Randomized phase III trial comparing biweekly infusional fluorouracil/leucovorin alone or with irinotecan in the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer: PETACC-3

Total neoadjuvant therapy with mFOLFIRINOX versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: long-term results of the UNICANCER-PRODIGE 23 trial

BACKGROUND

The standard of care for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) results in an excellent local disease control but the metastasis rates remain high. PRODIGE 23 demonstrated improved disease-free survival (DFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) with total neoadjuvant therapy versus standard of care in this population. Long-term analysis of overall survival (OS) is reported here.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study design, participants, and primary endpoint DFS have been reported for this multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial investigating the neoadjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFIRINOX (6 cycles) followed by chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy (6 cycles), versus chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy (12 cycles) in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma under peritoneal reflection on magnetic resonance imaging, and staged cT3/T4. Key secondary endpoints included OS, MFS, and local and metastatic recurrence rate.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 82.2 months, the 7-year DFS was 67.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 60.7% to 73.9%] and 62.5% (95% CI 55.6% to 68.6%) [restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference 5.73 months, 95% CI 0.05-11.41 months, P = 0.048] in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the standard-of-care groups, respectively. The 7-year MFS was 79.2% (95% CI 73.0% to 84.4%) in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and 72.3% (95% CI 65.8% to 77.8%) in the standard-of-care group (RMST difference 6.1 months, 95% CI 0.93-11.37 months, P = 0.021). The 7-year OS was 81.9% (95% CI 75.8% to 86.6%) in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and 76.1% (95% CI 69.7% to 81.2%) in the standard-of-care group (RMST difference 4.37 months, 95% CI 0.35-8.38 months, P = 0.033). The safety profile remained unchanged since the previous analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFIRINOX followed by chemoradiotherapy improved OS, confirmed long-term DFS and MFS benefits in LARC patients, and should be considered as one of the best options of care for these patients.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy With Oxaliplatin and Fluoropyrimidine Versus Upfront Surgery for Locally Advanced Colon Cancer: The Randomized, Phase III OPTICAL Trial

PURPOSE

The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in colon cancer remains unclear. This trial investigated whether 3 months of modified infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) as NAC could improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced colon cancer versus upfront surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

OPTICAL was a randomized, phase III trial in patients with clinically staged locally advanced colon cancer (T3 with extramural spread into the mesocolic fat ≥5 mm or T4). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive six preoperative cycles of mFOLFOX6 or four cycles of CAPOX, followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy (NAC group), or immediate surgery and the physician's choice of adjuvant chemotherapy (upfront surgery group). The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population.

RESULTS

Between January 2016 and April 2021, of the 752 patients enrolled, 744 patients were included in the mITT analysis (371 in the NAC group; 373 in the upfront surgery group). At a median follow-up of 48.0 months (IQR, 46.0-50.1), 3-year DFS rates were 82.1% in the NAC group and 77.5% in the upfront surgery group (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.54 to 1.03]). The R0 resection was achieved in 98% of patients who underwent surgery in both groups. Compared with upfront surgery, NAC resulted in a 7% pathologic complete response rate (pCR), significantly lower rates of advanced tumor staging (pT3-4: 77% v 94%), lymph node metastasis (pN1-2: 31% v 46%), and potentially improved overall survival (stratified HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.25 to 0.77]).

CONCLUSION

NAC with mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX did not show a significant DFS benefit. However, this neoadjuvant approach was safe, resulted in substantial pathologic downstaging, and appears to be a viable therapeutic option for locally advanced colon cancer.

SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guidelines for the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer (2023)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a 5-year overall survival rate of over 60%. The decrease in the rate of metastatic disease is due to screening programs and the population's awareness of healthy lifestyle. Similarly, advancements in surgical methods and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy have contributed to a decrease in the recurrence of resected disease. Before evaluating a patient's treatment, it is recommended to be discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board. In stage II tumors, the pathologic characteristics of poor prognosis must be known (T4, number of lymph nodes analyzed less than 12, lymphovascular or perineural invasion, obstruction or perforation, poor histologic grade, presence of tumor budding) and it is mandatory to determine the MSI/MMR status for avoiding administering fluoropyridimidines in monotherapy to patients with MSI-H/dMMR tumors. In stage III tumors, the standard treatment consists of a combination of fluoropyrimidine (oral or intravenous) with oxaliplatin for 6 months although the administration of CAPOX can be considered for 3 months in low-risk tumors. Neoadjuvant treatment is not consolidated yet although immunotherapy is achieving very good preliminary results in MSI-H patients. The use of ctDNA to define the treatment and monitoring of resected tumors is only recommended within studies. These guidelines are intended to help decision-making to offer the best management of patients with non-metastatic colon cancer.

Efficacy comparison of fruquintinib, regorafenib monotherapy or plus programmed death-1 inhibitors for microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Regorafenib (R) and fruquintinib (F) are the standard third-line regimens for colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, but both have limited efficacy. Several phase 2 trials have indicated that R or F combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors can reverse immunosuppression and achieve promising efficacy for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair (MSS/pMMR) CRC. Due to the lack of studies comparing the efficacy between F, R, F plus programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor, and R plus PD-1 inhibitors (RP), it is still unclear whether the combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy.

AIM

To provide critical evidence for selecting the appropriate drugs for MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC (mCRC) patients in clinical practice.

METHODS

A total of 2639 CRC patients were enrolled from January 2018 to September 2022 in our hospital, and 313 MSS/pMMR mCRC patients were finally included.

RESULTS

A total of 313 eligible patients were divided into F (n = 70), R (n = 67), F plus PD-1 inhibitor (FP) (n = 95) and RP (n = 81) groups. The key clinical characteristics were well balanced among the groups. The median progression-free survival (PFS) of the F, R, FP, and RP groups was 3.5 months, 3.6 months, 4.9 months, and 3.0 months, respectively. The median overall survival (OS) was 14.6 months, 15.7 months, 16.7 months, and 14.1 months. The FP regimen had an improved disease control rate (DCR) (P = 0.044) and 6-month PFS (P = 0.014) and exhibited a better trend in PFS (P = 0.057) compared with F, and it was also significantly better in PFS than RP (P = 0.030). RP did not confer a significant survival benefit; instead, the R group had a trend toward greater benefit with OS (P = 0.080) compared with RP. No significant differences were observed between the R and F groups in PFS or OS (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

FP is superior to F in achieving 6-month PFS and DCR, while RP is not better than R. FP has an improved PFS and 6-month PFS compared with RP, but F and R had similar clinical efficacy. Therefore, FP may be a highly promising strategy in the treatment of MSS/pMMR mCRC.

Efficacy comparison of fruquintinib, regorafenib monotherapy or plus programmed death-1 inhibitors for microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Regorafenib (R) and fruquintinib (F) are the standard third-line regimens for colorectal cancer (CRC) according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, but both have limited efficacy. Several phase 2 trials have indicated that R or F combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors can reverse immunosuppression and achieve promising efficacy for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair (MSS/pMMR) CRC. Due to the lack of studies comparing the efficacy between F, R, F plus programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor, and R plus PD-1 inhibitors (RP), it is still unclear whether the combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy.

AIM

To provide critical evidence for selecting the appropriate drugs for MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC (mCRC) patients in clinical practice.

METHODS

A total of 2639 CRC patients were enrolled from January 2018 to September 2022 in our hospital, and 313 MSS/pMMR mCRC patients were finally included.

RESULTS

A total of 313 eligible patients were divided into F (n = 70), R (n = 67), F plus PD-1 inhibitor (FP) (n = 95) and RP (n = 81) groups. The key clinical characteristics were well balanced among the groups. The median progression-free survival (PFS) of the F, R, FP, and RP groups was 3.5 months, 3.6 months, 4.9 months, and 3.0 months, respectively. The median overall survival (OS) was 14.6 months, 15.7 months, 16.7 months, and 14.1 months. The FP regimen had an improved disease control rate (DCR) (P = 0.044) and 6-month PFS (P = 0.014) and exhibited a better trend in PFS (P = 0.057) compared with F, and it was also significantly better in PFS than RP (P = 0.030). RP did not confer a significant survival benefit; instead, the R group had a trend toward greater benefit with OS (P = 0.080) compared with RP. No significant differences were observed between the R and F groups in PFS or OS (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

FP is superior to F in achieving 6-month PFS and DCR, while RP is not better than R. FP has an improved PFS and 6-month PFS compared with RP, but F and R had similar clinical efficacy. Therefore, FP may be a highly promising strategy in the treatment of MSS/pMMR mCRC.

Non-metastatic colon cancer: French Intergroup Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatments, and follow-up (TNCD, SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, SFP, AFEF, and SFR)

INTRODUCTION

This article is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of non-metastatic colon cancer (CC), revised in November 2022.

METHODS

These guidelines represent collaborative work of all French medical and surgical societies involved in the management of CC. Recommendations were graded in three categories (A, B, and C) according to the level of evidence found in the literature published up to November 2022.

RESULTS

Initial evaluation of CC is based on clinical examination, colonoscopy, chest-abdomen-pelvis computed tomography (CT) scan, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) assay. CC is usually managed by surgery and adjuvant treatment depending on the pathological findings. The use of adjuvant therapy remains a challenging question in stage II disease. For high-risk stage II CC, adjuvant chemotherapy must be discussed and fluoropyrimidine monotherapy or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy proposed according to the type and number of poor prognostic features. Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (FOLFOX or CAPOX) is the current standard for adjuvant therapy of patients with stage III CC. However, these regimens are associated with significant oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity. The results of the recent IDEA study provide evidence that 3 months of treatment with CAPOX is as effective as 6 months of oxaliplatin-based therapy in patients with low-risk stage III CC (T1-3 and N1). A 6-month oxaliplatin-based therapy remains the standard of care for high-risk stage III CC (T4 and/or N2). For patients unfit for oxaliplatin, fluoropyrimidine monotherapy is recommended.

CONCLUSION

French guidelines for non-metastatic CC management help to offer the best personalized therapeutic strategy in daily clinical practice. Each individual case must be discussed within a multidisciplinary tumor board and then the treatment option decided with the patient.

mFOLFIRINOX versus mFOLFOX 6 as adjuvant treatment for high-risk stage III colon cancer - the FROST trial: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized controlled, phase II trial

BACKGROUND

High-risk stage III colon cancer has a considerably poorer prognosis than stage II and low-risk stage III colon cancers. Nevertheless, most guidelines recommend similar adjuvant treatment approaches for all these stages despite the dearth of research focusing on high-risk stage III colon cancer and the potential for improved prognosis with intensive adjuvant treatment. Given the the proven efficacy of triplet chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer treatment, the goal of this study is to evaluate the oncologic efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX in comparison to those of the current standard of care, mFOLFOX 6, as an adjuvant treatment for patients diagnosed with high-risk stage III colon cancer after radical resection.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized (1:1), open-label, phase II trial will assess and compare the effectiveness and toxicity of mFOLFIRINOX and mFOLFOX 6 in patients with high-risk stage III colon cancer after radical resection. The goal of the trial is to enroll 312 eligible patients, from 11 institutes, aged between 20 and 70 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, or between 70 and 75 with an ECOG performance status of 0. Patients will be randomized into two arms - Arm A, the experimental arm, and Arm B, the reference arm - and will receive 12 cycles of mFOLFIRINOX and mFOLFOX 6 every 2 weeks, respectively. The primary endpoint of this study is the 3-year disease-free survival, and secondary endpoints include the 3-year overall survival and treatment toxicity.

DISCUSSION

The Frost trial would help determine the oncologic efficacy and safety of adjuvant triplet chemotherapy for high-risk stage III colon cancers and ultimately improve prognoses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05179889, registered on 17 December 2021.

Pathway level subtyping identifies a slow-cycling biological phenotype associated with poor clinical outcomes in colorectal cancer

Molecular stratification using gene-level transcriptional data has identified subtypes with distinctive genotypic and phenotypic traits, as exemplified by the consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) in colorectal cancer (CRC). Here, rather than gene-level data, we make use of gene ontology and biological activation state information for initial molecular class discovery. In doing so, we defined three pathway-derived subtypes (PDS) in CRC: PDS1 tumors, which are canonical/LGR5+ stem-rich, highly proliferative and display good prognosis; PDS2 tumors, which are regenerative/ANXA1+ stem-rich, with elevated stromal and immune tumor microenvironmental lineages; and PDS3 tumors, which represent a previously overlooked slow-cycling subset of tumors within CMS2 with reduced stem populations and increased differentiated lineages, particularly enterocytes and enteroendocrine cells, yet display the worst prognosis in locally advanced disease. These PDS3 phenotypic traits are evident across numerous bulk and single-cell datasets, and demark a series of subtle biological states that are currently under-represented in pre-clinical models and are not identified using existing subtyping classifiers.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage colon cancer

Surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard treatment for early-stage colon cancer. However, evidence has recently emerged for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with the results of randomised clinical trials sparking debates within multidisciplinary teams and splitting the gastrointestinal oncology community. Further to a systematic search of the literature, we provide a thorough and in-depth analysis of the findings from these trials, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We conclude that, while there is a potential value of moving systemic therapy from the post-operative to the pre-operative setting, the available evidence does not justify a shift in the treatment paradigm of early-stage colon cancer, and surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy should remain the standard approach for these patients.

Personalizing adjuvant therapy for patients with colorectal cancer

The current standard-of-care adjuvant treatment for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) comprises a fluoropyrimidine (5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) as a single agent or in combination with oxaliplatin, for either 3 or 6 months. Selection of therapy depends on conventional histopathological staging procedures, which constitute a blunt tool for patient stratification. Given the relatively marginal survival benefits that patients can derive from adjuvant treatment, improving the safety of chemotherapy regimens and identifying patients most likely to benefit from them is an area of unmet need. Patient stratification should enable distinguishing those at low risk of recurrence and a high chance of cure by surgery from those at higher risk of recurrence who would derive greater absolute benefits from chemotherapy. To this end, genetic analyses have led to the discovery of germline determinants of toxicity from fluoropyrimidines, the identification of patients at high risk of life-threatening toxicity, and enabling dose modulation to improve safety. Thus far, results from analyses of resected tissue to identify mutational or transcriptomic signatures with value as prognostic biomarkers have been rather disappointing. In the past few years, the application of artificial intelligence-driven models to digital images of resected tissue has identified potentially useful algorithms that stratify patients into distinct prognostic groups. Similarly, liquid biopsy approaches involving measurements of circulating tumour DNA after surgery are additionally useful tools to identify patients at high and low risk of tumour recurrence. In this Perspective, we provide an overview of the current landscape of adjuvant therapy for patients with CRC and discuss how new technologies will enable better personalization of therapy in this setting.

Progression-free survival, disease-free survival and other composite end points in oncology: improved reporting is needed

Composite outcome measures such as progression-free survival and disease-free survival are increasingly used as surrogate end points in oncology research, frequently serving as the primary end point of pivotal trials that form the basis for FDA and EMA approvals. Such outcome measures combine two or more distinct events (for example, tumour (re)growth, new lesions and/or death) into a single, time-to-event end point. The use of a composite end point can increase the statistical power of a clinical trial and decrease the follow-up period required to demonstrate efficacy, thus lowering costs; however, these end points have a number of limitations. Composite outcomes are often vaguely defined, with definitions that vary greatly between studies, complicating comparisons of results across trials. Altering the makeup of events included in a composite outcome can alter study conclusions, including whether treatment effects are statistically significant. Moreover, the events included in a composite outcome often vary in clinical significance, reflect distinct biological pathways and/or are affected differently by treatment. Therefore, knowing the precise breakdown of the component events is essential to accurately interpret trial results and gauge the true benefit of an intervention. In oncology clinical trials, however, such information is rarely provided. In this Perspective, we emphasize this deficiency through a review of 50 studies with progression-free survival as an outcome published in five top oncology journals, discuss the advantages and challenges of using composite end points, and highlight the need for transparent reporting of the component events.

Predictive modelling for high-risk stage II colon cancer using auto-artificial intelligence

BACKGROUND

Recently, stratification of high-risk stage II colon cancer (CC) and the need for adjuvant chemotherapy have been the focus of attention. The aim of this retrospective study was to define high-risk factors for recurrent stage II CC using Prediction One auto-artificial intelligence (AI) software and develop a new predictive model for high-risk stage II CC.

METHODS

The study included 259 consecutive pathological stage II CC patients undergoing curative resection at our institution between January 2000 and December 2016. Prediction One software with five-fold cross-validation was used to create a predictive model and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Predictive accuracy of AI was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve (AUC). We also evaluated the importance of variables (IOV) using a method based on permutation feature importance (IOV > 0.01 defined high-risk factors) to evaluate disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

The median observation period was 6.1 (range = 0.3-15.8) years. Thirty-seven patients had recurrence (14.3%); the AUC of the AI model was 0.775. Preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen > 5.0 ng/mL (IOV = 0.047), venous invasion (IOV = 0.014), and obstruction (IOV = 0.012) were high-risk factors contributing to cancer recurrence. Patients with 2-3 high-risk factors had lower 5-year DFS than those with 0-1 factor (87.4% vs 62.7%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a new predictive model that could predict recurrent high-risk stage II CC with high probability using auto-AI Prediction One software. Patients with ≥ 2 of the aforementioned factors are considered to have high risks for recurrent stage II CC and may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.

Postoperative Chemotherapy After Surgical Resection of Metachronous Metastases of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

Currently, 6 months of perioperative or adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) is a standard treatment option after radical surgical removal of metachronous metastases in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Data show that ACT improves relapse-free survival in such patients, although no difference in overall survival rate was observed. We perform a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical resection of metachronous metastases in CRC.

Comprehensive analysis of the prognosis, tumor microenvironment, and immunotherapy response of SDHs in colon adenocarcinoma

Background

Succinate dehydrogenase (SDH), one of the key enzymes in the tricarboxylic acid cycle, is mainly found in the mitochondria. SDH consists of four subunits encoding SDHA, SDHB, SDHC, and SDHD. The biological function of SDH is significantly related to cancer progression. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignant tumors globally, whose most common histological subtype is colon adenocarcinoma (COAD). However, the correlation between SDH factors and COAD remains unclear.

Methods

The data on pan-cancer was obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed the prognostic ability of SDHs. The cBioPortal database reflected genetic variations of SDHs. The correlation analysis was conducted between SDHs and mitochondrial energy metabolism genes (MMGs) and the protein-protein interaction (PPI) network was built. Consequently, Univariate and Multivariate Cox Regression Analysis on SDHs and other clinical characteristics were conducted. A nomogram was established. The ssGSEA analysis visualized the association between SDHs and immune infiltration. Immunophenoscore (IPS) explored the correlation between SDHs and immunotherapy, and the correlation between SDHs and targeted therapy was investigated through Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer. Finally, qPCR and immunohistochemistry detected SDHs' expression.

Results

After assessing SDHs differential expression in pan-cancer, we found that SDHB, SDHC, and SDHD benefit COAD patients. The cBioPortal database demonstrated that SDHA was the top gene in mutation frequency rank. Correlation analysis mirrored a strong link between SDHs and MMGs. We formulated a nomogram and found that SDHB, SDHC, SDHD, and clinical characteristics correlated with COAD patients' survival. For T helper cells, Th2 cells, and Tem, SDHA, SDHB, SDHC, and SDHD were significantly enriched in the high expression group. Moreover, COAD patients with high SDHA expression were more suitable for immunotherapy. And COAD patients with different SDHs' expression have different sensitivity to targeted drugs. Further verifying the gene and protein expression levels of SDHs, we found that the tissues were consistent with the bioinformatics analysis.

Conclusions

Our study analyzed the expression and prognostic value of SDHs in COAD, explored the pathway mechanisms involved, and the immune cell correlations, indicating that SDHs might be biomarkers for COAD patients.

The efficacy of irinotecan supplementation for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of irinotecan as the adjunctive therapy to fluorouracil and leucovorin remains controversial in patients with colorectal cancer. We conduct this meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of irinotecan supplementation for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We have searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through March 19, 2020, and included randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of irinotecan plus fluorouracil and leucovorin for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with fluorouracil and leucovorin for colorectal cancer, irinotecan supplementation could significantly improve progression-free survival rate (hazard ratio = 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58-0.90; P = .003), median progression-free survival (standard mean difference = -0.30; 95% CI = -0.44 to -0.15; P < .0001), overall survival rate (hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.66-0.90; P = .001), and objective response (risk ratio [RR] = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.49-0.66; P < .00001) and decrease progressive disease (RR = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.40-3.14; P = .0003), but revealed no obvious effect on complete response (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.33-2.29; P = .79). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events in irinotecan supplementation group was increased compared to control group (RR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.57-0.79; P < .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Irinotecan as the adjunctive therapy to fluorouracil and leucovorin can increase the survival and objective response of patients with colorectal cancer, but the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events is found to be increased after irinotecan supplementation.

Using empirical biological knowledge to infer regulatory networks from multi-omics data

Background

Integration of multi-omics data can provide a more complex view of the biological system consisting of different interconnected molecular components, the crucial aspect for developing novel personalised therapeutic strategies for complex diseases. Various tools have been developed to integrate multi-omics data. However, an efficient multi-omics framework for regulatory network inference at the genome level that incorporates prior knowledge is still to emerge.

Results

We present IntOMICS, an efficient integrative framework based on Bayesian networks. IntOMICS systematically analyses gene expression, DNA methylation, copy number variation and biological prior knowledge to infer regulatory networks. IntOMICS complements the missing biological prior knowledge by so-called empirical biological knowledge, estimated from the available experimental data. Regulatory networks derived from IntOMICS provide deeper insights into the complex flow of genetic information on top of the increasing accuracy trend compared to a published algorithm designed exclusively for gene expression data. The ability to capture relevant crosstalks between multi-omics modalities is verified using known associations in microsatellite stable/instable colon cancer samples. Additionally, IntOMICS performance is compared with two algorithms for multi-omics regulatory network inference that can also incorporate prior knowledge in the inference framework. IntOMICS is also applied to detect potential predictive biomarkers in microsatellite stable stage III colon cancer samples.

Conclusions

We provide IntOMICS, a framework for multi-omics data integration using a novel approach to biological knowledge discovery. IntOMICS is a powerful resource for exploratory systems biology and can provide valuable insights into the complex mechanisms of biological processes that have a vital role in personalised medicine.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12859-022-04891-9.

Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in resectable rectal cancer after preoperative short-course radiotherapy-results from randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The value of the lymph node ratio (LNR) in patients with rectal cancer has not yet been unequivocally established. This study aims to assess the effect of the lymph node ratio on the prognosis of rectal cancer in patients operated after short-course preoperative 25 Gy radiotherapy, at 10-year follow-up.

METHODS

This is a substudy based on data from a prospective randomized clinical trial. A total of 141 patients with resectable rectal cancer were included. Lymph node yield was compared in patients with short and long time intervals between radiotherapy and surgery. Survival curves were compared between patients with different ypN and LNR categories. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent prognostic factors for overall survival and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

Survival and recurrence data were available for a median follow-up of 11.6 years. The lymph node yield did not differ significantly between the patients in the short- and long-interval groups. A greater difference in 10-year survival was observed in patients with LNR ≤ 0.41 and > 0.41 when compared to the ypN categories. Separate prognostic factor analyses were performed for the entire population and for subgroups that had < 12 and 12 lymph nodes resected. LNR was identified as an independent prognostic factor for overall survival, in multivariate analyses, for all patients and those with less than 12 retrieved lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

The lymph node yield is comparable in patients with different time intervals between radiation therapy and surgery. LNR better discriminates patients in terms of overall survival than ypN categories.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01444495, date of registration: September 30, 2011.

MCC Gene Silencing Is a CpG Island Methylator Phenotype-Associated Factor That Predisposes Colon Cancer Cells to Irinotecan and Olaparib

Simple Summary

DNA hypermethylation of specific regulatory regions causes gene silencing that is an important cancer-promoting mechanism. A subset of colorectal cancers display concordant hypermethylation and silencing of multiple genes, and this appears to change the way in which tumors respond to some cancer therapies. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the presence of the MCC gene silencing relates to the highly methylated subset of colorectal cancers and how it may affect therapy responsiveness. We found that strong MCC silencing is found throughout the hypermethylated subset, but MCC expression is also lost or reduced in some other tumors which show hypomethylated regions of the gene. In cell culture experiments, the deletion of MCC increased the responsiveness of cancer cells to the chemotherapy drug irinotecan (SN38), and this was further augmented by a targeted cancer drug, the PARP-inhibitor Olaparib.

Abstract

Chemotherapy is a mainstay of colorectal cancer treatment, and often involves a combination drug regime. CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)-positive tumors are potentially more responsive to the topoisomerase-inhibitor irinotecan. The mechanistic basis of the increased sensitivity of CIMP cancers to irinotecan is poorly understood. Mutated in Colorectal Cancer (MCC) is emerging as a multifunctional tumor suppressor gene in colorectal and liver cancers, and has been implicated in drug responsiveness. Here, we found that CIMP tumors undergo MCC loss almost exclusively via promoter hypermethylation rather than copy number variation or mutations. A subset of cancers display hypomethylation which is also associated with low MCC expression, particularly in rectal cancer, where CIMP is rare. MCC knockdown or deletion was found to sensitize cells to SN38 (the active metabolite of irinotecan) or the PARP-inhibitor Olaparib. A synergistic effect on cell death was evident when these drugs were used concurrently. The improved SN38/irinotecan efficacy was accompanied by the down-regulation of DNA repair genes. Thus, differential methylation of MCC is potentially a valuable biomarker to identify colorectal cancers suitable for irinotecan therapy, possibly in combination with PARP inhibitors.

Treatment strategies to resectable metachronous colorectal liver metastases after adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for primary colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

outcome of patients who develop resectable metachronous colorectal liver metastases (CLM) after adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for Stage III colorectal cancer (CRC) is not well defined and the value of preoperative chemotherapy is controversial.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2013, all patients undergoing liver resection for Class I metachronous CLM after adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for CRC, across 32 French academic centers, were included.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients with an average of 2 ± 1 CLM were included. Thirty-two (52%) patients received preoperative chemotherapy. There was no significant difference in the characteristics of CLM between patients with or without preoperative chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 29 months, 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 79.8% and 34.6%, respectively. The median disease-free survival was not different in patients with or without preoperative chemotherapy (17 vs. 35 months respectively, p = 0.112). In multivariate analysis, only CEA level > 200 ng/ml was associated with the risk of recurrence (p = 0.027; OR = 4.7, 95% CI = 1.2-18.7).

CONCLUSION

Liver resection provides a good outcome in patients with limited metachronous CLM after adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for CRC. The interest of preoperative chemotherapy is not obvious and should be tested in a prospective controlled study.

Top advances of the year in colorectal cancer

LAY SUMMARY

Over the past year, studies have demonstrated better ways of using the agents that we have to improve outcomes for patients with colon and Rectal cancers.

Sustainable Clinical Development of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer

Numerous clinical studies in an adjuvant setting have been conducted and the combination therapy of 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin has been established as the standard treatment for Stage III and as an option for high-risk Stage II patients. Biologics such as bevacizumab and antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibodies have failed to show additional survival benefits. The indication of adjuvant chemotherapy has been determined according to the pathological stage. Nevertheless, a pathological diagnosis does not necessarily result in selection of the optimal treatment. To improve treatment decisions, many trials have aimed to stratify patients into treatment groups using genomic testing. Recently, gene signature, Immunoscore, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assays have been reported and among them, ctDNA was shown to be a promising accurate predictive marker for recurrence. Treatment of ctDNA-positive patients with aggressive chemotherapy may reduce recurrence rates. The ultimate goal is to accurately predict the risk of recurrence and to prevent recurrence in colon cancer patients. In this review we focus on the clinical development of adjuvant chemotherapy and stratification of patients according to risk of recurrence and the future direction of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Adjuvant treatment of colon cancer with microsatellite instability - the state of the art

Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine (FP) plus oxaliplatin in stage III resected colorecatal cancer (RCRC) resulted in a 30% relative reduction of disease recurrence risk and mortality. The presence of altered mismatch repair genes identify tumors with microsatellite instability (MSI) that have a better prognosis than stable tumors, but data about adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in this subgroup are compelling. We investigate the role of adjuvant therapy in resected MSI RCRC. The standard treatment is the association of FP plus oxaliplatin, while it can avoided in low risk stage II, thanks to its good prognosis. We propose a practice strategy to approach MSI RCRC in line with the current knowledge. In consideration of the dramatic results in chemorefractory MSI metastatic CRC, there are assumptions that immunotherapy can become a potential alternative to classical systemic therapies also in the adjuvant setting. We await the results of ongoing studies to draw further conclusions."

Reevaluating Disease-Free Survival as an Endpoint vs Overall Survival in Stage III Adjuvant Colon Cancer Trials

BACKGROUND

Disease-free survival (DFS) with a 3-year median follow-up (3-year DFS) was validated as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) with a 5-year median follow-up (5-year OS) in adjuvant chemotherapy colon cancer (CC) trials. Recent data show further improvements in OS and survival after recurrence in patients who received adjuvant FOLFOX. Hence, reevaluation of the association between DFS and OS and determination of the optimal follow-up duration of OS to aid its utility in future adjuvant trials are needed.

METHODS

Individual patient data from 9 randomized studies conducted between 1998 and 2009 were included; 3 trials tested biologics. Trial-level surrogacy examining the correlation of treatment effect estimates of 3-year DFS with 5 to 6.5-year OS was evaluated using both linear regression (RWLS2) and Copula bivariate (RCopula2) models and reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For R2, a value closer to 1 indicates a stronger correlation.

RESULTS

Data from a total of 18 396 patients were analyzed (median age = 59 years; 54.0% male), with 54.1% having low-risk tumors (T1-3 and N1), 31.6% KRAS mutated, 12.3% BRAF mutated, and 12.4% microsatellite instability high or deficient mismatch repair tumors. Trial-level correlation between 3-year DFS and 5-year OS remained strong (RWLS2 = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.98; RCopula2 = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.83 to 1.00) and increased as the median follow-up of OS extended. Analyses limited to trials that tested biologics showed consistent results.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-year DFS remains a validated surrogate endpoint for 5-year OS in adjuvant CC trials. The correlation was likely strengthened with 6 years of follow-up for OS.

Adjuvant Therapies in Colon Cancer

Most of the patients with localized colon cancer undergo curative resection. However, significant number of patients will recur with metastatic disease, especially those with node positive cancer. Adjuvant chemotherapy has shown to improve cure rate and survival by eradicating micrometastases. The benefit of adjuvant therapy is well established in node-positive cancers, while their role in stage II cancer is not well defined. A number of molecular markers have been identified that are prognostic and/or predictive in colon cancer. Such molecular markers, and other clinicopathological features play an important role in selection of appropriate therapy and duration of treatment. Emerging evidence for the utility of genomic profiling or detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) are promising which may further facilitate decision making in the future. This chapter reviews the evolution of adjuvant therapy for resected colon cancer, the current evidence and the factors influence the choice of therapy.

Colorectal Cancer: From Genetic Landscape to Targeted Therapy

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer type and the second cause of death worldwide. The advancement in understanding molecular pathways involved in CRC has led to new classifications based on the molecular characteristics of each tumor and also improved CRC management through the integration of targeted therapy into clinical practice. In this review, we will present the main molecular pathways involved in CRC carcinogenesis, the molecular classifications. The anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR therapies currently used in CRC treatment and those under clinical investigation will also be outlined, as well as the mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (cetuximab and panitumumab). Targeted therapy has led to great improvement in the treatment of metastatic CRC. However, there has been variability in CRC treatment outcomes due to molecular heterogeneity in colorectal tumors, which underscores the need for identifying prognostic and predictive biomarkers for CRC-targeted drugs.

The impact of socioeconomic status on survival in stage III colon cancer patients: A retrospective cohort study using the SEER census-tract dataset

Background

The impact of socioeconomic status (SES) has been described for screening and accessing treatment for colon cancer. However, little is known about the “downstream” effect in patients who receive guideline‐concordant treatment. This study assessed the impact of SES on cancer‐specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) for stage III colon cancer patients.

Methods

The SEER Census Tract‐Level SES Dataset from 2004 to 2015 was used to identify stage III colon adenocarcinoma patients who received curative‐intent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. The predictor variable was census tract SES. SES was analyzed as quintiles. The outcome variables were OR and CSS. Statistical analysis included chi square tests for association, Kaplan–Meier, Cox, Fine and Gray regression for survival analysis.

Results

In total, 27,222 patients met inclusion criteria. Lower SES was associated with younger age, Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, Medicaid/uninsured, higher T stage, and lower grade tumors. CSS at the 25th percentile was 54 months for the lowest SES quintile and 80 for the highest. Median OS was 113 months for the lowest SES quintile and not reached for highest. The 5‐year CSS rate was 72.4% for the lowest SES quintile compared to 78.9% in the highest (p < 0.001). The 5‐year OS rate was 66.5% for the lowest SES quintile and 74.6% in the highest (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This is the first study to evaluate CSS and OS in an incidence‐based cohort of stage III colon cancer patients using a granular, standardized measure of SES. Despite receipt of guideline‐based treatment, SES was associated with disparities in CSS and OS.

Real-World Outcomes of Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy on R0 Resected Colonic Liver Metastasis

INTRODUCTION

In resected colonic liver metastasis (CLM), randomized studies of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy have demonstrated improvements in disease-free survival (DFS), but not overall survival (OS). Additionally, oxaliplatin regimens have not been compared to non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy. Despite limited evidence, perioperative chemotherapy is often used in the management of CLM. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of oxaliplatin chemotherapy regimens on OS in patients who have undergone resection of CLM in a real-world setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent resection of CLM in the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, Canada, were identified from 1996 to 2016. Perioperative (pre- and/or post-) systemic therapy was categorized as oxaliplatin or non-oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy or no chemotherapy. The primary and secondary outcomes were OS and DFS, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 511 patients who underwent R0 resection of CLM. A significant difference in median OS was identified among the oxaliplatin, non-oxaliplatin, and no-chemotherapy groups of 100, 60, and 59 months, respectively (P = .009). In multivariate analysis, patients who received oxaliplatin regimens had a lower risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.92; P = .012), whereas the non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy group did not (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.20; P = .422) compared with no chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicenter, retrospective, population-based study, perioperative oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in conjunction with R0 resection of CLM. Further studies should evaluate the optimal duration and sequencing of perioperative chemotherapy in relation to curative-intent surgical resection of CLM.

Total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: Making sense of the results from the RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23 trials

A few months ago, results from two randomised phase III trials of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in locally advanced rectal cancer were presented (RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23), consistently showing better short- and long-term outcomes with TNT as compared with standard neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT). These results represent corroborating evidence in support of a practice that many centres had already implemented based on promising preliminary data. Also, they provide new, high-level evidence to endorse TNT as a new management option in the treatment algorithm of stage II-III rectal cancer in those centres where CRT and SCRT have long remained the only accepted standard neoadjuvant treatments. Having two consistently positive trials is certainly reassuring regarding the potential of TNT as a general treatment approach. Nevertheless, substantial differences between these trials pose important challenges in relation to the generalisability and applicability of their results, and translation of the same into practical clinical recommendations. In this article, we address a number of key questions that the RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23 trials have raised among the broad community of gastrointestinal oncologists, proposing an interpretation of the data that may help the decision making, and highlighting grey areas that warrant further investigation.

The clinical relevance of gene expression based prognostic signatures in colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent cancers, with more than one million new cases every year. In the last few decades, several advancements in therapeutic and preventative levels have reduced the mortality rate, but new biomarkers are required for improved prognosis. The alterations at the genetic and epigenetic level have been recognized as major players in tumorigenesis. The products of gene expression in the form of mRNA, microRNA, and long-noncoding RNA, have started to emerge as important regulatory molecules, playing an important role in cancer. Gene-expression based prognostic risk scores, which quantify and compare their expression, have emerged as promising biomarkers with enormous clinical value. These composite multi-gene models in which more than one gene is used to predict prognosis have been shown to be significantly effective in identifying patients with multiple clinico-pathological risks like overall mortality, response to chemotherapy, risk of metastasis, etc. The advent of microarray and advanced sequencing technologies have led to the generation of large datasets like TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) and GEO (Gene Expression Omnibus), which have fueled the search for new biomarkers. Continuous evaluation of these candidate biomarkers in clinical settings is promising to improve the management of CRC. These composite gene signatures provide potential in identifying high-risk patients, which might help clinicians to better manage these patients and design appropriate personalized therapeutic interventions. In this review, we emphasize on composite prognostic scores from diverse resources with clinical utility in CRC.

ctDNA and Adjuvant Therapy for Colorectal Cancer: Time to Re-Invent Our Treatment Paradigm

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. While there have been significant developments in the treatments for patients with metastatic CRC in recent years, improving outcomes in the adjuvant setting has been more challenging. Recent technological advances in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) assay with the ability to detect minimal residual disease (MRD) after curative intent surgery will fundamentally change how we assess recurrence risk and conduct adjuvant trials. Studies in non-metastatic CRC have now demonstrated the prognostic impact of ctDNA analysis after curative intent surgery over and above current standard of care clinicopathological criteria. This ability of ctDNA analysis to stratify patients into low- and very-high-risk groups provides a window of opportunity to personalise adjuvant treatment where escalation/de-escalation of adjuvant systemic therapy could potentially increase cure rates and also reduce treatment-related physical and financial toxicity. Emerging data suggest that conversion of ctDNA from detectable to undetectable after adjuvant chemotherapy may reflect treatment efficacy. This real-time assessment of treatment benefit could be used as a surrogate endpoint for adjuvant novel drug development. Several ctDNA-based randomized adjuvant trials are ongoing internationally to confirm the clinical utility of ctDNA in colorectal cancer.

The Landmark Series: Chemotherapy for Non-Metastatic Colon Cancer

Micrometastatic disease that is present at the time of surgery is responsible for the overwhelming majority of deaths in patients with what is otherwise perceived to be local and regional colon cancer. The goal of perioperative therapy is to eliminate microscopic residual disease that would otherwise be left behind following surgery. A secondary goal specific to neoadjuvant (preoperative) therapy is to downstage tumors deemed potentially not amenable to an R0 resection on the basis of a suspected T4b primary (locally invading into a surrounding structure). In this landmark series paper, we review the current standard for perioperative therapy in patients with colon cancer.

Statistical Considerations for Trials in Adjuvant Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

The design of the best possible clinical trials of adjuvant interventions in colorectal cancer will entail the use of both time-tested and novel methods that allow efficient, reliable and patient-relevant therapeutic development. The ultimate goal of this endeavor is to safely and expeditiously bring to clinical practice novel interventions that impact patient lives. In this paper, we discuss statistical aspects and provide suggestions to optimize trial design, data collection, study implementation, and the use of predictive biomarkers and endpoints in phase 3 trials of systemic adjuvant therapy. We also discuss the issues of collaboration and patient centricity, expecting that several novel agents with activity in the (neo)adjuvant therapy of colon and rectal cancers will become available in the near future.

SMAD4-Expressing Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas Have Better Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy and Significantly Lower Lymph Node Metastasis Rates

OBJECTIVE

For many patients whose pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is locally advanced, neoadjuvant therapy has been proposed as a way to decrease tumor burden. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is generally thought to be resistant to chemotherapy and radiation, however, response to neoadjuvant therapy in PDAC has been described in a subset of patients. The SMAD4 status is considered to be an important molecular feature which distinguishes two subsets of PDAC, SMAD4-positive and -negative tumors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the neoadjuvant treatment response rate as well as compare the different clinicopathologic variables between SMAD4-positive and -negative tumors.

METHODS

We analyzed the data of patients who underwent surgical resection for PDAC from 2009-2019. Our cohort from a single institution included 233 patients.

RESULTS

Of the 233 cases, 143 (61.4%) were SMAD4-negative and 90 (38.6%) were SMAD4-positive. Overall, SMAD4-positive tumors with neoadjuvant therapy had better treatment response and better tumor regression scores. In addition, SMAD4-positive tumors had a significantly lower lymph node metastasis rate in both the neoadjuvant and nonneoadjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Further characterization of the role of SMAD4 within the context of neoadjuvant therapy will lead to improved personalized therapeutic strategies.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer

In patients with stage III colon cancer (CC), adjuvant chemotherapy with the combination of oxapliplatin to a fluoropyrimidine (FOLFOX or CAPOX) is a standard of care. The duration of treatment can be reduced from 6 months to 3 months, depending on the regimen, for patients at low risk of recurrence, without loss of effectiveness and allowing a significant reduction in the risk of cumulative sensitive neuropathy. However, our capacity to identify patients that do really need this doublet adjuvant treatment remains limited. In fact, only 30% at the most will actually benefit from this adjuvant treatment, 50% of them being already cured by the surgery and 20% of them experiencing disease recurrence despite the adjuvant treatment. Thus, it is necessary to be able to better predict individually for each patient the risk of recurrence and the need for adjuvant chemotherapy together with the need of new treatment approaches for specific subgroups. Many biomarkers have been described with their own prognostic weight, without leading to any change in clinical practices for now. In this review, we will first discuss the recommendations for adjuvant chemotherapy, and then the different biomarkers described and the future perspectives for the management of stage III CC.

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.

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.

Comprehensive literature review of randomized clinical trials examining novel treatment advances in patients with colon cancer

The treatment of colon cancer has had numerous recent advances, in terms of surgical approach, adjuvant therapies, and more. In this review, the authors examine randomized clinical trials comparing open surgery to laparoscopic surgery (including total mesocolic excision), and also examine the role of robotic surgery. Novel surgical techniques including the no-touch technique, side-to-side anastomosis, suture technique, complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL), and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) are outlined. The role of placing endoscopic self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for colonic obstruction is compared and contrasted with the surgical approach, and the effect that the anti-VEGF inhibitor bevacizumab may have on this side effect profile is further explored. The role of the resection of the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic disease is examined with respect to survival benefit. Pathways of perioperative care which can accelerate post-surgical recovery, including enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are examined. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II and patients with stage III disease is examined, along with the role on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as well as with the biologic targeted agents cetuximab and bevacizumab. Lastly, the authors detail the postoperative surveillance schedules after surgical resection with respect to survival outcomes.

Genomic Alterations and Their Implications on Survival in Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer: Status Quo and Future Perspectives

The selection of treatment according to genomic alterations is a standard approach in metastatic colorectal cancer but is only starting to have an impact in the earlier stages of the disease. The status if genes like KRAS, BRAF, and MMR has substantial survival implications, and concerted research efforts have revolutionized treatment towards precision oncology. In contrast, a genomic-based approach has not changed the adjuvant setting after curative tumor-resection in the daily routine so far. This review focuses on the current knowledge regarding prognostic and predictive genomic biomarkers in patients with locally advanced nonmetastasized colorectal cancer. Furthermore, we provide an outlook on future challenges for a personalized adjuvant treatment approach in patients with colorectal cancer.

ColoType: a forty gene signature for consensus molecular subtyping of colorectal cancer tumors using whole-genome assay or targeted RNA-sequencing

Colorectal cancer (CRC) tumors can be partitioned into four biologically distinct consensus molecular subtypes (CMS1-4) using gene expression. Evidence is accumulating that tumors in different subtypes are likely to respond differently to treatments. However, to date, there is no clinical diagnostic test for CMS subtyping. In this study, we used novel methodology in a multi-cohort training domain (n = 1,214) to develop the ColoType scores and classifier to predict CMS1-4 based on expression of 40 genes. In three validation cohorts (n = 1,744, in total) representing three distinct gene-expression measurement technologies, ColoType predicted gold-standard CMS subtypes with accuracies 0.90, 0.91, 0.88, respectively. To accommodate for potential intratumoral heterogeneity and tumors of mixed subtypes, ColoType was designed to report continuous scores measuring the prevalence of each of CMS1-4 in a tumor, in addition to specifying the most prevalent subtype. For analysis of clinical specimens, ColoType was also implemented with targeted RNA-sequencing (Illumina AmpliSeq). In a series of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded CRC samples (n = 49), ColoType by targeted RNA-sequencing agreed with subtypes predicted by two independent methods with accuracies 0.92, 0.82, respectively. With further validation, ColoType by targeted RNA-sequencing, may enable clinical application of CMS subtyping with widely-available and cost-effective technology.

ABCG2 Protein Levels and Association to Response to First-Line Irinotecan-Based Therapy for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

In this study we investigated the use of cancer cell protein expression of ABCG2 to predict efficacy of systemic first-line irinotecan containing therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). From a Danish national cohort, we identified 119 mCRC patients treated with irinotecan containing therapy in first-line setting. Among these, 108 were eligible for analyses. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) analyses were performed on the primary tumor tissue in order to classify samples as high or low presence of ABCG2 protein. Data were then associated with patient outcome (objective response (OR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)). ABCG2 protein expression in the basolateral membrane was high (score 3+) in 33% of the patients. Exploratory analyses revealed a significant interaction between ABCG2 score, adjuvant treatment and OR (p = 0.041) in the 101 patients with evaluable disease. Patients with low ABCG2 (score 0-2) and no prior adjuvant therapy had a significantly higher odds ratio of 5.6 (Confidence Interval (CI) 1.68-18.7; p = 0.005) for obtaining OR. In contrast, no significant associations between ABCG2 expression and PFS or OS were found. These results suggest that measurement of the ABCG2 drug efflux pump might be used to select patients with mCRC for irinotecan treatment. However, additional studies are warranted before conclusions regarding a clinical use can be made. Moreover, patients with high ABCG2 immunoreactivity could be candidates for specific ABCG2 inhibition treatment in combination with irinotecan.

PDXGEM: patient-derived tumor xenograft-based gene expression model for predicting clinical response to anticancer therapy in cancer patients

Background

Cancer is a highly heterogeneous disease with varying responses to anti-cancer drugs. Although several attempts have been made to predict the anti-cancer therapeutic responses, there remains a great need to develop highly accurate prediction models of response to the anti-cancer drugs for clinical applications toward a personalized medicine. Patient derived xenografts (PDXs) are preclinical cancer models in which the tissue or cells from a patient’s tumor are implanted into an immunodeficient or humanized mouse. In the present study, we develop a bioinformatics analysis pipeline to build a predictive gene expression model (GEM) for cancer patients’ drug responses based on gene expression and drug activity data from PDX models.

Results

Drug sensitivity biomarkers were identified by performing an association analysis between gene expression levels and post-treatment tumor volume changes in PDX models. We built a drug response prediction model (called PDXGEM) in a random-forest algorithm by using a subset of the drug sensitvity biomarkers with concordant co-expression patterns between the PDXs and pretreatment cancer patient tumors. We applied the PDXGEM to several cytotoxic chemotherapies as well as targeted therapy agents that are used to treat breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, colorectal cancer, or non-small cell lung cancer. Significantly accurate predictions of PDXGEM for pathological response or survival outcomes were observed in extensive independent validations on multiple cancer patient datasets obtained from retrospective observational studies and prospective clinical trials.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrated the strong potential of using molecular profiles and drug activity data of PDX tumors in developing a clinically translatable predictive cancer biomarkers for cancer patients. The PDXGEM web application is publicly available at http://pdxgem.moffitt.org.

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.

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.