Delayed care for patients with newly diagnosed cancer due to COVID-19 and estimated impact on cancer mortality in France

BACKGROUND

The impact of the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wave on cancer patient management was measured within the nationwide network of the Unicancer comprehensive cancer centers in France.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The number of patients diagnosed and treated within 17 of the 18 Unicancer centers was collected in 2020 and compared with that during the same periods between 2016 and 2019. Unicancer centers treat close to 20% of cancer patients in France yearly. The reduction in the number of patients attending the Unicancer centers was analyzed per regions and cancer types. The impact of delayed care on cancer-related deaths was calculated based on different hypotheses.

RESULTS

A 6.8% decrease in patients managed within Unicancer in the first 7 months of 2020 versus 2019 was observed. This reduction reached 21% during April and May, and was not compensated in June and July, nor later until November 2020. This reduction was observed only for newly diagnosed patients, while the clinical activity for previously diagnosed patients increased by 4% similar to previous years. The reduction was more pronounced in women, in breast and prostate cancers, and for patients without metastasis. Using an estimated hazard ratio of 1.06 per month of delay in diagnosis and treatment of new patients, we calculated that the delays observed in the 5-month period from March to July 2020 may result in an excess mortality due to cancer of 1000-6000 patients in coming years.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the delays in cancer patient management were observed only for newly diagnosed patients, more frequently in women, for breast cancer, prostate cancer, and nonmetastatic cancers. These delays may result is an excess risk of cancer-related deaths in the coming years.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus upfront surgery in esophageal or gastro-esophageal carcinoma

4067

Background: Defining the optimal neoadjuvant treatment for resectable locally advanced esophageal carcinoma remains an open question. The debate is fuelled by the fact that most of the available randomized clinical trials (RCT) accrued two histological subtypes (adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)) and two anatomical locations (TE and GEJ). The aim of this individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of preoperative chemotherapy on survival with a specific focus on histological subtypes and anatomical locations. Methods: Were eligible published or unpublished RCT closed to accrual before December 2015 and comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CS) to primary surgery (S), identified by electronic database, conference proceedings and clinical trial register. All analyses were conducted on IPD obtained from trial Investigators. The Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) with a 6-months landmark time, local/distant relapse/death without relapse as competing events. Two subgroup analyses were pre-planned one on the histological subtype and another on the anatomical location. A stratified logrank test was used for OS and DFS, and a stratified fine and gray model for competing events. HR, and risk ratios (RR) were combined using a random effect model. Results: IPD were obtained from 12 RCT (2601 patients) out of 16 identified (2863 patients) When compared to S, CS was associated with a significantly increased OS, (HR = 0.85[0.78-0.92], p < 0.0001), with a 5-year absolute OS benefit of 5.7%. However, the subgroup analysis by histological subtype showed an OS benefit from CS higher for AC (HR = 0.80[0.72-0.91], p < 0.01), when compared to SCC (HR = 0.90[0.80-1.01], p = 0.06), but with p for interaction = 0.2. In the subgroup analysis by anatomical location CS benefit was seen across both anatomical location with a trend in favor of GEJ (TE: HR = 0.89[0.81-0.98], p = 0.02 GEJ: HR = 0.71[0.57-0.88]), p < 0.01, p for interaction = 0.057). CS also improved DFS (HR = 0.81[0.74-0.88], p < 0.0001), with the same trend for the subgroup analyses, with apparent significant benefit for AC HR = 0.80[0.72-0.91] when compared to SCC HR = 0.90[0.80-1.01], (p for interaction 0.045) and a similar benefit for both location (TE: HR = 0.89[0.81-0.98] p < 0.01, GEJ: HR = 0.71[0.57-0.88], p = 0.095, P for interaction 0.11). Local (HR = 0.76[0.63-0.92], p = 0.0045) and distant (HR = 0.87[0.76-0.99], p = 0.04) relapses were also significantly lower in the CS arm, with no significant variation according to histological subtypes or tumor location. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improves OS when added to upfront surgery and was equally effective in AC and SCC. A slightly more pronounced effect was observed for overall survival in the GEJ location vs. the TE.

FOLFIRINOX-R study design: a phase I/II trial of FOLFIRINOX plus regorafenib as first line therapy in patients with unresectable RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

The chemotherapy triplet FOLFOXIRI combined to the anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab is an option in selected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. In this setting, RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer do not benefit the same from treatment than RAS-wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer do. Together with its antiangiogenic properties, the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor regorafenib has also anti-proliferative activities whatever the RAS status is. The present trial aims at studying the safety and the efficacy of regorafenib in combination with FOLFIRINOX – a chemotherapy triplet using a different dosing schedule than FOLFOXIRI - in patients with RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Methods

FOLFIRINOX-R is a prospective, multicentric, non-randomised, dose-finding phase 1–2 trial. The primary endpoints are the determination of the maximum tolerated dose, the recommended phase 2 dose, and the proportion of patients achieving disease control at 48-weeks. Phase 1 follows a 3 + 3 design (12 to 24 patients to be included). Sixty nine patients will be necessary in phase 2, including 5% non-evaluable ones, with the following assumptions, one-stage Fleming design, α = 5%, β = 20%, p0 = 35% and p1 = 50%. Key eligibility criteria include Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of ≤1 and RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer not amenable to surgery with curative intent and not previously treated for metastatic disease. FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², folinic acid 400 mg/m², irinotecan 150–180 mg/m², 5-fluorouracil: 400 mg/m² then 2400 mg/m² over 46 h) is administered every 14 days. Regorafenib (80 to 160 mg, as per dose-level) is administered orally, once daily on days 4 to 10 of each cycle.

Discussion

FOLFIRINOX-R is the first phase I/II study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of regorafenib in combination with FOLFIRINOX as frontline therapy for patients with RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Trial registration

EudraCT: 2018-003541-42; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03828799.

Population pharmacokinetic model of irinotecan and its four main metabolites in patients treated with FOLFIRI or FOLFIRINOX regimen

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to characterize the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its four main metabolites (SN-38, SN-38G, APC and NPC) in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with FOLFIRI and FOLFIRINOX regimens and to quantify and explain the inter-individual pharmacokinetic variability in this context.

METHODS

A multicenter study including 109 metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with FOLFIRI or FOLFIRINOX regimen, associated or not with a monoclonal antibody, was conducted. Concentrations of irinotecan and its four main metabolites were measured in 506 blood samples during the first cycle of treatment. Collected data were analyzed using the population approach. First, fixed and random effects models were selected using statistical and graphical methods; second, the impact of covariates on pharmacokinetic parameters was evaluated to explain the inter-individual variability in pharmacokinetic parameters.

RESULTS

A seven-compartment model best described the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its four main metabolites. First-order rates were assigned to distribution, elimination, and metabolism processes, except for the transformation of irinotecan to NPC which was nonlinear. Addition of a direct conversion of NPC into SN-38 significantly improved the model. Co-administration of oxaliplatin significantly modified the distribution of SN-38.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, the present model is the first to allow a simultaneous description of irinotecan pharmacokinetics and of its four main metabolites. Moreover, a direct conversion of NPC into SN-38 had never been described before in a population pharmacokinetic model of irinotecan. The model will be useful to develop pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models relating SN-38 concentrations to efficacy and digestive toxicities.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00559676.

Phase II study evaluating the association of gemcitabine, trastuzumab and erlotinib as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (GATE 1)

In a previous phase II study (THERAPY), cetuximab and trastuzumab combination, as second-line after progression with gemcitabine, showed disease stabilization in 27% of 33 patients with pancreatic carcinoma. In the present phase II multicenter study, we assessed the efficacy and tolerance of gemcitabine, trastuzumab plus erlotinib as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR, RECIST v.1); secondary endpoints were progression-free (PFS), overall (OS) survival and toxicity (NCI-CTCAE v3.0). Ancillary study addressed the predictive value of both EGFR/HER2 expression and KRAS mutational status. Sixty-three patients from four centers were included (62 evaluable for toxicity, 59 for efficacy), median age was 62 years (35-77), 59.7% men. The median treatment duration was 16.1 weeks (2.1-61). Eleven patients (19%) reported a partial tumor response, and 33 (56%) disease stabilization. DCR was 74.6% (95%CI: 61.8-85.0; 44/59 patients). After a median follow-up of 23.3 months (0.6-23.6), median PFS was 3.5 months (95%CI: 2.4-3.8) and median OS 7.9 months (95%CI: 5.1-10.2). PFS was significantly longer in patients with grade ≥ 2 cutaneous toxicities vs patients with grade 0-1 toxicities (HR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.33-0.92, P = .020). Expression of EGFR and HER2 was correlated with PFS and OS in multivariate analysis; HER2 expression was correlated with the tumor response. Main severe toxicities were neutropenia (32%), cutaneous rash (37%) and thrombosis/embolisms (35.5%). This triplet combination is effective in terms of disease control, PFS and OS, and acceptable for safety. A larger study to investigate this combination compared to the standard regimen should be discussed.

Machine Learning-Assisted Evaluation of Circulating DNA Quantitative Analysis for Cancer Screening

While the utility of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in cancer screening and early detection have recently been investigated by testing genetic and epigenetic alterations, here, an original approach by examining cfDNA quantitative and structural features is developed. First, the potential of cfDNA quantitative and structural parameters is independently demonstrated in cell culture, murine, and human plasma models. Subsequently, these variables are evaluated in a large retrospective cohort of 289 healthy individuals and 983 patients with various cancer types; after age resampling, this evaluation is done independently and the variables are combined using a machine learning approach. Implementation of a decision tree prediction model for the detection and classification of healthy and cancer patients shows unprecedented performance for 0, I, and II colorectal cancer stages (specificity, 0.89 and sensitivity, 0.72). Consequently, the methodological proof of concept of using both quantitative and structural biomarkers, and classification with a machine learning method are highlighted, as an efficient strategy for cancer screening. It is foreseen that the classification rate may even be improved by the addition of such biomarkers to fragmentomics, methylation, or the detection of genetic alterations. The optimization of such a multianalyte strategy with this machine learning method is therefore warranted.

Disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in neoadjuvant trials of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: Pooled analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials

4533

Background: Disease-free survival (DFS) is an appealing surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in trials on neoadjuvant or adjuvant cancer therapy, because it is available faster and with less follow-up effort. The aim of this study was to assess if DFS can be a valid surrogate endpoint for OS when comparing neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery to surgery alone for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Methods: Individual patient data (IPD) from eight randomized controlled trials (n = 1,126 patients) which compared neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery with surgery alone for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were used for the analysis. Correlation between OS-time and DFS-time was calculated. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and corresponding hazard ratios (HRs) for treatment effects were separately determined for each trial. Subsequently, HRs were pooled in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. An error-in-variables linear regression model was used to compare observed and predicted values. The minimum treatment effect on DFS necessary to predict a non-zero treatment effect on OS was estimated by calculating the surrogate threshold effect. Results: OS-time correlated strongly with DFS-time. HRs for OS and DFS were highly similar for all single trials. The meta-analysis yielded almost identical overall HRs for treatment effects on OS and DFS. The determination coefficient for the association between HRs for OS and DFS was 0.912 (95% confidence interval 0.75-1.0), indicating a strong trial-level surrogacy between OS and DFS. The surrogate threshold effect was calculated at 0.79, indicating that a future trial yielding a hazard ratio for the treatment effect on DFS < 0.79 could be expected with a 95% probability to yield a hazard ratio for the treatment effect on OS < 1. Conclusions: DFS and OS strongly correlate both after neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery and after surgery alone for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Likewise, the treatment effects on the two endpoints are very similar. Consequently, DFS can be regarded an appropriate surrogate endpoint for OS in trials on neoadjuvant therapy for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

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.

[Does the FLOT regimen a new standard of perioperative chemotherapy for localized gastric cancer?]

FLOT-4 study recently reports that in patients with gastric cancer, perioperative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracile, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT regimen) increases survival over standard ECF/ECX regimen (epirubicine, cisplatine and 5-fluorouracile [or capecitabine]). Does this study, make FLOT a new standard of perioperative chemotherapy for localized gastric cancer? Seven hundred and sixteen patients were included into that randomized study. Thirty seven per cent and 46% of the patients received the full planned treatment in the ECF/ECX group and in the FLOT group, respectively. The primary aim of FLOT-4 was met as FLOT significantly reduced the relative risk of death vs. ECF/ECX (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.94; P=0.012). Median survival is increased by 15 months with FLOT (50 months vs. 35 months). FLOT also provided better complete resection rates, better complete pathological response rates, and better disease-free survival than ECF/ECX. FLOT is more likely associated with the following adverse events: diarrheas, leuco-neutropenia (including 51% of severe ones), infections (including 18% of severe ones), and peripheral neuropathy. On the contrary, ECF/ECX provided more likely severe nausea and vomiting, severe anemia, and thromboembolic events. Overall, the number of patients with related serious adverse events (including those that occurred during hospital stay for surgery) was similar in the two groups, as was the number of toxic deaths and postoperative deaths. FLOT should be regarded as the recommended perioperative chemotherapy for patients with gastric cancer or adenocarcinoma of the gastro-esophageal junction. However, some doubts remain as regards of its use in the daily practice for unselected patients.

The oncogenic and druggable hPG80 (Progastrin) is overexpressed in multiple cancers and detected in the blood of patients

BACKGROUND

In colorectal cancer, hPG80 (progastrin) is released from tumor cells, promotes cancer stem cells (CSC) self-renewal and is detected in the blood of patients. Because the gene GAST that encodes hPG80 is a target gene of oncogenic pathways that are activated in many tumor types, we hypothesized that hPG80 could be expressed by tumors from various origins other than colorectal cancers, be a drug target and be detectable in the blood of these patients.

METHODS

hPG80 expression was monitored by fluorescent immunohistochemistry and mRNA expression in tumors from various origins. Cancer cell lines were used in sphere forming assay to analyze CSC self-renewal. Blood samples were obtained from 1546 patients with 11 different cancer origins and from two retrospective kinetic studies in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis or hepatocellular carcinomas. These patients were regularly sampled during treatments and assayed for hPG80.

FINDINGS

We showed that hPG80 was present in the 11 tumor types tested. In cell lines originating from these tumor types, hPG80 neutralization decreased significantly CSC self-renewal by 28 to 54%. hPG80 was detected in the blood of patients at significantly higher concentration than in healthy blood donors (median hPG80: 4.88 pM versus 1.05 pM; p < 0.0001) and shown to be correlated to GAST mRNA levels in the matched tumor (i.e., lung cancers, Spearman r = 0.8; p = 0.0023). Furthermore, we showed a strong association between longitudinal hPG80 concentration changes and anti-cancer treatment efficacy in two independent retrospective studies. In the peritoneal carcinomatosis cohort, median hPG80 from inclusion to the post-operative period decreased from 5.36 to 3.00 pM (p < 0.0001, n = 62) and in the hepatocellular carcinoma cohort, median hPG80 from inclusion to remission decreased from 11.54 pM to 1.99 pM (p < 0.0001, n = 63).

INTERPRETATION

Because oncogenic hPG80 is expressed in tumor cells from different origins and because circulating hPG80 in the blood is related to the burden/activity of the tumor, it is a promising cancer target for therapy and for disease monitoring.

FUNDINGS

ECS-Progastrin.

Management of colorectal peritoneal metastases: Expert opinion

When peritoneal metastases are diagnosed (strong agreement of experts): (i) seek advice from a multidisciplinary coordination meeting (MCM) with large experience in peritoneal disease (e.g. BIG RENAPE network); (ii) transfer (or not) the patient to a referral center with experience in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), according to the advice of the MCM. With regard to systemic chemotherapy (strong agreement of experts): (i) it should be performed both before and after surgery, (ii) for no longer than 6 months; (iii) without postoperative anti-angiogenetic drugs. With regard to cytoreductive surgery (strong agreement of experts): (i) Radical surgery requires a xiphopubic midline incision; (ii) no cytoreductive surgery via laparoscopy. With regard to HIPEC: HIPEC can be proposed for trials outside an HIPEC referral center (weak agreement between experts): (i) if surgery is radical; (ii) if the expected morbidity is "reasonable"; (iii) if the indication for HIPEC was suggested by a MCM, and; (iv) mitomycin is preferred to oxaliplatin (which cannot be recommended) for this indication.

Circulating Tumor Cells and Circulating Tumor DNA Detection in Potentially Resectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Prospective Ancillary Study to the Unicancer Prodige-14 Trial

The management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and potentially resectable liver metastases (LM) requires quick assessment of mutational status and of response to pre-operative systemic therapy. In a prospective phase II trial (NCT01442935), we investigated the clinical validity of circulating tumor cell (CTC) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection. CRC patients with potentially resectable LM were treated with first-line triplet or doublet chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy. CTC (Cellsearch^®) and Kirsten RAt Sarcoma (KRAS) ctDNA (droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR)) levels were assessed at inclusion, after 4 weeks of therapy and before LM surgery. 153 patients were enrolled. The proportion of patients with high CTC counts (≥3 CTC/7.5mL) decreased during therapy: 19% (25/132) at baseline, 3% (3/108) at week 4 and 0/57 before surgery. ctDNA detection sensitivity at baseline was 91% (N=42/46) and also decreased during treatment. Interestingly, persistently detectable KRAS ctDNA (p=0.01) at 4 weeks was associated with a lower R0/R1 LM resection rate. Among patients who had a R0/R1 LM resection, those with detectable ctDNA levels before liver surgery had a shorter overall survival (p<0.001). In CRC patients with limited metastatic spread, ctDNA could be used as liquid biopsy tool. Therefore, ctDNA detection could help to select patients eligible for LM resection.

Progastrin, a novel ubiquitous cancer blood biomarker for early detection and monitoring

3037

Background: The successes of recent publications on “multi-tumor” circulating markers highlight the relevance of novel universal diagnostic cancer serum biomarkers. Since the Wnt/ß-catenin/Tcf4 pathway, activated in many tumors, induces the GAST Gene encoding progastrin synthesis, we hypothesized that progastrin, easily measurable in the blood, might be a “multi-tumor” diagnostic biomarker. Methods: Progastrin levels were measured in the blood samples of 1319 patients with 12 different cancer origins, and compared to those of 557 asymptomatic 18-75 years old blood donors. Moreover the longitudinal kinetics of progastrin concentrations were serially assessed during treatments in 168 patients with ovarian cancers enrolled in the randomized CHIVA trial (NCT01583322, GINECO), 191 patients with peritoneal involvement from gastro-intestinal cancers enrolled in BIG-RENAPE trial (NCT03787056), and in 95 HCC patients. The progastrin was measured using an ELISA test developed by ECS Progastrin (Prilly, Switzerland). Results: Compared to healthy blood donors, progastrin was found at higher concentrations in the plasma of cancer patients: median 4.47 vs 0.20 pM, P < 0.0001; diagnostic discriminative power, ROC analysis AUC = 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.89; P < 0.0001). Progastrin levels were found elevated in all cancer groups, regardless of disease stages, and of pathology origins: ROC AUCs ranged from 0.71 to 0.93, all P < 0.0001 (Table). The longitudinal progastrin changes during treatments, suggest relationships to tumor burden, and potential monitoring value. Conclusions: Progastrin is a novel ubiquitous cancer biomarker, easily detectable in the blood using an affordable ELISA test (CancerRead Lab test(R)). It may change the future paradigms about screening (in particular for populations at higher or lower risks of cancer), cancer diagnostic & monitoring. [Table: see text]

Towards a screening test for cancer by circulating DNA analysis

e13146

Background: Following works on the clinical potentials of circulating DNA (cfDNA), our group is now particularly focused on evaluating its potential for early detection of cancer. We recently developed a test (MNR: Multi Normalized Ratio), based on various cfDNA parameters determined by a specific q-PCR based method, targeting both nuclear and mitochondrial sequences. When applied to the supernatant of cell culture, the MNR had a discriminative potential of 100% between normal and cancer cell lines. Methods: We recently developed a screening test (MNR: Multi Normalized Ratio), based on various cfDNA parameters determined by a specific q-PCR based method, targeting both nuclear and mitochondrial sequences. When applied to the supernatant of cell culture, the MNR had a discriminative potential of 100% between normal and cancer cell lines. Results: We are currently carrying out an extensive evaluation of this test in plasma samples from diagnosed and healthy individuals. Preliminary results on the plasma of 289 healthy subjects and 1,200 patients with various types of cancer (colorectal, breast, lung, liver, pancreatic, ovarian) of all stages, revealed a high potential with an AUC of 0.82 (0.78-0.84, 95% confidence interval, CI) and 70% sens. with 78% spe.. In breast cancer (N = 169), an AUC of 0.82 (0.78-0.86, 95% CI) with 72% sens. and 80% spe. were observed. In all stages CRC patients (N = 887), the results showed an AUC of 0.81 (0.78-0.84, 95%, CI) and 68% sens. with 80% spe.; for CRC stages 0/I/II (N = 249), an AUC of 0.75 (0.71-0.80, 95% CI) and 60% sens. with 79% spe.; and for CRC stage IV (N = 101), a 0.86 AUC (0.82-0.91, 95% CI) with 81% sens. and 78% spe.. When combining the MNR test to a threshold value of the total concentration of cfDNA (AUC = 0.82 (0.79-0.84, 95% CI), 70% sens. and 80% spe. in all stage cancers (N = 1078)), in CRC stages 0/I/II (N = 249) vs Healthy Individuals (N = 289), we observed a 63% sens. with 84% spe. Conclusions: Furthermore we recently discovered that cfDNA fragmentation, as determined by Whole Genome Sequencing using either double or single strand library, is also a parameter enabling discrimination between healthy and cancer individuals. Data on a multi-parametric test combining total cfDNA quantification, MNR and fragmentation biomarkers with help of a ongoing decision tree algorithm in machine learning will be presented during the meeting. Our on-going data suggest that our strategy in targeting cfDNA quantitative/structural features might be powerful for cancer screening/early detection and appears as an alternative or a synergistic combination to searching mutations.

Modulating PKCα Activity to Target Wnt/β-Catenin Signaling in Colon Cancer

Inactivating mutations of the tumor suppressor Adenomatosis Polyposis Coli (APC), which are found in familial adenomatosis polyposis and in 80% of sporadic colorectal cancers (CRC), result in constitutive activation of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway and tumor development in the intestine. These mutations disconnect the Wnt/β-catenin pathway from its Wnt extracellular signal by inactivating the APC/GSK3-β/axin destruction complex of β-catenin. This results in sustained nuclear accumulation of β-catenin, followed by β-catenin-dependent co-transcriptional activation of Wnt/β-catenin target genes. Thus, mechanisms acting downstream of APC, such as those controlling β-catenin stability and/or co-transcriptional activity, are attractive targets for CRC treatment. Protein Kinase C-α (PKCα) phosphorylates the orphan receptor RORα that then inhibits β-catenin co-transcriptional activity. PKCα also phosphorylates β-catenin, leading to its degradation by the proteasome. Here, using both in vitro (DLD-1 cells) and in vivo (C57BL/6J mice) PKCα knock-in models, we investigated whether enhancing PKCα function could be beneficial in CRC treatment. We found that PKCα is infrequently mutated in CRC samples, and that inducing PKCα function is not deleterious for the normal intestinal epithelium. Conversely, di-terpene ester-induced PKCα activity triggers CRC cell death. Together, these data indicate that PKCα is a relevant drug target for CRC treatment.

Regorafenib for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Progressed After Standard Therapy: Results of the Large, Single-Arm, Open-Label Phase IIIb CONSIGN Study

BACKGROUND

In the phase III CORRECT trial, regorafenib significantly improved survival in treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The CONSIGN study was designed to further characterize regorafenib safety and allow patients access to regorafenib before market authorization.

METHODS

This prospective, single-arm study enrolled patients in 25 countries at 186 sites. Patients with treatment-refractory mCRC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≤1 received regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. Progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator assessment was the only efficacy evaluation.

RESULTS

In total, 2,872 patients were assigned to treatment and 2,864 were treated. Median age was 62 years, ECOG PS 0/1 was 47%/53%, and 74% had received at least three prior regimens for metastatic disease. Median treatment duration was three cycles. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) led to dose reduction in 46% of patients. Regorafenib-related TEAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 9%. Grade 5 regorafenib-related TEAEs occurred in <1%. The most common grade ≥3 regorafenib-related TEAEs were hypertension (15%), hand-foot skin reaction (14%), fatigue (13%), diarrhea (5%), and hypophosphatemia (5%). Treatment-emergent grade 3-4 laboratory toxicities included alanine aminotransferase (6%), aspartate aminotransferase (7%), and bilirubin (13%). Ongoing monitoring identified one nonfatal case of regorafenib-related severe drug-induced liver injury per DILI Working Group criteria. Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 2.7 months (2.6-2.7).

CONCLUSION

In CONSIGN, the frequency and severity of TEAEs were consistent with the known safety profile of regorafenib. PFS was similar to reports of phase III trials. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01538680.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who fail treatment with standard therapies, including chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor or epidermal growth factor receptor, have few treatment options. The multikinase inhibitor regorafenib was shown to improve survival in patients with treatment-refractory mCRC in the phase III CORRECT (N = 760) and CONCUR (N = 204) trials. However, safety data on regorafenib for mCRC in a larger number of patients were not available. The CONSIGN trial, carried out prospectively in more than 2,800 patients across 25 countries, confirmed the safety profile of regorafenib from the phase III trials and reinforced the importance of using treatment modifications to manage adverse events.

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, combination chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) leads to longer overall survival than gemcitabine therapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen with gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 493 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to receive a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen (oxaliplatin [85 mg per square meter of body-surface area], irinotecan [180 mg per square meter, reduced to 150 mg per square meter after a protocol-specified safety analysis], leucovorin [400 mg per square meter], and fluorouracil [2400 mg per square meter] every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival and safety.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, the median disease-free survival was 21.6 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 12.8 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for cancer-related event, second cancer, or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.73; P<0.001). The disease-free survival rate at 3 years was 39.7% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 21.4% in the gemcitabine group. The median overall survival was 54.4 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 35.0 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86; P=0.003). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 63.4% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 48.6% in the gemcitabine group. Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 75.9% of the patients in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and in 52.9% of those in the gemcitabine group. One patient in the gemcitabine group died from toxic effects (interstitial pneumonitis).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant therapy with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen led to significantly longer survival than gemcitabine among patients with resected pancreatic cancer, at the expense of a higher incidence of toxic effects. (Funded by R&D Unicancer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526135 ; EudraCT number, 2011-002026-52 .).

Progastrin, a New Blood Biomarker for Multiple Cancers Allowing a New Strategy for Screening, Early Detection and Monitoring

Background: The majority of cancers evolve for years before becoming symptomatic. But once symptomatic, it is often too late for the patients to be cured. It is thus of paramount importance to improve early cancer screening in the general population as well as in genetically predisposed individuals. Moreover, although there is an undeniable progress in treatments, in particular in the immuno-oncology field, there is a growing need for circulating biomarkers to monitor treatment efficacy to better impact patient health and social economics. Aim: Progastrin (PG) is abnormally released in the blood of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), as the gene coding for PG is a direct target of the WNT/β-catenin oncogenic pathway involved in tumorigenesis of many organs and activated from the very first steps of tumorigenesis, allowing the detection of PG in early stage cancers. The objective was to assess the diagnostic value of PG in a series of different types of cancers (early and advanced stages), as well as the role of PG as a circulating biomarker for treatment follow-up in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, a metastatic disease where imaging monitoring is impossible (due to the small size of lesions). Methods: Progastrin was measured in plasma EDTA samples using the ELISA cancerREAD technology. For the evaluation of PG in cancer patients, 673 samples were collected for comparison with 119 healthy volunteers. For the follow-up monitoring, patients were enrolled during management of peritoneal carcinomatosis (before or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or surgery). The diagnostic value of PG concentrations at inclusion in 190 GI cancer patients was assessed against 80 control samples. Results: Progastrin was detected in 77% of cancer patients, all cancers combined. The diagnosis area under the ROC curve of PG was 0.9114, P < 0.0001. Sensitivity ranged from 71% (breast cancer) to 87% (skin melanoma). All the 15 different types of cancers tested were positive. Early stage detection was assessed for colorectal and breast cancers with a sensitivity of 62.5% for adenomatous polyps, and 68.2% for stage 0 and I breast cancers. Sensitivity increased up to 82% for stage II colorectal cancer and to 78% for stage II-IV breast cancers. For the follow-up of peritoneal carcinomatosis patients, median PG levels decreased whatever the GI subtype with sequential treatments from 4.4 pM at inclusion time, to 1.3 after adjuvant chemotherapy. A trend for better PFS was observed in patients with PG decline after surgery. Conclusion: Progastrin assay is a simple and inexpensive blood test exhibiting high diagnostic accuracy for multiple gastro-intestinal, gynecologic, skin cancers. It may be used for cancer screening before tumor localization. It also exhibits promising therapeutic monitoring value during treatment in advanced CRC patients. Assessment of PG value as a multitumor screening biomarker, and as a monitoring test, is ongoing.

Unicancer GI PRODIGE 24/CCTG PA.6 trial: A multicenter international randomized phase III trial of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine (gem) in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas

LBA4001

Background: FOLFIRINOX is more effective than gem as first-line treatment in metastatic pancreatic cancer for patients (pts) with good performance status. This trial assessed the benefit of mFOLFIRINOX in the adjuvant setting. Methods: PRODIGE 24/CCTG PA.6 is a phase III multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Pts aged 18-79 years with histologically proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas, 21-84 days after R0 or R1 resection, WHO PS ≤1, adequate hematologic and renal function, and no cardiac ischemia, were eligible. Randomization was stratified by center, pN, R margin status, and post-operative CA 19-9 level (≤ 90 U/mL vs 91-180). Arm A pts received 28-day cycles of gem on days 1, 8, and 15 for 6 cycles. Arm B pts received mFOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², leucovorin 400 mg/m², irinotecan 150 mg/m² D1, and 5-FU 2.4 g/m² over 46 h) every 14 days for 12 cycles. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and adverse events (AE). 490 pts were required to observe 342 events to show a gain in 3-year DFS from 17% to 27% (HR = 0.74) with a two-sided α = 0.05 and 80% power. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CI were estimated by a stratified Cox proportional hazard model. We observed 91.5% of the events required. The IDMC approved early ITT analysis before March 15, 2018. Surgical procedures, pathology and postoperative CT scans reports were centrally reviewed. Results: From Apr 2012 to Oct 2016, 493 pts were enrolled in 77 centers: Arm A/B: 246/247. With a median follow up of 30.5 months [m] (95% CI, 29.5-33.7), median DFS was 12.8 (95% CI, 11.7-15.2) in Arm A vs 21.6 m (95% CI, 17.5-26.7) in Arm B, HR = 0.59 (95% CI, 0.47-0.74). The median OS (Arm A/B) was 34.8 (95% CI, 28.6-43.8) vs 54.4 m (95% CI, 41.5- --), HR = 0.66 (95% CI, 0.49-0.89). The median MFS (Arm A/B) was 17.7 (95% CI, 14.2-21.7) vs 30.4 m (95% CI, 21.6- --), HR = 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76). Grade 3-4 AE (Arm A/B) were reported in 51.1% vs 75.5%, including 12% grade 4 in each arm, with a toxic death in Arm A. Conclusion: Adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX is safe and significantly improves DFS, MFS and OS compared to gem. Clinical trial information: NCT01526135.