The association of clinical and patient factors with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in colorectal cancer: secondary analysis of the SCOT trial

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common adverse effect of oxaliplatin. CIPN can impair long-term quality of life and limit the dose of chemotherapy. We investigated the association of CIPN over time with age, sex, body mass index, baseline neuropathy, and chemotherapy regimen in people treated with adjuvant oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out secondary analysis of data from the SCOT randomised controlled trial. SCOT compared 3 months to 6 months of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy in 6088 people with colorectal cancer recruited between March 2008 and November 2013. Two different chemotherapy regimens were used: capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) or fluorouracil with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX). CIPN was recorded with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynaecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity 4 tool in 2871 participants from baseline (randomisation) for up to 8 years. Longitudinal trends in CIPN [averages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)] were plotted stratified by the investigated factors. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to analyse the association of factors with CIPN adjusting for the SCOT randomisation arm and oxaliplatin dose. P < 0.01 was adopted as cut-off for statistical significance to account for multiple testing.

RESULTS

Patients receiving CAPOX had lower CIPN scores than those receiving FOLFOX. Chemotherapy regimen was associated with CIPN from 6 months (P < 0.001) to 2 years (P = 0.001). The adjusted ANCOVA coefficient for CAPOX at 6 months was -1.6 (95% CIs -2.2 to -0.9) and at 2 years it was -1.6 (95% CIs -2.5 to -0.7). People with baseline neuropathy scores ≥1 experienced higher CIPN than people with baseline neuropathy scores of 0 (P < 0.01 for all timepoints apart from 18 months). Age, sex, and body mass index did not link with CIPN.

CONCLUSIONS

A neuropathy assessment before treatment with oxaliplatin can help identify people with an increased risk of CIPN. More research is needed to understand the CIPN-inducing effect of different chemotherapy regimens.

SCOT: Tumor Sidedness and the Influence of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Duration on Disease Free Survival (DFS)

AIM

Patients with loco-regional right-sided colorectal tumors have a worse overall survival (OS). Here we investigate the difference in disease free survival (DFS) between colorectal patients with right and left sided tumors in the SCOT study.

METHODS

The SCOT study showed 3-months of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy (OxFp) is non-inferior to 6-months for patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colorectal cancer. We divided the cohort into patients with left and right sided tumors, and evaluated the effect on DFS and the principle 3 versus 6-months analysis.

RESULTS

6088 patients with Stage III/high risk Stage II colorectal cancers were randomized between 27th March 2008 and 29th November 2013 from 244 centers internationally. In February 2017 (3-years FU) information on sidedness was available for 3309 patients (1238 R-sided, 2071 L-sided). Patients with right-sided tumors had a significantly worse DFS (3-year DFS right: 73.3% (se = 1.3%), left: 80.2% (se = 0.9%) HR 1.423 (95% CI 1.237-1.637; P < .0001). Adjusting for T and N-stage reduced the HR to 1.230 (95% CI 1.066-1.420, P = .005). The data did not suggest that sidedness affected the impact of chemotherapy duration on 3-year DFS (R: HR 1.024 [0.831-1.261], L: HR 0.944 [0.783-1.139]). Test for heterogeneity, P = .571. Further sub-set analysis was limited due to cohort size.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to show that unselected patients with right-sided tumors had a worse DFS compared to left-sided tumors. Tumor sidedness did not impact upon the 3-months versus 6-months comparison in SCOT.

Codon-specific KRAS mutations predict survival benefit of trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer

Genomics has greatly improved how patients with cancer are being treated; however, clinical-grade genomic biomarkers for chemotherapies are currently lacking. Using whole-genome analysis of 37 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with the chemotherapy trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI), we identified KRAS codon G12 (KRAS^G12) mutations as a potential biomarker of resistance. Next, we collected real-world data of 960 patients with mCRC receiving FTD/TPI and validated that KRAS^G12 mutations were significantly associated with poor survival, also in analyses restricted to the RAS/RAF mutant subgroup. We next analyzed the data of the global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RECOURSE trial (n = 800 patients) and found that KRAS^G12 mutations (n = 279) were predictive biomarkers for reduced overall survival (OS) benefit of FTD/TPI versus placebo (unadjusted interaction P = 0.0031, adjusted interaction P = 0.015). For patients with KRAS^G12 mutations in the RECOURSE trial, OS was not prolonged with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 279; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73-1.20; P = 0.85). In contrast, patients with KRAS^G13 mutant tumors showed significantly improved OS with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 60; HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.15-0.55; P < 0.001). In isogenic cell lines and patient-derived organoids, KRAS^G12 mutations were associated with increased resistance to FTD-based genotoxicity. In conclusion, these data show that KRAS^G12 mutations are biomarkers for reduced OS benefit of FTD/TPI treatment, with potential implications for approximately 28% of patients with mCRC under consideration for treatment with FTD/TPI. Furthermore, our data suggest that genomics-based precision medicine may be possible for a subset of chemotherapies.

Prognostic Impact of Early Treatment and Oxaliplatin Discontinuation in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: An ACCENT/IDEA Pooled Analysis of 11 Adjuvant Trials

PURPOSE

Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) for 6 months remains a standard in high-risk stage III patients. Data are lacking as to whether early discontinuation of all treatment (ETD) or early discontinuation of oxaliplatin (EOD) could worsen the prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied the prognostic impact of ETD and EOD in patients with stage III CC from the ACCENT/IDEA databases, where patients were planned to receive 6 months of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin. ETD was defined as discontinuation of treatment and EOD as discontinuation of oxaliplatin only before patients had received a maximum of 75% of planned cycles. Association between ETD/EOD and overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed by Cox models adjusted for established prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Analysis of ETD and EOD included 10,447 (20.9% with ETD) and 7,243 (18.8% with EOD) patients, respectively. Compared with patients without ETD or EOD, patients with ETD or EOD were statistically more likely to be women, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 1, and for ETD, older with a lower body mass index. In multivariable analyses, ETD was associated with a decrease in disease-free survival and overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61, P < .001 and HR, 1.73, P < .001), which was not the case for EOD (HR, 1.07, P = .3 and HR, 1.13, P = .1). However, patients who received < 50% of the planned cycles of oxaliplatin had poorer outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In patients treated with 6 months of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for stage III CC, ETD was associated with poorer oncologic outcomes. However, this was not the case for EOD. These data favor discontinuing oxaliplatin while continuing fluoropyrimidine in individuals with significant neurotoxicity having received > 50% of the planned 6-month chemotherapy.

NEOPRISM-CRC: Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab stratified to tumor mutation burden for high-risk stage 2 or stage 3 deficient-MMR/MSI-high colorectal cancer

TPS3645

Background: The prognostic advantage of early stage deficient-MMR/MSI-High CRC is lost after relapse, so there is a pressing clinical need to maximize the chance of cure in the early stages where prevalence of dMMR is higher comprising approximately 12% of Stage 3 and 20% of Stage 2 CRC. The efficacy of adjuvant checkpoint inhibition in this patient group has yet to be demonstrated in the context of micrometastatic disease without a supporting immune-competent microenvironment. Longitudinal studies especially in the neoadjuvant setting would optimally interrogate post-immunotherapy changes both in time and space. The NEOPRISM-CRC (NEOadjuvant PembRolizumab In Stratified Medicine – ColoReCtal) study is a Phase II Trial to determine whether neoadjuvant Pembrolizumab stratified to tumour mutation burden (TMB) is efficacious and safe. It will also be a platform to explore the relationships between possible predictive novel biomarkers and response to Pembrolizumab in blood, tumour tissue and microbiome. Methods: The study population consists of subjects with newly diagnosed operable dMMR/MSI-H CRC. Patients must be fit and eligible for planned curative surgery based on a) radiological node positive T1-4 CRC or b) high risk T3 defined as EITHER ≥ 5mm of extramural depth of invasion or unequivocal EMVI on imaging (regardless of depth), or T4 disease. They will receive one of two pre-operative regimens depending upon their TMB based on the FoundationOne®CDx test (FM1CDx). All patients will have one 21 day cycle of Pembrolizumab 200 mg IV. Prior to cycle 2 and with the result of the FM1CDx test, patients will continue their treatment as follows: A) TMB-high (defined as ≥20 mutations per Mb) or TMB-medium (defined as 6-19 mutations per Mb), or MSI-H on PCR if FM1CDx test is not evaluable: A further 2 cycles of Pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 21 days. B) TMB-low (defined as ≤5 mutations per Mb), or if FM1CDx and PCR tests are not evaluable: No further Pembrolizumab given. Surgery to remove the CRC will be performed 4-6 weeks after the last dose of Pembrolizumab in both arms. Following resection patients may receive adjuvant chemotherapy in accordance with local institutional guidelines. The primary end point is pathological complete response rate (pCR). Secondary endpoints include 3 year RFS, OS, safety and health-related quality of life. Up to 32 patients will be registered over a 18-24 month period assuming that the pCR with 3 cycles of Pembrolizumab will be ≥ 33% for patients with high or medium TMB based on the FM1CDx profile, and intend to rule out a percentage ≤10%. To reach 80% power with 5% statistical significance, 19 patients are required in the high/medium TMB arm. The trial will be considered a success if at least 5/19 patients have a pCR after 3 cycles of Pembrolizumab. Enrolment will commence in March 2022. Clinical trial information: NCT05197322.

Clinical performance of Immunoscore in stage III colorectal cancer patients in the SCOT and IDEA-HORG cohorts

196

Background: The ESMO clinical practice guidelines recommend consideration of Immunoscore (IS) for risk assessment of early colon cancer patients. IS clinical performance was assessed in the SCOT and IDEA-HORG trials evaluating 3 vs. 6 months (3m vs. 6m) of mFOLFOX6 adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: 1,002 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples (762 from SCOT;240 from HORG) were collected, of which 851 were eligible for biomarker analysis. Eligible samples were classified into 2 groups using pre-defined cut-offs (IS-Low, IS- High) and the performance of IS to predict 3 year disease-free survival (3y-DFS) was evaluated. Results: IS was successfully assessed in 846 cases (99%). 615 (72.7%) samples were classified as IS-High (311 and 304 in 3m and 6m arm, respectively). No significant association between IS and patients’ gender, age, PS, BMI or primary tumour location was observed. However, a significant difference between IS-High (43.7%) and IS Low (57.1%) was observed in the proportion of high risk (T4 and/or N2) tumours (p=0.001). Patients with IS-High tumors had significantly longer 3y-DFS (79.4%, 95%CI: 75.9%-82.4%) compared to those with IS-Low tumors (65.0%, 95%CI: 58.3%-70.9%); adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.9 (95%CI: 1.46-2.46; p<0.0001). Similarly, IS-High was significantly correlated with longer 3y-DFS in both treatment arms: 78.5% (95% CI 73.4%-82.7%) for IS-High and 65.8% (95% CI 56.1%-73.9%) for IS-Low in 3m arm; 80.3% (95% CI 75.3%-84.5%) for IS-High and 64.4% (95% CI 54.8%-72.6%) for IS-Low in 6m arm. The estimated HRs according to treatment duration and IS classification were 1.80 (95% CI 1.25-2.60) in 3m arm, 2.00 (95% CI 1.38-2.92) in 6m arm and 1.89 (95% CI 1.46-2.47) in the total study population; interaction p = 0.687. Conclusions: The results of this study confirm the prognostic value of IS observed in the IDEA-France trial (Pagès F et al 2020). However, this analysis was not powered to determine the predictive value of IS for treatment duration. Similar analysis of patients treated with CAPOX is warranted.

Prognostic impact of early treatment discontinuation and early oxaliplatin discontinuation in patients treated with 6 months of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: an ACCENT/IDEA pooled analysis of 11 trials

11

Background: Six months of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) remains a standard in high-risk stage III patients. Early treatment discontinuation (ETD) could worsen the prognosis. In addition, there is current lack of data on the prognostic impact of early oxaliplatin only discontinuation (EOD). Methods: We studied the prognostic impact of ETD and EOD in patients with stage III CC who participated in 11 relevant clinical trials of the ACCENT and IDEA databases, where patients were planned to receive 6 months of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX or CAPOX). ETD was defined as discontinuation of treatment before 75% of cycles of chemotherapy. EOD was defined as discontinuation of oxaliplatin only, while continuing the fluoropyrimidine, before 75% of cycles of oxaliplatin. Association between ETD/EOD and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) was assessed by Cox model adjusted for prognostic factors. Results: ETD analysis included 10,444 patients (FOLFOX n = 7,033; CAPOX n = 3,411), with 20.9% of patients with ETD (17.8% with FOLFOX and 27.2% with CAPOX, p < 0.001). Out of 7,243 patients, 18.8% experienced EOD (17.4% FOLFOX versus 21.4% with CAPOX, p < 0.001). Compared to patients without ETD or EOD, patients with ETD or EOD were statistically more likely to be women, older, with higher ECOG-PS ≥ 1, and in addition for ETD, a Body Mass Index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m2. In multivariate analyses, ETD was associated with a decrease in DFS and OS in the overall population (HR: 1.40 95%CI 1.23-1.58, p < 0.001 and HR: 1.51 95%CI 1.31-1.74, p < 0.001, respectively). The same pattern was present with FOLFOX and CAPOX regimen, and also in low-risk and high-risk groups for each regimen with the exception of the CAPOX regimen in the low-risk group for DFS and OS. By contrast, EOD was not associated with reduced DFS or OS in the overall population (HR: 1.10 95%CI 0.77-1.58, p = 0.6 and HR: 0.97 95%CI 0.62-1.52, p = 0.9, respectively), in the low-risk group (HR: 0.97 95%CI 0.56-1.66, p = 0.9 and HR: 0.97 95%CI 0.51-1.82, p = 0.9, respectively) and high-risk group (HR: 1.22 95%CI 0.74-2.02, p = 0.4 and HR: 1.05 95%CI 0.53-2.08, p = 0.9, respectively) and for all subgroups of regimen. Conclusions: In patients treated with 6 months of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III CC, ETD was associated with a decrease in DFS and OS. By contrast, EOD was not significantly associated with poorer outcomes. In case of relevant neurotoxicity during a 6 months schedule, these data are not in favor of continuing oxaliplatin beyond 75% of planned cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy, and demonstrate that fluoropyrimidines remain the cornerstone of adjuvant chemotherapy in localized CC.

Early-Onset Colorectal Adenocarcinoma in the IDEA Database: Treatment Adherence, Toxicities, and Outcomes With 3 and 6 Months of Adjuvant Fluoropyrimidine and Oxaliplatin

PURPOSE

Early-onset (EO) colorectal cancer (CRC, age < 50 years) incidence is increasing. Decisions on optimal adjuvant therapy should consider treatment adherence, adverse events, and expected outcomes in a population with life expectancy longer than later-onset (LO) CRC (age ≥ 50 years).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Individual patient data from six trials in the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy database were analyzed. Characteristics, treatment adherence, and adverse events in stage II or III EO-CRC and LO-CRC were compared. To reduce confounders of non-cancer-related deaths because of age or comorbidities, time to recurrence (3-year relapse-free rate) and cancer-specific survival (5-year cancer-specific mortality rate) were considered.

RESULTS

Out of 16,349 patients, 1,564 (9.6%) had EO-CRC. Compared with LO-CRC, EO-CRC had better performance status (86% v 80%, P < .01), similar T stage (% T1-3/T4: 76/24 v 77/23, P = .97), higher N2 disease rate (24% v 22%, P < .01), more likely to complete the planned treatment duration (83.2% v 78.2%, P < .01), and received a higher treatment dose intensity, especially with 6-month regimens. Gastrointestinal toxicity was more common in EO-CRC; hematologic toxicity was more frequent in LO-CRC. Compared with LO-CRC, significantly worse cancer-specific outcomes were demonstrated especially in high-risk stage III EO-CRC: lower 3-year relapse-free rate (54% v 65%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.33; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.55; P value < .001) and higher 5-year cancer-specific mortality rate (24% v 20%; HR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.47; P value < .06). In this subgroup, no difference was observed with 3 or 6 months of therapy, with equally poor disease-free survival rates (57% v 56%; HR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.29; P value = .85).

CONCLUSION

Young age is negatively prognostic in high-risk stage III CRC and associated with significantly higher relapse rate; this is despite better treatment adherence and higher administered treatment intensity, suggesting more aggressive disease biology.

Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A UK Multicenter Real-world Analysis on Efficacy, Safety, Predictive and Prognostic Factors

BACKGROUND

The orally administered combination trifluridine/tipiracil has been approved as third line treatment in mCRC, demonstrating survival benefit and acceptable toxicity profile in the phase III RECOURSE study.

PATIENT AND METHODS

We performed a multicenter retrospective real-world analysis of patients with mCRC receiving trifluridine/tipiracil between 2016 and 2019 in eight cancer centers across the United Kingdom.

RESULTS

A total of 236 patients were included with median age of 69 years. All patients had received at least 2 lines of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy doublet with oxaliplatin or irinotecan. About 10% of patients had ECOG ≥ 2. Median duration of trifluridine/tipiracil treatment was 3 months with an ORR of 2.1% and disease control rate of 21.6%. Median OS was 7.6 and median PFS 3.3 months. A dose reduction was required in 27% of patients, while 7.6% discontinued treatment due to toxicity. The most common grade 3 toxicities were neutropenia (34%), fatigue (10%), anemia (9%) and febrile neutropenia (5%). Baseline NLR <5 and CEA <200 had favorable prognostic (HR: 0.52 and 0.39, P≤ .001) and predictive value (OR: 4.1 and 6.7, P< .05). Development of grade 3 neutropenia predicted treatment response (OR: 0.32, P< .001). Following treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil 41% were referred for phase I trial or rechallenged with chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Trifluridine/tipiracil is well tolerated in refractory mCRC patients with comparable efficacy and toxicity profile to that of the phase III RECOURSE. Pretreatment NLR and CEA could serve as potential markers for patient selection, while treatment-induced grade 3 neutropenia predicted response. Prospective validation is needed.

Do clinical trials change practice? A longitudinal, international assessment of colorectal cancer prescribing practices

INTRODUCTION

Over half of the 1.5 million individuals globally who are diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with stage II-III disease. Understanding clinician attitudes towards treatment for this group is paramount to contextualise real-world outcomes and plan future trials. The aim of this study was to assess clinician awareness of trials assessing the optimal duration of CRC adjuvant therapy, their attitudes towards shorter treatment and their self-reported practice.

METHODS

A survey was developed using OnlineSurveys® and distributed to clinicians in April 2019, with a follow-up survey disseminated to a subset of respondents in August 2020. Microsoft Excel® and Stata® were used for analysis.

RESULTS

265 clinicians replied to the first survey, with the majority aware of findings from the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Therapy collaboration and contributory trials. Practice change was greatest for patients under 70 with low-risk stage III CRC, with most uncertainty around using 3-months of doublet chemotherapy for high-risk stage II disease. In August 2020, clinicians (n = 106) were more likely to use 3-months of FOLFOX for low-risk stage III disease and 3-months of CAPOX for stage II disease compared to April 2019. There was no indication that the COVID-19 pandemic had enduring changes on treatment decisions beyond those made in response to trial evidence.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians use a risk-stratified approach to treat CRC the adjuvant setting. Lower utilisation of doublet chemotherapy for older and stage II patients has affected the extent of trial implementation. Active dialogue regarding how trial results apply to these groups may improve consensus.

The Early Impact of the IDEA Collaboration Results: How the Results Changed Prescribing Practice

Background

Traditionally, adjuvant treatment for colon cancer has been 6 months of combination chemotherapy. Six phase III trials tested the hypothesis that 3 months is noninferior in efficacy to 6 months and reduces long-term side effects for patients. The results were pooled in the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant therapy (IDEA) collaboration. Although this did not meet the noninferiority endpoint, a preplanned subgroup analysis by chemotherapy regimen did demonstrate noninferiority for capecitabine and oxaliplatin. Additionally, risk stratification by T and N stage was defined.

Methods

In an effort to understand the real-life impact of these results, 4 months after the IDEA results, an online survey was distributed to clinicians to ask their approach to the adjuvant treatment of patients with stage III colon cancer.

Results

The survey was completed by 458 clinicians from 12 countries. Assuming that 6 months of treatment was the pretrial standard of care, 89.5% of clinicians reported they had changed practice to prescribe 3 months of treatment for some patients. For patients with low-risk stage III disease, there was a preference for 3 months, and for patients with high-risk stage III disease, most clinicians still prescribed 6 months at that time. Overall, capecitabine and oxaliplatin regimen was the most popular. There were important differences in responses depending on the location of respondent and T and N stage of disease.

Conclusion

This survey shows that the IDEA collaboration has been practice changing but reveals important differences in the way results are interpreted by individual clinicians.

Early-onset stage II/III colorectal adenocarcinoma in the IDEA database: Treatment adherence, toxicities, and outcomes from adjuvant fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin

3517

Background: Incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC, age < 50) is steadily increasing. Decisions on adjuvant treatment (adjTx) regimen and duration should consider tx adherence, toxicity (tox) and expected outcomes in a population with life-expectancy longer than late onset CRC (loCRC, age ≥ 50). Methods: Individual patient data from stage II/III patients (pts) from 6 randomised trials in the IDEA database were used to compare characteristics, tx adherence, and adverse events of eoCRC to loCRC. To reduce the confounder of non-cancer-related deaths due to age/co-morbidities, time-to-recurrence (TTR) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared by stratified Gay k-sample test. 5-year cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rate were estimated by adjusted cumulative incidence function. 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate were compared by stratified and adjusted COX models. Results: Out of 16,349 pts included, 1564 (9.6%) were eoCRC. Compared to loCRC, eoCRC had lower percent of male pts (51% vs 57%, p < 0.01) better performance status (PS0 86% vs 80%, p < 0.01), similar T stage distribution (% T1-3/T4: 76/24 vs 77/23, p = 0.97), higher rate of N2 disease (24% vs 22%, p < 0.01), more likely to complete pre-planned duration of adjTx (83.2% vs 78.2%, p < 0.01) and received a higher tx intensity especially with 6 month tx (mean oxaliplatin dose intensity 75% vs 72%, p < 0.01; capecitabine 85% vs 78%, p < 0.01; 5FU 85% vs 82% p < 0.01). Gastrointestinal tox was more common in eoCRC (any grade nausea 58% vs 45%, p < 0.01; any grade vomiting 22% vs 16%, p < 0.01); haematological tox was more frequent in loCRC (62% vs, 69%, p = < 0.01); any grade neuropathy rate was similar (75%). Significant interaction was found between age and T stage for TTR (p = 0.04). Clinical outcome estimates and comparisons are shown in Table. Notably, high risk stage III (T4/N2) eoCRC had significantly lower 3-y RFS rate (54% vs 64%, HRadj 0.74, p < 0.01). Conclusions: eoCRC have better tx adherence than loCRC, as expected. While in high risk stage II and low risk stage III, cancer-specific outcomes are not different, in high risk stage III young age is negatively prognostic and associated with significantly higher relapse rate and risk of CRC death; this is despite a higher administered adjTx-intensity, suggesting a more aggressive disease biology. Clinical trial information: NCT00749450 (SCOT); NCT00646607 (TOSCA); NCT01150045 (CALGB/SWOG 80702); NCT00958737 (IDEA France) [Table: see text]

Effect of duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer (IDEA collaboration): final results from a prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND

A prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised phase 3 trials was done to investigate disease-free survival regarding non-inferiority of 3 months versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer; non-inferiority was not shown. Here, we report the final overall survival results.

METHODS

In this prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised phase 3 trials, we included patients with stage III colon cancer aged at least 18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 recruited between June 20, 2007, and Dec 31, 2015, across 12 countries in the CALGB/SWOG 80702, IDEA France, SCOT, ACHIEVE, TOSCA, and HORG trials, who started any treatment (modified intention-to-treat). Patients in all trials were randomly assigned to 3 months or 6 months of adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) every 2 weeks or capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) in different doses and methods every 3 weeks, at the treating physician's discretion. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (time to relapse, secondary colorectal primary tumour, or death due to all causes), and overall survival (time to death due to all causes) was the prespecified secondary endpoint. The non-inferiority margin for overall survival was set as a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·11. Pre-planned subgroup analyses included regimen and risk group. Non-inferiority was declared if the one-sided false discovery rate adjusted (FDRadj) p value was less than 0·025.

FINDINGS

With median follow-up of 72·3 months (IQR 72·2-72·5), 2584 deaths among 12 835 patients were observed. 5064 (39·5%) patients received CAPOX and 7771 (60·5%) received FOLFOX. 5-year overall survival was 82·4% (95% CI 81·4-83·3) with 3 months of therapy and 82·8% (81·8-83·8) with 6 months of therapy (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·95-1·11]; non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·058). For patients treated with CAPOX, 5-year overall survival was 82·1% (80·5-83·6) versus 81·2% (79·2-82·9; HR 0·96 [0·85-1·08]); non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·033), and for patients treated with FOLFOX 5-year overall survival was 82·6% (81·3-83·8) and 83·8% (82·6-85·0; HR 1·07 [0·97-1·18]; non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·34). Updated disease-free survival results confirmed previous findings (HR 1·08 [95% CI 1·02-1·15]; non-inferiority FDRadj p=0·25). Data on adverse events were not further recorded.

INTERPRETATION

Non-inferiority of 3 months versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer was not confirmed in terms of overall survival, but the absolute 0·4% difference in 5-year overall survival should be placed in clinical context. Overall survival results support the use of 3 months of adjuvant CAPOX for most patients with stage III colon cancer. This conclusion is strengthened by the substantial reduction of toxicities, inconveniencies, and cost associated with a shorter treatment duration.

FUNDING

US National Cancer Institute.

A new prognostic and predictive tool for shared decision making in stage III colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Survival of patients with stage III colon cancer varies widely according to T-N sub-stages. Estimating the benefit of each therapeutic option in each T-N subgroup may provide more accurate information helping doctors and patients in the complex shared decision-making process surrounding adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

The outcomes data of 12,834 patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in the IDEA trial served as our database. Patients were categorised in 16 sub-stages, based on T-N categories. We created a meta-regression model to predict the expected 5-year DFS within each T-N sub-stage. We then evaluated the efficacy of each therapeutic option in every sub-stage, working backward by subtraction, using an average of the HRs reported in pertinent trial publications as a conversion factor.

RESULTS

Large differences in 5-year DFS rate were observed among the subgroups, ranging from 89% (T1N1a) to 31% (T4N2b) in the overall population. The contribution to the outcome of each therapeutic option in this setting varied widely across sub-stages. According to our model, patients with T1N1a cancers have a projected 5-year DFS of 79.6% with surgery alone. Adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone results in 5.6% absolute DFS gain; an additional 2.3% and 0.8% gain is seen with oxaliplatin for 3 and 6 months, respectively. Patients with T4N2b cancers show a 13.9% 5-year DFS with surgery alone, and an 11.2%, 6.4%, 2.5% increase with the aforementioned adjuvant options, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The resulting overlay bar graph gives patients and doctors the projected relative benefit of each treatment option and may substantially help the shared decision-making process, although caution must be exercised in using this model due to the significant variance of the estimates.

Overall survival (OS) and long-term disease-free survival (DFS) of three versus six months of adjuvant (adj) oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based therapy for patients (pts) with stage III colon cancer (CC): Final results from the IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adj chemotherapy) collaboration

4004

Background: In overall population, IDEA pooled analysis did not demonstrate non-inferiority (NI) regarding 3y DFS in pts with stage III CC receiving 3m vs. 6m of adj FOLFOX/CAPOX. However, in pts treated with CAPOX (especially in low-risk pts), 3m of therapy was as effective as 6m. Results of OS and 5y DFS are reported. Methods: OS was defined as time from enrollment to death due to all causes. OS NI margin was conservatively set to be Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.11, which is equivalent to: the maximum acceptable loss of OS efficacy, by shortening treatment to 3m, was half of the OS efficacy gained in MOSAIC trial (i.e., 2.26% absolute reduction in 5y OS rate). Pre-planned sub-group analyses included by regimen and risk group for both OS and 5y DFS. NI was to be declared if the one-sided false discovery rate adjusted (FDRa) NI p-value < 0.025. Results: With an overall median survival follow-up of 72 m (range per study, 62 to 84 m), 2584 deaths and 3777 DFS events among 12,835 pts from six trials were observed. Across 6 studies, 39.5% of pts received CAPOX (rate by study, 0% to 75.1%). Overall, the 5y OS rate was 82.4% (3m) and 82.8% (6m), with estimated OS HR of 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.11; FDRa NI p, 0.058) and absolute 5-y OS rate difference of -0.4% (95% CI, -2.1 to 1.3%). Overall, the 5y DFS rate was 69.1% (3m) and 70.8% (6m), with estimated DFS HR of 1.08 (95%CI, 1.01-1.15, FDRa NI p, 0.22). HRs (95% CI) within subgroups see table. Conclusions: 5y OS rate reported in IDEA trials was higher than historical rates, regardless of duration of therapy. While overall survival in IDEA did not meet prior statistical assumptions for NI in overall population, the 0.4% difference in 5y OS should be placed in clinical context. OS and 5y DFS results continue to support the use of 3m adjuvant CAPOX for the vast majority of stage III colon cancer pts. This conclusion is strengthened by the substantial reduction of toxicities, inconveniencies and cost associated with shorter treatment duration. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045; 2009-010384-16; NCT00749450; ISRCTN59757862; 2007-003957-10; UMIN000008543; 2007-000354 . [Table: see text]

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.

Review of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment pathways and early clinical experience of trifluridine/tipiracil in the UK named patient programme

Background

The standard first- and second- line chemotherapy backbone regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based with addition of irinotecan or oxaliplatin. Until recently, evidence for optimal sequencing post second-line was sparse. Trifluridine/tipiracil (indicated for mCRC and gastric cancer after standard chemotherapies) was made available to UK patients via a named patient programme (NPP) before receiving marketing authorisation in Europe in 2016, allowing characterisation of UK treatment pathways, and evaluation of trifluridine/tipiracil in a UK non-trial population.

Methods

Data collected routinely for the NPP were analysed to describe the patient demographics, clinical characteristics and treatment pathways. Patients eligible for the programme were adults (≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed mCRC who had previously received chemotherapy treatment(s).

Results

Of the 250 eligible patients enrolled in the NPP, 194 patients received ≥1 dose of trifluridine/tipiracil and 56 patients did not receive trifluridine/tipiracil. The following results are reported first for patients who received trifluridine/tipiracil and second for those who did not receive trifluridine/tipiracil: median (IQR) age was 63.0 (54.0–69.0) and 62.0 (54.8–69.0) years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score was 0 for 28 and 14%, 1 for 65 and 70%, 2 for 7 and 16%. In terms of previous systemic treatments 47 and 43% had 2 prior lines of therapy. FOLFOX-, FOLFIRI- and CAPOX-based therapies were the most common first-line regimens in patients receiving trifluridine/tipiracil (37, 35 and 21%, respectively), and in patients not receiving trifluridine/tipiracil (41, 30 and 20%, respectively). Second-line treatment regimens in patients receiving and not receiving trifluridine/tipiracil were most commonly FOLFIRI-based (48 and 41%, respectively) and FOLFOX-based (19 and 21%, respectively). Patients received a median of 2 cycles of trifluridine/tipiracil with a median treatment duration of 1.8 (95% CI: 1.8–2.4) months. In patients who discontinued treatment due to disease progression, the median progression-free duration was 2.8 (95% CI: 2.4–2.9) months.

Conclusions

The results highlight the number of treatment pathways used to treat mCRC in routine UK clinical practice prior to the marketing authorisation and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence approval of trifluridine/tipiracil and highlight the lack of clinical guidelines for mCRC.

Prognostic phenotypic subtypes to predict recurrence and response to adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer

205

Background: Histological phenotypic subtypes have been proposed that stratify survival in a discovery cohort of patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer (CRC). However, clinical utility has not been validated nor associations with recurrence and chemotherapy assessed. Therefore, this study assessed prognostic value in patients with stage I-III CRC as well as predictive value for recurrence and chemotherapy response. Methods: Two independent stage I-III CRC patient cohorts were utilized to assess associations between phenotypic subtypes, survival, and recurrence. Stage II-III patients, from the SCOT adjuvant chemotherapy trial, were utilized to assess associations between phenotypic subtypes and adjuvant chemotherapy response. Log rank analysis compared immune and stromal subtypes. Results: In an 867-patient internal cohort, phenotypic subtype stratified patients by disease-free survival (DFS) (HR 2.18 95% CI 2.26-4.47, p < 0.001); independent of stage and location. The stromal subtype also predicted increased local and distant recurrence (p < 0.001). In a 146-patient external validation cohort, phenotypic subtype significantly stratified patients by DFS (HR 3.43 95% CI 1.60-7.35, p = 0.001). In 1343 SCOT trial patients, phenotypic subtype significantly stratified patients by DFS (HR 1.59 95% CI 1.13-2.25, p = 0.010). Furthermore, there was evidence that the effect of regimen depended on phenotypic subtype (p = 0.048), only significantly stratifying DFS in patients receiving FOLFOX (HR 3.73 95% CI 1.58-8.81, p = 0.003) but not CAPOX (HR 0.84 95% CI 0.56-1.26, p = 0.396) adjuvant chemotherapy. Interestingly, the immune subtype associated with improved DFS in patients receiving FOLFOX compared to CAPOX adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 3.40 95% CI 1.41-8.19, p = 0.006). Whereas patients with a stromal subtype trended towards improved DFS in patients receiving CAPOX compared to FOLFOX adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.72 95% CI 0.50-1.05 p = 0.088). Conclusions: Histological phenotypic subtypes are an effective independent prognostic classification for patients with stage I-III CRC that can predict response to FOLFOX adjuvant chemotherapy as well as the presence of local and distant recurrence.

3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk stage II and III colorectal cancer: 3-year follow-up of the SCOT non-inferiority RCT

BACKGROUND

Oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy administered over 6 months is the standard adjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colorectal cancer. However, the regimen is associated with cumulative toxicity, characterised by chronic and often irreversible neuropathy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of 3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and to compare the toxicity, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the durations.

DESIGN

An international, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, Phase III, parallel-group trial.

SETTING

A total of 244 oncology clinics from six countries: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged ≥ 18 years who had undergone curative resection for high-risk stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum.

INTERVENTIONS

The adjuvant treatment regimen was either oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin and capecitabine, randomised to be administered over 3 or 6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Overall survival, adverse events, neuropathy and health-related quality of life were also assessed. The main cost categories were chemotherapy treatment and hospitalisation. Cost-effectiveness was assessed through incremental cost comparisons and quality-adjusted life-year gains between the options and was reported as net monetary benefit using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year per patient.

RESULTS

Recruitment is closed. In total, 6088 patients were randomised (3044 per group) between 27 March 2008 and 29 November 2013, with 6065 included in the intention-to-treat analyses (3-month analysis, n = 3035; 6-month analysis, n = 3030). Follow-up for the primary analysis is complete. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in the 3-month treatment group was 76.7% (standard error 0.8%) and in the 6-month treatment group was 77.1% (standard error 0.8%), equating to a hazard ratio of 1.006 (95% confidence interval 0.909 to 1.114; p-value for non-inferiority = 0.012), confirming non-inferiority for 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy. Frequent adverse events (alopecia, anaemia, anorexia, diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, sensory neuropathy, neutropenia, pain, rash, altered taste, thrombocytopenia and watery eye) showed a significant increase in grade with 6-month duration; the greatest difference was for sensory neuropathy (grade ≥ 3 was 4% for 3-month vs.16% for 6-month duration), for which a higher rate of neuropathy was seen for the 6-month treatment group from month 4 to ≥ 5 years (p < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores were better in the 3-month treatment group over months 4-6. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed 3-month treatment to cost £4881 less over the 8-year analysis period, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £7246 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

The study achieved its primary end point, showing that 3-month oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is non-inferior to 6 months of the same regimen; 3-month treatment showed a better safety profile and cost less. For future work, further follow-up will refine long-term estimates of the duration effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. The health economic analysis will be updated to include long-term extrapolation for subgroups. We expect these analyses to be available in 2019-20. The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study translational samples may allow the identification of patients who would benefit from longer treatment based on the molecular characteristics of their disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59757862 and EudraCT 2007-003957-10.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (transferred to NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre - Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; grant reference G0601705), the Swedish Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK Core Clinical Trials Unit Funding (funding reference C6716/A9894).

Aspirin as an adjuvant treatment for cancer: feasibility results from the Add-Aspirin randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Preclinical, epidemiological, and randomised data indicate that aspirin might prevent tumour development and metastasis, leading to reduced cancer mortality, particularly for gastro-oesophageal and colorectal cancer. Randomised trials evaluating aspirin use after primary radical therapy are ongoing. We present the pre-planned feasibility analysis of the run-in phase of the Add-Aspirin trial to address concerns about toxicity, particularly bleeding after radical treatment for gastro-oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

The Add-Aspirin protocol includes four phase 3 randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of daily aspirin on recurrence and survival after radical cancer therapy in four tumour cohorts: gastro-oesophageal, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer. An open-label run-in phase (aspirin 100 mg daily for 8 weeks) precedes double-blind randomisation (for participants aged under 75 years, aspirin 300 mg, aspirin 100 mg, or matched placebo in a 1:1:1 ratio; for patients aged 75 years or older, aspirin 100 mg or matched placebo in a 2:1 ratio). A preplanned analysis of feasibility, including recruitment rate, adherence, and toxicity was performed. The trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry (ISRCTN74358648) and remains open to recruitment.

FINDINGS

After 2 years of recruitment (October, 2015, to October, 2017), 3494 participants were registered (115 in the gastro-oesophageal cancer cohort, 950 in the colorectal cancer cohort, 1675 in the breast cancer cohort, and 754 in the prostate cancer cohort); 2719 (85%) of 3194 participants who had finished the run-in period proceeded to randomisation, with rates consistent across tumour cohorts. End of run-in data were available for 2253 patients; 2148 (95%) of the participants took six or seven tablets per week. 11 (0·5%) of the 2253 participants reported grade 3 toxicity during the run-in period, with no upper gastrointestinal bleeding (any grade) in the gastro-oesophageal cancer cohort. The most frequent grade 1-2 toxicity overall was dyspepsia (246 [11%] of 2253 participants).

INTERPRETATION

Aspirin is well-tolerated after radical cancer therapy. Toxicity has been low and there is no evidence of a difference in adherence, acceptance of randomisation, or toxicity between the different cancer cohorts. Trial recruitment continues to determine whether aspirin could offer a potential low cost and well tolerated therapy to improve cancer outcomes.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme, The MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL.

The hard road to data interpretation: 3 or 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer?

Background

Six months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is standard for patients with stage III colon cancer following surgery. However, oxaliplatin is associated with peripheral neurotoxicity which worsens over treatment duration. Consequently, a shorter treatment duration, if equally effective, would be extremely beneficial. A pooled analysis of data for 12 834 stage III colon cancer patients, from six randomised phase III trials of adjuvant therapy, the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant chemotherapy study, was carried out and the results presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting 2017. To clarify the potential impact of these results on clinical practice, ESMO decided to sponsor a special session at their 2017 Annual Meeting dedicated to achieving a more meaningful interpretation of the results.

Methods

Medical oncologists from Europe, the United States and Asia selected for their involvement in the trials, together with an independent statistician and an independent clinician, were invited to provide their independent interpretations of the results and contribute to a moderated panel discussion. The pooled analysis evaluated the non-inferiority of 3 versus 6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX/CAPOX therapy but not the non-inferiority of 3 months CAPOX versus 6 months FOLFOX therapy.

Results

There was strong evidence of an interaction between the choice of regimen (CAPOX or FOLFOX) and duration of treatment. Patients were classified as either 'fighters' or 'fatalists', and 3-month CAPOX was considered standard for patients classified as fatalists even if they had high-risk disease. However, patients classified as 'fighters' would only receive 3 months of CAPOX if they had low-risk disease but would always receive 6 months of CAPOX/FOLFOX if they had T4 disease. The panel was split on whether they would advocate 3 or 6 months CAPOX therapy based on high-risk N2 disease.

Conclusions

The main drivers of the duration of treatment were choice of regimen and patient attitude, with risk, based mainly on T4 stage, having less influence.

Pattern Recognition Receptor Polymorphisms as Predictors of Oxaliplatin Benefit in Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Constitutional loss of function (LOF) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in pattern recognition receptors FPR1, TLR3, and TLR4 have previously been reported to predict oxaliplatin benefit in colorectal cancer. Confirmation of this association could substantially improve patient stratification.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective biomarker analysis of the Short Course in Oncology Therapy (SCOT) and COIN/COIN-B trials. Participant status for LOF variants in FPR1 (rs867228), TLR3 (rs3775291), and TLR4 (rs4986790/rs4986791) was determined by genotyping array or genotype imputation. Associations between LOF variants and disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox regression, adjusted for confounders, using additive, dominant, and recessive genetic models. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Our validation study populations included 2929 and 1948 patients in the SCOT and COIN/COIN-B cohorts, respectively, of whom 2728 and 1672 patients had functional status of all three SNPs determined. We found no evidence of an association between any SNP and DFS in the SCOT cohort, or with OS in either cohort, irrespective of the type of model used. This included models for which an association was previously reported for rs867228 (recessive model, multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for DFS in SCOT = 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.99 to 1.45, P = .07; HR for OS in COIN/COIN-B = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.63 to 1.34, P = .66), and rs4986790 (dominant model, multivariable-adjusted HR for DFS in SCOT = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.13, P = .27; HR for OS in COIN/COIN-B = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.31, P = .40).

CONCLUSION

In this prespecified analysis of two large clinical trials, we found no evidence that constitutional LOF SNPs in FPR1, TLR3, or TLR4 are associated with differential benefit from oxaliplatin. Our results suggest these SNPs are unlikely to be clinically useful biomarkers.

Prospective pooled analysis of four randomized trials investigating duration of adjuvant (adj) oxaliplatin-based therapy (3 vs 6 months {m}) for patients (pts) with high-risk stage II colorectal cancer (CC)

3501

Background: 6m of oxaliplatin-based treatment is an option as adj chemotherapy for patients with high risk stage II CC (T4, inadequate nodal harvest, poorly differentiated, obstruction, perforation or vascular/perineural invasion). The IDEA collaboration showed shorter treatment duration to be appropriate for most pts with stage III colon cancer. The results of the 4 IDEA studies with stage II pts are presented here. Methods: A prospective, pre-planned pooled analysis of high-risk stage II patients from 4 concurrently conducted randomized phase III trials (SCOT, TOSCA, ACHIEVE-2, HORG) was performed to evaluate non-inferiority (NI) of 3m compared with 6m (ref) of adj FOLFOX/CAPOX (regimen preselected, not randomized). The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), NI was to be declared if the 2-sided 80% confidence interval (CI) for DFS hazard ratio (HR 3m v 6m) estimated by a stratified Cox model was below 1.2. 542 DFS events were required to provide 80% power to declare NI. NI was also examined within regimen, T4 (Yes v No) and inadequate nodal harvest (Yes v No) as pre-planned subgroups. Results: The primary analysis included 3273 randomised pts of which 1254 had FOLFOX and 2019 had CAPOX. There were 552 events and the median follow-up was 60.2 m. There was significantly less grade 3-5 toxicity with 3m treatment (p < .0001). The 5-year DFS rate was 80.7% and 84.0% for 3m and 6m treatment with an estimated DFS HR of 1.18 (80% CI:1.05-1.31, p for NI = 0.404). For CAPOX the estimated HR was 1.02 (80% CI: 0.88-1.17, p for NI = 0.087) and for FOLFOX the estimated HR was 1.42 (80% CI: 1.19-1.70, p for NI = 0.894). The test for interaction between duration and regimen was not statistically significant (p = .174 adjusted for multiple testing) but was stronger than that for the other subgroups examined. Conclusions: In the overall population non-inferiority for 3m adj treatment in pts with high-risk stage II CC was not shown. As with the stage III population the choice of adj regimen appears important (although this did not reach statistical significance) with a small difference in DFS between 3 and 6 m treatment if CAPOX is used. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN59757862.

Aspirin as adjuvant treatment for colorectal cancer: Rationale and progress of the Add-Aspirin trial

TPS3624

Background: There is now a body of evidence indicating a potential role for aspirin in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. In cardiovascular trials, effects on incidence of cancer metastases and short-term mortality suggest further possible roles in the treatment setting, supported by observational studies of aspirin use after cancer diagnosis. In the prevention setting, aspirin use has been limited by toxicity concerns, particularly of serious bleeding. In the adjuvant setting, benefits associated with reducing recurrence and subsequent treatment may outweigh these risks. The Add-Aspirin trial will investigate this, and will also consider possible mechanisms of action for aspirin effects, including the impact of PIK3CA mutations, where there are currently several theories and conflicting data. Methods: Add-Aspirin (ISRCTN74358648) is an international, phase III, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial recruiting patients who have undergone surgery and relevant adjuvant treatment for stage II or III CRC, as well as those with completely resected CRC liver metastases. Parallel randomised cohorts will address the question in breast, gastro-oesophageal and prostate cancer. Participants take aspirin 100mg daily for an 8-week run-in, to assess adherence and toxicity, and those suitable to proceed are randomised (1:1:1) to aspirin 100mg, aspirin 300mg or placebo daily for at least 5 years. A number of measures – including blood pressure control and PPI use where relevant - are in place to reduce bleeding risk. The primary outcome is disease-free survival (target hazard ratio = 0.8, n = 2600 in 5 years) with a long term analysis of survival planned across the tumour groups. Translational work includes a sub-study monitoring urinary thromboxane B2 as a marker of platelet activation in a subgroup (n = 500) to investigate mechanisms of action. Add-Aspirin opened in 2015 and recruited 1505 CRC patients during the first 3 years from 137 UK centres. 1282 (85%) proceeded to randomisation. A pre-planned feasibility analysis of run-in data (n = 2253 across all 4 tumour groups) provided reassuring data on safety, tolerability and adherence, and recruitment continues with centres in India and Republic of Ireland recently joining. Clinical trial information: 74358648.

Association analyses identify 31 new risk loci for colorectal cancer susceptibility

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and has a strong heritable basis. We report a genome-wide association analysis of 34,627 CRC cases and 71,379 controls of European ancestry that identifies SNPs at 31 new CRC risk loci. We also identify eight independent risk SNPs at the new and previously reported European CRC loci, and a further nine CRC SNPs at loci previously only identified in Asian populations. We use in situ promoter capture Hi-C (CHi-C), gene expression, and in silico annotation methods to identify likely target genes of CRC SNPs. Whilst these new SNP associations implicate target genes that are enriched for known CRC pathways such as Wnt and BMP, they also highlight novel pathways with no prior links to colorectal tumourigenesis. These findings provide further insight into CRC susceptibility and enhance the prospects of applying genetic risk scores to personalised screening and prevention.

Duration of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Since 2004, a regimen of 6 months of treatment with oxaliplatin plus a fluoropyrimidine has been standard adjuvant therapy in patients with stage III colon cancer. However, since oxaliplatin is associated with cumulative neurotoxicity, a shorter duration of therapy could spare toxic effects and health expenditures.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, preplanned, pooled analysis of six randomized, phase 3 trials that were conducted concurrently to evaluate the noninferiority of adjuvant therapy with either FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) administered for 3 months, as compared with 6 months. The primary end point was the rate of disease-free survival at 3 years. Noninferiority of 3 months versus 6 months of therapy could be claimed if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio did not exceed 1.12.

RESULTS

After 3263 events of disease recurrence or death had been reported in 12,834 patients, the noninferiority of 3 months of treatment versus 6 months was not confirmed in the overall study population (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 1.15). Noninferiority of the shorter regimen was seen for CAPOX (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.06) but not for FOLFOX (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.26). In an exploratory analysis of the combined regimens, among the patients with T1, T2, or T3 and N1 cancers, 3 months of therapy was noninferior to 6 months, with a 3-year rate of disease-free survival of 83.1% and 83.3%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.12). Among patients with cancers that were classified as T4, N2, or both, the disease-free survival rate for a 6-month duration of therapy was superior to that for a 3-month duration (64.4% vs. 62.7%) for the combined treatments (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.23; P=0.01 for superiority).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with stage III colon cancer receiving adjuvant therapy with FOLFOX or CAPOX, noninferiority of 3 months of therapy, as compared with 6 months, was not confirmed in the overall population. However, in patients treated with CAPOX, 3 months of therapy was as effective as 6 months, particularly in the lower-risk subgroup. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.).

SCOT: Tumor sidedness and the influence of chemotherapy duration on DFS

558

Background: Patients with R-sided tumours who develop metastatic disease have a worse prognosis compared to patients with L-sided tumours. The latter may also have a greater benefit from treatment with EGFR inhibitors. In general, registry studies and meta-analyses have shown that patients with loco-regional R-sided tumours have a worse overall survival (OS). This has recently been confirmed by the PETACC8 study but only after they had relapsed. There was not a significant difference in disease free survival (DFS). Methods: The SCOT study showed that 3-months of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy (OxFp) was non-inferior to 6-months for patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colorectal cancer. Here we divide the population into left and right-sided tumours to see whether sidedness had an impact on DFS. We also evaluated whether sidedness impacted on the 3 vs. 6-months comparison in SCOT. Results: 6088 patients with Stage III/high risk Stage II cancers or the colon or rectum were randomised between March 27, 2008 and November 29, 2013 from 244 centres (164 UK, 32 Australia, 19 Spain, 14 Sweden, 10 Denmark and 5 New Zealand). In February 2017 (3-years FU) information on sidedness was available for 3219 patients (1207 R-sided, 2012 L-sided). Characteristics: Right: median age: 65, Male: 53%, T4 41%, Stage II: 17%; Left: median age: 65, Male: 66%, T4 24%, Stage II: 21%). Patients with R-sided tumours had a significantly worse DFS (3-year DFS right: 73% (se=1%), left: 80% (se=1%). HR 1.401 (95% CI 1.216-1.615; p=0.000004). Adjusting for T and N-stage reduced the HR to 1.215 (95% ci 1.051-1.404, p=0.009). The data did not suggest that sidedness affected the impact of chemotherapy duration on 3-year DFS (R: HR (3 month/6 month) 1.049 (0.849 -1.296) L: 0.910 (0.753-1.099). Test for homogeneity, p=0.327). Further sub-set analysis was limited due to cohort size. Conclusions: This is the first study to show that unselected patients with R-sided tumours had a worse DFS compared to L-sided tumours. This implies that prognosis is influenced primarily by greater recurrence rather than the contributing factors that influence OS. Tumour sidedness did not impact on the 3-months vs. 6-months comparison in SCOT. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN59757862.

Impact of tumour histological subtype on chemotherapy outcome in advanced oesophageal cancer

AIM

To investigate the impact of histology on outcome in advanced oesophageal cancer treated with first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

Individual patient data were pooled from three randomised phase III trials of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy ± platinum/anthracycline in patients with advanced, untreated gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) randomised between 1994 and 2005. The primary endpoint was overall survival of oesophageal cancer patients according to histology. Secondary endpoints were response rates and a toxicity composite endpoint.

RESULTS

Of the total 1836 randomised patients, 973 patients (53%) were eligible (707 patients with gastric cancer were excluded), 841 (86%) had adenocarcinoma and 132 (14%) had SCC. There was no significant difference in survival between patients with adenocarcinoma and SCC, with median overall survivals of 9.5 mo vs 7.6 mo (HR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.70-1.03, P = 0.09) and one-year survivals of 38.8% vs 28.2% respectively. The overall response rate to chemotherapy was 44% for adenocarcinoma vs 33% for SCC (P = 0.01). There was no difference in the frequency of the toxicity composite endpoint between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in survival between adenocarcinoma and SCC in patients with advanced oesophageal cancer treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy despite a trend for worse survival and less chemo-sensitivity in SCC. Tolerance to treatment was similar in both groups. This analysis highlights the unmet need for SCC-specific studies in advanced oesophageal cancer and will aid in the design of future trials of targeted agents.

Prospective pooled analysis of six phase III trials investigating duration of adjuvant (adjuv) oxaliplatin-based therapy (3 vs 6 months) for patients (pts) with stage III colon cancer (CC): The IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant chemotherapy) collaboration

LBA1

Background: Since 2004, 6 months (m) of oxaliplatin (oxali)-based treatment has been the standard of care as adjuvant therapy for stage III CC. Since oxali is associated with cumulative neurotoxicity, shorter duration of adjuv therapy could spare pts toxicity and lead to substantial saving in health expenditures. Methods: A prospective, pre-planned pooled analysis of 6 concurrently conducted randomized phase III trials (SCOT, TOSCA, Alliance/SWOG 80702, IDEA France (GERCOR/PRODIGE), ACHIEVE, HORG) was performed to evaluate the non-inferiority (NI) of 3m compared with 6m (ref) of adjuv FOLFOX/XELOX. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), defined as time from enrolment to relapse, 2nd CRC, and death (all causes). NI was to be declared if the 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for DFS hazard ratio (HR 3m v 6m) estimated by a stratified Cox model was below 1.12. NI was examined within regimen and stage subgroups as pre-planned. Results: The analysis included 12,834 pts from 12 countries, accrued from 6/07 to 12/15. Stage distribution: 13% T1-2, 66% T3, 21% T4; 28% N2; 40% received XELOX. G3+ neurotoxicity was higher in the 6m v 3m arm (16 v 3% FOLFOX, 9 v 3% XELOX, p<0.0001). With a median follow-up of 39 mos, 3263 DFS events were observed. Overall, the 3 year DFS rate was 74.6% (3m) and 75.5% (6m), with estimated DFS HR of 1.07 (95%CI, 1.00-1.15). The 3m v 6m DFS HRs were 1.16 (95%CI, 1.06-1.26) and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.85-1.06) for FOLFOX and XELOX treated pts, respectively. The 3m v 6m DFS HRs were 1.01 (95%CI, 0.90-1.12) in T1-3 N1, and 1.12 (95%CI, 1.03-1.23) for T4 or N2 pts. Conclusions: While NI was not established for the overall cohort, NI of 3m v 6m oxali-based adjuv therapy was supported for XELOX. As each IDEA trial treated varying proportions of pts with XELOX (0 to 75%), the regimen interaction likely produced the differential outcomes observed between individual studies. Certain substages (T1-3 N1) also showed NI for 3m v 6m. These data provide a framework for discussions on risks and benefits of individualized adjuv therapy approaches. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180888, U10CA180835, INCA, PHRC2009, EME 09/800/34, HTA 14/140/84, CRUK C1348/A15960, JFMC. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045.

Final DFS results of the SCOT study: An international phase III randomised (1:1) non-inferiority trial comparing 3 versus 6 months of oxaliplatin based adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer

3502

Background: Six months of oxaliplatin-based treatment has been the mainstay of adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer for the last 13 years. Neurotoxicity from oxaliplatin is cumulative, dose limiting, and potentially irreversible. A shorter duration of treatment would save patients significant toxicity/time and substantially reduce the costs of the drug, its administration, and treatment of adverse effects. Methods: SCOT is a non-inferiority randomised study designed to determine whether 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy with OxMdG or Xelox (physician/patient choice) in Stage III/high risk Stage II colorectal cancer is as effective as 6 months treatment. Non-inferiority was determined to be a maximum 2.5% fall in 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) on the 3 month arm (from 78% on the 6 month arm) corresponding to a hazard ratio upper limit of 1.13. The study was designed with 90% power at the 2.5% 1-sided level of statistical significance and aimed to recruit 9500 patients to observe 2,750 DFS events (relapses/deaths/new colorectal cancers). Analysis used a Cox model adjusted for study minimisation factors. Results: 6088 patients (60% male, median age 65) with Stage III/high risk Stage II cancers of the colon or rectum were randomised between 27th March 2008 and 29th November 2013. The arms were balanced for clinical and pathological factors. Intended treatment was OxMdG for 1981 and Xelox for 4107 patients. There were 1469 DFS events (734 in 3 month arm and 735 in 6 month arm) giving the study 66% power. 3 year DFS was 76.8% (se = .8%) for the 3 month arm and 77.4% (se = .8%) for the 6 month arm (HR 1.008, 95% CI 0.910-1.117, test for non-inferiority p = 0.014). Non-inferiority appeared stronger for Xelox than OxMdG (test for heterogeneity, p = .059). Results will be shown broken down by stage, site, age, gender and achieved duration of treatment. Conclusions: The SCOT study has shown that 3 months adjuvant treatment is not inferior to 6 months treatment. However the SCOT study is part of the IDEA consortium and the results from the 6 studies in the IDEA consortium addressing the same duration question will also be presented at ASCO 2017. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN59757862.

Prospective pooled analysis of six phase III trials investigating duration of adjuvant (adjuv) oxaliplatin-based therapy (3 vs 6 months) for patients (pts) with stage III colon cancer (CC): The IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant chemotherapy) collaboration

LBA1

The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstracts.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Sunday, June 4, 2017, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2017, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Sunday edition of ASCO Daily News.

Nintedanib (N) plus best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo (P) plus BSC for the treatment of patients (pts) with colorectal cancer (CRC) refractory to standard therapies: Subanalysis of the phase III LUME-colon 1 study in pts by prior regorafenib (R) treatment

660

Background: N is a triple angiokinase inhibitor (including VEGFR, PDGFR and FGFR). LUME-Colon 1 (NCT02149108) evaluated the efficacy and safety of N in pts with metastatic CRC (mCRC) after failure of standard therapies and showed a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) (HR [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.49–0.69]; p < 0.0001) but no difference in overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.01 [0.86–1.19]; p = 0.8659). Here, we report results of a prespecified subanalysis in pts by prior R treatment. Methods: Eligible pts (aged ≥ 18 years; ECOG PS 0–1; mCRC adenocarcinoma refractory to standard treatments, including oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluoropyrimidines, anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR in RAS wt) were randomised 1:1 to N (200 mg bid) + BSC or P (bid) + BSC. Prior R treatment was a stratification factor. Co-primary endpoints were PFS by central review and OS. Results: 768 mCRC pts were randomised; 285 (37%) had received prior R (N, n = 141; P, n = 144) and 483 (63%) were R naïve (N, n = 245; P, n = 238). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups (pretreated vs naïve) except: race (Asian: 39% vs 19%), time from first diagnosis ( ≥ 36 months [m]: 67% vs 48%), time from onset of metastatic disease ( ≥ 24 m: 85% vs 64%). Median PFS (N vs P) was 1.5 vs 1.4 m (HR: 0.61 [0.47–0.79]) in prior R pts and 1.5 vs 1.4 m (HR: 0.62 [0.51–0.76]) in R-naïve pts (interaction p-value = 0.9245). Median OS (N vs P) was 6.5 vs 4.6 m (HR: 0.90 [0.69–1.17]) in prior R pts and 6.3 vs 6.6 m (HR: 1.09 [0.89–1.33]) in R-naïve pts (interaction p-value = 0.2529). N was tolerable in both subgroups; AEs leading to discontinuation (N vs P) occurred in 12% vs 8% of prior R pts and 16% vs 12% of R-naïve pts. The most frequent AEs with N were diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting in both subgroups. Conclusions: N demonstrated clinical activity in CRC regardless of prior R treatment; significant improvement in PFS compared to P was observed in both R-pretreated and R-naïve pts, supporting the concept of continuous antiangiogenic therapy. A slight improvement in OS was observed in R-pretreated compared to R-naïve pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02149108.

An unusual differential diagnosis of penile warts: metastases from rectal carcinoma

Patients with penile lesions, such as virally induced papillomata, frequently present to genitourinary medicine clinics and general practitioners. Their diagnosis is usually based on clinical observation and biopsy is not generally undertaken. Penile lesions may rarely have a more sinister aetiology and represent metastatic spread from solid tumours arising at distant sites. Penile metastases arise most frequently from genitourinary cancers (prostate, bladder and kidney), but may also arise from tumours of the large bowel; other primary sites are extremely uncommon. We report the case of a patient presenting with penile metastases from rectal carcinoma arising during third-line chemotherapy for metastatic disease.

Oxaliplatin and 5-FU/folinic acid (modified FOLFOX6) with or without aflibercept in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the AFFIRM study

BACKGROUND

The combination of aflibercept with FOLFIRI has been shown to significantly prolong overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after progression on oxaliplatin-based therapy. This trial evaluated the addition of aflibercept to oxaliplatin-based first-line treatment of patients with mCRC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mCRC were randomized to receive first-line therapy with mFOLFOX6 plus aflibercept (4 mg/kg) or mFOLFOX6 alone. The primary end point of this phase II study was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 months in each arm. The analysis of efficacy between the arms was a pre-planned secondary analysis.

RESULTS

Of 236 randomized patients, 227 and 235 patients were evaluable for the primary efficacy analysis and safety, respectively. The probabilities of being progression-free at 12 months were 25.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 17.2-34.4] for the aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 arm and 21.2% (95% CI 12.2-30.3) for the mFOLFOX6 arm. The median PFS was 8.48 months (95% CI 7.89-9.92) for the aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 arm and 8.77 months (95% CI 7.62-9.27) for the mFOLFOX6 arm; the hazard ratio of aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 versus mFOLFOX6 was 1.00 (95% CI 0.74-1.36). The response rates were 49.1% (95% CI 39.7-58.6) and 45.9% (95% CI 36.4-55.7) for patients treated with and without aflibercept, respectively. The most frequent treatment-emergent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) excluding laboratory abnormalities reported for aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 versus mFOLFOX6 were neuropathy (16.8% versus 17.2%) and diarrhea (13.4% versus 5.2%). Neutropenia grade 3/4 occurred in 36.1% versus 29.3%. The most common vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition class-effect grade 3/4 AEs for aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 versus mFOLFOX6 were hypertension (35.3% versus 1.7%), proteinuria (9.2% versus 0%), deep vein thrombosis (5.9% versus 0.9%) and pulmonary embolism (5.9% versus 5.2%).

CONCLUSION

No difference in PFS rate was observed between treatment groups. Adding aflibercept to first-line mFOLFOX6 did not increase efficacy but was associated with higher toxicity.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT00851084, www.clinicaltrials.gov, EudraCT 2008-004178-41.

Rilotumumab in combination with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine as first-line treatment for gastric or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: an open-label, dose de-escalation phase 1b study and a double-blind, randomised phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Dysregulation of the hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)/MET pathway promotes tumour growth and metastasis. Rilotumumab is a fully human, monoclonal antibody that neutralises HGF. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, biomarkers, and pharmacokinetics of rilotumumab combined with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX) in patients with advanced gastric or oesophagogastric junction cancer.

METHODS

We recruited patients (≥18 years old) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, who had not received previous systemic therapy, from 43 sites worldwide. Phase 1b was an open-label, dose de-escalation study to identify a safe dose of rilotumumab (initial dose 15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1) plus ECX (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, capecitabine 625 mg/m(2) twice a day orally on days 1-21, respectively), administered every 3 weeks. The phase 1b primary endpoint was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities in all phase 1b patients who received at least one dose of rilotumumab and completed the dose-limiting toxicity assessment window (first cycle of therapy). Phase 2 was a double-blind study that randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) using an interactive voice response system to receive rilotumumab 15 mg/kg, rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg, or placebo, plus ECX (doses as above), stratified by ECOG performance status and disease extent. The phase 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), analysed by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00719550.

FINDINGS

Seven of the nine patients enrolled in the phase 1b study received at least one dose of rilotumumab 15 mg/kg, only two of whom had three dose-limiting toxicities: palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, cerebral ischaemia, and deep-vein thrombosis. In phase 2, 121 patients were randomly assigned (40 to rilotumumab 15 mg/kg; 42 to rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg; 39 to placebo). Median PFS was 5·1 months (95% CI 2·9-7·0) in the rilotumumab 15 mg/kg group, 6·8 months (4·5-7·5) in the rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg group, 5·7 months (4·5-7·0) in both rilotumumab groups combined, and 4·2 months (2·9-4·9) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for PFS events compared with placebo was 0·69 (80% CI 0·49-0·97; p=0·164) for rilotumumab 15 mg/kg, 0·53 (80% CI 0·38-0·73; p=0·009) for rilotumumab 7·5 mg/kg, and 0·60 (80% CI 0·45-0·79; p=0·016) for combined rilotumumab. Any grade adverse events more common in the combined rilotumumab group than in the placebo group included haematological adverse events (neutropenia in 44 [54%] of 81 patients vs 13 [33%] of 39 patients; anaemia in 32 [40%] vs 11 [28%]; and thrombocytopenia in nine [11%] vs none), peripheral oedema (22 [27%] vs three [8%]), and venous thromboembolism (16 [20%] vs five [13%]). Grade 3-4 adverse events more common with rilotumumab included neutropenia (36 [44%] vs 11 [28%]) and venous thromboembolism (16 [20%] vs four [10%]). Serious adverse events were balanced between groups except for anaemia, which occurred more frequently in the combined rilotumumab group (ten [12%] vs none).

INTERPRETATION

Rilotumumab plus ECX had no unexpected safety signals and showed greater activity than placebo plus ECX. A phase 3 study of the combination in MET-positive gastric and oesophagogastric junction cancer is in progress.

FUNDING

Amgen Inc.

Presence of digital dermatitis treponemes on cattle and sheep hoof trimming equipment

Digital dermatitis (DD) is an infectious foot disease causing severe lameness in dairy cattle (worldwide) and sheep (UK). This study investigated whether DD Treponema phylogroups can be present on equipment used to trim ruminant hooves and, therefore, consider this trimming equipment as a possible vector for the transmission of DD. Equipment was tested after being used to trim DD symptomatic and asymptomatic cattle and sheep hooves, and subsequently after disinfection of equipment. After trimming, 'Treponema medium/Treponema vincentii-like', 'Treponema phagedenis-like' and 'Treponema denticola/T putidum-like' DD spirochaetes, were shown to be present on 23/37 (62%), 21/37 (57%) and 20/37 (54%) of knives, respectively. After disinfection, detection rates for the DD treponemes were 9/37 (24%), 6/37 (16%) and 3/37 (8%), respectively. Following culture of a swab, an isolate belonging to the T phagedenis-like spirochaetes was identified from a knife sample after trimming a DD positive cow. No isolates were obtained from knife samples after disinfection. This new data has, for the first time, identified treponemes in the farm environment, and highlighted disinfection of hoof trimming equipment between animals and between farms, as a logical precaution to limit the spread of DD.

Prognostication in esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (OGA): Factors influencing overall survival (OS) in REAL3

91

Background: The REAL3 trial evaluated the addition of panitumumab (P) to epirubicin, oxaliplatin and capecitabine (EOC) in advanced OGA. We previously reported that addition of panitumumab was not associated with improvement in survival endpoints. In this analysis we aimed to explore factors associated with OS in the REAL3 population. Methods: Analysis performed in ITT population (n=553). OS was evaluated in relation to the baseline characteristics displayed in the table below. Cox regression was used to obtain HRs and 95% CIs. Factors with p<0.2 were included in a forward stepwise model and factors with p<0.1 were regarded as significant in the final model. OS was also assessed using the RMH Prognostic Index score which comprises 4 adverse variables: PS 2; liver mets; peritoneal mets; ALP >100 U/L. Results: Results of the univariate analysis are shown in the table below. In multi-variate analysis, the factors which remained statistically significant for OS were: PS (p=0.080): 1 vs 0 HR 1.24 (95% CI 0.99-1.57); 2 vs 0 HR 1.57 (95%CI 0.97-2.54) Disease extent (p=0.054): Met disease vs LA HR 1.42 (95% CI 0.99-2.02) Baseline global health score (p=0.005): Low vs high HR 1.52 (95% CI 1.16-2.00); middle vs high HR 1.45 (95% CI 1.11-1.89) Patients with an RMH Prognostic Index score of 0 (good prognosis) had median OS of 13.1 mo. This compared to 9.5 mo in patients with 1-2 adverse features (intermediate prognosis) (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.12-1.68; p=0.002) and 4.7 mo in patients with 3-4 adverse features (poor prognosis) (HR 4.02, 95% CI 1.96-8.22; p<0.001). Conclusions: Baseline global quality of life may represent a useful adjunct to clinical parameters to guide prognostication in advanced OGA. These findings also validate the RMH Prognostic Index score in the REAL3 population. Clinical trial information: 2007-005976-15.[Table: see text]