Phase II evaluation of 5-fluourouracil plus folinic acid and alpha 2b-interferon in metastatic colorectal cancer

Continuous sensing of IFNα by hepatic endothelial cells shapes a vascular antimetastatic barrier

Hepatic metastases are a poor prognostic factor of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) and new strategies to reduce the risk of liver CRC colonization are highly needed. Herein, we used mouse models of hepatic metastatization to demonstrate that the continuous infusion of therapeutic doses of interferon-alpha (IFNα) controls CRC invasion by acting on hepatic endothelial cells (HECs). Mechanistically, IFNα promoted the development of a vascular antimetastatic niche characterized by liver sinusoidal endothelial cells (LSECs) defenestration extracellular matrix and glycocalyx deposition, thus strengthening the liver vascular barrier impairing CRC trans-sinusoidal migration, without requiring a direct action on tumor cells, hepatic stellate cells, hepatocytes, or liver dendritic cells (DCs), Kupffer cells (KCs) and liver capsular macrophages (LCMs). Moreover, IFNα endowed LSECs with efficient cross-priming potential that, along with the early intravascular tumor burden reduction, supported the generation of antitumor CD8+ T cells and ultimately led to the establishment of a protective long-term memory T cell response. These findings provide a rationale for the use of continuous IFNα therapy in perioperative settings to reduce CRC metastatic spreading to the liver.

The treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with interferon-alpha: a review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the western world. The majority of patients who develop this tumour will ultimately die from metastatic disease. The fluorinated pyrimidine 5 fluorouracil (5-FU) is at present the most active drug available for first-line therapy of this disease. Randomised studies have consistently demonstrated a survival advantage from early treatment with 5-FU in advanced CRC, which can be achieved without deterioration in quality of life. Despite over 30 years of use, the optimal 5-FU schedule remains controversial with a wide range of response rates reported in the literature. Single agent activity is in the order of 10-11%. In an attempt to improve response rates, modulation of 5-FU with a variety of agents has been intensively investigated. This article examines the role of interferon-alpha in the treatment of advanced CRC.

Efficacy of 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Recently published population-based investigations showed elderly patients to be underrepresented in clinical trials and less often treated according to the standard therapy. Although there is evidence that elderly patients benefit from adjuvant (radio-) chemotherapy to the same extent as younger patients, no large series describes the influence of age on efficacy of chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective analysis using source data of 3825 patients who received 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-containing treatment in 22 European trials and identified 629 patients with an age of > or = 70 years.

RESULTS

We found an equal overall survival in elderly patients [10.8 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.7-11.8] and in younger patients (11.3 months, 95% CI 10.9-11.7; P = 0.31). Response rate did not differ between age groups > or = 70 and <70 years (23.9% and 21.1%; respectively; P = 0.14). Progression-free survival was marginally prolonged in elderly patients (5.5 months, 95% CI 5.2-5.8; compared with 5.3 months, 95% CI 5.1-5.5; P = 0.01). In both age groups, infusional 5-FU resulted in significantly increased response rates, overall survival and progression-free survival compared with bolus 5-FU.

CONCLUSIONS

'Fit' elderly patients benefit at least to the same extent from palliative chemotherapy with 5-FU as younger patients. Infusional 5-FU was shown to be more effective than bolus 5-FU in both age groups. Therefore, standardized palliative chemotherapy should generally be offered to elderly patients and they should not be excluded from clinical trials.

Potential of interferon-alpha in solid tumours: part 2

The second part of this review examines the use of recombinant interferon-alpha (rIFNalpha) in the following solid tumours: superficial bladder cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma, head and neck cancer, gastrointestinal cancers, lung cancer, mesothelioma and ovarian, breast and cervical malignancies. In superficial bladder cancer, intravesical rIFNalpha has a promising role as second-line therapy in patients resistant or intolerant to intravesical bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG). In HIV-associated Kaposi's sarcoma, rIFNalpha is active as monotherapy and in combination with antiretroviral agents, especially in patients with CD4 counts >200/mm(3), no prior opportunistic infections and nonvisceral disease. rIFNalpha has shown encouraging results when used in combination with retinoids in the chemoprevention of head and neck squamous cell cancers. It is effective in the chemoprevention of hepatocellular cancer in hepatitis C-seropositive patients. In neuroendocrine tumours, including carcinoid tumour, low-dosage (</=3 MU) or intermediate-dosage (5 to 10 MU) rIFNalpha is indicated as second-line treatment, either with octreotide or alone in patients resistant to somatostatin analogues. Intracavitary IFNalpha may be useful in malignant pleural effusions from mesothelioma. Similarly, intraperitoneal IFNalpha may have a role in the treatment of minimal residual disease in ovarian cancer. In breast cancer, the only possible role for IFNalpha appears to be intralesional administration for resistant disease. IFNalpha may have a role as a radiosensitising agent for the treatment of cervical cancer; however, this requires confirmation in randomised trials. On the basis of current evidence, the routine use of rIFNalpha is not recommended in the therapy of head and neck squamous cell cancers, upper gastrointestinal tract, colorectal and lung cancers, or mesothelioma. Pegylated IFNalpha (peginterferon-alpha) is an exciting development that offers theoretical advantages of increased efficacy, reduced toxicity and improved compliance. Further data from randomised studies in solid tumours are needed where rIFNalpha has activity, such as neuroendocrine tumours, minimal residual disease in ovarian cancer, and cervical cancer. A better understanding of the biological mechanisms that determine response to rIFNalpha is needed. Studies of IFNalpha-stimulated gene expression, which are now feasible, should help to identify molecular predictors of response and allow us to target therapy more selectively to patients with solid tumours responsive to IFNalpha.

Clinical determinants of survival in patients with 5-fluorouracil-based treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a multivariate analysis of 3825 patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer are usually offered systemic chemotherapy as palliative treatment. A multivariate analysis was performed in order to identify predictors and their constellation that allow a valid prediction of the outcome in patients treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 3825 patients treated with 5-FU within 19 prospective randomised and three phase II trials were separated into learning (n = 2549) and validation (n = 1276) samples. Data were analysed by tree analysis using the recursive partition and amalgamation method (RECPAM). A predictor could only enter the RECPAM analysis if the number of patients with missing values was < 33.3% within a node, and the minimal node size was set to 50 patients. Twenty-three potential predictors were grouped into subsets of laboratory variables (11 parameters), tumour-related variables (seven parameters) and clinical variables (five parameters). In the first step, tree analysis was performed separately for each predictor subset. The selected prognostic parameters of the resulting partial models (the 'winners') were entered into the general model. The classification rule from the data of the learning set was applied to the independent validation set.

RESULTS

Winners of the subgroup analysis for laboratory variables were: platelets > or = 400 x 10(9)/l, alkaline phosphatase > or = 300 U/l, white blood cell (WBC) count > or = 10 x 10(9)/l and haemoglobin < 11 x 10(9)/l, and all predicted a worse outcome. Negative predictors within the subgroup of tumour parameters were: number of tumour sites more than one or more than two, presence of liver metastases or peritoneal carcinomatosis, which predicted a worse outcome. Furthermore, presence of lung metastases, a primary rectal cancer and presence of lymph node metastases all predicted a better outcome in the multivariate setting. Among the clinical parameters only performance status of ECOG 0 or 1 predicted better outcome. In the final regression tree, three risk groups could be identified: low risk group (n = 1111) with a median survival of 15 months for patients with ECOG 0/1 and only one tumour site; intermediate risk group (n = 904) with a median survival of 10.7 months for patients with ECOG 0/1 and more than one tumour site and alkaline phosphatase < 300 U/l or patients with ECOG > 1, WBC count < 10 x 10(9)/l and only one tumour site; high risk group (n = 534) with a median survival of 6.1 months for patients with ECOG 0/1 and more than one tumour site and alkaline phosphatase of > or = 300 U/l or patients with ECOG > 1 and more than one tumour site or WBC count > 10 x 10(9)/l. The median survival times for the good, intermediate and high risk groups in the validation sample were 14.7, 10.5 and 6.4 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients can be divided into at least three risk groups depending on the four baseline clinical parameters: performance status, WBC count, alkaline phosphatase and number of metastatic sites. Any molecular or biological marker should be validated against these clinical parameters and decisions for more or less intensive treatments may be studied separately in these three risk groups. Also, clinical trials should be stratified according to the three risk groups.