Study protocol of the TRICOLORE trial: a randomized phase III study of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy versus combination chemotherapy with S-1, irinotecan, and bevacizumab as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

TP53 Gain-of-Function Mutation is a Poor Prognostic Factor in High-Methylated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Neither TP53 mutation nor DNA methylation status has been established as a biomarker alone of metastatic colorectal cancer. We analyzed the association between TP53 mutation functional subtypes and genome-wide DNA methylation status (GWMS) as combined prognostic markers.

METHODS

Patient clinical data were obtained from the TRICOLORE study, a randomized phase III trial. The TP53 mutations were classified into wild-type, gain-of-function (GOF) mutations, and non-gain-of-function (non-GOF) mutations. GWMS of the tumor tissues classified them into high-methylated colorectal cancer (HMCC) and low-methylated colorectal cancer (LMCC). Overall survival (OS) was compared based on these subgroups.

RESULTS

Of the 209 patients, 60 (28.7%) were HMCC and 149 (71.3%) were LMCC, 35 (16.7%) were TP53 wild-type and 174 (83.3%) were TP53 mutants including 79 (45.4%) GOF mutations and 95 (54.6%) non-GOF mutations. The OS of the HMCC group was shorter than that of the LMCC group (median 25.3 vs. 40.3 months, P < .001, hazard ratio 1.87) in the total cohort. The combined subgroup analyses of GWMS and TP53 mutation subtypes showed that the HMCC/GOF group had significantly shorter OS than the HMCC/non-GOF group, the LMCC/GOF group, and the LMCC/non-GOF group (median 17.7; 35.3, 40.3, and 41.2 months, P = .007, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively), regardless of the primary tumor location. By the multivariate analysis, only HMCC (P = .009) was a poor prognostic factor in the GOF mutation group.

CONCLUSIONS

TP53 GOF with HMCC is a newly identified poorest prognostic molecular subset in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Combination therapy of bevacizumab with either S-1 and irinotecan or mFOLFOX6/CapeOX as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (TRICOLORE): Exploratory analysis of RAS status and primary tumour location in a randomised, open-label, phase III, non-inferiority trial

AIM

The TRICOLORE trial previously demonstrated that S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab was non-inferior, based on progression-free survival (PFS), to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6)/capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOX) plus bevacizumab as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Overall survival (OS) data were immature at the time of the primary analysis.

METHODS

In total, 487 patients from 53 institutions with previously untreated mCRC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mFOLFOX6/CapeOX plus bevacizumab (control group) or S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (experimental group; 3- or 4-week regimen). The final OS data were analysed from follow-up data collected until 30th September 2017.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up period of 48.7 months, median survival times were 32.6 and 34.3 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-1.10, P = 0.293) and median PFS durations were 10.8 and 14.0 months in the control and experimental groups, respectively (HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71-1.04, P < 0.0001 for non-inferiority). In patients with left-sided RAS wild-type tumours, median PFS durations were 11.4 and 16.9 months in the control and experimental groups, respectively (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.48-0.96, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab resulted in comparable OS and non-inferior PFS with that of mFOLFOX6/CapeOX plus bevacizumab treatment as first-line chemotherapy for patients with mCRC. We recommend the use of S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab as a standard first-line regimen independent of tumour sidedness or RAS status in mCRC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR: 000007834.

In vitro and in vivo combinatorial anticancer effects of oxaliplatin- and resveratrol-loaded N,O-carboxymethyl chitosan nanoparticles against colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Oxaliplatin (OXE) combined with other chemotherapy drugs against colorectal cancer had been reported in the literature before, however, the efficacy of oxaliplatin combined with natural compounds was elusive. In addition, the clinical bioactivity and therapeutic dose of antitumor drugs are severely limited due to poor targeting and side effects. NDDSs offers an excellent strategy to overcome the disadvantages of small molecule anticancer drugs.

METHODS

Here, we have prepared N,O-carboxymethyl chitosan Oxaliplatin nanoparticles (CMCS-OXE NPs) and N,O-carboxymethyl chitosan Resveratrol nanoparticles (CMCS-Res NPs) were prepared by ion crosslinking and emulsification crosslinking, respectively.

RESULTS

The results revealed that the CMCS-OXE NPs exhibited a high encapsulation efficiency (60%) with a size of approximately 190.0 nm, and the CMCS-Res NPs exhibited a high encapsulation efficiency (65%) with a size of approximately 164.2 nm. The treatment with both types of nanoparticles combined exhibited more significant anti-colon cancer activity than the free drugs or either type of nanoparticle alone. In the in vivo experiments, the inhibition efficiency of the combined nanoparticle treatment was much stronger than the free drugs or either type of nanoparticle alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, combination of oxaliplatin and resveratrol into a nanoparticle-drug delivery systems (NDDSs) appears to be a promising strategy for colorectal cancer (CRC) therapy.

Advanced colorectal cancer subtypes (aCRCS) help select oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based therapy for colorectal cancer

Oxaliplatin (OX) and irinotecan (IRI) are used as key drugs for the first‐line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, no biomarkers have been identified to decide which of the drugs is initially used. In this translational research (TR) of the TRICOLORE trial, the advanced colorectal cancer subtype (aCRCS) was analyzed as a potential biomarker for the selection of OX or IRI. We collected 335 (68.8%) formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) primary tumor specimens from 487 patients registered in the TRICOLORE trial and performed direct sequencing and immunohistochemical staining of CRC‐related genes, comprehensive gene‐expression analysis, and genome‐wide methylation analysis. The progression‐free survival (PFS) of the IRI group was significantly better compared with the OX group in BRAF wild‐type (WT), PTEN‐positive, and aCRCS A1 patients. Among the molecular factors, aCRCS were only associated with the PFS of OX and IRI groups. The PFS of the IRI group was significantly better compared with the OX group in aCRCS A1 + B1 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41‐0.82; P = .0023). In contrast, the OX group had better PFS compared with the IRI group in aCRCS B2, although this was not statistically significant (HR = 1.66; 95% CI = 0.94‐2.96; P = .083). Nearly half of patients with mCRC (46.8%, aCRCS A1 + B1) respond well to IRI, while only about 18.5% (aCRCS B2) of patients with mCRC responded well to OX. In conclusion, the aCRCS might be a predictive factor for the clinical outcomes of OX‐based and IRI‐based therapies.

S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab versus mFOLFOX6 or CapeOX plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRICOLORE): a randomized, open-label, phase III, noninferiority trial

Background

Combination therapy with oral fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan has not yet been established as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We carried out a randomized, open-label, phase III trial to determine whether S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab is noninferior to mFOLFOX6 or CapeOX plus bevacizumab in terms of progression-free survival (PFS).

Patients and methods

Patients from 53 institutions who had previously untreated mCRC were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to receive either mFOLFOX6 or CapeOX plus bevacizumab (control group) or S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (experimental group; a 3-week regimen: intravenous infusions of irinotecan 150 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg on day 1, oral S-1 80 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by a 1-week rest; or a 4-week regimen: irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg on days 1 and 15, S-1 80 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest). The primary end point was PFS. The noninferiority margin was 1.25; noninferiority would be established if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the hazard ratio (HR) of the control group versus the experimental group was less than this margin.

Result

Between June 2012 and September 2014, 487 patients underwent randomization. Two hundred and forty-three patients assigned to the control group and 241 assigned to the experimental group were included in the primary analysis. Median PFS was 10.8 months (95% CI 9.6-11.6) in the control group and 14.0 months (95% CI 12.4-15.5) in the experimental group (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-1.02; P < 0.0001 for noninferiority, P = 0.0815 for superiority). One hundred and fifty-seven patients (64.9%) in the control group and 140 (58.6%) in the experimental group had adverse events of grade 3 or higher.

Conclusion

S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab is noninferior to mFOLFOX6 or CapeOX plus bevacizumab with respect to PFS as first-line treatment of mCRC and could be a new standard treatment.

Clinical trials number

UMIN000007834.

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KACO, MOS, SSO and TOS

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) consensus guidelines for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was published in 2016, identifying both a more strategic approach to the administration of the available systemic therapy choices, and a greater emphasis on the use of ablative techniques, including surgery. At the 2016 ESMO Asia Meeting, in December 2016, it was decided by both ESMO and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting, endorsed by both ESMO and JSMO, immediately after the JSMO 2017 Annual Meeting. The aim was to adapt the ESMO consensus guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences relating to the toxicity as well as other aspects of certain systemic treatments in patients of Asian ethnicity. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with mCRC identified by the Presidents of the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology), Korea (Korean Association for Clinical Oncology), Malaysia (Malaysian Oncological Society), Singapore (Singapore Society of Oncology) and Taiwan (Taiwan Oncology Society). The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.

A phase II study of irinotecan combined with S-1 in patients with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer previously treated with platinum based chemotherapy

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a phase II study to investigate the efficacy and toxicities of irinotecan plus oral S-1 in patients with advanced or recurrent uterine cervical cancer.

METHODS

Patients with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer previously treated with platinum based chemotherapy were enrolled. Irinotecan (150 mg/m²) was administered intravenously over the course of 90 min on day 1, and S-1 (80 mg/m²) was given orally in two divided doses from days 1 to 14 of a 21 day cycle. The primary endpoint of this phase II study was response rate. Secondary endpoints included safety, progression free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 19 patients were enrolled and treated. The response rate was 29.4%. Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities were observed in three patients (15.7%). The only grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicity observed was grade 3 diarrhea. The median progression free survival and overall survival were 3 months and 9 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

S-1 plus irinotecan in a 3 weekly setting is safe and active in women with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer previously treated with platinum based chemotherapy. Future corroborative clinical studies are warranted.

Nicotinic acid inhibits angiogenesis likely through cytoskeleton remodeling

Angiogenesis is a physiological procedure during which the new blood vessels develop from the pre-existing vessels. Uncontrolled angiogenesis is related to various diseases including cancers. Clinical inhibition of undesired angiogenesis is still under investigation. We utilized nicotinic acid, a family member of the B-vitamin niacin (vitamin B3) that has been used in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerosis or other lipid-metabolic disorders, to treat human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) and chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM), and investigated its influence on angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo. We found that nicotinic acid could obviously inhibit HUVEC proliferation induced by vascular endothelial growth factor. Both the in vitro and in vivo assays showed that nicotinic acid could significantly inhibit the process of angiogenesis. To further investigate the mechanism underlying the effect of nicotinic acid on angiogenesis, we found that it might function via regulating the cytoskeleton arrangements, especially the rearranging the structures of F-actin and paxillin. In summary, we discovered that nicotinic acid could obviously inhibit the process of angiogenesis by changing the angiogenesis factor expression levels and inducing the cytoskeleton rearrangement of endothelial cells.

Unravelling the pharmacologic opportunities and future directions for targeted therapies in gastro-intestinal cancers Part 1: GI carcinomas

Until the 1990s, cytotoxic chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of medical therapy for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Better understanding of the molecular biology of cancer cell has led to the therapeutic revolution of targeted therapies, i.e. monoclonal antibodies or small molecule inhibitors directed against proteins that are specifically overexpressed or mutated in cancer cells. These agents being more specific to cancer cells were expected to be less toxic than cytotoxic agents. Targeted agents have provided clinical benefit in many GI cancer types. For example, antiangiogenics and anti-EGFR therapies have significantly improved survival of patients affected by metastatic colorectal cancer and have deeply changed the therapeutic strategy in this disease. However, their effects have sometimes been disappointing, due to intrinsic or acquired resistance mechanisms (e.g., RAS mutation for anti-EGFR therapies), or to an activity restricted to some tumour settings (e.g., lack of activity in other cancer types, or on the microscopic residual disease in adjuvant setting). Many studies are negative in overall population but positive in some specific patient subgroups (e.g., trastuzumab in HER2-positive gastric cancer), illustrating the importance of patient selection and early identification of predictive biomarkers of response to these therapies. We propose a comprehensive two-part review providing a panoramic approach of the successes and failures of targeted agents in GI cancers to unravel the pharmacologic opportunities and future directions for these agents in GI oncology. In this first part, we will focus on adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas, for which targeted therapies are mostly used in combination with chemotherapy.

Combined application of anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR attenuates the growth and angiogenesis of colorectal cancer mainly through suppressing AKT and ERK signaling in mice model

BACKGROUND

Angiogenesis is generally involved during the cancer development and hematogenous metastasis. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are considered to have an important role in tumor-associated angiogenesis. However, the effects of simultaneously targeting on VEGF and EGFR on the growth and angiogenesis of colorectal cancer (CRC), and its underlying mechanisms remain unknown.

METHODS

Immunohistochemical staining was used to detect the VEGF and EGFR expression in different CRC tissue specimens, and the correlation between VEGF/EGFR expression with the clinicopathologic features was analyzed. Cell counting kit‑8 (CCK-8) and transwell assays were used to assess the cellular proliferation and invasion of CRC cells after treated with anti-VEGF antibody and/or anti-EGFR antibody in vitro, respectively. Moreover, in vivo tumor formation was performed on nude mice model, and the tumor microvessel density (MVD) was determined by anti-CD34 staining in different groups. Finally, we evaluated the impact of anti-VEGF antibody and/or anti-EGFR antibody on the activation of downstream signaling effectors using western blot.

RESULTS

VEGF and EGFR were upregulated in CRC tissues, and their expression levels were correlated with hepatic metastasis. Blockage on VEGF or EGFR alone could inhibit the cellular proliferation and metastasis while their combination could reach a good synergism in vitro. In addition, in vivo xenograft mice model demonstrated that the tumor formation and angiogenesis were strongly suppressed by combination treatment of anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR antibodies. Besides, the combination treatment significantly reduced the activation of AKT and ERK1/2, but barely affected the activation of c-Myc, NF-κB/p65 and IκBα in CRC cells tumors. Interestingly, anti-VEGF antibody or anti-EGFR antibody alone could attenuate the phosphorylation of STAT3 as compared with negative control group, whereas the combined application not further suppressed but at least partially restored the activation of STAT3 in vivo.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous targeting on VEGF and EGFR does show significant inhibition on CRC tumor growth and angiogenesis in mice model, and these effects are mainly attributed to suppression of the AKT and ERK signaling pathways.

Panitumumab in combination with irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) is the only oral fluoropyrimidine-based regimen reported to be non-inferior to FOLFIRI and widely used in clinical practice for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, the combination of IRIS plus an anti-EGFR agent has not been evaluated previously. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of IRIS with panitumumab as second-line therapy for wild-type KRAS mCRC.

METHODS

Main inclusion criteria were patients with wild-type KRAS mCRC refractory to one prior chemotherapy regimen for mCRC, ECOG PS 0-2, and age ≥20 years. Patients received panitumumab (6 mg/kg) and irinotecan (100 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 15 and S-1 (40-60 mg according to body surface area) twice daily for 2 weeks, repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the feasibility of the therapy. The secondary endpoints were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients received protocol treatment in eight centers. Of these, 23 patients (63.9 %) completed protocol treatment, demonstrating achievement of the primary endpoint. The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were diarrhea (16.7 %), acne-like rash (13.9 %), and neutropenia (11.1 %). The overall RR was 33.3 % (12/36). Of these patients, five underwent conversion surgery. Median PFS and OS were 9.5 months (95 % CI 3.5-15.4 months) and 20.1 months (95 % CI 16.7-23.2 months), respectively.

CONCLUSION

IRIS plus panitumumab has an acceptable toxicity profile and a promising efficacy in patients with previously treated wild-type KRAS mCRC. Accordingly, this regimen can be an additional treatment option for second-line chemotherapy in wild-type KRAS mCRC.