Clinical trial to assess the relative efficacy of fluorouracil and leucovorin, fluorouracil and levamisole, and fluorouracil, leucovorin, and levamisole in patients with Dukes' B and C carcinoma of the colon: results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project C-04

Bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for colon cancer (AVANT): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess the use of bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma.

METHODS

Patients from 330 centres in 34 countries were enrolled into this phase 3, open-label randomised trial. Patients with curatively resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 200 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus plus 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) plus fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus plus 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion on day 2) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles; bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOX4 (every 2 weeks for 12 cycles) followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks); or bevacizumab 7·5 mg/kg plus XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 2 weeks plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-15) every 3 weeks for eight cycles followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks). Block randomisation was done with a central interactive computerised system, stratified by geographic region and disease stage. Surgery with curative intent occurred 4-8 weeks before randomisation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed for all randomised patients with stage III disease. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00112918.

FINDINGS

Of the total intention-to-treat population (n=3451), 2867 patients had stage III disease, of whom 955 were randomly assigned to receive FOLFOX4, 960 to receive bevacizumab-FOLFOX4, and 952 to receive bevacizumab-XELOX. After a median follow-up of 48 months (range 0-66 months), 237 patients (25%) in the FOLFOX4 group, 280 (29%) in the bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 group, and 253 (27%) in the bevacizumab-XELOX group had relapsed, developed a new colon cancer, or died. The disease-free survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·17 (95% CI 0·98-1·39; p=0·07), and for bevacizumab-XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·07 (0·90-1·28; p=0·44). After a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the overall survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·27 (1·03-1·57; p=0·02), and for bevacizumab-XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·15 (0·93-1·42; p=0·21). The 573 patients with high-risk stage II cancer were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were neutropenia (FOLFOX4: 477 [42%] of 1126 patients, bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 416 [36%] of 1145 patients, and bevacizumab-XELOX: 74 [7%] of 1135 patients), diarrhoea (110 [10%], 135 [12%], and 181 [16%], respectively), and hypertension (12 [1%], 122 [11%], and 116 [10%], respectively). Serious adverse events were more common in the bevacizumab groups (bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 297 [26%]; bevacizumab-XELOX: 284 [25%]) than in the FOLFOX4 group (226 [20%]). Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving FOLFOX4, two receiving bevacizumab-FOLFOX4, and five receiving bevacizumab-XELOX.

INTERPRETATION

Bevacizumab does not prolong disease-free survival when added to adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III colon cancer. Overall survival data suggest a potential detrimental effect with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in these patients. On the basis of these and other data, we do not recommend the use of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with curatively resected stage III colon cancer.

FUNDING

Genentech, Roche, and Chugai.

Clinical management of localized colon cancer with capecitabine

Large randomized trials demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of the primary colon cancer. It improves overall survival and reduces the risk of death, by 5% in UICC (Union Internationale Contre le Cancer) stage II and approximately 15%-20% in stage III. Fluoropyrimidines have been the standard drugs for the treatment of colon cancer since large randomized controlled trials demonstrated their efficacy and safety in treating patients suffering from this disease. Capecitabine is an orally administered fluoropyrimidine, which is preferably activated in tumor tissue to the active moiety 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and is cytotoxic through inhibition of DNA synthesis. It has proven equivalent efficacy and tolerability despite a changed toxicity profile compared to 5FU with less myelosuppression but more hand-and-foot syndrome. Capecitabine is well tolerated in elderly patients. The oral route of administration avoids frequent clinical visits as well as insertion of central venous catheters. The impact of the particular drug features on daily clinical practice is discussed in this review.

Recommendations and expert opinion on the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in Spain

Adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard in the management of patients with localised colon cancer (CC) following curative resection. The use of oxaliplatin plus 5 fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFOX) or oxaliplatin plus capecitabine-based (XELOX) regimens, both approved in Europe as adjuvant treatment for stage III CC, has improved prognosis in this stage, but questions on their usefulness in high-risk stage II or elderly CC patients and on the role of some prognostic biomarkers are still pending. In April 2010, a consensus meeting on adjuvant CC treatment based on a revision of the most recent literature was held in Spain. The panel considered the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk stage II CC patients to be justified. Additionally, the more convenient administration of oral fluoropyrimidines vs. IV continuous infusion 5-FU would make XELOX a more suitable alternative for the patient. A more cautious decision should be taken when prescribing oxaliplatin treatment in patients aged ≥70.

Association of right-sided tumors with high thymidine phosphorylase gene expression levels and the response to oral uracil and tegafur/leucovorin chemotherapy among patients with colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To identify useful predictive factors for the response to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) and oral uracil and tegafur (UFT)/LV chemotherapy among patients with colorectal cancer, we investigated the association between the gene expression levels of pyrimidine and folate metabolism-related enzymes in colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues and the response to UFT/LV neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

The subjects were 76 CRC patients who were scheduled to undergo surgery. UFT (300 mg/m(2)/day) and LV (75 mg/body/day) were administered for 2 weeks before surgery. Biopsy samples were endoscopically obtained before drug administration. The gene expression levels of 14 genes in the biopsy samples were quantitatively evaluated using a real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (19.7 %) with marked pathological regression were judged to be responders. Thymidine phosphorylase (TP) gene expression levels among the responders were significantly higher than those among the non-responders. Right-sided tumors with high TP gene expression levels were associated with a significantly higher response rate to UFT/LV chemotherapy than left-sided tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

TP gene expression levels in primary CRC tissues and the primary tumor site may be useful predictors of the efficacy of oral UFT/LV chemotherapy.

Feasibility study of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the safety, efficacy, and compliance of 1-year treatment with S-1 in patients with stage II/III resectable colorectal cancer.

METHODS

S-1 was administered orally in two divided doses daily. The dose was assigned according to body surface area (BSA) as follows: BSA <1.25 m(2), 80 mg/day; BSA ≥1.25 to <1.5 m(2), 100 mg/day; and BSA ≥1.5 m(2), 120 mg/day. S-1 was given for 28 consecutive days, followed by a 14-day rest. The study objects were the rate of completion of treatment as planned at 1 year, the ratio of the actually administered dose to the planned dose at 1 year, and the total number of days of treatment.

RESULTS

At 1 year, the rate of completion of treatment as planned was 77.7 % (42/54 patients), and the ratio of the actually administered dose to the planned dose was 82.9 %. The mean and median total numbers of days of treatment were 209 and 252, respectively. Grade 3 or higher toxicity (watery eyes) occurred in only 1 patient.

CONCLUSION

S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy had acceptable compliance, safety, and efficacy in patients with colorectal cancer. S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy is considered a possible standard treatment regimen for colorectal cancer.

Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: final results from the X-ACT trial with analysis by age and preliminary evidence of a pharmacodynamic marker of efficacy

BACKGROUND

This multicenter randomized trial compared oral capecitabine with bolus i.v. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were assigned to 24 weeks of capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks or 5-FU/FA (Mayo Clinic regimen). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat population received capecitabine (n = 1004) or 5-FU/FA (n = 983). With a median follow-up of 6.9 years, capecitabine was at least equivalent to 5-FU/FA in terms of DFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.01] and overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.74-1.01); the 95% CI upper limits were significantly less than the predefined noninferiority margins of 1.20 (P < 0.0001) and 1.14 (P < 0.001), respectively. This pattern was maintained in all subgroups, including patients aged ≥ 70 years. Preplanned multivariate analyses showed that capecitabine had statistically significant beneficial effects on DFS (P = 0.021) and OS (P = 0.020) versus 5-FU/FA. A post hoc analysis suggested that the occurrence of hand-foot syndrome may be associated with better outcomes in capecitabine recipients.

CONCLUSION

Oral capecitabine is an effective alternative to bolus 5-FU/FA as adjuvant treatment of patients with stage III colon cancer with efficacy benefits maintained at 5 years and in older patients.

The evolution of adjuvant therapy in the treatment of early-stage colon cancer

Adjuvant treatment of colon cancer, one of the most common malignancies, is an important issue in oncology. This article describes the development of adjuvant therapy and how the 2 major evolution steps, the successes of fluoropyrimidines, and then of oxaliplatin, have been achieved, Problems and failures, such as those of targeted therapies, also are addressed to help us to overcome their limitations. Special situations, such as stage II disease and an elderly population in which adjuvant chemotherapy is still controversial, are reviewed from the clinician perspective. The synthesis of these data allows us to conceive a future development focused on translational research.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX therapy for stage III colon cancer in Japan based on the MOSAIC trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX therapy versus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FU/LV) for patients with stage III colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We performed the cost-effectiveness of FOLFOX compared with standard FU/LV treatment by the retrospective analysis of patient-level data from the randomized controlled Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer (MOSAIC) trial. Predicted mean time spent in each disease state was calculated by our statistical model, which takes into account the cure rate and treats death from causes other than colon cancer as a competing risk. We performed this analysis from the perspective of the health-care payer. Using a time horizon of 30 years, both cost and effectiveness were discounted by 3% per year.

RESULTS

Estimated cure rates for colon cancer were 0.715 (FOLFOX) and 0.622 (FU/LV). Estimated medical costs of FOLFOX were JPY 3.1 million (USD 34,000) compared with JPY 1.9 million (USD 22,000) of FU/LV. The mean estimated quality-adjusted life-year was 9.83 with FOLFOX and 9.07 with that of FU/LV. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of FOLFOX was JPY 1.5 million (USD 17,000) per quality-adjusted life-year compared with FU/LV, which was supported by sensitivity analysis. Even if we assume that Japanese outcomes were better than those reported by the MOSAIC trial, which would reduce the difference between cure rates for each treatment to 5%, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained below 5.0 million (USD 56,000) per quality-adjusted life-year.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant FOLFOX is a cost-effective treatment for stage III colon cancer in Japan compared with FU/LV therapy. Even when parameters were changed to reflect smaller improvements with FOLFOX, the conclusion is the same.

Feasibility of mFOLFOX6 as the adjuvant treatment after curative resection of metastases from colorectal cancer in Japanese patients

BACKGROUND

An oxaliplatin-based regimen as the adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer demonstrated a survival advantage over fluorouracil (FU) and leucovorin (LV) in the MOSAIC and NSABP C-07 trials. For adjuvant treatment after the resection of metastases from colorectal cancer), active chemotherapy regimens such as FOLFOX are recommended. However, the safety data of FOLFOX are insufficient for its use after metastasectomy of colorectal cancer in Japanese patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of mFOLFOX6 for adjuvant treatment after the resection of metastases from colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Among 67 consecutive patients who received mFOLFOX6 as the adjuvant treatment after resection of metastases from colorectal cancer between September 2002 and March 2009 in our institution, 51 patients who had not received preoperative chemotherapy were reviewed. The mFOLFOX6 treatment comprised oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) and l-leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) given intravenously over a 2-h period on day 1, followed by a 5-FU bolus of 400 mg/m(2) and a 46-h infusion of 5-FU 2400 mg/m(2), every 2 weeks for up to 12 cycles.

RESULTS

National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 (NCI-CTC) grade 3-4 toxicities per patient were: peripheral neuropathy 8%, allergic reaction 4%, aspartate transaminase (AST) 4%, febrile neutropenia 4%, nausea 2%, anorexia 2%, fatigue 2%, alanine transaminase (ALT) 2%, bilirubin 2%, neutrophils 49%, leukocytes 6%, and hemoglobin 2%; 71% of the patients completed the scheduled 12 cycles.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant therapy with mFOLFOX6 after resection of metastases from colorectal cancer is feasible for Japanese patients.

Outcomes among black patients with stage II and III colon cancer receiving chemotherapy: an analysis of ACCENT adjuvant trials

BACKGROUND

Among patients with resected colon cancer, black patients have worse survival than whites. We investigated whether disparities in survival and related endpoints would persist when patients were treated with identical therapies in controlled clinical trials.

METHODS

We assessed 14,611 patients (1218 black and 13,393 white) who received standardized adjuvant treatment in 12 randomized controlled clinical trials conducted in North America for resected stage II and stage III colon cancer between 1977 and 2002. Individual patient data on covariates and outcomes were extracted from the Adjuvant Colon Cancer ENdpoinTs (ACCENT) database. The endpoints examined in this meta-analysis were overall survival (time to death), recurrence-free survival (time to recurrence or death), and recurrence-free interval (time to recurrence). Cox models were stratified by study and controlled for sex, stage, age, and treatment to determine the effect of race. Kaplan-Meier estimates were adjusted for similar covariates to control for confounding. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Black patients were younger than whites (median age, 58 vs 61 years, respectively; P < .001) and more likely to be female (55% vs 45%, respectively; P < .001). Overall survival was worse in black patients than whites (hazard ratio [HR] of death = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11 to 1.34, P < .001). Five-year overall survival rates for blacks and whites were 68.2% and 72.8%, respectively. When subsets defined by sex, stage, and age were analyzed, overall survival was consistently worse in black patients. Recurrence-free survival was worse in black patients than whites (HR of recurrence or death = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.24, P = .0045). Three-year recurrence-free survival rates in blacks and whites were 68.4% and 72.1%, respectively. In contrast, recurrence-free interval was similar in black and white patients (HR of recurrence = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.97 to 1.19, P = .15). Three-year recurrence-free interval rates in blacks and whites were 71.3% and 74.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients with resected stage II and stage III colon cancer who were treated with the same therapy as white patients experienced worse overall and recurrence-free survival, but similar recurrence-free interval, compared with white patients. The differences in survival may be mostly because of factors unrelated to the patients' adjuvant colon cancer treatment.

Long-term survival benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy by decreasing incidence of tumor recurrence without delaying relapse in stage III colorectal cancer

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS

To elucidate the survival benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy by decreasing incidence or by delaying time of tumor recurrence, we reported the long-term results of a nonrandomized prospective study comparing the adjuvant chemotherapy to no chemotherapy in stage III colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS

From 1991 to 1995, 463 patients with stage III colorectal cancer were divided to three groups which were no chemotherapy, weekly chemotherapy, and monthly chemotherapy (5-FU plus levamisole).

RESULTS

The recurrent incidence was significantly decreased in patients with chemotherapy (47.8% vs. 63.9% of no chemotherapy, P = 0.001), resulting into better survival. The 10-year cancer-specific and overall survival rates of patients with chemotherapy vs. no chemotherapy were 52.1% vs. 37.8% and 46.9% vs. 29.9%, respectively (P < 0.001). Weekly chemotherapy had better survival than monthly chemotherapy (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in recurrent time or types between the patients with and without chemotherapy. The percentages of patients with recurrence happened within 3 years were 85.2% and 84.6% of those with and without chemotherapy, respectively. Patients with advanced stage of T4b invasion depth, N2, and central node invasion had no significant survival benefits by adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival benefits achieved by adjuvant chemotherapy is through decreasing recurrent incidence, not through postponing tumor recurrent time. That means adjuvant chemotherapy indeed cures some patients by eradicating occult tumor. In adjuvant setting, more powerful regimen for eradicating occult tumor is the keystone to improve long-term survival of stage III colorectal cancer.

From chemotherapy to targeted therapy in adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer

Colorectal cancer represents a major public health problem due to its frequency and mortality rate. Adjuvant chemotherapy has improved the prognosis of colon cancer. Six months of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine in combination is the standard adjuvant treatment in stage III patients. Ongoing trials are evaluating the optimal duration of chemotherapy. A critical issue, which needs to be specifically addressed, is the role of adjuvant therapy in elderly patients. Preliminary results of trials evaluating targeted therapies in combination with chemotherapy have shown disappointing results. The monoclonal antibodies bevacizumab, targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and cetuximab, targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)/HER1, which improved survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, could even induce chemotherapy resistance in a significant number of patients in the adjuvant setting. A major challenge is emerging to understand the mechanism leading to this effect and to multi-target the tumor cell proliferation and survival network. Clarity regarding the clinical signal needed before launching a phase III study and optimized designs adapted to multiple agents are urgently needed for new trials.

Documenting the natural history of patients with resected stage II adenocarcinoma of the colon after random assignment to adjuvant treatment with edrecolomab or observation: results from CALGB 9581

PURPOSE

We conducted a randomized trial comparing adjuvant treatment with edrecolomab versus observation in patients with resected, low-risk, stage II colon cancer. This study also prospectively studied patient- and tumor-specific markers of treatment outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After surgical resection, patients with stage II colon cancer were randomly assigned to either five infusions of edrecolomab at 28-day intervals or observation without adjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Final accrual included 1,738 patients; 865 patients received edrecolomab, and 873 patients were observed without adjuvant treatment. Median follow-up time was 7.9 years. There were no significant outcome differences between study arms (overall survival [OS], P = .71; disease-free survival, P = .64). The combined 5-year all-cause OS was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.84 to 0.88), and the combined 5-year disease-specific OS was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94). The relationships between demographic and histopathologic factors and survival differed for all-cause and disease-specific survival outcomes, but no combined prognostic factor model was found to adequately classify patients at higher risk of recurrence or death as a result of colon cancer.

CONCLUSION

Edrecolomab did not prolong survival. Consequently, this large study with a long duration of follow-up provided unique data concerning the natural history of resected stage II colon cancer. Prognostic factors identified in previous retrospective and pooled analyses were associated with survival outcomes in this stage II patient cohort. Results from ongoing molecular marker studies may enhance our ability to determine the risk profile of these patients.

Challenges in the management of stage II colon cancer

Approximately one third of patients diagnosed with early-stage colon cancer will present with lymph node involvement (stage III) and about one quarter with transmural bowel wall invasion but negative lymph nodes (stage II). Adjuvant chemotherapy targets micrometastatic disease to improve disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). While beneficial for stage III patients, the role of adjuvant chemotherapy is unestablished in stage II disease. This likely relates to the improved outcome of these patients, and the difficulties in developing studies with sufficient power to document benefit in this patient population. However, recent investigation also suggests that molecular differences may exist between stage II and III cancers and within stage II patients. Validated pathologic prognostic markers are useful at identifying stage II patients at high risk for recurrence for whom the benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy may be greater. Such high-risk features include higher T stage (T4 v T3), suboptimal lymph node retrieval, presence of lymphovascular invasion, bowel obstruction, or bowel perforation, and poorly differentiated histology. However, for the majority of patients who do not carry any of these adverse features and are classified as "average-risk" stage II patients, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy remains unproven. Emerging understanding of the underlying biology of stage II colon cancer has identified molecular markers that may change this paradigm and improve our risk assessment and treatment choices for stage II disease. Assessment of microsatellite stability (MSI), which serves as a marker for DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system function, has emerged as a useful tool for risk stratification of patients with stage II colon cancer. Patients with high frequency of MSI have been shown to have increased OS and limited benefit from 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy. Additional research is necessary to clearly define the most appropriate way to use this marker and others in routine clinical practice.

Oral uracil-tegafur plus leucovorin vs fluorouracil bolus plus leucovorin for advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate systematically the efficacy and safety of oral uracil-tegafur (UFT) plus leucovorin (LV) compared with infusional fluorouracil (5-FU) plus LV for advanced colorectal cancer.

METHOD

Eligible studies were identified from Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The end-points included overall survival and overall tumour response rate, and toxicity including leucopenia, febrile neutropenia, stomatitis/mucositis and diarrhoea.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials were identified. Pooled data demonstrated no difference in overall survival between the oral UFT plus LV regimen and the 5-FU bolus plus LV regimen [hazard ratio 1.013; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.911-1.127].The fixed-effect pooled estimate for overall tumour response rate showed no significant difference between the two regimens (relative risk 0.893; 0.672-1.187). Grade 3-4 leucopenia [odds ratio (OR) 0.126; 955 CI 0.048-0.326], grade 1-4 leucopenia (OR 0.089; 95% CI 0.067-0.119) and grade1-4 febrile neutropenia (OR 0.020; 95% CI 0.004-0.102) were significantly less prominent in the oral UFT regimens. For nonhaematological toxicities, grade 3-4 stomatitis/mucositis (OR 0.075; 95% CI 0.039-0.146), grade 3-4 infection (OR 0.484; 95% CI 0.310-0.758), grade 1-4 infection (OR 0.672; 95% CI 0.547-0.826, P < 0.001), grade 1-4 diarrhoea (OR 0.743; 95% CI 0.626-0.881) were also less likely to happen in patients in the oral UFT plus LV regimen, while there was no significant difference between the two treatment regimens with respect to grade 1-4 stomatitis/mucositis (OR 0.278; 95% CI 0.053-1.456) and grade 3-4 (OR 1.174; 95% CI 0.983-1.403) diarrhoea.

CONCLUSION

Oral UFT or 5-FU bolus combined with LV results in similar overall survival and tumour response rates for advanced colorectal cancer. The former treatment regimen is greatly superior in terms of toxicity, especially haematological toxicity.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer with poor prognostic features

PURPOSE

Adjuvant chemotherapy is typically considered for patients with stage II colon cancer characterized by poor prognostic features, including obstruction, perforation, emergent admission, T4 stage, resection of fewer than 12 lymph nodes, and poor histology. Despite frequent use, the survival advantage conferred on patients with stage II disease by chemotherapy is yet unproven. We sought to determine the overall survival benefit of chemotherapy among patients with stage II colon cancer having poor prognostic features.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 43,032 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent colectomy for stage II and III primary colon adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 1992 to 2005 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) -Medicare database. χ(2) and two-way analysis of variance were used to assess differences in patient- and disease-related characteristics. Five-year overall survival was examined using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression with propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

Of the 24,847 patients with stage II cancer, 75% had one or more poor prognostic features. Adjuvant chemotherapy was received by 20% of patients with stage II disease and 57% of patients with stage III disease. After adjustment, 5-year survival benefit from chemotherapy was observed only for patients with stage III disease (hazard ratio[HR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.67). No survival benefit was observed for patients with stage II cancer with no poor prognostic features (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.25) or stage II cancer with any poor prognostic features (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.13).

CONCLUSION

Among Medicare patients identified with stage II colon cancer, either with or without poor prognostic features, adjuvant chemotherapy did not substantially improve overall survival. This lack of benefit must be considered in treatment decisions for similar older adults with colon cancer.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer: The Role of Molecular Markers in Choosing Therapy

The optimal adjuvant treatment for stage II colon cancer remains controversial. While chemotherapy is often recommended for high-risk stage II disease, many low-grade tumors with similar histopathologic features will recur and ultimately cause cancer-associated mortality. The development of molecular markers that predict clinical outcome or response to therapy in stage II colon cancer is an important tool that could give clinicians added information in discussions regarding the role of adjuvant chemotherapy. While many potential molecular biomarkers have been investigated, to date none have been validated in prospective clinical trials. Among the most promising molecular markers to be studied are microsatellite instability and 18q and 17p loss of heterozygosity, both of which are currently being evaluated as prognostic indicators in a large prospective clinical trial (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 5202). This review focuses on potential molecular biomarkers being evaluated for their prognostic value in stage II colon cancer and their potential role in clinical decision-making regarding the use of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Lymph node ratio is a powerful prognostic index in patients with stage III distal rectal cancer: a Japanese multicenter study

PURPOSE

The present study aims to define the prognostic impact of the lymph node ratio (LNR) in patients with stage III distal rectal cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 501 patients who underwent curative resection (total mesorectal excision, TME) for stage III distal rectal cancer at 12 institutions between 1991 and 1998. Patients were divided into four groups according to quartiles based on LNR.

RESULTS

Among the 501 patients, 381 underwent TME with pelvic sidewall dissection (PSD). The median numbers of lymph nodes retrieved with and without PSD were 45 and 17, respectively (P < 0.0001). Forty-nine patients with lymph node retrieved less than 12 were excluded from further analyses. Among various clinicopathological parameters, univariate analysis identified age (P = 0.0059), histological grade (P < 0.0001), depth of tumor invasion (P = 0.0003), and number of positive nodes (P < 0.0001) and LNR (P < 0.0001) as prognostic factors. The Cox proportional hazards model revealed that age (P = 0.014), histological grade (P < 0.0001), depth of tumor invasion (P = 0.0002), and LNR (group 3, P = 0.0012; group 4, P < 0.0001) were independent prognostic factors. When the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) seventh staging system was added as a covariate, both AJCC stage (P < 0.0001) and LNR (P < 0.0001) were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding the LNR concept to the AJCC cancer staging system will improve accuracy in evaluating the nodal status of distal rectal cancer.

Optimal use of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The prognosis of stage II colorectal cancer varies. Whether or not to perform adjuvant chemotherapy on patients with stage II colorectal cancer is a controversial issue. The aims of this study were to identify relevant risk factors for the prognosis of stage II colorectal cancer and to evaluate the need for adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHOD

Between January 2000 and January 2005, 443 patients with stage II colorectal cancer who had received radical surgery at the Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center were retrospectively analyzed. The overall survival rates and survival curves were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate prognostic analyses were performed using the Cox regression model. Patients with certain important risk factors were analyzed according to whether they received adjuvant chemotherapy, and four chemotherapeutic regimens were classified into sub-groups and analyzed.

RESULTS

Univariate analyses showed that intestinal obstruction or perforation, type 2 diabetes mellitus, an inadequate surgical margin, and sampling of less than 12 lymph nodes were risk factors that correlated with poor prognosis. Patients with an intestinal obstruction or perforation and insufficient lymph node samples achieved higher 5-year survival rates with adjuvant chemotherapy than with surgery alone.

CONCLUSION

Intestinal obstruction or perforation, sampling of less than 12 lymph nodes, and inadequate surgical margins were identified as risk factors for poor survival, and patients with either of the first two factors benefited from adjuvant chemotherapy. Moreover, the use of capecitabine alone may be insufficient for patients with an intestinal obstruction or perforation.

Cancer immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy consists of approaches that modify the host immune system, and/or the utilization of components of the immune system, as cancer treatment. During the past 25 years, 17 immunologic products have received regulatory approval based on anticancer activity as single agents and/or in combination with chemotherapy. These include the nonspecific immune stimulants BCG and levamisole; the cytokines interferon-α and interleukin-2; the monoclonal antibodies rituximab, ofatumumab, alemtuzumab, trastuzumab, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab; the radiolabeled antibodies Y-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan and I-131 tositumomab; the immunotoxins denileukin diftitox and gemtuzumab ozogamicin; nonmyeloablative allogeneic transplants with donor lymphocyte infusions; and the anti-prostate cancer cell-based therapy sipuleucel-T. All but two of these products are still regularly used to treat various B- and T-cell malignancies, and numerous solid tumors, including breast, lung, colorectal, prostate, melanoma, kidney, glioblastoma, bladder, and head and neck. Positive randomized trials have recently been reported for idiotype vaccines in lymphoma and a peptide vaccine in melanoma. The anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody ipilumumab, which blocks regulatory T-cells, is expected to receive regulatory approval in the near future, based on a randomized trial in melanoma. As the fourth modality of cancer treatment, biotherapy/immunotherapy is an increasingly important component of the anticancer armamentarium.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Using the FOLFOX Regimen in Colon Cancer

PURPOSE

Great progress has been made in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy using the FOLFOX regimen in patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer.

METHODS

Eighty-two patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for stage III or high-risk stage II colon cancer were enrolled in this retrospective study. They received FOLFOX4 or modified FOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up of 37 months (range, 21 to 61 months), 14 patients experienced disease relapse. The disease-free survival rate at 3 years was 82.9%: 84.6% for stage II and 82.6% for stage III. At the time of the analysis, 8 patients were dead from recurrence. The probability of overall survival at 5 years was 74.5%: 90% for stage II and 74.6% for stage III. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic adverse events included neutropenia (40.2%), anemia (2.4%), and thrombocytopenia (1.2%). Gastrointestinal toxicities included grade 3 or 4 nausea (4.9%) and stomatitis (2.4%). Peripheral sensory neuropathy was observed in 81.7% of the patients during treatment. Of the 11 patients (13.4%) who had grade 3 peripheral sensory neuropathy during treatment, grade 3 symptoms were persistent in 3 patients with gait disturbance at the time of analysis. No treatment-related deaths were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative chemotherapy using the FOLFOX regimen, oxaliplatin in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin, is effective and tolerable in patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer.

Mature Results of a Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing 5-Flourouracil with Leucovorin to 5-Flourouracil with Levamisole as Adjuvant Therapy of Stage II and III Colorectal Cancer- The Israel Cooperative Oncology Group (ICOG) Study

Objective: Survival benefit with adjuvant therapy was shown in patients with Stage III colorectal cancer (CRC). This study evaluates long-term (10-year) outcome in patients with CRC randomly assigned to adjuvant 5-Fluorouracil/Leucovorin (5FU+LV) or 5-FU/Levamisole (5FU+LEV).

Methods: Between 1990 and 1995, 398 patients with curatively resected Stage II-III CRC were randomly assigned to adjuvant 5FU+LV or 5FU+LEV for 12 months.

Results: No difference was evident in 10-year relapse-free or overall survival between study groups. Grade III toxicity was similar between groups; however, neurotoxicity was significantly greater with 5FU+LEV (p=0.02) and gastrointestinal toxicity with 5FU+LV (p=0.03). Female patients treated with 5FU+LEV had improved overall survival.

Conclusions: Adjuvant treatment of CRC is still based on leucovorin modulated fluorouracil. The long-term follow-up results of this trial indicate that the adjuvant treatment of Stage II-III CRC with 5FU+LV or 5FU+LEV is equally effective. The finding of improved survival in female subjects treated with 5FU+LEV warrants further study to determine if Levamisole is a better modulator of 5-FU than Leucovorin in this patient subset.

Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy for Stage II and III colon cancer after complete resection: an updated practice guideline

AIMS

The standard adjuvant therapy for resected stage III colon cancer has been intravenous 5-fluorouracil. However, newer chemotherapy agents, such as capecitabine, oxaliplatin and irinotecan, have been investigated in clinical trials since the publication of the original guidelines. The Gastrointestinal Cancer Disease Site Group (DSG) conducted a systematic review of the evidence for the use of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy for patients with resected stage II and III colon cancer and developed an updated practice guideline based on that evidence and expert consensus. The following research questions were addressed: Should patients with stage II or III colon cancer receive adjuvant systemic chemotherapy? What are the preferred adjuvant systemic chemotherapy options for patients with completely resected stage II or III colon cancer? Outcomes of interest were disease-free survival, overall survival, adverse effects and quality of life.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of published studies was conducted for the time period following the publication of the original guidelines to identify relevant randomised trials and syntheses of evidence in the form of meta-analyses. Recommendations were based on that evidence, evidence contained in the original guidelines and consensus of the Gastrointestinal Cancer DSG. The systematic review and practice guideline were externally reviewed through a mailed survey of practitioners in Ontario, Canada.

RESULTS

Recommendations were drafted based on the available evidence and expert consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients with stage II colon cancer is not recommended. However, a subset of patients with high-risk stage II disease should be considered for adjuvant therapy. Patients with completely resected stage III colon cancer should be offered adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment should depend on factors such as patient suitability and preference, and patients and clinicians must work together to determine the optimal course of treatment.

Phase II evaluation of early oral estramustine, oral etoposide, and intravenous paclitaxel combined with hormonal therapy in patients with high-risk metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma: Southwest Oncology Group S0032

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of a multiagent taxane-based chemotherapy combined with hormonal therapy in men with metastatic androgen-dependent prostate cancer in a multicenter, cooperative group, single-arm trial.

METHODS

A total of 41 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer involving both the axial and the appendicular skeletons or viscera were enrolled. Of the 41 patients, 35 were treated with combined androgen blockade and ≤4 cycles of oral estramustine (280 mg orally 3 times daily) and etoposide (50 mg/m(2) daily) for 14 days of each 21-day cycle, with paclitaxel (135 mg/m(2) intravenously within 1 hour) on day 2 of each cycle. Chemotherapy was started within 30 days of the initiation of hormonal therapy. The patients were followed up to determine the progression-free survival.

RESULTS

The 35 patients received a total of 126 cycles of chemotherapy, with 30 receiving all 4 cycles. The median progression-free survival for the evaluable population was 13 months (95% confidence interval 10-16), with a median overall survival of 38 months (95% confidence interval 28-49). The main toxicities were myelosuppression, with 9 patients experiencing grade 3 or greater neutropenia and 1 developing grade 4 thrombocytopenia. One patient died of neutropenic infection. Thrombosis embolism occurred 4 times (3 of grade 4 and 1 of grade 3), with 1 episode of grade 4 cardiac ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study have shown that the administration of chemotherapy to this population is feasible, with moderate toxicity. Taxane-based chemotherapy did not demonstrate significant efficacy in this high-risk population of patients with a poor prognosis.

Adjuvant colon cancer chemotherapy: where we are and where we'll go

Many patients with early-stage colon cancer are cured with surgery alone, even if the standard of care remains an uniform approach to adjuvant chemotherapy based primarily on tumour stage. Consequently, it is important to individualize decision-making in this subset of patients with the aim to identify potential prognostic and predictive markers in colon cancer. While 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin are widely known as gold treatment in the post-operative of stage III, well-validated molecular markers might help define which patients with stage II disease are likely to benefit from adjuvant therapy as well. Herein we review the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer and analyzed the date on the clinical development of molecular markers to individualize another therapeutic approach in colon cancer.

Stage II and stage III colon cancer: treatment advances and future directions

Because of its frequency and mortality rate, colorectal cancer represents a major public health problem. Adjuvant chemotherapy has improved the prognosis. Six months of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine in combination is the standard adjuvant treatment in stage III patients. Two monoclonal antibodies, bevacizumab targeting vascular endothelial growth factor and cetuximab targeting epidermal growth factor receptor 1, are being assessed in addition to chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting. Preliminary results of 2 trials have shown disappointing results. Duration of therapy is another other critical issue for the future. Adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage II colon cancer is still a subject of controversy. The potential biomarkers that can accurately select patients with stage II or III cancer who are at risk for recurrence to individualize therapy from microsatellite instability to gene signature are reviewed. Adjuvant therapy in elderly patients is another matter of debate due to the lack of survival advantage in the recent trials.

Relationship between tumor gene expression and recurrence in four independent studies of patients with stage II/III colon cancer treated with surgery alone or surgery plus adjuvant fluorouracil plus leucovorin

PURPOSE

These studies were conducted to determine the relationship between quantitative tumor gene expression and risk of cancer recurrence in patients with stage II or III colon cancer treated with surgery alone or surgery plus fluorouracil (FU) and leucovorin (LV) to develop multigene algorithms to quantify the risk of recurrence as well as the likelihood of differential treatment benefit of FU/LV adjuvant chemotherapy for individual patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) on RNA extracted from fixed, paraffin-embedded (FPE) tumor blocks from patients with stage II or III colon cancer who were treated with surgery alone (n = 270 from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project [NSABP] C-01/C-02 and n = 765 from Cleveland Clinic [CC]) or surgery plus FU/LV (n = 308 from NSABP C-04 and n = 508 from NSABP C-06). Overall, 761 candidate genes were studied in C-01/C-02 and C-04, and a subset of 375 genes was studied in CC/C-06.

RESULTS

A combined analysis of the four studies identified 48 genes significantly associated with risk of recurrence and 66 genes significantly associated with FU/LV benefit (with four genes in common). Seven recurrence-risk genes, six FU/LV-benefit genes, and five reference genes were selected, and algorithms were developed to identify groups of patients with low, intermediate, and high likelihood of recurrence and benefit from FU/LV.

CONCLUSION

RT-qPCR of FPE colon cancer tissue applied to four large independent populations has been used to develop multigene algorithms for estimating recurrence risk and benefit from FU/LV. These algorithms are being independently validated, and their clinical utility is being evaluated in the Quick and Simple and Reliable (QUASAR) study.

Targeted therapies as adjuvant treatment for early-stage colorectal cancer: first impressions and clinical questions

Survival rates for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have increased considerably over the years largely because of the application of optimized chemotherapy regimens. More recently, the addition of the targeted agents bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in advanced disease has also demonstrated clinical benefit. Adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard of care in patients with early-stage CRC who are at high risk of recurrence. One challenge is how to apply targeted agents in early-stage CRC. Initial results from the NSABP-08 trial in CRC, the first report of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of solid cancers, are disappointing. Nevertheless, the results of several important phase III trials of targeted adjuvant therapy are awaited. Until then, the use of targeted agents in early-stage CRC cannot be recommended. The identification of biomarkers to select patients who might derive clinical benefit is crucial in determining the full potential of targeted agents in the adjuvant setting. In this review, we discuss the biologic rationale for targeted therapies in early-stage CRC, the current clinical trials, and the clinical challenges facing the success of these agents in the adjuvant setting.

Defective mismatch repair as a predictive marker for lack of efficacy of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in colon cancer

PURPOSE

Prior reports have indicated that patients with colon cancer who demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or defective DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have improved survival and receive no benefit from fluorouracil (FU) -based adjuvant therapy compared with patients who have microsatellite-stable or proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors. We examined MMR status as a predictor of adjuvant therapy benefit in patients with stages II and III colon cancer.

METHODS

MSI assay or immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins were performed on 457 patients who were previously randomly assigned to FU-based therapy (either FU + levamisole or FU + leucovorin; n = 229) versus no postsurgical treatment (n = 228). Data were subsequently pooled with data from a previous analysis. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Overall, 70 (15%) of 457 patients exhibited dMMR. Adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.93; P = .02) in patients with pMMR tumors. Patients with dMMR tumors receiving FU had no improvement in DFS (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.42 to 2.91; P = .85) compared with those randomly assigned to surgery alone. In the pooled data set of 1,027 patients (n = 165 with dMMR), these findings were maintained; in patients with stage II disease and with dMMR tumors, treatment was associated with reduced overall survival (HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.02 to 8.54; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Patient stratification by MMR status may provide a more tailored approach to colon cancer adjuvant therapy. These data support MMR status assessment for patients being considered for FU therapy alone and consideration of MMR status in treatment decision making.

Combination therapy in high-risk stage II or stage III colon cancer: current practice and future prospects

Colon cancer represents the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. For patients who have undergone curative surgery, adjuvant therapy can reduce the risk of recurrence and death from relapsed or metastatic disease. Postoperative chemotherapy with a 5-fluorouracil-based regimen combined with oxaliplatin is the current standard of care for stage III patients. However, there is still controversy in stage II disease about the real impact of adjuvant monotherapy or combined therapy on survival. Better identification of a subgroup of patients with a higher risk of recurrence can select patients who might benefit from adjuvant therapy. For the elderly population, there is a well-established role for postoperative therapy, although the most appropriate regimen remains to be defined. Targeted agents for combined adjuvant therapy in stage II and III colon cancer is a promising area, but to date, there is no evidence supporting its use in this setting. Results from large prospective trials with targeted therapy have been disappointing and new drugs and strategies are needed to define the role of these types of agents in the adjuvant scenario of colon cancer.

Long-term survival results of surgery alone versus surgery plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin for stage II and stage III colon cancer: pooled analysis of NSABP C-01 through C-05. A baseline from which to compare modern adjuvant trials

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to conduct a pooled analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) colon trials involving surgery and surgery plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) to compare survival and establish a baseline from which to evaluate future studies.

METHODS

All patients enrolled in NSABP adjuvant trials C-01 through C-05 with stage II and III disease who were treated with surgery or with surgery plus 5-FU/LV were examined for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence-free interval (RFI). Time-to-event by treatment group was examined using adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariable Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

There were 2,966 eligible patients: 693 (23%) surgery and 2,273 (77%) surgery plus 5-FU/LV; 1,255 (42%) stage II and 1,711 (58%) stage III. Age > or =60 years [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.36, P < 0.0001], male gender (HR = 1.20, P = 0.0012), and more nodes positive or fewer nodes examined (P < 0.0001) were associated with worse survival. At 5 years, the adjusted OS was 0.62 [confidence interval (CI) = 0.60-0.63] in the surgery group and 0.76 (CI = 0.74-0.78) in the surgery plus 5-FU/LV group. Treatment with 5-FU/LV was associated with improved outcome compared with surgery: OS (HR = 0.62, P < 0.0001), DFS (HR = 0.66, P < 0.0001) and RFI (HR = 0.64, P < 0.0001). Improved OS with adjuvant treatment was seen in both stage II (HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.48-0.71) and stage III disease (HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.55-0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates that treatment of colon cancer patients with 5-FU/LV following surgery provides benefit over surgery alone and can provide anticipated survival outcomes with which to compare modern adjuvant trials.

Defective mismatch repair as a predictive marker for lack of efficacy of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in colon cancer

PURPOSE

Prior reports have indicated that patients with colon cancer who demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or defective DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have improved survival and receive no benefit from fluorouracil (FU) -based adjuvant therapy compared with patients who have microsatellite-stable or proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors. We examined MMR status as a predictor of adjuvant therapy benefit in patients with stages II and III colon cancer.

METHODS

MSI assay or immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins were performed on 457 patients who were previously randomly assigned to FU-based therapy (either FU + levamisole or FU + leucovorin; n = 229) versus no postsurgical treatment (n = 228). Data were subsequently pooled with data from a previous analysis. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Overall, 70 (15%) of 457 patients exhibited dMMR. Adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.93; P = .02) in patients with pMMR tumors. Patients with dMMR tumors receiving FU had no improvement in DFS (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.42 to 2.91; P = .85) compared with those randomly assigned to surgery alone. In the pooled data set of 1,027 patients (n = 165 with dMMR), these findings were maintained; in patients with stage II disease and with dMMR tumors, treatment was associated with reduced overall survival (HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.02 to 8.54; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Patient stratification by MMR status may provide a more tailored approach to colon cancer adjuvant therapy. These data support MMR status assessment for patients being considered for FU therapy alone and consideration of MMR status in treatment decision making.

Final results of randomized trials by the National Surgical Adjuvant Study of Colorectal Cancer (NSAS-CC)

OBJECTIVE

In the latter 1990s, adjuvant chemotherapy for completely resected Stage III colorectal cancer remained controversial in Japan. We conducted two independent randomized controlled trials in patients with Stage III colon and rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery alone or surgery followed by treatment with UFT (400 mg/m²/day), given for five consecutive days per week for 1 year. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS), and the secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 334 patients with colon cancer and 276 with rectal cancer were enrolled. The patients' characteristics were similar between the UFT group and the Surgery-alone group. There was no significant difference in RFS or OS in colon cancer. In rectal cancer, however, RFS and OS were significantly better in the UFT group than in the Surgery-alone group. The only grade 4 toxicity in the UFT group was diarrhea, occurring in one patient with colon cancer and one patient with rectal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with UFT is successfully tolerated and improves RFS and OS in patients with Stage III rectal cancer. In colon cancer, the expected benefits were not obtained (hazard ratio = 0.89).

Molecular markers to individualize adjuvant therapy for colon cancer

While many patients with early-stage colon cancer are cured with surgery alone, the standard of care remains a uniform approach to adjuvant chemotherapy based primarily on tumor stage. Recently, increasing awareness of the need for more individualized decision-making in cancer care has led to the development of several potential prognostic and predictive markers in colon cancer. While adjuvant chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin is clearly beneficial to patients with stage III disease, well-validated molecular markers might help define which patients with stage II disease are likely to benefit from adjuvant therapy as well. Here, we review the data on the clinical development of molecular markers to individualize adjuvant therapy in colon cancer.

Conditional survival and the choice of conditioning set for patients with colon cancer: an analysis of NSABP trials C-03 through C-07

PURPOSE

Colon cancer overall survival (OS) is usually computed from the time of diagnosis. Survival gives the initial prognosis but does not reflect how prognosis changes with changing hazard rates over time. Conditional survival (probability of surviving y additional years given they have survived x years [CS or OS|OS]) is an alternative measure that accounts for elapsed time since diagnosis, providing more relevant prognostic information. We extend the concept of CS to condition on the set of patients alive, recurrence-free, and second primary cancer-free (disease-free survival [OS|DFS]).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using data from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trials C-03 through C-07, 5-year OS|DFS was calculated on patients who were disease free up to 5 years after diagnosis, stratified by age, stage, nodal status, and performance status (PS).

RESULTS

For stage II, OS|DFS improved from 87% to 92% at 5 years. For stage III, OS|DFS improved from 69% to 88%. Patients younger than 50 years showed OS|DFS improvement from 79% to 95%; those older than 70 years showed no sustained increase in OS|DFS. Node-negative patients with > or = 12 nodes resected showed little change (89% to 94%); those with more than four positive nodes showed an improvement (57% to 86%). Patients with a PS of 0 or 1 demonstrated a small improvement; those with a PS of 2 did not (64% to 58%).

CONCLUSION

Prognosis improves over time for almost all groups of patients with colon cancer, especially those with positive nodes. OS|DFS is a more relevant measure of prognosis for those who have already survived disease free a period of time after diagnosis.

A case of advanced rectal adenocarcinoid tumor with long-term survival

Adenocarcinoid tumor most commonly occurs in the appendix and a tumor arising in the rectum is extremely rare. A 58-year-old man underwent total pelvic exenteration with extended lateral lymph node dissection for rectal adenocarcinoid tumor invading the urethra with lateral lymph node metastasis. Microscopically and immunohistochemically, the tumor consisted of carcinoid-like components and signet-ring-cell-carcinoma-like components, and an adenocarcinoid tumor was diagnosed. Postoperatively, the patient received combination chemotherapy of fluorouracil and leucovorin as an adjuvant therapy. Three years and 5 years after the initial surgery, the patient developed left groin and left external iliac lymph node recurrences, and lymphadenectomy was performed each time. As a result, the patient is alive more than 5 years after the initial surgery. There is no consensus on the indication of surgical treatment for adenocarcinoid tumor. However, in advanced cases, an aggressive surgical procedure might result in long-term survival when resectable.