates the prognostic value of LBR12 and its mortality risk discrimination beyond RECIST responses. Methods: Pts with ≥ 2 lesions and no new lesions at 12 weeks (wks) were eligible. For each pt, after 12 wks of Rx, each lesion was categorized as progressive disease (L-PD: ≥20% increase in the longest diameter [LD]), partial response (L-PR: ≥30% decrease in LD), or stable disease (L-SD: neither L-PD nor L-PR). LBR12 was defined, per patient, by the combination of lesion responses: homogeneous LBR12 (L-PD, L-SD, L-PR only) and heterogeneous LBR12 (mixture of L-PD/L-SD, L-PD/L-PR, L-SD/L-PR). LBR12 and overall survival (OS) were correlated using stratified multivariate Cox models after adjusting for age, gender, and ECOG PS. Results: Among 9,092 mCRCs (Rx: chemo alone 44%; chemo + VEGF inhibitor [VEGFi] 42%; chemo + EGFR inhibitor [EGFRi] 10%) from 16 1st-line studies. Median OS: 2.2 years. Per RECIST at 12 wks, CR 0%; PR 36.1%; SD 60.9%; PD 3.0%. Responses in 52% were heterogeneous (Table). VEGFi and EGFRi treated pts had the highest rate of L-SD/L-PR (45%) and L-PR only (22%) status, respectively. Median OS increased monotonically across pts with more L-PRs and fewer L-PDs (Table). Pts with L-SD/L-PR status, among which 51% had SD per RECIST, had longer OS than those with L-SD only status (HRadj.= .81, padj.< .0001), but shorter OS than those with L-PR only status (HRadj.= 1.46, padj.< .0001). Pts with L-PD/L-SD status, among which 71% were SD per RECIST, had shorter OS than those with L-SD only status (HRadj.= 2.22, padj.< .0001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimens. Conclusions: The lesion-based response captures the heterogeneity of within pt lesion responses and provides refinement in predicting outcome beyond RECIST response at 12 wks. [Table: see text]

Aflibercept Plus FOLFIRI vs. Placebo Plus FOLFIRI in Second-Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: a Post Hoc Analysis of Survival from the Phase III VELOUR Study Subsequent to Exclusion of Patients who had Recurrence During or Within 6 Months of Completing Adjuvant Oxaliplatin-Based Therapy

The aim of this post hoc analysis of the VELOUR study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00561470) was to investigate the treatment effect of adding aflibercept to second-line infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had failed any prior oxaliplatin-containing regimen. Adjuvant rapid relapsers (ARR), who were enrolled directly following relapse during or within 6 months of completion of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy (N = 124, including 17 patients who also received bevacizumab as part of their adjuvant therapy), were excluded from the original VELOUR intention-to-treat (ITT) population (N = 1226). After exclusion of the ARR, overall survival (OS) in the ITT minus ARR (ITT-ARR) population (N = 1102) was longer in the aflibercept plus FOLFIRI arm than in the placebo plus FOLFIRI arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.90; median survival difference 1.87 months]. In the subgroup of patients assigned to the prior bevacizumab stratum at randomization, OS was numerically longer in the aflibercept plus FOLFIRI arm than in the placebo plus FOLFIRI arm (HR 0.81; 95 % CI 0.63-1.04; median survival difference 2.14 months). Comparison of the post hoc analysis results with the primary analysis from VELOUR suggests that the inclusion of the directly enrolled ARR may have understated the aflibercept treatment benefit for both bevacizumab-pretreated and bevacizumab-naïve patients in the strictly second-line setting although no definitive conclusion may be inferred. The benefit associated with the addition of aflibercept to second-line FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC was observed whatever the timing of first-line disease progression. There were no unexpected safety concerns.

How health-related quality of life assessment should be used in advanced colorectal cancer clinical trials

Traditionally, the efficacy of cancer treatment in patients with advance or metastatic disease in clinical studies has been studied using overall survival and more recently tumor-based end points such as progression-free survival, measurements of response to treatment. However, these seem not to be the relevant clinical end points in current situation if such end points were no validated as surrogate of overall survival to demonstrate the clinical efficacy. Appropriate, meaningful, primary patient-oriented and patient-reported end points that adequately measure the effects of new therapeutic interventions are then crucial for the advancement of clinical research in metastatic colorectal cancer to complement the results of tumor-based end points. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is effectively an evaluation of quality of life and its relationship with health over time. HRQoL includes the patient report at least of the way a disease or its treatment affects its physical, emotional and social well-being. Over the past few years, several phase III trials in a variety of solid cancers have assessed the incremental value of HRQoL in addition to the traditional end points of tumor response and survival results. HRQoL could provide not only complementary clinical data to the primary outcomes, but also more precise predictive and prognostic value. This end point is useful for both clinicians and patients in order to achieve the dogma of precision medicine. The present article examines the use of HRQoL in phase III metastatic colorectal cancer clinical trials, outlines the importance of HRQoL assessment methods, analysis, and results presentation. Moreover, it discusses the relevance of including HRQoL as a primary/co-primary end point to support the progression-free survival results and to assess efficacy of treatment in the advanced disease setting.

Clinical Calculator for Early Mortality in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Analysis of Patients From 28 Clinical Trials in the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive Database

Purpose Factors contributing to early mortality after initiation of treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer are poorly understood. Materials and Methods Data from 22,654 patients enrolled in 28 randomized phase III trials contained in the ARCAD (Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive) database were pooled. Multivariable logistic regression models for 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality were constructed, including clinically and statistically significant patient and disease factors and interaction terms. A calculator (nomogram) for 90-day mortality was developed and validated internally using bootstrapping methods and externally using a 10% random holdout sample from each trial. The impact of early progression on the likelihood of survival to 90 days was examined with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. Results Mortality rates were 1.4% at 30 days, 3.4% at 60 days, and 5.5% at 90 days. Among baseline factors, advanced age, lower body mass index, poorer performance status, increased number of metastatic sites, BRAF mutant status, and several laboratory parameters were associated with increased likelihood of early mortality. A multivariable model for 90-day mortality showed strong internal discrimination (C-index, 0.77) and good calibration across risk groups as well as accurate predictions in the external validation set, both overall and within patient subgroups. Conclusion A validated clinical nomogram has been developed to quantify the risk of early death for individual patients during initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This tool may be used for patient eligibility assessment or risk stratification in future clinical trials and to identify patients requiring more or less aggressive therapy and additional supportive measures during and after treatment.

Efficacy of targeted drugs in germ cell cancer cell lines with differential cisplatin sensitivity

Testicular germ cell tumors (TGCTs) are the most common malignancies in men between the age of 15 and 35. Although cisplatin-based chemotherapy is highly effective in advanced disease, approximately 20% of patients have an unfavorable prognosis due to primary or acquired cisplatin resistance. For these patients, new therapeutic options are urgently needed. In numerous tumor entities, combinations of monoclonal antibodies or kinase inhibitors with chemotherapy exerted promising preclinical or clinical results, which have led to new treatment concepts. This prompted us to investigate the activity of different targeted agents alone or in combination with cisplatin in a panel of TGCT cell lines.

Impact of FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab (bev) compared to FOLFOX and bev on health related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC): Analysis of the CHARTA-AIO 0209 trial

3544

Background: FOLFOXIRI/bev is a highly efficacious first line regimen in MCRC. Despite higher rates of neutropenia, diarrhea and stomatitis, FOLFOXIRI/bev is tolerable and feasible in MCRC patients. To date nothing is known about the impact of this regimen on HRQOL. Methods: 250 patients were randomized to FOLFOX/bev (arm A) or FOLFOXIRI/bev (arm B). HRQOL were assessed at baseline, every 8 weeks during induction treatment (6 months) and every 12 weeks during maintenance treatment, using the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29 and QLQ-CIPN20. The mean values of every score were calculated as the average of week 8, 16 and 24 assessment. Test concerning mean values were performed as t-test, with global type I error set at 0.05. HRQOL deterioration and improvement rates were analyzed and compared between treatment groups using chi² tests. Results: For HRQOL analysis, 237 patients were eligible (arm A: 118; arm B: 119). Compliance rate with the HRQOL questionnaires was 95.4% at baseline, 72.6% at week 8, 59.5 % at week 16 and 43.5% at week 24. Whereas mean global quality of life score (GHS/QOL) was similar between arm A and B (59.8 vs. 58.8; p = 0.726), mean scores for nausea/vomiting (9.4 vs. 16.0; p = 0.015) and diarrhea (23.7 vs. 32.1; p = 0.051) significantly or borderline significantly favored arm A during induction period. Furthermore, at week 8 scores of nausea/vomiting (9.2 versus 17.3, p = 0.006) appetite loss (19.5 vs. 29.4; p = 0.035) and financial problems (18.3 vs. 29.5; p = 0.021) and at the end of treatment physical functioning (75.0 vs. 65.8; p = 0.048) were significantly better for arm A compared to arm B. No significant differences were observed in the remaining EORTC scores. The rates of deterioration and improvement between baseline and week 8 of at least 10 points in the EORTC scores were similar (e.g. deterioration-rate GHS/QOL score 21.5% vs. 26.5% for arm A vs. B; p = 0.461). Conclusions: Although no remarkable detriment in HRQOL was noted, the better efficacy of FOLFOXIRI/bev compared to FOLFOX/bev is associated with a decrease in mainly gastrointestinal QOL scores. Further subgroup-analyses will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT01321957.

Phase II-study of sequential high-dose-chemotherapy with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide( P-ICE) in patients with relapsed or refractory germ cell tumors (GCT)

4552

Background: High-dose chemotherapy (HD-CTx) is an active option for salvage chemotherapy in patients (pts) with refractory or relapsed GCT. All previous trials with HD-CTx used one or two cycles of high dose chemotherapy (CTx) including 2 or a maximum of 3 drugs. Another potentially more active option is the application of four sequential HD-CTx cycles (Schmoll et al, JCO 2003). Methods: We conducted a phase II trial of 1(-2) cycle(s) induction CTx with standard dose P-ICE (Paclitaxel 135mg/m² d1, Ifosfamide 1500mg/m² d1-3, Carboplatin 150mg/m² d1-3, Etoposide 150mg/m² d1-3), followed by 4 sequential cycles of HD-P-ICE (Paclitaxel 200mg/m² d1, Ifosfamide 3300mg/m² d1-3, Carboplatin 330mg/m² d1-3, Etoposide 330mg/m² d1-3). Eligibility criteria: relapse or progression under one or more induction CTx, ECOG PS (0-1), Creatinine-clearance > 30ml/min, adaequate liver function, measurable tumor or at least marker-elevation. Results: 37 pts entered the trial and 33 are evaluable (4 pts never received HD-CTx due to lack of stem cells (3) or medical reasons (1)). Prior CTx:1 (N = 26), 2 (N = 4), 3 (N = 3); primary extragonadal: 6; seminoma/ non-seminoma 5/28; ECOG-PS: 0 (19), 1 (14). Response rate: CR/NED 17 (51.5%), CR/NED/PR-/SD- with marker normalization 21 (63.6%), PD 12 (36.4%). DFS of CR/NED: median 59 (8-105) months; RFS of all favourable responders 60 (8-105) months, PFS total 46 (2-105) months. OS for all pts. 51 (6-105) months, OS Favourable Responders: 65 (23 – 105), Nonfavourable Responders: 11 (6-27) months,. Toxicity was tolerable without treatment related death, with mainly grade 4 bone-marrow toxicity and grade 2 mucositis and/or diarrhea. Conclusions: Sequential HD-CTx with one cycle of SD-P-ICE and four cycles HD-CTx is feasible with acceptable toxicity and favourable efficacy. Sequential HD-CTx using the four most active drugs might be a potentially option for this pts-population due to good tolerability, applicability and interesting long-term outcome. Comparison of the standard approach with 1 to 3 sequential high dose cycles of Carboplatin/Etoposide is ongoing (TIGER-Trial). Clinical trial information: EUDRA-CT: 2006-006004-11.

“CHARTA”: FOLFOX/Bevacizumab vs. FOLFOXIRI/Bevacizumab in advanced colorectal cancer—Final results, prognostic and potentially predictive factors from the randomized Phase II trial of the AIO

3533

Background: FOLFOXIRI/Bevacizumab (Bev) is superior to FOLFIRI/Bev in the TRIBE trial (F Loupakis, NEJM 2014). The CHARTA trial was developed parallel to TRIBE with the same 4-drug-protocol but vs. FOLFOX/B ev as control arm. Methods: From 7/11 to 12/14 250 patients were randomized, including ECOG 0-2, ≥ 1 measurable lesion > 1cm, stratified by ESMO-Group 1,2,3 (HJ Schmoll, Ann Oncol 2012). Induction: 6 months, maintenance Capecitabine+Bev until progression or max.12 months, at P reinduction by investigators decision. 25% dose reduction was allowed in cycle 1 + 2 on the investigator’s discretion. Primary EP: significant improvement of PFS-rate @ 9 months (p<0.1, 2-sided Fisher’s-exact test); secondary EP: RR, PFS, OS, toxicity. Results: 241 pts. (1 not elig., 8 prot. violation) are evaluable after a follow up of 31.4 (0.1-51) months. m/f: 65%/35%, age 61y (21-82), ECOG 0-1/2: 96%/4%. The Primary Endpoint was met: PFS @ 9 months 56% vs. 68%, p= 0.086. PFS was improved: 9.8 vs. 12.0 months, HR 0.7 (ns.), identical to TRIBE with 9.7 vs. 12.1 months. Response rate (A/B): CR: 5%/5%, CR/PR 60%/70%, SD 25%/21%, PD 14%/9%. Final OS will be available at the meeting. Toxicity was low to moderate without major differences except ° ¾ diarrhea (12%/16%) and neutrophils (14%/20%). Clinical/molecular prognostic or predictive factors are equally distributed (stratification by ESMO groups) (see table). There are major, but mostly not significant differences in RR/ PFS in most subgroups, however, not strong enough to safely identify patients with high potential to benefit from the 4-drug combination. Therefore, a multivariate analysis to model a common prognostic and predictive risk score is ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: “CHARTA” supports the superiority of FOLFOXIRI/Bev. A combined prognostic and predictive classification is required to better select those patients with most potential benefit from the 4-drug combination. Clinical trial information: NCT01321957. [Table: see text]

Heterogeneity in early lesion changes on treatment as a marker of poor prognosis in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with first line systemic chemotherapy ± biologic: Findings from 9,092 pts in the ARCAD database

3535

Background: CRC is known to be a heterogeneous disease. This study quantifies within pt heterogeneity in early lesion change rate (LCR) in the era of targeted agents compared to chemo alone and its potential impact on survival. Methods: Pts with 2-10 lesions measured at baseline were included. For each lesion, the early LCR was defined as the change in size (shrinking or growing) from baseline to 12 weeks on treatment. Within pt heterogeneity in early LCR among lesions was estimated by standard deviation (STD). A larger value of STD indicates larger variation of LCR per pt. Stratified multivariate Cox models were used to assess the associations between LCR STD with overall survival (OS). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRadj) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported. Results: Data were available on 9,092 mCRC pts (median age 61; 60% male, 55% ECOG PS 0; 61% 2+ metastatic sites) enrolled in 16 1st-line randomized trials, with 44%, 42%, and 10% of pts received chemo alone, + a VEGF inhibitor (VEGFi) or an EGFR inhibitor (EGFRi), respectively. LCR heterogeneity is the highest among pts received EGFRi but lowest among pts received VEGFi (Table). Overall, higher heterogeneity is associated with worst OS (HRadj1.22, 95% CI (1.16, 1.27)). The effect is most pronounced in pts received VEGFi (interaction p=0.0012). Conclusions: There was heterogeneity observed in lesion size changes within pts. Its magnitude varies across treatment approaches, and was associated with poor survival. This preliminary result reveals the great potentials to define novel response endpoint and refine treatment decision-making by incorporating heterogeneities in lesion changes. [Table: see text]

CHARTA: FOLFOX+bevacizumab +/- irinotecan in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC)—Final results of the randomized phase II trial of the AIO (KRK 0209)

658

Background: The 4-drug-regimen FOLFOXIRI+Bevacizumab (Bev) was superior to FOLFIRI+Bev (TRIBE F.Loupakis, NEJM 2014). CHARTA investigates the same 4-drug-regimen vs. FOLFOX+Bev. Methods: 250 patients were randomized from 7/11 to 12/14 to standard FOLFOX+Bev (A) vs. FOLFOXIRI+Bev (B), with dose/schedule as in TRIBE, 25% dose reduction in cycle 1 + 2, if necessary. Incl.criteria: ECOG 0-2, ≥ 1 measurable lesion > 1cm; stratified by ESMO-Group 1, 2, 3 (HJ Schmoll et. al., Ann Oncol 2012). Induction: 6 months, maintenance Capecitabine+Bev until progression or max. of 12 months, with reinduction by individual decision. Primary EP: significant improvement of PFS-rate at 9 months (p<0.1, 2-sided Fisher’s-exact test); secondary EP: RR- rate, PFS, OS, sec. resection. Results: Evaluable 241 pts. (1 not elig., 8 prot. violation); m/f: 65%/35%, age 61 yrs. (21-82), left/right: left A: 51, 5%, B: 48, 5%; right A: 45%, B: 55%; ECOG 0-1/2: 96% / 4%, ESMO-group 1/2/3: 29%/ 55%/ 16%. Primary endpoint was met: significantly improved PFS at 9 months 56% vs. 68% (p= 0,086). Preliminary PFS 9,76 vs. 12,0 months (HR 0.77, p=0.61), identical to TRIBE: 9.7 vs. 12.1. Response (A/B): CR: 5/5%, CR/PR 60/70%, SD 25/21%, PD 14/9%; sec. resection: 21/23%. Subgroup - analyses did not show significant differences, except CR / PR left/right (A/B): left 59/68%, right 63/73%; PFS (months) left 10.4/12 (HR 0.69, p=0.03), right: 8.2 /10.7); non-significant improvement in ESMO-group 3 (HR 0.51), RAS-wt (HR 0.67), Koehne-Score High risk HR 0.58; ECOG 1: HR 0.69. QL-Global- Health-Score: slightly worse in A, vs. improved in B. Dose-intensity <70%/ 70-90%/ >90% (A/B): 39/37%/ 18/26%/ 41%/36%; initial dose-reduction 17% of pts. Toxicity: low to moderate without major differences between A &B, except grade ¾ diarrhea 12/16%, neutrophils 14/20%, GI 12/20%. Conclusions: The 4-drug-regimen has superior activity with the same outcome as TRIBE and is well tolerated, without a negative effect of initial dose-reduction, and an improvement of global QoL-Score. Final PFS, OS data and detailed subgroup/multivariate analysis, including Quality of life data, will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT01321957.

ESMO / ASCO Recommendations for a Global Curriculum in Medical Oncology Edition 2016

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) are publishing a new edition of the ESMO/ASCO Global Curriculum (GC) thanks to contribution of 64 ESMO-appointed and 32 ASCO-appointed authors. First published in 2004 and updated in 2010, the GC edition 2016 answers to the need for updated recommendations for the training of physicians in medical oncology by defining the standard to be fulfilled to qualify as medical oncologists. At times of internationalisation of healthcare and increased mobility of patients and physicians, the GC aims to provide state-of-the-art cancer care to all patients wherever they live. Recent progress in the field of cancer research has indeed resulted in diagnostic and therapeutic innovations such as targeted therapies as a standard therapeutic approach or personalised cancer medicine apart from the revival of immunotherapy, requiring specialised training for medical oncology trainees. Thus, several new chapters on technical contents such as molecular pathology, translational research or molecular imaging and on conceptual attitudes towards human principles like genetic counselling or survivorship have been integrated in the GC. The GC edition 2016 consists of 12 sections with 17 subsections, 44 chapters and 35 subchapters, respectively. Besides renewal in its contents, the GC underwent a principal formal change taking into consideration modern didactic principles. It is presented in a template-based format that subcategorises the detailed outcome requirements into learning objectives, awareness, knowledge and skills. Consecutive steps will be those of harmonising and implementing teaching and assessment strategies.

Sunitinib added to FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI in patients with chemorefractory advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or lower esophagus: a randomized, placebo-controlled phase II AIO trial with serum biomarker program

BACKGROUND

As a multi-targeted anti-angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor sunitinib (SUN) has been established for renal cancer and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. In advanced refractory esophagogastric cancer patients, monotherapy with SUN was associated with good tolerability but limited tumor response.

METHODS

This double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase II clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of SUN as an adjunct to second and third-line FOLFIRI (NCT01020630). Patients were randomized to receive 6-week cycles including FOLFIRI plus sodium folinate (Na-FOLFIRI) once every two weeks and SUN or placebo (PL) continuously for four weeks followed by a 2-week rest period. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Preplanned serum analyses of VEGF-A, VEGF-D, VEGFR2 and SDF-1α were performed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Overall, 91 patients were randomized, 45 in each group (one patient withdrew). The main grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia and leucopenia, observed in 56 %/20 % and 27 %/16 % for FOLFIRI + SUN/FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. Median PFS was similar, 3.5 vs. 3.3 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95 % CI 0.70-1.74, P = 0.66) for FOLFIRI + SUN vs. FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. For FOLFIRI + SUN, a trend towards longer median overall survival (OS) compared with placebo was observed (10.4 vs. 8.9 months, HR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.50-1.34, one-sided P = 0.21). In subgroup serum analyses, significant changes in VEGF-A (P = 0.017), VEGFR2 (P = 0.012) and VEGF-D (P < 0.001) serum levels were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although sunitinib combined with FOLFIRI did not improve PFS and response in chemotherapy-resistant gastric cancer, a trend towards better OS was observed. Further biomarker-driven studies with other anti-angiogenic RTK inhibitors are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered prospectively in the NCT Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) under NCT01020630 on November 23, 2009 after approval by the leading ethics committee of the Medical Association of Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, in coordination with the participating ethics committees (see Additional file 2) on September 16, 2009.

ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in Western countries. Over the last 20 years, and the last decade in particular, the clinical outcome for patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) has improved greatly due not only to an increase in the number of patients being referred for and undergoing surgical resection of their localised metastatic disease but also to a more strategic approach to the delivery of systemic therapy and an expansion in the use of ablative techniques. This reflects the increase in the number of patients that are being managed within a multidisciplinary team environment and specialist cancer centres, and the emergence over the same time period not only of improved imaging techniques but also prognostic and predictive molecular markers. Treatment decisions for patients with mCRC must be evidence-based. Thus, these ESMO consensus guidelines have been developed based on the current available evidence to provide a series of evidence-based recommendations to assist in the treatment and management of patients with mCRC in this rapidly evolving treatment setting.

MRI rectal cancer in Australia and New Zealand: An audit from the PETACC-6 trial

INTRODUCTION

An MRI audit substudy was conducted in patients who underwent an MRI prior to treatment in Australia and New Zealand as part of the PETACC-6 trial in locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 82 patients from 15 centres had rectal MRI scans reviewed for technique, data included in reports and comparison of reports with blinded central reporting by two experienced radiologists.

RESULTS

In total, 82% performed minimum T2 sagittal and T2 axial oblique sequences. The high-resolution T2 sequence parameters varied significantly with only 33% obtaining a voxel size of <1.3 mm³ . The rate of inclusion of relevant findings in the reports was T3 distance in mm 21%, N stage 84%, circumferential resection margin (CRM) status 72%, extramural venous invasion (EMVI) status 29% and distance from the puborectalis sling 17%. In total, 31% reports included all of T stage with T3 substage, N stage and CRM involvement. In total, 17% reports included these 3 findings and EMVI. Eleven reports used a template with 82% of these including the first 3 findings. The agreement with central reporters was T stage 76%, N stage 70%, CRM status 57% and EMVI 16%.

CONCLUSION

There is significant variation in scan quality and low rates of including all relevant findings in rectal MRI reports in the audit. The authors recommend adoption of routine sequences and template reports in both trial settings and routine practice to improve scan technique and adequacy of reports in rectal cancer MRI staging scans across Australia and New Zealand.