Rationale and design of the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG) trial ReLApsE: a randomized, open, multicenter phase III trial of lenalidomide/dexamethasone versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone plus subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation and lenalidomide maintenance in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Despite novel therapeutic agents, most multiple myeloma (MM) patients eventually relapse. Two large phase III trials have shown significantly improved response rates (RR) of lenalidomide/dexamethasone compared with placebo/dexamethasone in relapsed MM (RMM) patients. These results have led to the approval of lenalidomide for RMM patients and lenalidomide/dexamethasone has since become a widely accepted second-line treatment. Furthermore, in RMM patients consolidation with high-dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem cell transplantation has been shown to significantly increase progression free survival (PFS) as compared to cyclophosphamide in a phase III trial. The randomized prospective ReLApsE trial is designed to evaluate PFS after lenalidomide/dexamethasone induction, high-dose chemotherapy consolidation plus autologous stem cell transplantation and lenalidomide maintenance compared with the well-established lenalidomide/dexamethasone regimen in RMM patients.

METHODS/DESIGN

ReLApsE is a randomized, open, multicenter phase III trial in a planned study population of 282 RMM patients. All patients receive three lenalidomide/dexamethasone cycles and--in absence of available stem cells from earlier harvesting--undergo peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and harvesting. Subsequently, patients in arm A continue on consecutive lenalidomide/dexamethasone cycles, patients in arm B undergo high dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem cell transplantation followed by lenalidomide maintenance until discontinuation criteria are met. Therapeutic response is evaluated after the 3(rd) (arm A + B) and the 5(th) lenalidomide/dexamethasone cycle (arm A) or 2 months after autologous stem cell transplantation (arm B) and every 3 months thereafter (arm A + B). After finishing the study treatment, patients are followed up for survival and subsequent myeloma therapies. The expected trial duration is 6.25 years from first patient in to last patient out. The primary endpoint is PFS, secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), RR, time to best response and the influence of early versus late salvage high dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem cell transplantation on OS.

DISCUSSION

This phase III trial is designed to evaluate whether high dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem cell transplantation and lenalidomide maintenance after lenalidomide/dexamethasone induction improves PFS compared with the well-established continued lenalidomide/dexamethasone regimen in RMM patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN16345835 (date of registration 2010-08-24).

Maintenance strategies after first-line oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AIO 0207): a randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The definition of a best maintenance strategy following combination chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated whether no continuation of therapy or bevacizumab alone are non-inferior to fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, following induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab.

METHODS

In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial, we included patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function, no pre-existing neuropathy greater than grade 1, and measurable disease, from 55 hospitals and 51 private practices in Germany. After 24 weeks of induction therapy with either fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin, both with bevacizumab, patients without disease progression were randomly assigned centrally by fax (1:1:1) to standard maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, bevacizumab alone, or no treatment. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. Stratification criteria were response status, termination of oxaliplatin, previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin, and ECOG performance status. At first progression, re-induction with all drugs of the induction treatment was a planned part of the protocol. Time to failure of strategy was the primary endpoint, defined as time from randomisation to second progression after maintenance (and if applicable re-induction), death, or initiation of further treatment including a new drug. Time to failure of strategy was equivalent to time to first progression for patients who did not receive re-induction (for any reason). The boundary for assessment of non-inferiority was upper limit of the one-sided 98·8% CI 1·43. Analyses were done by intention to treat. The study has completed recruitment, but follow-up of participants is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00973609.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 17, 2009, and Feb 21, 2013, 837 patients were enrolled and 472 randomised; 158 were randomly assigned to receive fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, 156 to receive bevacizumab monotherapy, and 158 to receive no treatment. Median follow-up from randomisation is 17·0 months (IQR 9·5-25·4). Median time to failure of strategy was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·1-8·5) for the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 6·1 months (5·3-7·4) for the bevacizumab alone group, and 6·4 months (4·8-7·6) for the no treatment group. Bevacizumab alone was non-inferior to standard fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·85-1·37]; p=0·53; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·42), whereas no treatment was not (HR 1·26 [0·99-1·60]; p=0·056; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·65). The protocol-defined re-induction after first progression was rarely done (30 [19%] patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 67 [43%] in the bevacizumab monotherapy group, and 73 [46%] in the no treatment group. The most common grade 3 adverse event was sensory neuropathy (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 22 [14%] of 156 patients in the bevacizumab alone group, and 12 [8%] of 158 patients in the no treatment group).

INTERPRETATION

Although non-inferiority for bevacizumab alone was demonstrated for the primary endpoint, maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab may be the preferable option for patients following an induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab, as it allows the planned discontinuation of the initial combination without compromising time with controlled disease. Only a few patients were exposed to re-induction treatment, thus deeming the primary endpoint time to failure of strategy non-informative and clinically irrelevant. Progression-free survival and overall survival should be considered primary endpoints in future trials exploring maintenance strategies.

Maintenance strategies after first-line oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AIO 0207): a randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The definition of a best maintenance strategy following combination chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated whether no continuation of therapy or bevacizumab alone are non-inferior to fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, following induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab.

METHODS

In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial, we included patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function, no pre-existing neuropathy greater than grade 1, and measurable disease, from 55 hospitals and 51 private practices in Germany. After 24 weeks of induction therapy with either fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin, both with bevacizumab, patients without disease progression were randomly assigned centrally by fax (1:1:1) to standard maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, bevacizumab alone, or no treatment. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. Stratification criteria were response status, termination of oxaliplatin, previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin, and ECOG performance status. At first progression, re-induction with all drugs of the induction treatment was a planned part of the protocol. Time to failure of strategy was the primary endpoint, defined as time from randomisation to second progression after maintenance (and if applicable re-induction), death, or initiation of further treatment including a new drug. Time to failure of strategy was equivalent to time to first progression for patients who did not receive re-induction (for any reason). The boundary for assessment of non-inferiority was upper limit of the one-sided 98·8% CI 1·43. Analyses were done by intention to treat. The study has completed recruitment, but follow-up of participants is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00973609.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 17, 2009, and Feb 21, 2013, 837 patients were enrolled and 472 randomised; 158 were randomly assigned to receive fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, 156 to receive bevacizumab monotherapy, and 158 to receive no treatment. Median follow-up from randomisation is 17·0 months (IQR 9·5-25·4). Median time to failure of strategy was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·1-8·5) for the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 6·1 months (5·3-7·4) for the bevacizumab alone group, and 6·4 months (4·8-7·6) for the no treatment group. Bevacizumab alone was non-inferior to standard fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·85-1·37]; p=0·53; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·42), whereas no treatment was not (HR 1·26 [0·99-1·60]; p=0·056; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·65). The protocol-defined re-induction after first progression was rarely done (30 [19%] patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 67 [43%] in the bevacizumab monotherapy group, and 73 [46%] in the no treatment group. The most common grade 3 adverse event was sensory neuropathy (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 22 [14%] of 156 patients in the bevacizumab alone group, and 12 [8%] of 158 patients in the no treatment group).

INTERPRETATION

Although non-inferiority for bevacizumab alone was demonstrated for the primary endpoint, maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab may be the preferable option for patients following an induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab, as it allows the planned discontinuation of the initial combination without compromising time with controlled disease. Only a few patients were exposed to re-induction treatment, thus deeming the primary endpoint time to failure of strategy non-informative and clinically irrelevant. Progression-free survival and overall survival should be considered primary endpoints in future trials exploring maintenance strategies.

Oxaliplatin added to fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer (the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 study): final results of the multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with infusional fluorouracil, total mesorectal excision surgery, and postoperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil was established by the German CAO/ARO/AIO-94 trial as a standard combined modality treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. Here we compare the previously established regimen with an investigational regimen in which oxaliplatin was added to both preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy.

METHODS

In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study we randomly assigned patients with rectal adenocarcinoma, clinically staged as cT3-4 or any node-positive disease, to two groups: a control group receiving standard fluorouracil-based combined modality treatment, consisting of preoperative radiotherapy of 50·4 Gy in 28 fractions plus infusional fluorouracil (1000 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 and 29-33), followed by surgery and four cycles of bolus fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 and 29); or to an investigational group receiving preoperative radiotherapy of 50·4 Gy in 28 fractions plus infusional fluorouracil (250 mg/m(2) on days 1-14 and 22-35) and oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 22, and 29), followed by surgery and eight cycles of oxaliplatin (100 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15), leucovorin (400 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15), and infusional fluorouracil (2400 mg/m(2) on days 1-2 and 15-16). Randomisation was done with computer-generated block-randomisation codes stratified by centre, clinical T category (cT1-3 vs cT4), and clinical N category (cN0 vs cN1-2) without masking. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, defined as the time between randomisation and non-radical surgery of the primary tumour (R2 resection), locoregional recurrence after R0/1 resection, metastatic disease or progression, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Survival and cumulative incidence of recurrence analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle; toxicity analyses included all patients treated. Enrolment of patients in this trial is completed and follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00349076.

FINDINGS

Of the 1265 patients initially enrolled, 1236 were assessable (613 in the investigational group and 623 in the control group). With a median follow-up of 50 months (IQR 38-61), disease-free survival at 3 years was 75·9% (95% CI 72·4-79·5) in the investigational group and 71·2% (95% CI 67·6-74·9) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·79, 95% CI 0·64-0·98; p=0·03). Preoperative grade 3-4 toxic effects occurred in 144 (24%) of 607 patients who actually received fluorouracil and oxaliplatin during chemoradiotherapy and in 128 (20%) of 625 patients who actually received fluorouracil chemoradiotherapy. Of 445 patients who actually received adjuvant fluorouracil and leucovorin and oxaliplatin, 158 (36%) had grade 3-4 toxic effects, as did 170 (36%) of 470 patients who actually received adjuvant fluorouracil. Late grade 3-4 adverse events in patients who received protocol-specified preoperative and postoperative treatment occurred in 112 (25%) of 445 patients in the investigational group, and in 100 (21%) of 470 patients in the control group.

INTERPRETATION

Adding oxaliplatin to fluorouracil-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy (at the doses and intensities used in this trial) significantly improved disease-free survival of patients with clinically staged cT3-4 or cN1-2 rectal cancer compared with our former fluorouracil-based combined modality regimen (based on CAO/ARO/AIO-94). The regimen established by CAO/ARO/AIO-04 can be deemed a new treatment option for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

FUNDING

German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe).

Prognostic value of microsatellite instability and p53 expression in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of MSI-H and p53 overexpression in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based first line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Tumour samples were retrospectively obtained from 229 patients from a prospective randomised phase III trial of the AIO colorectal study group, comparing CAPOX and FUFOX in mCRC. Immunohistochemistry of p53 and MMR proteins as well as microsatellite analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The incidence of MSI-H and p53 overexpression was 7.9 % and 65.4 %, respectively. MSI-H status was not correlated with ORR, PFS and OS. We observed a trend to lower DCR for MSI-H tumours (65 % vs. 85 %, p = 0.055). p53 overexpression was not correlated with DCR, ORR and PFS. The median OS of patients with tumors with p53 overexpression was significantly longer compared to tumors withhout p53 overexpression (19.6 vs. 15.8 months; p = 0.05). The post-progression survival (PPS) of p53-positive patients undergoing 2nd and/or 3rd line chemotherapy with irinotecan and/or cetuximab was significantly longer compared to p53-negative patients.

CONCLUSION

MSI-H tumours tend to have lower disease control rates when treated with an oxaliplatin/fluoropyrmidin combination. mCRC patients with p53 overexpression undergoing an irinotecan containing second- or third-line chemotherapy after oxaliplatin failure have a significantly longer post-progression survival compared to patients without p53 overexpression. To validate the clinical impact of p53 in patients with mCRC treated with irinotecan- and/or cetuximab further studies are needed.

POWER: An open-label, randomized phase III trial of cisplatin and 5-FU with or without panitumumab (P) for patients (pts) with nonresectable, advanced, or metastatic esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC)

TPS4158

Background: More than 50% of pts with esophageal cancer have locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of initial diagnosis. For this group chemotherapy is increasingly used intending local and distant tumor control, improvement of quality of life (QoL) and longer survival. Previous data suggested that EGFR-targeting antibodies may be safely combined with cisplatin and 5-FU, and in addition may increase the efficacy of the standard cisplatin/5-FU regimen [Lorenzen et al, Ann Oncol2009; 20(10): 1667-1673]. Methods: In this open-label, randomized (1:1), multicenter, multinational phase III trial pts with nonresectable, advanced or metastatic ESCC, not eligible for definitive radiochemotherapy, are included. Pts have measurable or non-measurable disease according to RECIST 1.1 and an ECOG PS 0-1. Previous chemotherapy of ESCC in the metastatic setting, concurrent radiotherapy involving target lesions and previous exposure to EGFR-targeted therapy are excluded. Pts receive either CTX (cisplatin 100 mg/m² on day 1 and 5-FU 1000 mg/m²/d on day 1-4) or CTX + P (9 mg/kg on day 1). Cycles are repeated every 3 weeks until progression of disease. Tumor assessment is performed every 9 weeks. The primary objective is to demonstrate superiority of CTX + P over CTX alone in terms of overall survival. Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, 1-year survival, response rate, safety and tolerability, and QoL. A translational analysis in tumor tissue and serum samples is included. 300 pts are planned to be enrolled for a power of 90% to reject the null hypothesis in which the median overall survival in the control and experimental groups are 6 and 9 months, respectively. 18 pts have been enrolled to date. A Data Monitoring Board will review safety data after 40, 100 and 200 pts. The clinical trial registry number is NCT1627379. Clinical trial information: NCT01627379.

Capecitabine/irinotecan or capecitabine/oxaliplatin in combination with bevacizumab is effective and safe as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II study of the AIO colorectal study group

BACKGROUND

This randomized phase II trial investigated the efficacy and safety of capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CapOx) plus bevacizumab and dose-modified capecitabine/irinotecan (mCapIri) plus bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients received bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2)/day 1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) bid/days 1-14 or with irinotecan 200 mg/m(2)/day 1 plus capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) bid/days 1-14 both every 21 days. The primary end point was 6 months progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

A total of 255 patients were enrolled. The intent-to-treat population comprised 247 patients (CapOx-bevacizumab: n = 127; mCapIri-bevacizumab: n = 120). The six-month PFS rates were 76% (95% CI, 69%-84%) and 84% (95% CI, 77%-90%). Median PFS and OS were 10.4 months (95% CI, 9.0-12.0) and 24.4 months (95% CI, 19.3-30.7) with CapOx-bevacizumab, and 12.1 months (95% CI, 10.8-13.2) and 25.5 months (95% CI, 21.0-31.0) with mCapIri-bevacizumab. Grade 3/4 diarrhea as predominant toxic effect occurred in 22% of patients with CapOx-bevacizumab and in 16% with mCapIri-bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Both, CapOx-bevacizumab and mCapIri-bevacizumab, show promising activity and an excellent toxic effect profile. Efficacy is in the range of other bevacizumab-containing combination regimen although lower doses of irinotecan and capecitabine were selected for mCapIri.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin versus fluorouracil alone in locally advanced rectal cancer: initial results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy, total mesorectal excision surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil is the standard combined modality treatment for rectal cancer. With the aim of improving disease-free survival (DFS), this phase 3 study (CAO/ARO/AIO-04) integrated oxaliplatin into standard treatment.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study in patients with histologically proven carcinoma of the rectum with clinically staged T3-4 or any node-positive disease. Between July 25, 2006, and Feb 26, 2010, patients were randomly assigned to two groups: a control group receiving standard fluorouracil-based combined modality treatment, consisting of preoperative radiotherapy of 50·4 Gy plus infusional fluorouracil (1000 mg/m(2) days 1-5 and 29-33), followed by surgery and four cycles of bolus fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2) days 1-5 and 29; fluorouracil group); and an experimental group receiving preoperative radiotherapy of 50·4 Gy plus infusional fluorouracil (250 mg/m(2) days 1-14 and 22-35) and oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 22, and 29), followed by surgery and eight cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (100 mg/m(2) days 1 and 15), leucovorin (400 mg/m(2) days 1 and 15), and infusional fluorouracil (2400 mg/m(2) days 1-2 and 15-16; fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin group). Randomisation was done with computer-generated block-randomisation codes stratified by centre, clinical T category (cT1-4 vs cT4), and clinical N category (cN0 vs cN1-2) without masking. DFS is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints, including toxicity, compliance, and histopathological response are reported here. Safety and compliance analyses included patients as treated, efficacy endpoints were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00349076.

FINDINGS

Of the 1265 patients initially enrolled, 1236 were evaluable (613 in the fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin group and 623 in the fluorouracil group). Preoperative grade 3-4 toxic effects occurred in 140 (23%) of 606 patients who actually received fluorouracil and oxaliplatin during chemoradiotherapy and in 127 (20%) of 624 patients who actually received fluorouracil chemoradiotherapy. Grade 3-4 diarrhoea was more common in those who received fluorouracil and oxaliplatin during chemoradiotherapy than in those who received fluorouracil during chemoradiotherapy (73 patients [12%] vs 52 patients [8%]), as was grade 3-4 nausea or vomiting (23 [4%] vs nine [1%]). 516 (85%) of the 606 patients who received fluorouracil and oxaliplatin-based chemoradiotherapy had the full dose of chemotherapy, and 571 (94%) had the full dose of radiotherapy; as did 495 (79%) and 601 (96%) of 624 patients who received fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy, respectively. A pathological complete response was achieved in 103 (17%) of 591 patients who underwent surgery in the fluorouracil and oxaliplatin group and in 81 (13%) of 606 patients who underwent surgery in the fluorouracil group (odds ratio 1·40, 95% CI 1·02-1·92; p=0·038). In the fluorouracil and oxaliplatin group, 352 (81%) of 435 patients who began adjuvant chemotherapy completed all cycles (with or without dose reduction), as did 386 (83%) of 463 patients in the fluorouracil group.

INTERPRETATION

Inclusion of oxaliplatin into modified fluorouracil-based combined modality treatment was feasible and led to more patients achieving a pathological complete response than did standard treatment. Longer follow-up is needed to assess DFS.

FUNDING

German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe).

Prognostic value of reduced SMAD4 expression in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer under oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy: a translational study of the AIO colorectal study group

BACKGROUND

SMAD4 is a polypeptide with tumor suppressor function being investigated as a prognostic biomarker in Union Internationale Contre le Cancer stages II and III in previous studies, but its role as a prognostic marker in stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) is still undefined. We investigated the prognostic value of reduced SMAD4 expression in patients with metastatic (mCRC) under first-line oxaliplatin-containing combination chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Tumor samples were obtained from patients who took part in a prospective randomized phase III chemotherapy trial of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie of the German Cancer Society colorectal study group, comparing the use of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin with infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) plus oxaliplatin as first-line therapy in mCRC. SMAD4 expression was determined by immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

Tumor tissues from 230 patients were obtained. Reduced SMAD4 expression was identified in 34% of samples. Patients with reduced nuclear SMAD4 expression in tumor tissue showed a shorter progression-free survival (PFS; 7.0 months vs. 8.9 months; P = .024) and overall survival (OS; 13.9 months vs. 17.8 months; P = .044) compared with patients retaining SMAD4 expression. The effect of SMAD4 expression on PFS and OS could be demonstrated in univariate and multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate the importance of reduced SMAD4 expression in patients with mCRC receiving chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and 5-FU.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin versus 5-fluorouracil alone in locally advanced rectal cancer: First results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomized phase III trial

LBA3505

Background: The German CAO/ARO/AIO-94 trial established preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT), surgery, and postoperative chemotherapy with 5-FU as standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. With this approach local relapse rates are below 10%. The development of distant metastasis is the predominant mode of failure. Integrating more effective systemic treatment into combined modality therapy was the goal of CAO/ARO/AIO-04. Methods: Between 7/2006-2/2010, patients with rectal cancer within 12 cm from the anal verge and clinical evidence of perirectal fat or lymph node involvement were randomly assigned to receive preoperative CRT, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy with 5-FU according to CAO/ARO/AIO-94 (arm 1), or preoperative CRT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) with 5-FU (250 mg/m2/days 1-14 and 22-35) and oxaliplatin (50 mg/m2/days 1, 8, 22, 29), surgery, and 8 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy according to modified FOLFOX6 regimen (arm 2). Disease-free survival was the primary endpoint. We present early secondary endpoints, including acute toxicity, treatment compliance, and pCR-rates. Results: 637 patients were randomly assigned to arm 1 and 628 to arm 2. Full dose preoperative RT and full dose concurrent chemotherapy was delivered in 97% and 74% of patients in both arms, respectively. Preoperative grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 21.6% in arm 1 and in 22.9% in arm 2. The R0-resection rate was 95.4% in both arms, and abdominoperineal resections were limited to 11.9% and 12.2% in arms 1 and 2, respectively. Overall postoperative complications were not different between both arms (21.0% and 21.9%). The pCR rate (ypT0N0) was 13.1% in arm 1 and 17.6% in arm 2 (p = 0.033, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Chi-Squared Test without continuity correction for conditional independence of pCR rate in the two treatment arms in each stratum). Conclusions: Inclusion of oxaliplatin to 5-FU based CRT was well tolerated and associated with increased pCR-rates compared with 5-FU-CRT alone. Longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate the primary endpoint, disease-free survival.

Results of a phase II trial of S-1 as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (CESAR-study group)

PURPOSE

S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, has previously demonstrated anticancer efficacy in pancreatic cancer (PC), predominantly in Asian populations. This study evaluated the antitumor effect and safety of S-1 in Caucasian patients with metastatic PC.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naïve patients received S-1 orally at 30 mg/m(2) twice daily (BID) for 2 weeks, repeated every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was ORR. Secondary endpoints included PFS, OS and safety assessment. The trial had a Simon's two-stage design with 22 patients evaluable for efficacy in stage 1 and an additional 18 patients in stage 2, if ≥3/22 patients had a confirmed response at the first stage.

RESULTS

Three out of 27 patients showed PR, however, detection of asymptomatic brain metastases in one of them prevented this study from proceeding to stage 2. The median PFS and OS for all patients was 3.5 and 9.1 months, respectively. The median duration of disease control for patients with SD or PR (n = 17) was 4.3 months. S-1 was well tolerated; fatigue was the most frequent grade 3/4 adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacy data of PFS and OS are at least comparable to gemcitabine, the current standard of care. S-1 is active in Caucasian patients with metastatic PC.