Oxaliplatin as adjuvant therapy for colon cancer: updated results of NSABP C-07 trial, including survival and subset analyses

Model-based evaluation of the cost effectiveness of 3 versus 6 months' adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk stage II colon cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of 3 months' adjuvant chemotherapy versus 6 months in high-risk (T4 stage + microsatellite stable) stage II colon cancer (CC) patients.

METHODS

Using the validated PATTERN Markov cohort model, which simulates the disease progression of stage II CC patients from diagnosis to death, we first evaluated a reference strategy in which high-risk patients were treated with chemotherapy for 6 months. In the second strategy, treatment duration was shortened to 3 months. Both strategies were evaluated for CAPOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) and FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin). Based on trial data, we assumed that shortened treatment duration compared with a 6-month regimen was equally effective for CAPOX and less effective for FOLFOX. Adverse events were highest in the 6-month strategy. Analyses were conducted from a societal perspective using a lifelong time horizon. Outcomes were number of CC deaths per 1000 patients and total discounted costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient (pp). Incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) was calculated using a willingness-to-pay value of €50,000/QALY.

RESULTS

For CAPOX, the 6-month strategy resulted in 316 CC deaths per 1000 patients, 6.71 QALYs pp and total costs of €41,257 pp. The 3-month strategy resulted in an equal number of CC deaths, but higher QALYs (6.80 pp) and lower costs (€37,645 pp), leading to a iNMB of €8454 per person for 3 months versus 6 months. For FOLFOX, the 6-month strategy resulted in 316 CC deaths per 1000 patients, 6.71 QALYs pp and total costs of €47,135 pp. The 3-month strategy resulted in more CC deaths (393), lower QALYs (6.19 pp) and lower costs (€44,389 pp). An iNMB of -€23,189 was found for 3 months versus 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that 3 months' adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered as standard of care in high-risk stage II CC patients for CAPOX, but not for FOLFOX.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer

Simple Summary

Stage II colon cancer is defined as an early stage of the tumor disease, without the involvement of lymph nodes or distant organs. In this group of patients, surgery alone is associated with high cure rate and the role of post-operative chemotherapy is still a matter of debate. In patients with tumor features associated with a high risk of recurrence, post-operative chemotherapy is recommended even if it has a small survival benefit. This clinical issue leads to the need for identifying patients who may benefit from post-operative chemotherapy based on their risk of recurrence. The purpose of this review is to highlight and discuss the uncertainties of the previous trials about the risk stratification, the weight of each prognostic factor and the therapeutic benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer patients. Moreover, we summarize the data from previous studies in a decision algorithm that could help clinicians in clinical practice.

Abstract

In stage II colon cancer management, surgery alone has shown a high cure rate (about 80%), and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy is still a matter of debate. Patients with high-risk features (T4, insufficient nodal sampling, grading, etc.) have a poorer prognosis and, usually, adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended. The purpose of the present study is to highlight and discuss what is still unclear and not completely defined from the previous trials regarding risk stratification and therapeutic benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. With all the limitations of generalizing, we make the effort of trying to quantify the relative contribution of each prognostic factor and the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer. Finally, we propose a decision algorithm with the aim of summarizing the current evidence and translating it to clinical practice.

The Optimal Duration of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colon Cancer

Adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer (UICC stage II and III) has been under investigation over the last 30 years, regarding treatment duration and regimens. In this review, choice of regimen, its duration, possible limitations and future perspectives are discussed. Monotherapy with 5-fluorouracil was followed by addition of oxaliplatin, resulting in improved 3-yr disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates, but also increased peripheral sensory neurotoxicity (PSN). The International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant therapy (IDEA) collaboration demonstrated less toxicity, especially PSN, when shortening treatment duration to 3 months. However, formally, the anticipated non-inferiority of 3 months with fluoropyrimidine (FP)/oxaliplatin over 6 months (at 3-yr DFS) was not met for all patients groups, although subgroup analyses showed non-inferiority with capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CAPOX) rather than with FOLFOX, and also in relation to the prognostic information (e.g., clinical low-risk group, pT1-3 N0). In addition, first data of newer parameters like Immunoscore® and ctDNA show promising results as stratification parameters. Further investigations to better define clinical risk groups and prognostic factors are mandatory. Besides this, individual decision-making of treatment intensity (FP or FP/oxaliplatin) and duration should always consider patient characteristics and preferences, also given the absolute relatively small differences and their clinical relevance.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy without Radiation in Colorectal Cancer

In colon cancer, primary surgery followed by postoperative chemotherapy represents the standard of care. In rectal cancer, the standard of care is preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiation, which significantly reduces local recurrence but has no impact on subsequent metastatic disease or overall survival. The administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) before surgery can increase the chance of a curative resection and improves long-term outcomes in patients with liver metastases. Hence, NACT is being explored in both primary rectal and colon cancers as an alternative strategy to shrink the tumor, facilitate a curative resection, and simultaneously counter the risk of metastases. Yet, this lack of clarity regarding the precise aims of NACT (downstaging, maximizing response, or improving survival) is hindering progress. The appropriate cytotoxic agents, the optimal regimen, the number of cycles, or duration of NACT prior to surgery or in the postoperative setting remains undefined. Several potential strategies for integrating NACT are discussed with their advantages and disadvantages.

Lessons learnt from scoring adjuvant colon cancer trials and meta-analyses using the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale V.1.1

Click here to listen to the Podcast BACKGROUND: Form 1 of the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) serves to grade therapies with curative intent. Hitherto only few trials with curative intent have been field tested using form 1. We aimed to evaluate the applicability of the scale and to assess the reasonableness of the generated scores in early colon cancer, in order to identify shortcomings that may be rectified in future amendments.

METHODS

Adjuvant studies were identified in PubMed, Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency registration sites, as well as ESMO and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were graded using form 1 of the ESMO-MCBS V.1.1 and field tested by ESMO Colorectal Cancer Faculty. Shortcomings of the scale were identified and evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 57 trials and 7 out of 14 meta-analyses identified met criteria for ESMO-MCBS V.1.1 grading. In stage III colon cancer, randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses of modulated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based chemotherapy versus surgery scored ESMO-MCBS grade A and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses comprising oxaliplatin added to this 5-FU backbone showed a more modest additional overall survival benefit (grade A and B). For stage II colon cancer, the findings are less consistent. The fluoropyrimidine trials in stage II were graded 'no evaluable benefit' but the most recent meta-analysis demonstrated a 5.4% survival advantage after 8 years follow-up (grade A). RCTs and a meta-analysis adding oxaliplatin demonstrated no added benefit. Exploratory toxicity evaluation and annotation was problematic given inconsistent toxicity reporting and limited results of late toxicity. Field testers (n=37) reviewed the scores, 25 confirmed their reasonableness, 12 found them mostly reasonable. Moreover, they identified the inability of crediting improved convenience in non-inferiority trials as a shortcoming.

CONCLUSION

Form 1 of the ESMO-MCBS V.1.1 provided very reasonable grading for adjuvant colon cancer studies.

Early stage colon cancer: Current treatment standards, evolving paradigms, and future directions

Colon cancer continues to be one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity throughout the world despite the availability of reliable screening tools and effective therapies. The majority of patients with colon cancer are diagnosed at an early stage (stages I to III), which provides an opportunity for cure. The current treatment paradigm of early stage colon cancer consists of surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in a select group of patients, which is directed at the eradication of minimal residual disease to achieve a cure. Surgery alone is curative for the vast majority of colon cancer patients. Currently, surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy can achieve long term survival in about two-thirds of colon cancer patients with nodal involvement. Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for all patients with stage III colon cancer, while the benefit in stage II patients is not unequivocally established despite several large clinical trials. Contemporary research in early stage colon cancer is focused on minimally invasive surgical techniques, strategies to limit treatment-related toxicities, precise patient selection for adjuvant therapy, utilization of molecular and clinicopathologic information to personalize therapy and exploration of new therapies exploiting the evolving knowledge of tumor biology. In this review, we will discuss the current standard treatment, evolving treatment paradigms, and the emerging biomarkers, that will likely help improve patient selection and personalization of therapy leading to superior outcomes.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Elderly Colorectal Cancer Patients

The value of adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients has been the subject of many overviews, with opinions varying from “not effective”, since randomized trials have not been performed, to “as effective as in young individuals”, based upon many retrospective analyses of randomized trials that have included patients of all ages. In the absence of randomized trials performed specifically with elderly patients, retrospective analyses demonstrate that the influence on the time to tumour recurrence (TTR) may be the same as in young individuals, but that endpoints that include death for any reason, such as recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), are poorer in the elderly. This is particularly true if oxaliplatin has been part of the treatment. The need for adjuvant chemotherapy after colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients is basically the same as that in younger patients. The reduction in recurrence risks may be similar, provided the chosen treatment is tolerated but survival gains are less. Adding oxaliplatin to a fluoropyrimidine is probably not beneficial in individuals above a biological age of approximately 70 years. If an oxaliplatin combination is administered to elderly patients, three months of therapy is in all probability the most realistic goal.

Outcomes and Utilization of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer in the Oxaliplatin Period: A SEER-Medicare Analysis

PURPOSE

Previous SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare analyses have shown no definitive survival benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) with fluoropyrimidines. Impact of oxaliplatin-containing regimens for elderly stage II patients in real-world setting is unknown. We explored the utilization and outcome of AC after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of oxaliplatin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage II colon cancer (2004-2011) who underwent resection were selected for this analysis. Medicare claims data were used to ascertain the administration of AC within 120 days after surgery. The primary endpoint of the analysis was overall survival. We used the Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the effect of AC while adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic variables available in SEER. To adjust for referral pattern, a source of selection bias, we conducted an instrumental variable analysis using the surgeon of record and health service area.

RESULTS

A total of 16,468 patients were identified and 12.1% received AC. AC recipients were significantly younger, more likely to be male, nonwhite, married, and had lower comorbidity index. Their tumors had a more advanced stage, more likely to be left sided, and were less differentiated. The hazard ratio (HR) from the Cox model showed a statistically significant survival advantage for AC (HR=0.847, 95% confidence interval: 0.782-0.916). However, results from the instrumental variable analysis indicated that there was no definitive benefit of survival in AC recipients (HR=1.779, 95% confidence interval: 0.927-3.415). AC use decreased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

After controlling for referral patterns, administration of AC provided no definitive survival benefit. Future studies may elucidate the elderly population who may benefit from AC.

Carcinoembryonic Antigen Levels and Survival in Stage III Colon Cancer: Post hoc Analysis of the MOSAIC and PETACC-8 Trials

BACKGROUND

We explored and validated the association of postoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in stage III colon cancer.

METHODS

Patients with stage III colon cancer from the MOSAIC and PETACC-8 trials were enrolled. The relation between CEA and outcomes was continuously modeled with the restricted cubic splines (RCS) method. Association of CEA with outcomes was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method, with two risk groups among patients with a CEA level ≤5 ng/mL. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were constructed.

RESULTS

The CEA level was available in 1,292 (96%) and 2,477 (97%) patients in the discovery and validation cohorts. The RCS analysis confirmed that patients with a CEA level >5 ng/mL were at highest risk of recurrence or death and those with a CEA level ≤5 ng/mL presented a heterogeneous risk population. In the discovery cohort, the 3-year DFS rate was 75%, 65%, and 45% in a group of patients with CEA level of 0-1.30 ng/mL (n = 630), 1.30-5 ng/mL (n = 613), and >5 ng/mL (n = 49), respectively (P < 0.001). CEA was independently associated with endpoints. All findings were confirmed in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative CEA level was highly and independently associated with DFS and OS, especially in patients with a CEA level of ≤5 ng/mL, suggesting that this cutoff is not optimal.

IMPACT

CEA levels should be applied more accurately in future trials and clinical practice.

Long-Term Prevalence of Sensory Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy for 5 Years after Adjuvant FOLFOX Chemotherapy to Treat Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

(1) Background: Oxaliplatin is among the most neurotoxic anticancer drugs. Little data are available on the long-term prevalence and consequences of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), even though the third largest population of cancer survivors is made up of survivors of colorectal cancer. (2) Methods: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted in 16 French centers to assess the prevalence of CIPN, as well as its consequences (neuropathic pain, anxiety, depression, and quality of life) in cancer survivors during the 5 years after the end of adjuvant oxaliplatin chemotherapy. (3) Results: Out of 406 patients, the prevalence of CIPN was 31.3% (95% confidence interval: 26.8–36.0). Little improvement in CIPN was found over the 5 years, and 36.5% of patients with CIPN also had neuropathic pain. CIPN was associated with anxiety, depression, and deterioration of quality of life. None of the patients with CIPN were treated with duloxetine (recommendation from American Society of Clinical Oncology), and only 3.2%, 1.6%, and 1.6% were treated with pregabalin, gabapentin, and amitriptyline, respectively. (4) Conclusions: Five years after the end of chemotherapy, a quarter of patients suffered from CIPN. The present study showed marked psychological distress and uncovered a failure in management in these patients.

Impact of adjuvant therapy toxicity on quality of life and emotional symptoms in patients with colon cancer: a latent class analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify distinct trajectories of toxicity in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients after adjuvant chemotherapy and its impact on quality of life (QoL) and psychological symptoms.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter study was conducted in 157 patients. A latent class analysis defined the unobserved latent constructs that can be predicted as symptom clusters, considering the intensity of four types of adverse events (AEs). Patients completed EORTC-QLQ-C30, BSI-18, PDRQ-9, and DRS scales.

RESULTS

Ninety-six percent had some degree of toxicity, with grades 3-4 being the most common: neurotoxicity (7.2%), hematological (13.1%), digestive (5.2%), and skin toxicity (1.4%). Three distinct latent classes were identified (high [72.5%], mild [16.9%], and low [10.6%] toxicity). Patients with high toxicity had the worst QoL scores and moderately high somatization and psychological distress scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant chemotherapy for CRC was associated with frequent toxicity that negatively impacted QoL and psychological wellbeing.

Personalized Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer

Introduction

Colon cancer (CC) is one of the most frequent malignant diseases. Adjuvant chemotherapy is of utmost importance in the management of localized disease. With the emergence of precision medicine, treatment approaches are becoming increasingly personalized and complex. This review contributes to a broader understanding of the role and relevance of personalized adjuvant treatment strategies in colon carcinoma, and summarizes the current status in this disease entity.

Methods

We searched the websites ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and ASCO (American Society of Medical Oncology) Meeting Library for clinical trials and retrospective analyses in the field of adjuvant treatment of CC with special attention to personalized approaches.

Results

Various factors, including gender, age, sidedness, stage, dMMR/MSI-H, mutations, molecular profile, CMS, immunoscore, minimal residual disease, type of adjuvant therapy, therapy duration, and the patient's wish play an important role in the adjuvant setting of CC and should be considered in treatment decision making.

Conclusion

Future molecular profiling ideally assessed and monitored by liquid biopsy might personalize decision making even more in the adjuvant setting of CC patients. Further research and clinical trials are needed to clarify relevant questions and to highlight important clinical aspects.

Development and clinical application of bispecific antibody in the treatment of colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of colorectal cancer as one of the most commonly diagnosed and a frequent cause of cancer-related deaths is of great challenges in health-related issues.

AREAS COVERED

Immunotherapy is the fourth pillar of cancer treatment which provides more novel therapeutic options with expanding investigational potentials. One of the modalities in immunotherapy is the use of bispecific antibodies. Despite demonstrating many promising roles, it still needs more advanced studies to identify the actual pros and cons. In this review, the application of bispecific antibody in the treatment of colorectal cancer has been explained, based on preclinical and clinical studies. The literature search was conducted mainly through PubMed in June and September 2019.

EXPERT OPINION

Bispecific antibody is in its early stages in colorectal cancer treatment, requiring modern technologies in manufacturing, better biomarkers and more specific target antigens, more studies on individual genetic variations, and conducting later phase clinical trials and systematic reviews to achieve better survival benefits.

Real-world evidence on adjuvant chemotherapy in older adults with stage II/III colon cancer

Colon cancer represents one of the most common cancers diagnosed in older adults worldwide. The standard of care in resected stage II and stage III colon cancer continues to evolve. While there is unequivocal evidence to suggest both disease free and overall survival benefits with the use of combination chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer, data regarding its use in patients with stage II colon cancer are less clear. Further, although colon cancer is a disease that affects older adults, there is considerable debate on the value of adjuvant chemotherapy in the aging population. In particular, many older patients are undertreated when compared to their younger counterparts. In this review, we will describe the clinical trials that contributed to the current adjuvant chemotherapy approach in colon cancer, discuss representation of older adults in trials and the specific challenges associated with the management of this sub-population, and highlight the role of comprehensive geriatric assessments. We will also review how real-world evidence complements the data gaps from clinical trials of early stage colon cancer.

Optimize the dose of oxaliplatin for locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy

Background

Addition of oxaliplatin to capecitabine remains controversial for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). And cumulative oxaliplatin dose (COD) varied among clinical trials showing different therapeutic effects of this regimen. The objective of this study was to explore how COD affected tumor metastasis and patient survival.

Methods

Totally 388 patients diagnosed with stage cII-III rectal cancer and treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy were consecutively enrolled into this study and retrospectively reviewed. After grouping by total chemotherapy cycle (TCC), influences of COD on adverse effects and patients’ survivals were analyzed in each group. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed through Kaplan-Meier approach and COX proportional hazards model, respectively. Age, gender, anemia, differentiation, carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19–9, pretreatment clinical stage and postsurgical pathologic stage were used as covariates.

Results

COD < 460 mg/m² emerged as an independent predictor of poorer overall, metastasis-free and disease-free survivals, in patients treated with TCC ≤ 7. The hazard ratios were 1.972, 1.763 and 1.637 (P values were 0.021, 0.028 and 0.041), respectively. But it was note-worthy that COD ≥460 mg/m² increased incidence of acute toxicities from 38.4 to 70.8% (P < 0.001). And in patients treated with TCC ≥ 8, COD failed to be a prognosticator.

Conclusions

For LARC patients treated with insufficient TCC (≤ 7), oxaliplatin of ≥460 mg/m² might be needed to improve survival, though it might resulted in more acute toxicities.

Oxaliplatin infusion-related venous pain: prevention by simultaneous intravenous fluids

OBJECTIVE

Oxaliplatin is a cytotoxic agent frequently used in the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer patients. A known side effect of oxaliplatin administration via a peripheral vein is infusion-related pain. In this retrospective cohort study we compared the incidence of infusion-related pain in patients treated with oxaliplatin with or without simultaneous fluid infusion (FI) (800 mL glucose 5% in 2 hours).

METHODS

We retrospectively defined two cohorts: Patients treated with oxaliplatin and simultaneous intravenous FI and the same number of patients treated without FI.The incidence of infusion-related venous pain was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes included: Incidence of hypersensitivity reactions, infusion time, dose density, number of patients switched to a central venous catheter and incidence of peripheral neuropathy.

RESULTS

100 patients were included, 50 patients in both groups. Baseline characteristics were comparable, except for age (median 66.8 vs 62.4 years in groups with and without FI; p=0.017), and body mass index (28.0 vs 25.7 kg/m2, respectively; p=0.012). Patients treated with simultaneous FI experienced significantly less vascular pain compared with those without FI (10% vs 78%, respectively; p<0.0001; OR 0.031 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.098)). No difference was observed in dose density, treatment delay or the need of central venous catheter. Logistic regression analysis showed no confounders affecting the primary outcome. No adverse events of FI were observed.

CONCLUSION

Concurrent infusion of 800 mL glucose 5% with peripheral venous administration of oxaliplatin significantly reduces the incidence of infusion-related pain in gastrointestinal cancer patients and is highly feasible and affordable in everyday clinical practice.

Transcatheter rectal arterial chemoembolization with oxaliplatin plus S-1 concurrent chemoradiotherapy can improve the pathological remission rate in locally advanced rectal cancer: a comparative study

Background

To explore the efficacy and safety of Transcatheter rectal arterial chemoembolization with oxaliplatin and S-1 concurrent chemoradiotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Methods

This s a prospective, monocentric, non-randomized clinical study, a total of 95 patients were enrolled and assigned to two groups: an investigational group (n = 50) receiving transcatheter rectal arterial chemoembolization (TRACE) with oxaliplatin and preoperative radiotherapy plus S-1 concurrent chemotherapy (NATRACE-CRT), followed by surgery, a control group (n = 45) receiving standard fluorouracil-based combined modality treatment, consisting of preoperative radiotherapy plus capecitabine based chemotherapy (NA-CRT), followed by surgery. The primary endpoint was postoperative pathological regression rate which evaluated by tumor regression grade (TRG) according to the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) standard, and the secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and toxicity, as well as surgical complications, and postoperative tumor downstaging.

Results

Compared with NA-CRT group (17.78% (95% confidence interval (CI): 6.2–29.4)), the TRG0 was 30% (95% CI 16.8–43.2) in the NATRACE-CRT group (P = 0.231). The TRG0 + 1 rate was 60% (95% CI: 45.9–74.1) and 33.33% (95% CI: 19–47.7) in NATRACE-CRT group and NA-CRT group, respectively (P = 0.013). The ORR of the NATRACE-CRT group was 84% and that of the NA-CRT group was 66.67% (p = 0.058). Incidence of preoperative toxic side effects and surgical complications was similar between the two groups.

Conclusion

TRACE with oxaliplatin plus concurrent S-1 chemoradiotherapy as a neoadjuvant therapy provided better pathological remission rate versus standard treatment with a similar safety profile.

Trial registration

NCT03601156.

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.

Upfront radical surgery with total mesorectal excision followed by adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (TME-FOLFOX): an open-label, multicenter, phase II randomized controlled trial

Background

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard treatment for stage II/III rectal cancer. However, radiotherapy in the pelvic area is commonly associated with complications such as anastomotic leakage, sexual dysfunction, and fecal incontinence. Recently, the MERCURY study showed that preoperative high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) helped to selectively avoid PCRT. It remains unclear whether PCRT is necessary in patients who can achieve a negative circumferential resection margin (CRM) with surgery alone and in patients with cT_1–2N₁ or cT₃N₀ without CRM involvement and lateral lymph node metastasis. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of upfront radical surgery with total mesorectal excision (TME) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy with folinic acid (or leucovorin), fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) versus the current standard treatment in patients with surgically resectable, locally advanced rectal cancer.

Methods

This study, named TME-FOLFOX, is a prospective, open-label, multicenter, phase II randomized trial. Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer will be randomized to receive PCRT followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy (arm A) or upfront radical surgery with TME followed by adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy (arm B). Clinical stage II/III rectal cancer without CRM involvement and lateral lymph node metastasis will be defined using preoperative MRI. The primary endpoint is 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints include 5-year DFS, local recurrence rate, systemic recurrence rate, cost-effectiveness, and overall survival. We hypothesized that our experimental group (arm B) will have a 3-year DFS of 75% and a non-inferiority margin of 15%.

Discussion

Identifying whether patients require PCRT is one of the critical issues in locally advanced rectal cancer. This study aims to elucidate whether PCRT may not be required for all patients with stage II/III rectal cancer, especially for the MRI-based intermediate-risk group (with cT_1–2N₁ or cT₃N₀) without CRM involvement and lateral lymph node metastasis. If the findings indicate that our proposed treatment, which omits PCRT, is non-inferior to the standard treatment, then patients may avoid unnecessary radiation-related toxicity, have a shorter treatment duration, and save on medical costs.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02167321. Registered on 19 June 2014.

Prognostic Value of Tumor Deposits for Disease-Free Survival in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IDEA France Phase III Trial (PRODIGE-GERCOR)

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A post hoc analysis of all pathologic reports from patients with stage III CC included in the IDEA France phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00958737) investigating the duration of adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin or capecitabine and oxaliplatin therapy (3 v 6 months) was performed. The primary objective was to determine the prognostic impact of TD on disease-free survival (DFS). The effect of the addition of TD to LNM count on pN restaging was also evaluated. A multivariable analysis was performed to establish the association between TD and DFS.

RESULTS

Of 1,942 patients, 184 (9.5%) had TDs. The pN1a/b and pN1c populations showed similar DFS. TD-positive patients had worse prognosis compared with TD-negative patients, with 3-year DFS rates of 65.6% (95% CI, 58.0% to 72.1%) and 74.7% (95% CI, 72.6% to 76.7%; P = .0079), respectively. On multivariable analysis, TDs were associated with a higher risk of recurrence or death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36; P = .0201). Other adverse factors included pT4 and/or pN2 disease (HR, 2.21; P < .001), the 3 months of adjuvant treatment (HR, 1.29; P = .0029), tumor obstruction (HR, 1.28; P = .0233), and male sex (HR, 1.24; P = .0151). Patients restaged as having pN2 disease (n = 35, 2.3%) had similar DFS as patients initially classified as pN2.

CONCLUSION

The presence of TDs is an independent prognostic factor for DFS in patients with stage III CC. The addition of TD to LNM may help to better define the duration of adjuvant therapy.

Microsatellite Instability and Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Stage II Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Randomized control trials and population-based studies do not demonstrate a definitive benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in stage II colon cancer (CC). Tumor sidedness and microsatellite instability (MSI) status may predict response to ACT, but previous studies have limited microsatellite data. We assessed the efficacy of ACT and possible interaction with MSI status and tumor sidedness in patients with resected stage II CC diagnosed between 2010 and 2013 using the National Cancer Database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Overall survival was evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate and propensity score matched Cox proportional hazards models. The interaction between receipt of ACT, MSI status, and tumor sidedness was evaluated. The efficacy of ACT was assessed in patient subgroups by MSI status and tumor sidedness.

RESULTS

Among 6964 stage II CC patients with known MSI status, 1497 (21.5%) received ACT, 843 had MSI tumors, and 6121 had microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors. In multivariate and propensity score matched analyses, ACT was associated with improved survival after adjusting for factors including high-risk features, MSI status, and tumor sidedness (multivariate hazard ratio, 0.52; P<0.001). There was no interaction between receipt of ACT and MSI status (P=0.25). Patients with MSS tumors benefitted from ACT (multivariate hazard ratio, 0.47; P<0.001), even without other high-risk features. Patients with MSI tumors did not (P=0.671). ACT was associated with improved survival regardless of tumor sidedness.

CONCLUSIONS

MSS alone may warrant ACT in stage II CC while patients with MSI tumors may not derive significant benefit from ACT.

Microsatellite instability and survival after adjuvant chemotherapy among stage II and III colon cancer patients: results from a population-based study

Previous studies have reported conflicting results regarding the benefit of administering 5‐FU‐based chemotherapy to colon cancer (CC) patients with microsatellite‐instable (MSI‐high) tumors, and results from stage‐specific analyses are scarce. Patients with stage II or III CC were recruited as part of a population‐based study between 2003 and 2015. The Cox regression models including propensity score weighting were used to calculate hazard ratios and confidence intervals for the association between chemotherapy and cancer‐specific (CSS), relapse‐free (RFS), and overall survival (OS) by stage of disease and MSI status of the tumor. Median follow‐up was 6.2 years. A total of 1010 CC patients were included in the analysis (54% stage II, 46% stage III, 20% MSI‐high). Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 48 (8.7%) stage II and 366 (79%) stage III patients. Overall, patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy had better CSS [HR = 0.65 (0.49–0.86)] than those who received surgery alone. Among stage II patients, only 64 (12%) cancer‐related deaths occurred, none of which in MSI‐high patients who received chemotherapy. Patients with MSI‐high tumors who received adjuvant treatment showed better CSS and a tendency toward better RFS compared to MSI‐high patients who did not receive chemotherapy [HR_CSS = 0.36 (0.15–0.82), HR_RFS = 0.49 (0.22–1.06)]. Patients with microsatellite‐stable (MSS) tumors receiving adjuvant chemotherapy also had significantly better survival [HR_CSS = 0.65 (0.48–0.87) and HR_RFS = 0.68 (0.52–0.88)]. In this population‐based study including stage II and III CC patients, we observed a survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for both MSS and MSI‐high tumors. Adjuvant chemotherapy seemed to be beneficial among high‐risk stage II patients with MSI‐high tumors.

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2019 for the treatment of colorectal cancer

The number of deaths from colorectal cancer in Japan continues to increase. Colorectal cancer deaths exceeded 50,000 in 2016. In the 2019 edition, revision of all aspects of treatments was performed, with corrections and additions made based on knowledge acquired since the 2016 version (drug therapy) and the 2014 version (other treatments). The Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum guidelines 2019 for the treatment of colorectal cancer (JSCCR guidelines 2019) have been prepared to show standard treatment strategies for colorectal cancer, to eliminate disparities among institutions in terms of treatment, to eliminate unnecessary treatment and insufficient treatment and to deepen mutual understanding between healthcare professionals and patients by making these guidelines available to the general public. These guidelines have been prepared by consensuses reached by the JSCCR Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved by literature searches and in view of the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Therefore, these guidelines can be used as a tool for treating colorectal cancer in actual clinical practice settings. More specifically, they can be used as a guide to obtaining informed consent from patients and choosing the method of treatment for each patient. Controversial issues were selected as clinical questions, and recommendations were made. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of the evidence and a classification of recommendation categories based on the consensus reached by the Guideline Committee members. Here, we present the English version of the JSCCR guidelines 2019.

Impact of age on the efficacy of oxaliplatin in the preoperative chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy of rectal cancer: a post hoc analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase III trial

Background

The German rectal cancer trial CAO/ARO/AIO-04 has shown a significant benefit in 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) of adding oxaliplatin to a standard preoperative 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The use of oxaliplatin as adjuvant treatment in elderly patients with colon cancer is controversial. We therefore investigated the impact of age on clinical outcome in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase III trial.

Patients and methods

We carried out a post hoc analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase III trial evaluating primary and secondary end points according to age. Patient and tumor characteristics, NCI CTC adverse events grades 3-4 (version 3.0), dose intensities as well as survival and recurrence data were analyzed in three specified age groups (<60, 60-70, and ≥70 years). The influence of age as a continuous variable on DFS was modeled using a subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) analysis.

Results

A total of 1232 patients were assessable. With the exception of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status (P < 0.001), no differences in patient and tumor characteristics were noticed between age groups. Likewise, toxicity pattern, dose intensities of CRT and surgical results were similar in all age groups. After a median follow-up of 50 months, in patients aged <60 years a significant benefit of adding oxaliplatin to 5-FU-based CRT and adjuvant chemotherapy was observed for local (P = 0.013) and systemic recurrences (P = 0.023), DFS (P = 0.011), and even overall survival (OS; P = 0.044). The STEPP analysis revealed improved hazard ratios for DFS in patients aged 40-70 years compared with elderly patients treated with oxaliplatin.

Conclusion

The addition of oxaliplatin significantly improved DFS and OS in younger patients aged <60 years with advanced rectal cancer. Patients aged ≥70 years had no benefit.

Clinical Trials Number

NCT00349076.

Bevacizumab as adjuvant treatment of colon cancer: updated results from the S-AVANT phase III study by the GERCOR Group

BACKGROUND

The bevacizumab-Avastin® adjuVANT (AVANT) study did not meet its primary end point of improving disease-free survival (DFS) with the addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer (CC). We report here the long-term survival results (S-AVANT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with curatively resected stage III CC were randomly assigned to FOLFOX4, FOLFOX4-bevacizumab, or XELOX-bevacizumab.

RESULTS

A total of 2867 patients were randomized: FOLFOX4: n = 955, FOLFOX4-bevacizumab: n = 960, XELOX-bevacizumab: n = 952. With a median of 6.73 years follow-up (interquartile range 5.51-10.54), 672 patients died, of whom 198 (20.7%), 250 (26.0%), and 224 (23.5%) were in the FOLFOX4, FOLFOX4-bevacizumab, and XELOX-bevacizumab arms, respectively. The 10-year overall survival (OS) rates were 74.6%, 67.2%, and 69.9%, (P = 0.003) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 73.2%, 68.5%, and 71.0% (P = 0.174), respectively. OS and DFS hazard ratios were 1.29 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.55; P = 0.008] and 1.16 (95% CI 0.99-1.37; P = 0.063) for FOLFOX4-bevacizumab versus FOLFOX4 and 1.15 (95% CI 0.95-1.39; P = 0.147) and 1.1 (95% CI 0.93-1.29; P = 0.269) for XELOX-bevacizumab versus FOLFOX4, respectively. CC-related deaths (n = 542) occurred in 157 (79.3%) patients receiving FOLFOX4, 205 (82.0%) receiving FOLFOX4-bevacizumab, and 180 (80.4%) receiving XELOX-bevacizumab (P = 0.764), while non-CC-related deaths occurred in 41 (20.7%), 45 (18.0%), and 44 (19.6%) patients, respectively. Cardiovascular-related and sudden deaths during treatment or follow-up were reported in 13 (6.6%), 17 (6.8%), and 14 (6.3%) patients, in the FOLFOX4, FOLFOX4-bevacizuamb, and XELOX-bevacizumab arms, respectively (P = 0.789). Treatment arm, sex, age, histological differentiation, performance status, T/ N stages, and localization of primary tumor were independent prognostic factors of OS in stage III.

CONCLUSIONS

S-AVANT confirms the initial AVANT report. No benefit of the bevacizumab addition to FOLFOX4 adjuvant therapy in patients with stage III CC was observed in terms of DFS with a negative effect in OS, without increase in non-CC related deaths.

CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFICATION

NCT00112918.

Adjuvant Therapy for High-Risk Stage II or III Colon Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched, Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Study

Purpose: To determine the optimal adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colon adenocarcinoma, we conducted this propensity score-matched, nationwide, population-based cohort study to estimate the effects of adjuvant treatments in high-risk stage II or III colon adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods: Using propensity score matching, we minimized the confounding effects of sex, age, pathologic stage, tumor location, total chemotherapy cycles, and Charlson comorbidity index scores on adjuvant treatment outcomes in patients with high-risk stage II or III resectable colon adenocarcinoma. We selected the patients from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database and divided them into four groups: Group 1, comprising patients who received surgery alone; group 2, comprising those who received adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone; group 3, comprising those who received adjuvant oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine-leucovorin (FOLFOX); and group 4, comprising those who received adjuvant folinic acid-fluorouracil-irinotecan (FOLFIRI). Results: In both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs, as well as the 95% confidence intervals (Cis)) for mortality observed for groups 1, 2, and 4 relative to group 3 were 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82), 1.22 (1.05 to 1.43), and 2.97 (2.43 to 3.63), respectively. After a stratified subgroup analysis for high-risk stage II colon adenocarcinoma, we noted that the aHR (95% CI) for mortality for group 2 relative to group 3 was 0.52 (0.30 to 0.89). Conclusions: Adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone is the most optimal regimen for patients with high-risk stage II colon adenocarcinoma compared with the other adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Adjuvant FOLFOX can serve as an optimal regimen for patients with pathologic stage III colon adenocarcinoma, regardless of age, sex, or tumor location.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer: Current evidence and recommendations for clinical practice

While adjuvant chemotherapy is an established treatment for pathological stage II and especially stage III colon cancer, its role in the multimodal management of rectal cancer remains controversial. As a result, there is substantial variation in the use of this treatment in clinical practice. Even among centres and physicians who consider adjuvant chemotherapy as a standard treatment, notable heterogeneity exists with regard to patient selection criteria and chemotherapy regimens. The controversy around this topic is confirmed by the lack of full consensus among national and international clinical guidelines. While most of the clinical trials do not support the contention that adjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival outcomes if pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy is also given, these suffer from many limitations that preclude drawing definitive conclusions. Nevertheless, in the era of evidence-based medicine, physicians should be guided by the available data and refrain from extrapolating results of adjuvant colon cancer trials to inform treatment decisions for rectal cancer. Patients should be informed of the evidence gap, be given the opportunity to carefully discuss pros and cons of all the possible management options and be empowered in the decision making. In this article we review the available evidence on adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer and propose a risk-adapted decisional algorithm that largely relies on informed patient preferences.

Making sense of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer

Surgical resection is the only curative treatment for locoregional colon cancer. The goal of adjuvant chemotherapy is to eradicate micro-metastatic disease and improve survival. This has been most clearly demonstrated in stage III (node-positive) disease, whereas benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II disease remains controversial. In stage III colon cancer, 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy have been accepted as the standard for the last 15 years. The recent IDEA collaboration has challenged this in 2018; while overall was a negative non-inferiority study, pre-planned subset analyses do support that for patients with low-risk stage III disease, 3 months of XELOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin combination) is non-inferior to 6 months. In stage II colon cancer, where the potential benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy is small, the emergence of biomarkers has helped in decision-making. Tumors with deficient mismatch repair protein (dMMR) do not benefit from 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. For patients with high clinicopathological risk stage II disease with proficient mismatch repair proteins and good performance status, six months of adjuvant chemotherapy is still recommended. In the management of rectal cancers, where the risk of local recurrence is higher, chemoradiation (CRT) is often included as neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy in the management of stage II and III rectal cancer. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer has been extrapolated from adjuvant colon cancer studies with updated results from adjuvant rectal cancer studies demonstrating similar benefits. This review summarizes the current landscape of adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage II and III colorectal cancer.

MicroRNA-9-5p-CDX2 Axis: A Useful Prognostic Biomarker for Patients with Stage II/III Colorectal Cancer

A lack of caudal-type homeobox transcription factor 2 (CDX2) protein expression has been proposed as a prognostic biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the relationship between CDX2 levels and the survival of patients with stage II/III CRC along with the relationship between microRNAs (miRs) and CDX2 expression are unclear. Tissue samples were collected from patients with stage II/III CRC surgically treated at Kyoto University Hospital. CDX2 expression was semi-quantitatively evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). The prognostic impacts of CDX2 expression on overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were evaluated by multivariable statistical analysis. The expression of miRs regulating CDX2 expression and their prognostic impacts were analyzed using The Cancer Genome Atlas Program for CRC (TCGA-CRC). Eleven of 174 CRC tissues lacked CDX2 expression. The five-year OS and RFS rates of patients with CDX2-negative CRC were significantly lower than those of CDX2-positive patients. Multivariate analysis of clinicopathological features revealed that CDX2-negative status is an independent marker of poor prognosis in stage II/III CRC. miR-9-5p was shown to regulate CDX2 expression. TCGA-CRC analysis showed that high miR-9-5p expression was significantly associated with poor patient prognosis in stage II/III CRC. In conclusion, CDX2, the post-transcriptional target of microRNA-9-5p, is a useful prognostic biomarker in patients with stage II/III CRC.

Assessing Concordance With Watson for Oncology, a Cognitive Computing Decision Support System for Colon Cancer Treatment in Korea

PURPOSE

IBM Watson for Oncology (WFO) is a clinical decision-support computing system that provides oncologists with evidence-based treatment recommendations for a variety of cancer diagnoses. The evidence-based supported treatment recommendations are presented in three categories: Recommended, representing the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) preferred approach; For Consideration, evidence-based alternative treatments; and Not Recommended, alternative therapies that may be unacceptable. We examined the absolute concordance of treatment options with that of the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team of oncologists from Gachon University, Gil Medical Centre, Incheon, South Korea.

METHODS

We enrolled 656 patients with stage II, III, and IV colon cancer between 2009 and 2016. Cases were processed using WFO and, using retrospective clinical data, outputs were compared with the actual treatment the patient received. Absolute concordance was defined as an alignment of recommendation in the Recommended MSKCC preferred-approach category. Treatment recommendations that were represented in the For Consideration category were not the focus of this study.

RESULTS

The absolute concordance between the WFO-derived MSKCC preferred approach and Gil Medical Centre treatment recommendations was 48.9%. The percentage of cases found to be acceptable was 65.8% (432 of 656) and the stage-specific concordance rate was 32.5% for patients with stage II disease who had risk factors and 58.8% for patients with stage III disease. Patients 70 years of age and older had a concordance rate of only 20.2%, whereas younger patients had a concordance rate of 63.8% ( P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

The main reasons attributed to the low concordance rate were age, reimbursement plan, omitting chemotherapy after liver resection, and not recommending biologic agents (ie, cetuximab and bevacizumab).

Colorectal cancer

Several decades ago, colorectal cancer was infrequently diagnosed. Nowadays, it is the world's fourth most deadly cancer with almost 900 000 deaths annually. Besides an ageing population and dietary habits of high-income countries, unfavourable risk factors such as obesity, lack of physical exercise, and smoking increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Advancements in pathophysiological understanding have increased the array of treatment options for local and advanced disease leading to individual treatment plans. Treatments include endoscopic and surgical local excision, downstaging preoperative radiotherapy and systemic therapy, extensive surgery for locoregional and metastatic disease, local ablative therapies for metastases, and palliative chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. Although these new treatment options have doubled overall survival for advanced disease to 3 years, survival is still best for those with non-metastasised disease. As the disease only becomes symptomatic at an advanced stage, worldwide organised screening programmes are being implemented, which aim to increase early detection and reduce morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer.

Intraoperative Chemotherapy with a Novel Regimen Improved the Therapeutic Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer

Background: This study sought to evaluate the efficacy of a novel intraoperative chemotherapy (IOC) regimen that consists of hydroxycamptothecin, tumor necrosis factor (TNF), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and calcium folinate (CF) on the outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods: In total, 551 CRC patients who had undergone surgical resection were evaluated. Among these patients, 247 were treated with postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, and 193 were treated with intraoperative chemotherapy. Of the CRC patients who underwent chemotherapy, 52 were treated with both postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy and intraoperative chemotherapy. Patients' characteristics, including age, sex, stage, differentiation, lymph node metastasis, surgical-pathological staging, tumor location, tumor size, and relapse-free survival, were collected.

Results: IOC for CRC therapy was associated with a more favorable survival prognosis (HR, 0.30, 95%CI, 0.19-0.48, P<0.001) independent of other clinical covariates. CRC patients treated with IOC survived longer than patients who were not treated with IOC did during surgery (P<0.0001, Kaplan-Meier log rank). Meanwhile, a Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that individuals who received both IOC and POC survived longer than patients who received only POC: for stage II and stage III patients (P=0.0001, Kaplan-Meier log rank), stage II patients alone (P=0.02, Kaplan-Meier log rank), and stage III patients alone (P=0.046, Kaplan-Meier log rank).

Conclusions: The therapeutic effects of colorectal cancer by intraoperative chemotherapy with a novel regimen were enhanced, which improved the prognosis of patients with CRC.

Objectively measured physical activity during chemotherapy in colon cancer patients

PURPOSE

Although adjuvant chemotherapy can have an impact on physical activity (PA), PA level has not been studied in patients with stage II-III colon cancer. This study investigated PA levels during and between chemotherapy cycles.

METHODS

We objectively measured PA levels for 2 weeks during the 2nd and 11th chemotherapy cycles. In addition, self-reported PA levels were assessed before chemotherapy initiation, during 2nd, 6th, and 12th chemotherapy cycles. This study included 22 men and 33 women with stage II-III colon cancer patients (57 ± 9 years).

RESULTS

Before the initiation of chemotherapy, most cancer patients were minimally active. Compared with the 1st week of chemotherapy, moderate- and light-intensity PA levels significantly increased during the 2nd week of chemotherapy. Patients increased moderate- and light-intensity PA from 217.4 to 290.3 min per week and from 585.7 to 657.8 min per week, respectively (p < 0.01). PA levels did not show any difference between the 2nd and 12th cycles when objectively measured, or between baseline and 2nd, 6th, and 12th cycles when self-reported.

CONCLUSION

PA levels during chemotherapy cycles are initially low, and then increase towards the end of the cycle; however, PA levels do not change between chemotherapy cycles. Future work with broader and larger samples size is recommended.

Phase II study of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapOX) as adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (CORONA II)

Objective

This multicenter, single-arm phase II study (UMIN000008429) aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapOX) as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Methods

Patients with resectable clinical Stage II or III rectal cancer were enrolled to receive eight cycles of CapOX therapy (130 mg/m² oxaliplatin on day 1 and 2000 mg/m² oral capecitabine on days 1–14, every 3 weeks) after curative surgical resection. The primary endpoint was 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate, and secondary endpoints were 3-year overall survival (OS) rate, treatment compliance, and safety.

Results

A total of 40 patients (Stage II, 21; Stage III, 19) were enrolled between September 2012 and November 2015 from seven institutions. Thirty-nine patients (97%) received R0 resection, and 32 patients (84%) received postoperative CapOX therapy. The completion rate of all eight cycles of CapOX therapy was 66%. Relative dose intensities were 87% for oxaliplatin and 84% for capecitabine. At a median follow-up period of 46 months, disease recurrence was observed in nine patients, including three with local recurrence. Three-year RFS and OS rates were 75% (95% CI 57–86%) and 96% (95% CI 80–99%), respectively. Frequencies of Grade ≥ 3 hematological and non-hematologic adverse events were 19% and 38%, respectively.

Conclusion

CapOX therapy is feasible as adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Prognosis of microsatellite instability and/or mismatch repair deficiency stage III colon cancer patients after disease recurrence following adjuvant treatment: results of an ACCENT pooled analysis of seven studies

BACKGROUND

Microsatellite instable/deficient mismatch repair (MSI/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancers have been reported to have a poor prognosis. Frequent co-occurrence of MSI/dMMR and BRAFV600E complicates the association.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with resected stage III colon cancer (CC) from seven adjuvant studies with available data for disease recurrence and MMR and BRAFV600E status were analyzed. The primary end point was survival after recurrence (SAR). Associations of markers with SAR were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, gender, performance status, T stage, N stage, primary tumor location, grade, KRAS status, and timing of recurrence.

RESULTS

Among 2630 patients with cancer recurrence (1491 men [56.7%], mean age, 58.5 [19-85] years), multivariable analysis revealed that patients with MSI/dMMR tumors had significantly longer SAR than did patients with microsatellite stable/proficient MMR tumors (MSS/pMMR) (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.82; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.69-0.98; P = 0.029). This finding remained when looking at patients treated with standard oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy regimens only (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-1.00; P = 0.048). Same trends for SAR were observed when analyzing MSI/dMMR versus MSS/pMMR tumor subgroups lacking BRAFV600E (aHR, 0.84; P = 0.10) or those harboring BRAFV600E (aHR, 0.88; P = 0.43), without reaching statistical significance. Furthermore, SAR was significantly shorter in tumors with BRAFV600E versus those lacking this mutation (aHR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.73-2.46; P < 0.0001), even in the subgroup of MSI/dMMR tumors (aHR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.67-4.21; P < 0.0001). Other factors associated with a shorter SAR were as follows: older age, male gender, T4/N2, proximal primary tumor location, poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, and early recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In stage III CC patients recurring after adjuvant chemotherapy, and before the era of immunotherapy, the MSI/dMMR phenotype was associated with a better SAR compared with MSS/pMMR. BRAFV600E mutation was a poor prognostic factor for both MSI/dMMR and MSS/pMMR patients.

TRIAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS

NCT00079274, NCT00265811, NCT00004931, NCT00004931, NCT00026273, NCT00096278, NCT00112918.

Addition of Platinum Derivatives to Fluoropyrimidine-Based Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Stage II/III Rectal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend neoadjuvant therapy for patients with stage II or III rectal cancer. The addition of platinum derivatives to fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiotherapy has been frequently investigated, but their role in this setting remains controversial.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for randomized trials comparing chemoradiotherapy with or without platinum agents in stage II or III rectal cancer. Main outcome parameters were overall and disease-free survival, additional outcomes included pathological complete response, isolated local recurrence, distant recurrence, toxicity, and perioperative morbidity. Time-to-event data were pooled as hazard ratios (HRs) by the inverse variance method and binary outcomes as odds ratios (ORs) by the Peto method with their respective 95% confidence interval (CI). All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Ten randomized controlled trials with data on 5599 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Platinum derivatives did not statistically significantly improve overall survival (HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.82 to 1.05, P = .23), disease-free survival (HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.83 to 1.01, P = .07), or local recurrence (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.66 to 1.05, P = .12). However, it led to a statistically significant increase of pathological complete response (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.55, P = .002) and a statistically significant reduction of distant recurrence (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.92, P = .004). Benefits were accompanied by higher rates of grade 3 or 4 toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensified neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with the addition of platinum derivatives cannot be recommended routinely because it did not improve overall or disease-free survival and was associated with increased toxicity. It needs to be elucidated whether the benefits in distant recurrence and pathological complete response may be advantageous for selected high-risk patients.

Estimating adjuvant treatment effects in Stage II colon cancer: Comparing the synthesis of randomized clinical trial data to real-world data

There is an ongoing discussion regarding the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in Stage II colon cancer. We therefore estimated adjuvant treatment effect in Stage II colon cancer using pooled disease‐free survival (DFS) data from randomized clinical trials (RCT approach) and compared this to real‐world data (RWD approach) estimates. First, we estimated the treatment effect in RCTs by (i) searching relevant trials reporting DFS data, (ii) generating patient‐level data from reported DFS data and (iii) estimating treatment effect in the patient‐level data. Second, the treatment effect was estimated in an observational cohort of 1,947 patients provided by the Netherlands Cancer Registry using three propensity score methods; matching, weighting and stratification. In the RCT approach, patient‐level data of 4,489 patients (events: 853) were generated from seven trials which compared two of the following treatment arms: control, 5FU/LV or FOLFOX. A Cox model was used to estimate a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.77 (0.43;1.10) for 5FU/LV vs. control and 0.93 (0.72;1.15) for FOLFOX vs. 5FU/LV. In the RWD approach, HRs for any adjuvant treatment vs. control were 0.95 (0.50;1.80), 0.88 (0.24;3.21) and 1.05 (0.04;2.06) using matching, weighting and stratification, respectively. There was no significant difference with the estimates from the RCT approach (interaction test, p > 0.10). The RCT data suggest a clinically relevant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of DFS, but the estimate did not reach statistical significance. Stratified analyses are required to evaluate whether treatment effect differs in specific subgroups.

What's new?

There is an ongoing discussion regarding the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer. This study presents the most recent pooled estimate based on available RCT data since 1999, resulting in a pooled hazard ratio of 0.77 (95% CI 0.43;1.10) for fluoropyrimidine compared to no treatment. Even though no significant treatment effect was found, neither in the RCT approach nor in the real‐world data approach, the RCT data suggest a clinically‐relevant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. To improve guidance in treatment decisions, larger sample sizes, pooling of true patient‐level data with covariate information, and subgroup specific analyses are required.

De-escalating chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer?

BACKGROUND

Although adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for patients with stage II colon cancer characterized by poor prognostic features, its pros and cons remain a controversial issue. We aim to evaluate the real effectiveness of chemotherapy on stage II colon cancer as well as select suitable patients.

METHODS

Patients during 1988-2013 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The competing risk regression model and propensity score matching method were used to evaluate colon-cancer-specific death (CCSD) and non-CCSD. Also, a competing-risk nomogram was constructed to identify risk of patients. Risk score (RS) was calculated according to nomogram.

RESULTS

A total of 58,133 patients were included, 25.66% received chemotherapy, and 74.34% were without chemotherapy. In total, 19.95% and 25.78% of patients died of CCSD and non-CCSD, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that receiving chemotherapy appears to be associated with more CCSD and less non-CCSD (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.18-1.28; HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.43-0.47, respectively), even after adjustment for covariates and propensity score weighting. A competing-risk nomogram was established; the model was relatively good with a C-index of 0.661. Based on the RS, risk stage could only predict prognosis but failed to predict the benefit from chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The value of chemotherapy is much less than we thought. It is time to de-escalate chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer. CCSD, rather than overall survival, should be considered as an appropriate primary end point for future trials in stage II colon cancer.

U3-1402, a Novel HER3-Targeting Antibody-Drug Conjugate, for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

HER3 is overexpressed in several cancers, including colorectal cancer. Although therapies with anti-HER3 antibodies have been investigated, significant clinical benefits have not been reported. U3-1402 is a novel HER3-antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) composed of the HER3 antibody patritumab and a novel topoisomerase I inhibitor, DX-8951 derivative (DXd). The sensitivity of DXd was evaluated by a growth inhibition assay. The antitumor activity of U3-1402 was evaluated in a murine xenograft model in which its effects on cells, with a range of HER3 expression levels, were compared with those of patritumab alone, irinotecan, control-ADC, and saline. In the growth inhibition assay, all colorectal cancer cell lines were sensitive to DXd. In the tumor xenograft model, significant tumor regression with U3-1402 was observed both in the DiFi cell line (high HER3 expression; KRAS wild type) and in SW620 (high HER3 expression; KRAS mutation), but no treatment effect was observed in Colo320DM (low HER3 expression). Notably, SW620 tumor growth was significantly suppressed with U3-1402 compared with the saline-treated group (P < 0.001) and showed greater activity compared with the irinotecan group. By contrast, patritumab alone, control-ADC, and saline did not significantly differ in tumor growth inhibition. The antitumor activity of U3-1402 was dependent on HER3 expression level, but not on KRAS mutation status. These results support further investigation of development strategies for U3-1402 in patients with HER3-expressing colorectal cancer.

Association between Preoperative Pelvic Irradiation and Toxicity of Subsequent Chemotherapy in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials have shown a lower efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy in rectal cancer patients having received preoperative radiotherapy than in nonirradiated colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We hypothesized that preoperative radio(chemo)therapy impairs the relative dose intensity (RDI) of further chemotherapy because of long-term radiation damage. This retrospective study aimed to test this hypothesis.

METHODS

The analysis was conducted on 220 consecutive patients with CRC who received FOLFOX-4 postoperatively or because of cancer relapse. Of these, 41 patients with rectal cancer had preoperatively received radio(chemo)therapy (study group) and the remaining 179 with CRC had not (control group). The RDI of oxaliplatin at 8 and 16 weeks was calculated.

RESULTS

The median RDI of oxaliplatin at 8 weeks was 95.91% in the study group and 96.15% in the control group (p = 0.79). The corresponding percentages at 16 weeks were 87.6 and 86.5%, respectively (p = 0.55). It was found that within 0-8 weeks, 26.9% of the patients in the study group and 26.3% in the control group had grade 3+ toxicity, hypersensitivity reactions, or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration (p = 0.94). The corresponding percentages for 0-16 weeks were 44.8 and 43.9%, respectively (p = 0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no association between preoperative radio(chemo)therapy and the RDI of FOLFOX-4. We failed to explain the inferior efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who had preoperatively received irradiation compared to those with CRC who had not.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in resected colon cancer: When, how and how long?

The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly established in the adjuvant setting for node-positive colon cancer. A number of trials in the adjuvant setting have analyzed the efficacy of multiple-agent combinations, including irinotecan, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab and cetuximab. Only oxaliplatin added to fluorouracil/capecitabine has been shown to be superior beyond a fluropyrimidine alone in the adjuvant setting. As such, standard treatment options include fluorouracil (FU) or capecitabine with or without oxaliplatin. However, oxaliplatin is associated with cumulative dose-dependent neurotoxicity, characterized by distal or perioral paresthesias or dysesthesias; for this reason, in this review we discuss the results of the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) trial. The IDEA trail is the largest prospective clinical trial ever conducted in colorectal cancer, wherein patients were treated with either 3 months or 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy. In the era of cancer gene expression-based subtyping, the Colorectal Cancer Subtyping Consortium has proposed a four-subgroup molecular classification system for colorectal cancer, consisting of CMS1 (immune), CMS2 (canonical), CMS3 (metabolic) and CMS4 (mesenchymal). In this review, we present and analyze the available data on efficacy and toxicity of the combination regimen approved for treatment of resected colon cancer, and discuss the questions of when, how and how long we need to treat such patients.

Predicting Life Expectancy for Older Adults with Cancer in Clinical Practice: Implications for Shared Decision-making

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The calculation of noncancer-specific life expectancy can guide shared decision-making and avoid over- and undertreatment in older adults with cancer. Several factors determine life expectancy, including socio-demographic background, comorbidities, physical performance, and geriatric assessment variables. We present an overview of existing tools to estimate life expectancy, as well as practical examples of how to take into account the patient's noncancer-specific life expectancy when discussing screening decisions, initiation of treatment, and end-of-life care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Life expectancy prognostication has been recently recommended by international societies as part of the initial assessment of all older adults with cancer. Additionally, online resources have been created in order to make life expectancy calculation tools accessible for clinicians. Understanding available methods to estimate life expectancy, as well as how to utilize them, is a fundamental part of geriatric oncology that should be integrated into everyday clinical practice.

Clinical Implications of Mismatch Repair Status in Patients With High-risk Stage II Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

This study evaluated the clinical significance of the mismatch repair (MMR) status and prognostic factors in patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer (CC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 237 patients diagnosed with high-risk stage II CC who had test results for MMR status.

RESULTS

Among the 237 patients, 76 (32.1%) were identified as having a microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) status. No significant differences were identified in disease-free or overall survival according to the MMR status. Moreover, no association was found between the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival outcomes of the MSI-H group. In a multivariate survival analysis, the primary tumor location (right-sided versus left-sided, hazard ratio(HR)=0.172, p=0.003) and T-stage (HR=4.764, p=0.005) were identified as independent prognostic factors for disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

The present study found that the MMR status was neither prognostic nor predictive in patients with high-risk stage II CC.

Long-term outcome and prognostic factors for patients with para-aortic lymph node dissection in left-sided colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Para-aortic lymph node (PALN) metastasis of colorectal cancer is rare, and the treatment strategy for PALN metastasis (PALNM) is not established in contrast to liver or lung metastases. We sought to evaluate the survival outcomes and prognostic factors among patients undergoing surgery combined with extended lymphadenectomy for PALNM from left-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

From 1992 to 2012, 322 patients who underwent PALN dissection (PALND) synchronously with primary resection, among 1819 left-sided colorectal surgical cases, were retrospectively examined. We investigated the overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors for patients with PALNM.

RESULTS

Of the 322 patients, 62 (19.3%) were histologically confirmed to have PALNM. The 5-year OS in patients with and without PALNM was 19.5% and 67.0% (p < 0.001), respectively. Among patients with PALNM, on the multivariable analysis, the positive resection margin (hazard ratio (HR) 3.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85-7.06), undifferentiated histological type ((por/muc/sig), HR 4.51; 95% CI, 2.22-9.19), ≥ 4 PALNMs (HR 3.34; 95% CI 1.53-7.31), and preoperative CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL (HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.11-4.27) were significant prognostic factors. Among R0 resected cases, the 5-year OS of the 17 cases with ≤ 3 PALNM and well/moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma was 54.2%, which was comparable to that of patients undergoing PALND and diagnosed with stage IIIC (49.6%).

CONCLUSION

Patients with PALNM of colorectal cancer had a poor prognosis. However, curative resection, ≤ 3 PALNM, and well/moderately differentiated histology type were associated with the long-term survival.