Primary tumor location and survival in colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study

Sidedness is not a prognostic factor in an unselected cohort of patients with colon cancer but prognosis for caecal carcinoma is worse - A multivariate analysis of a large single institution database

PURPOSE

Sidedness has emerged as a prognostic factor for metastatic colorectal cancer treated with modern systemic therapies. This study investigates whether it is also relevant for an unselected patient cohort including all stages.

METHODS

All consecutive patients admitted with colon cancer between 1995 and 2018 were retrieved from an institution-held database. Patients were divided into two cohorts. The first cohort included patients without distant metastases who were able to undergo curative resection. The second cohort presented with distant metastases (stage IV). Potentially prognostic factors were subjected to multivariate Cox Regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,606 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. An R0-resection was achieved in 1,222 patients without distant metastases. Five-year cause-specific survival rate was 89.3% for this group. There was no difference between right- and left-sided cancers (88.2% vs. 90.1%, p = 0.220). However, prognosis of caecal carcinoma was significantly worse than that of all other sites combined (83.5% vs. 90.2%, p = 0.007). In multivariate analysis, pT-category, pN-category, grading, vascular invasion, emergency operation, adjuvant chemotherapy, and caecal carcinoma remained as independent prognostic factors. In the 384 patients with stage IV-disease, 3-year overall survival for right- vs. left-sided cancers differed only in univariate analysis (17.7% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

In non-metastatic colon cancer, location in the caecum is an independent prognostic factor. In unselected patients with stage IV colon cancer, sidedness was not found to be a prognostic factor. Differentiation into right- and left-sided tumors may be simplistic, and further studies on the biological behavior of different colonic sites are warranted.

Real-World Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Spain: The RWD-ACROSS Study

The retrospective, observational RWD-ACROSS study analyzed disease characteristics, systemic treatment, and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain. In total, 2002 patients were enrolled (mean age 65.3 years; 62.7% male). Overall median overall survival (OS) was 26.72 months, and was longer in patients with left-sided tumors (28.85 vs. 21.04 months (right-sided tumors); p < 0.0001) and in patients receiving first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment (31.21 vs. 26.75 (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment) and 24.45 months (chemotherapy); p = 0.002). Overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.72 months and was longer in patients with left-sided tumors (11.24 vs. 9.31 months (right-sided tumors); p < 0.0001), and in patients receiving either first-line anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF (12.13 and 12.00 vs. 8.98 months (chemotherapy); p < 0.001). PFS was longer with anti-VEGF treatment in patients with right-sided tumors and wild-type RAS (11.24 vs. 8.78 (anti-EGFR) and 7.83 months (chemotherapy); p = 0.025). Both anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF produced longer PFS in patients with left-sided tumors and wild-type RAS than chemotherapy alone (12.39 and 13.14 vs. 9.83 months; p = 0.011). In patients with left-sided tumors and mutant RAS, anti-VEGF produced a longer PFS than chemotherapy alone (12.36 vs. 9.34 months; p = 0.001). In Spain, wild-type RAS or left-sided mCRC tumors are predictive of longer survival times.

The effects of chemotherapy, primary tumor location and histological subtype on the survival of stage III colon cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Colon cancer (CC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide and has a poor prognosis. Surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard treatment strategy for stage III CC patients. Primary tumor location (PTL) is an important factor for the long-term survival of CC. However, the difference in the prognosis between the histological subtypes of mucinous adenocarcinoma (MAC) and nonspecific adenocarcinoma (AC) in stage III CC patients is unclear. The correlation of chemotherapy, PTL and histological subtype with the overall survival (OS) of stage III CC patients has not yet been explored.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with stage III CC from 2010 to 2016 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were retrieved. The clinicopathological features and OS were analyzed according to the chemotherapy, PTL and histological subtype.

RESULTS

A total of 28,765 eligible stage III CC patients were enrolled in this study. The results showed that chemotherapy, left-sided CC (LCC) and AC were favorable prognostic factors for OS. Right-sided CC (RCC) had worse OS than LCC regardless of chemotherapy. MAC had worse OS than AC in the patients with chemotherapy, but the survival benefits disappeared in the patients without chemotherapy. Additionally, in LCC, MAC had worse OS than AC regardless of chemotherapy. However, in RCC, MAC had worse OS than AC in patients with chemotherapy but had similar OS to AC in patients without chemotherapy. In the AC group, RCC had worse OS than LCC regardless of chemotherapy. In the MAC group, RCC had comparable OS to LCC regardless of chemotherapy. Four subgroups, i.e., RCC/MAC, RCC/AC, LCC/MAC and LCC/AC, all showed benefits from chemotherapy. Among them, LCC/AC had the best OS, and RCC/MAC had the worst OS compared with the other three subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The prognosis of MAC is worse than that of AC in stage III CC. LCC/AC has the best OS, while RCC/MAC has the worst OS but still benefits from chemotherapy. The impact of chemotherapy on survival is greater than that of histological subtype, but the impact of histological subtype on survival is similar to that of PTL.

Impact of primary tumor resection on the survival of patients with unresectable colon cancer liver metastasis at different colonic subsites: a propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) on the prognosis of patients with unresectable colon cancer liver metastasis (UCCLM) at seven colonic subsites using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance selection bias using all available variables that could be of potential relevance. After matching, the groups were redefined in a 1:1 ratio using the nearest method. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was compared among the patients of PTR and non-PTR groups. Cox regression models were used to identify the prognostic factors for CSS.

RESULTS

CSS was significantly different between all groups. Cox regression analysis showed that PTR was an independent prognostic factor for all groups. After PSM, PTR significantly prolonged CSS for all groups. Subgroup analysis showed that PTR did not improve the prognosis of N2 stage patients in the cecum, ascending colon, and descending colon groups; T1 + T2 stage patients in the hepatic flexure group; and patients with a tumor size ≤5 cm in the splenic flexure group. Segmental colectomy could prolong CSS of patients in the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, splenic flexure, and sigmoid colon groups, while extended colectomy could prolong CSS of patients in the hepatic flexure and descending colon groups.

CONCLUSION

At different colonic subsites, UCCLM patients had different CSS. PTR could improve their prognosis, however, N stage, T stage, and tumor size are important reference indicators. In addition to patients in the hepatic flexure and descending colon groups, we suggested that patients in other groups should choose segmental colectomy.

Comparative Analysis of First-Line FOLFOX Treatment With and Without Anti-VEGF Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma: A Real-World Data Study

BACKGROUND

FOLFOX (leucovorin calcium [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) combined with or without anti-VEGF therapy represents one of the primary first-line treatment options for metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). However, there is limited comparative data on the impact of anti-VEGF therapy on treatment effectiveness, survival outcomes, and tumor location.

METHODS

This retrospective, comparative study utilized data from the AIM Cancer Care Quality Program and commercially insured patients treated at medical oncology clinics in the US. We analyzed 1652 mCRC patients who received FOLFOX, of which 1015 (61.4%) were also treated with anti-VEGF therapy (VEGF cohort).

RESULTS

Patients in the VEGF cohort exhibited a higher frequency of lung (33% vs 23%; P < .001) and liver metastases (74% vs 62%; P < .001), underwent fewer liver surgeries prior to treatment (1.2% vs 3.6%; P = .002), and had a higher proportion of right-sided tumors (27% vs 18%; P = .001). Adjusted analysis revealed no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between patients treated with and without anti-VEGF (median survival: 25.4 vs 26.0 months; P = .4). FOLFOX-only treated patients experienced higher rates of post-treatment hospitalizations (22% vs 15%; P < .001). Notably, left-sided tumors treated with anti-VEGF showed a trend toward decreased OS (median survival: 26.8 vs 33 months; P = .09).

CONCLUSION

Our real-world data analysis suggests that the addition of anti-VEGF to FOLFOX offers limited and short-lived benefits in the context of mCRC and may provide differential survival benefit based on tumor sidedness.

Primary tumor location as a predictor of survival in patients with RAS wild-type colorectal cancer who receive molecularly targeted drugs as first-line therapy: a multicenter real-world observational study by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum

BACKGROUND

Primary tumor location is considered a predictor of overall survival (OS) in RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with bevacizumab (BEV) or an anti-epidermal growth factor antibody (cetuximab or panitumumab [CET/PAN]) as first-line molecularly targeted therapy. BEV is recommended for right-sided mCRC and CET/PAN for left-sided mCRC based on post-hoc analyses of clinical trial data, but real-world evidence is lacking.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data of patients who started BEV or CET/PAN plus 5-fluorouracil-based doublet chemotherapy between January 2013 and December 2016 as first-line treatment for RAS WT mCRC at any of 24 Japanese institutions. OS was compared between the BEV and CET/PAN groups according to primary tumor location by Cox multivariate regression analysis in the full cohort and in a propensity score-matched cohort.

RESULTS

In total, 935 patients were enrolled. Median OS was 24.6 months with BEV and 20.9 months with CET/PAN in right-sided mCRC (n = 213; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-1.06) and 35.7 months and 30.0 months, respectively, in left-sided mCRC (n = 722; adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74-1.13). In the propensity score-matched cohort, OS was significantly better in the BEV group than in the CET/PAN group in right-sided mCRC (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28-0.96) but was not significantly different in left-sided mCRC (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.53-1.07).

CONCLUSION

Real-world data showed that OS was better with BEV than with CET/PAN in right-sided mCRC. However, there was no significant difference in OS in left-sided mCRC.

TRIM29 is differentially expressed in colorectal cancers of different primary locations and affects survival by regulating tumor immunity based on retrospective study and bioinformatics analysis

Background

In colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, different primary tumor locations caused distinct prognosis and clinicopathological features. It is necessary to identify specific tumor markers according tumor site. Our previous work has identified differentially expressed genes between CRC and adjacent normal tissues, in which only TRIM29 was differently expressed between right colon cancer (RCC) and left colon cancer (LCC) patients. Rectal cancer (RECC) was not included in this latter study and the effects of TRIM29 on the survival with RCC and LCC patients were not investigated. This study further verified TRIM29 expression through Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database and our retrospective study. The role of TRIM29 on survival according tumor sites was also explored. Furthermore, the molecular mechanisms of TRIM29 were explored.

Methods

The GEO dataset was used to confirm the differential expression of TRIM29 in proximal and distal cancers. Moreover, TRIM29 were assess using immunohistochemistry (IHC) in 227 cases to observe the correlation between TRIM29 and tumor site. The relationship between TRIM29 and the clinicopathologic features was investigated according tumor sites. Furthermore, the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method to assess the prognostic value of TRIM29. Finally, bioinformatics analysis was used to explore the molecular mechanisms. The Tumor-Immune System Interactions and Drug Bank database (TISIDB) was used to analyze the correlations between TRIM29 expression and tumor immune functions. The correlation of TRIM29 with tumor infiltrating lymphocytes or mismatch-repair-proficient/mismatch-repair-deficient (pMMR/dMMR) status was also investigated.

Results

TRIM29 expression was significantly higher in patients with RCC (P<0.001). RCC patients with high TRIM29 tended to be older, male, in stage III-IV, with N+ staging, and intestinal obstruction (P<0.001, P<0.001, P<0.001, P<0.001, and P=0.010, respectively). High TRIM29 expression was associated with an increased risk of recurrence/metastasis and death, only in RCC patients (P=0.020 and P<0.001). Functional annotations and immune activity analysis showed that TRIM29 is related to tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and immune dysfunction.

Conclusions

TRIM29 plays varying roles in patients with different tumor sites. TRIM29 is correlated with the clinicopathological features and prognosis in RCC patients. Indeed, TRIM29 may serve as a new biomarker for RCC patients.

Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of HLX04 Versus Reference Bevacizumab in Combination with XELOX or mFOLFOX6 as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind Phase III Study

Background

HLX04 is a proposed biosimilar of bevacizumab.

Objective

This phase III study aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of HLX04 compared with reference bevacizumab in combination with XELOX or mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for recurrent/metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods

In this double-blind, parallel-group study, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive HLX04 or bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks when combined with XELOX; 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks when combined with mFOLFOX6). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival rate at week 36 (PFSR_36w) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1). Prespecified equivalence margins of PFSR_36w were set as − 11 to 15% (rate difference) and 0.8 to 1.25 (rate ratio). Secondary endpoints included efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics.

Results

A total of 677 patients were randomized (HLX04 n = 340; bevacizumab n = 337) between April 2018 and April 2020. PFSR_36w was 46.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.1–51.8) with HLX04 and 50.7% (95% CI 45.4–56.1) with bevacizumab. The rate difference (− 4.2%; 90% CI − 10.6 to 2.1) and rate ratio (0.92; 90% CI 0.80–1.05) both fell within the prespecified equivalence margins. No notable differences were observed between treatment groups in any efficacy endpoints or their subgroup analyses. Safety, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetic profiles were comparable between the two treatment groups.

Conclusions

HLX04 demonstrated equivalent efficacy with similar safety and immunogenicity profiles to reference bevacizumab among patients with recurrent/metastatic CRC, thus offering an alternative treatment option to patients.

Trial registration

Chinadrugtrials.org.cn, CTR20171503 (18 March 2018); ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03511963 (30 April 2018).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40259-021-00484-9.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. Approximately 20% of patients with CRC have metastases at their first visit. Bevacizumab is a biologic antibody approved in many countries for the treatment of metastatic CRC. However, high treatment costs significantly limit patient access to bevacizumab. Therefore, HLX04, a potential bevacizumab biosimilar, which is almost identical to bevacizumab but less expensive and more accessible, has been developed. This randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy (ability of a drug to produce the desired treatment effects), safety, and immunogenicity (ability of a drug to induce immune response that would affect its efficacy and safety) of HLX04 compared with the reference bevacizumab in patients with recurrent/metastatic CRC. Efficacy of the tested drug was evaluated by comparing the proportion of patients without disease progression or death at week 36 (PFSR_36w). Safety was monitored using adverse events and other clinical evaluations. Immunogenicity was assessed by the incidence of antidrug antibodies. Of the 677 patients enrolled in the study, 340 received HLX04 and 337 received bevacizumab. Statistical analyses showed that HLX04 was equivalent to bevacizumab in efficacy evaluations (the difference in PFSR_36w between the two treatment groups fell within the prespecified “equivalence margins”). Moreover, the two treatments were similar with respect to safety and immunogenicity evaluations. In summary, patients responded equally well to HLX04 and bevacizumab, supporting the development of HLX04 as a proposed biosimilar to bevacizumab for patients with recurrent/metastatic CRC.

Identification and validation of an immune-related gene signature predictive of overall survival in colon cancer

The heterogeneity and complexity of tumor-immune microenvironments lead to diverse immunotherapy effects among colon cancer patients. It is crucial to identify immune microenvironment-related biomarkers and construct prognostic risk models. In this study, the immune and stromal scores of 415 cases from TCGA were calculated using the ESTIMATE algorithm. AXIN2, CCL22, CLEC10A, CRIP2, RUNX3, and TRPM5 were screened and established a prognostic immune-related gene (IRG) signature using by univariate, LASSO, and multivariate Cox regression models. The predicted performance of IRG signature was external validated by GSE39582 (n=519). Stratified survival analysis showed IRG signature was an effective predictor of survival in patients with different clinical characteristics. The protein expression level of six genes was validated by immunohistochemistry analysis. Difference analysis indicated the mutation rate, immune cell of resting NK cells and regulatory T cells infiltration and four immune checkpoints of PD-1, PD-L1, LAG3 and VSIR expression levels in the high-risk group were significantly higher than those in the low-risk group. A nomogram incorporating the gene signatures and clinical factors was demonstrated had a good accuracy (1-, 3-, and 5-year AUC= 0.799, 0.791, 0.738). Our study identified a novel IRG signature, which may provide some references for the clinical precision immunotherapy of patients.