Longitudinal quality of life and quality adjusted survival in a randomised controlled trial comparing six months of bolus fluorouracil/leucovorin vs. twelve weeks of protracted venous infusion fluorouracil as adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer

Precision Medicine Versus Population Medicine in Colon Cancer: From Prospects of Prevention, Adjuvant Chemotherapy, and Surveillance

With the advances of technologic revolution that provides new insights into human biology, genetics and cancer, as well as advantages of big data which amasses large amounts of information for us to approach cancer treatment and prevention, we are facing challenges of organically combining data from studies based on general population and information from individual testing and setting out precisional recommendations in cancer diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. We are obligated to accelerate the adaptation of new scientific discoveries into effective treatments and prevention for cancer. In this review, we introduce our opinions on bringing knowledge of precision and population medicine together to guide our clinical practice from the prospects of colorectal cancer prevention, stage III colon cancer adjuvant therapy, and postsurgery surveillance.

Decision-Making Strategy for Rectal Cancer Management Using Radiation Therapy for Elderly or Comorbid Patients

Rectal cancer predominantly affects patients older than 70 years, with peak incidence at age 80 to 85 years. However, the standard treatment paradigm for rectal cancer oftentimes cannot be feasibly applied to these patients owing to frailty or comorbid conditions. There are currently little information and no treatment guidelines to help direct therapy for patients who are elderly and/or have significant comorbidities, because most are not included or specifically studied in clinical trials. More recently various alternative treatment options have been brought to light that may potentially be utilized in this group of patients. This critical review examines the available literature on alternative therapies for rectal cancer and proposes a treatment algorithm to help guide clinicians in treatment decision making for elderly and comorbid patients.

'Trial Exegesis': Methods for Synthesizing Clinical and Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Data in Trials to Inform Clinical Practice. A Systematic Review

Purpose

The CONSORT extension for patient reported outcomes (PROs) aims to improve reporting, but guidance on the optimal integration with clinical data is lacking. This study examines in detail the reporting of PROs and clinical data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in gastro-intestinal cancer to inform design and reporting of combined PRO and clinical data from trials to improve the ‘take home’ message for clinicians to use in practice.

Materials and Methods

The case study was undertaken in gastro-intestinal cancer trials. Well-conducted RCTs reporting PROs with validated instruments were identified and categorized into those combining PRO and clinical data in a single paper, or those separating data into linked primary and supplemental papers. Qualitative methods were developed to examine reporting of the critical interpretation of the trial results (trial exegesis) in the papers in relation of the PRO and clinical outcomes and applied to each publication category. Results were used to inform recommendations for practice.

Results

From 1917 screened abstracts, 49 high quality RCTs were identified reported in 36 combined and 15 linked primary and supplemental papers. In-depth analysis of manuscript text identified three categories for understanding trial exegesis: where authors reported a “detailed”, “general”, or absent PRO rationale and integrated interpretation of clinical and PRO results. A total of 11 (30%) and 6 (16%) combined papers reported “detailed” PRO rationale and integrated interpretation of results although only 2 (14%) and 1 (7%) primary papers achieved the same standard respectively. Supplemental papers provide better information with 11 (73%) and 3 (20%) achieving “detailed” rationale and integrated interpretation of results. Supplemental papers, however, were published a median of 20 months after the primary RCT data in lower impact factor journals (median 16.8 versus 5.2).

Conclusion

It is recommended that single papers, with detailed PRO rationale and integrated PRO and clinical data are published to optimize trial exegesis. Further work to examine whether this improves the use of PRO data to inform practice is needed.

Approach to the older patient with stage II/III colorectal cancer: who should get curative-intent therapy?

The majority of new colorectal cancer diagnoses occur in adults 65 and older a rapidly growing segment of the U.S. population. Older adults are a markedly heterogeneous group, and although recent clinical trials in locally advanced colorectal cancer have incorporated limited numbers of older patients, the data can not be generalized to most older patients. In particular, patients who are not "fit"-those with poor functional reserve, major comorbidities, or who otherwise meet criteria for frailty or "prefrailty"-are poorly represented in published trials. Population-based data demonstrate that older adults are much less likely to be treated in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant settings for stage II/III colorectal cancer, but it is unclear what the basis should be for withholding potentially curative therapy. Age and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) are frequently used to determine eligibility for treatment, but data increasingly suggest these are inadequate; the emerging definition of a spectrum of "fit" to "frail" older patients may provide additional guidance. Available data suggest that fit older patients may benefit as much from curative-intent therapy as younger patients. For frail or vulnerable (prefrail) patients, on the other hand, the benefit must be carefully weighed against the risk of toxicity and competing risks from their comorbidities. Life expectancy and patient preferences should always be elucidated. Geriatrician comanagement may be helpful in determining priorities, providing a comprehensive assessment, and modifying competing risk factors. Even many vulnerable or frail patients can successfully complete (and derive benefit from) carefully considered treatment regimens.

Irinotecan chemotherapy combined with fluoropyrimidines versus irinotecan alone for overall survival and progression-free survival in patients with advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy is the treatment of choice in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) where surgical resection of metastases is not an option. Both irinotecan (IRI) and fluoropyrimidines are often included in first- or second- line chemotherapy treatment regimens in such patients. However, it is not clear whether combining these agents is superior to irinotecan alone.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of two chemotherapeutic regimens, irinotecan monotherapy or irinotecan in combination with fluoropyrimidines, for patients with advanced CRC when administered in the first or second-line settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials: Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (January 13, 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)(The Cochrane Library Issue 12, 2016), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to January 13, 2016), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to January 13, 2016), registers of controlled trials in progress, references cited in relevant publications and conference proceedings in related fields (BioMed Central and Medscape's Conference). The key authors or investigators of all eligible studies, and professionals in the field were contacted when necessary. The search from January 2016 identified one eligible study, an ongoing trial currently presented as an abstract, to be considered in an update of this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy and safety of IRI chemotherapy combined with fluoropyrimidine compared with IRI alone for the treatment of patients with advanced CRC, regardless of treatment line settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study eligibility and methodological quality were assessed independently by the two authors, and any disagreement was solved by a third author. The data collected from the studies were reviewed qualitatively and quantitatively using the Cochrane Collaboration statistical software RevMan 5.3.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies were included in this review with a total of 1,726 patients. The top-up search resulted in an additional ongoing trial, the results of which have not been incorporated in this review. Among five included studies, no reduction in all-cause mortality was observed in the combination arm, with a summary hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.81-1.02). Longer progression-free survival was observed in those treated with the combination chemotherapy (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53-0.87), however, this result may have been driven by findings from the single first-line treatment setting study.The quality of evidence for overall survival was low and for progression-free survival was moderate, mainly due to study limitation from the lack of information on randomisation methods and allocation concealment.There were higher risks of toxicity outcomes grade 3 or 4 diarrhoea and grade 1 or 2 alopecia, and a lower risk of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in controls compared to the invervention group. Evidence for toxicity has been assessed to be low to moderate quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no overall survival benefit of the irinotecan and fluoropyrimidine treatment over irinotecan alone, thus both regimens remain reasonable options in treating patients with advanced or metastatic CRC. Given the low and moderate quality of the evidence, future studies with sufficient numbers of patients in each treatment arms are needed to clarify the benefit observed in progression-free survival with combination irinotecan and fluoropyrimidines.

Synthesis and summary of patient-reported outcome measures to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery

AIM

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PROMs) are standard measures in the assessment of colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment, but the range and complexity of available PROMs may be hindering the synthesis of evidence. This systematic review aimed to: (i) summarize PROMs in studies of CRC surgery and (ii) categorize PRO content to inform the future development of an agreed minimum 'core' outcome set to be measured in all trials.

METHOD

All PROMs were identified from a systematic review of prospective CRC surgical studies. The type and frequency of PROMs in each study were summarized, and the number of items documented. All items were extracted and independently categorized by content by two researchers into 'health domains', and discrepancies were discussed with a patient and expert. Domain popularity and the distribution of items were summarized.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight different PROMs were identified from the 104 included studies. There were 23 generic, four cancer-specific, 11 disease-specific and 16 symptom-specific questionnaires, and three ad hoc measures. The most frequently used PROM was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (50 studies), and most PROMs (n = 40, 69%) were used in only one study. Detailed examination of the 50 available measures identified 917 items, which were categorized into 51 domains. The domains comprising the most items were 'anxiety' (n = 85, 9.2%), 'fatigue' (n = 67, 7.3%) and 'physical function' (n = 63, 6.9%). No domains were included in all PROMs.

CONCLUSION

There is major heterogeneity of PRO measurement and a wide variation in content assessed in the PROMs available for CRC. A core outcome set will improve PRO outcome measurement and reporting in CRC trials.

Postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy: A meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing surgery ± a fluoropyrimidine and surgery + a fluoropyrimidine ± oxaliplatin

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the role of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who have received preoperative radio(chemo)therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed of trials that used preoperative radio(chemo)therapy and randomized patients either between postoperative chemotherapy and observation or between a fluoropyrimidine only (FU-only) and a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin (FU-OXA) as postoperative chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Five randomized studies compared postoperative chemotherapy with observation in a total of 2398 patients. None of these trials demonstrated a statistically significant benefit of chemotherapy for OS and DFS. The pooled differences in OS and DFS did not differ statistically significantly between the chemotherapy group and the observation group. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.95 (CI: 0.82-1.10), P = 0.49 and 0.92 (CI: 0.80-1.04), P = 0.19, respectively. In the subgroup of trials in which randomization was performed after surgery (n = 753), a statistically significant positive pooled chemotherapy effect was observed for DFS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00, P = 0.047), but not for OS (P = 0.39). Four randomized trials compared adjuvant FU-OXA with adjuvant FU-only in 2710 patients. In two trials, the difference in DFS between groups was statistically significant in favour of FU-OXA, and in the other two trials, the difference was not significant. The pooled difference in DFS between the FU-OXA group and the FU-only group was not statistically significant: HR = 0.84 (CI: 0.66-1.06), P = 0.15.

CONCLUSION

The use of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy is not based on strong scientific evidence.

Quality of life, immunomodulation and safety of adjuvant mistletoe treatment in patients with gastric carcinoma - a randomized, controlled pilot study

Background

Mistletoe (Viscum album L.) extracts are widely used in complementary cancer therapy. Aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of a standardized mistletoe extract (abnobaVISCUM® Quercus, aVQ) in patients with gastric cancer.

Patients and Methods

32 operated gastric cancer patients (stage Ib or II) who were waiting for oral chemotherapy with the 5-FU prodrug doxifluridine were randomized 1:1 to receive additional therapy with aVQ or no additional therapy. aVQ was injected subcutaneously three times per week from postoperative day 7 to week 24 in increasing doses. EORTC QLQ-C30 and -STO22 Quality of Life questionnaire, differential blood count, liver function tests, various cytokine levels (tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, interleukin (IL)-2), CD 16⁺/CD56⁺ and CD 19⁺ lymphocytes were analyzed at baseline and 8, 16 and 24 weeks later.

Results

Global health status (p <0.01), leukocyte- and eosinophil counts (p ≤0.01) increased significantly in the treatment group compared to the control group. Diarrhea was less frequently reported (7% vs. 50%, p=0.014) in the intervention group. There was no significant treatment effect on levels of TNF-alpha, IL-2, CD16⁺/CD56⁺ and CD 19⁺ lymphocytes and liver function tests measured by ANOVA.

Conclusion

Additional treatment with aVQ is safe and was associated with improved QoL of gastric cancer patients. ClinicalTrials.Gov Registration number NCT01401075.

Lung cancer: challenges and solutions for supportive care intervention research

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death. It is associated with a high level of morbidity, particularly fatigue, pain, breathlessness, and coughing. These symptoms can have a substantial impact on psychosocial functioning. It is critical to have effective interventions demonstrated to improve quality of life particularly for those with advanced disease. However there is a paucity of high quality intervention research to guide practice in this area. This article discusses the challenges in conducting supportive care research in this group, including the patient's level of literacy in English, poor performance status, rapidly fluctuating health status, and familial or professional "gate-keeping." Many of these challenges can be overcome by broadening eligibility criteria, permitting some flexibility in relation to recruitment and data collection procedures, working closely with the treatment team, involving the patient's family, minimizing practical difficulties associated with intervention delivery, and reducing study burden in other ways, such as limiting the amount of data collected from the patient and shortening follow-up time intervals. We explore these potential solutions drawing on the experience of conducting a randomized controlled trial of a support intervention for people with lung cancer and their family.

Nonpharmacologic strategies for managing common chemotherapy adverse effects: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Adverse effects of chemotherapy can be severe and can have a significant impact on a person's quality of life. With chemotherapy treatment increasingly administered in the ambulatory setting, there is a need for patients to be informed about effective self-care strategies to manage treatment adverse effects. Advice for patients needs to be based on evidence. This systematic review provides an overview of the intervention research in this area as well as an effectiveness review of nonpharmacologic (self-care) strategies evaluated in high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

An extensive literature search was conducted to identify RCTs relating to self-care strategies for reducing nausea/vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, fatigue, hair loss, or mucositis. Relevant studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1980 and August 2007 were included. Study characteristics, results and methodologic quality were examined. High-quality RCTs were further analyzed to establish the effectiveness of specific self-care strategies.

RESULTS

The search identified 77 RCTs. Findings from RCTs of reasonable quality provide limited support for cognitive distraction, exercise, hypnosis, relaxation, and systematic desensitization to reduce nausea and vomiting, psycho-education for fatigue, and scalp cooling to reduce hair loss.

CONCLUSION

Although some strategies seem promising, the quality of the RCTs was generally quite low, making it difficult to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of self-care strategies. Future studies require better design and reporting of methodologic issues to establish evidence-based self-care recommendations for people receiving chemotherapy.

A systematic review of the use of quality of life measures in colorectal cancer research with attention to outcomes in elderly patients

PURPOSE

Quality of life (QOL) measures are critical to the evaluation of new cancer treatments, particularly for elderly patients. Our intent was to assess patterns of use of QOL endpoints in colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment research and to summarize current knowledge about how CRC treatment affects elderly patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched MEDLINE for English-language, human trials published from 1995 to 2005 that met the following criteria: reported on patients with CRC, were not surgery-only cohorts, and included a QOL or functional endpoints. Trials specifically reporting data on elderly patients were reviewed in depth and summarized.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-one eligible studies and 10 trials with elderly-specific data were found. The median number of trials published annually increased from 5 (range, 4-8 trials) between 1995 and 1999 to 14.5 (range, 11-22 trials) between 2000 and 2005. Chemotherapy was the most commonly studied treatment (55%), and metastatic CRC (55%) was the most commonly studied population. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer C30, with or without C38, was the most frequently used instrument (49%). Studies reporting on elderly patients showed that many patients experience a decline in physical function immediately after surgery and have increased need for supportive services. Little information is available on the effect of chemotherapy in elderly patients. Use of QOL and functional measures in treatment-related CRC research has increased; however, it continues to be hampered by a lack of dissemination and methodologic problems.

CONCLUSION

Missing data from patient attrition, limitations of assessment methods, and a small number of patients treated with chemotherapy in the trials reporting on elderly patients seriously limit our ability to draw conclusions from this survey about how treatment affects QOL or function in CRC.

Toxicity profile and efficacy of oral capecitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for Chinese patients with Stage III colon cancer

PURPOSE

The Xeloda in Adjuvant Cancer Therapy trial, conducted in a white population of patients, established capecitabine (Xeloda) as adjuvant chemotherapy for Stage III colon cancer. Given the ethnical difference in toxicity of adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer, this study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjuvant capecitabine in Chinese patients with colon cancer.

METHODS

Chinese patients with curatively resected Stage III colon adenocarcinoma, who received adjuvant capecitabine, were entered into a prospective database. Oral capecitabine was given at 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily, Days 1 to 14, every 21 days, for 8 cycles. Toxicities, laboratory abnormalities, and survival outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were entered into the database between August 2004 and October 2005. The median age was 63.9 years with a male-to-female ratio of 1.15:1. With a median follow-up duration of 20.9 months, 14 patients relapsed and 3 patients died. Disease-free and overall survival at two years was 69 and 97 percent, respectively. Grade 3 toxicities occurred as follows: stomatitis (1.7 percent), diarrhea (0 percent), hand-foot syndrome (41.4 percent), leucopenia (1.7 percent), neutropenia (3.4 percent), and hyperbilirubinemia (1.7 percent). No Grade 4 or 5 toxicity was noted. Compared with the Xeloda in the Adjuvant Cancer Therapy trial, a much higher incidence of serious hand-foot syndrome and a lower rate of severe diarrhea were found in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

A different toxicity profile of adjuvant capecitabine was noted in this study on Chinese patients with colon cancer compared with that reported in the Xeloda in Adjuvant Cancer Therapy trial, whereas the efficacy outcomes were comparable.

Health-related quality-of-life assessment in gastrointestinal cancer: are results relevant for clinical practice?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Health-related quality-of-life studies are now recognized as critical to understand the burden of disease and treatments on patients' well being. Significant advances have been recently achieved in gastrointestinal cancers, including the development and clinical use of new robust quality-of-life instruments. We review recent literature to evaluate whether quality-of-life assessment contributes to optimal patient information and helps treatment choices.

RECENT FINDINGS

Treatments of gastrointestinal cancers have changed in the last few years with increasing use of multimodal therapies and advances in surgical techniques, especially for low-lying rectal cancers. Concurrent to the development of sphincter-saving procedures, however, the long-term consequences of a permanent stoma on quality of life have been debated. Results of new palliative treatments should also be considered looking at preservation or improvement of quality of life and not only prolongation of life.

SUMMARY

Gastrointestinal malignancies impact strongly on patient quality of life due to the aggressiveness of the treatments. Short-term negative effects of surgery and specific deficits in survivors were recently described in gastrointestinal cancers. Baseline quality-of-life data predict length of survival in hepatocarcinoma and metastatic colorectal cancer. Generally, quality-of-life results help to fully inform the patients of the advantages or disadvantages of therapeutic options, including adjuvant and palliative treatments.

New approaches to the adjuvant therapy of colon cancer

Analysis of data from patients treated outside clinical trials suggests that adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer provides less than a 3% absolute improvement in survival at 5 years. This is remarkably close to the small degree of benefit suggested by controlled studies. An overview of the data suggests that surgery alone cures approximately 75% of stage II patients. Between 20% and 25% of patients experience disease recurrence despite surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, whereas adjuvant chemotherapy cures between 1% and 6%. In stage III patients, the benefit of adjuvant therapy is greater overall. The extent of benefit relates to tumor grade, invasion, and nodal involvement. Incorporation of molecular markers in the design of current trials may enable us to refine our identification of patients at highest risk of recurrence and hence those standing to gain most from adjuvant therapy.

Adjuvant therapy in colon cancer--what, when and how?

Bolus fluorouracil and leucovorin has been accepted as the standard adjuvant therapy in stage III colon cancer for many years. New drugs such as irinotecan, oxaliplatin and oral fluoropyrimidines have all completed phase III randomised evaluation in colon cancer. Several of these studies have been reported in the last 24 months. Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is now emerging as the new standard of care in adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer. The advent of monoclonal antibodies such as cetuximab and bevacizumab has further broadened the treatment horizon for colorectal cancer and they are the focus of the on-going randomised studies in adjuvant therapy of colon cancer. In stage II colon cancer, adjuvant treatment remains controversial and is not routinely recommended in all medically fit patients by the current American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, except several subsets including poorly differentiated histology, T4 lesions, bowel perforation presentation and inadequately sampled lymph nodes (<13). This review focuses on the relative merits of these agents, their safety, duration of treatment, timing of commencing treatment after surgery and the role of adjuvant therapy in stage II colon cancer, thereby assisting clinicians in deciding the optimal adjuvant treatment for patients in routine clinical practice.