Should we screen for colorectal cancer in people aged 75 and over? A systematic review - collaborative work of the French geriatric oncology society (SOFOG) and the French federation of digestive oncology (FFCD)

BACKGROUND

We have done a systematic literature review about CRC Screening over 75 years old in order to update knowledge and make recommendations.

METHODS

PUBMED database was searched in October 2021 for articles published on CRC screening in the elderly, and generated 249 articles. Further searches were made to find articles on the acceptability, efficacy, and harms of screening in this population, together with the state of international guidelines.

RESULTS

Most benefit-risk data on CRC screening in the over 75 s derived from simulation studies. Most guidelines recommend stopping cancer screening at the age of 75. In private health systems, extension of screening up to 80-85 years is, based on the life expectancy and the history of screening. Screening remains effective in populations without comorbidity given their better life-expectancy. Serious adverse events of colonoscopy increase with age and can outweigh the benefit of screening. The great majority of reviews concluded that screening between 75 and 85 years must be decided case by case.

CONCLUSION

The current literature does not allow Evidence-Based Medicine propositions for mass screening above 75 years old. As some subjects over 75 years may benefit from CRC screening, we discussed ways to introduce CRC screening in France in the 75-80 age group. IRB: An institutional review board composed of members of the 2 learned societies (SOFOG and FFCD) defined the issues of interest, followed the evolution of the work and reviewed and validated the report.

Comparison of screening strategies with two new tests to score and diagnose varices needing treatment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to improve non-invasive screening of varices needing treatment (VNT) and compare different screening strategies.

METHODS

2,290 patients with chronic liver disease were included in a retrospective study. Etiologies were: virus: 50.0%, NAFLD: 29.5%, alcohol: 20.5%, VNT: 14.9%. Test descriptors were performance (spared endoscopy) and safety (missed VNT). VNT tests were evaluated according to their safety levels either for individual screening (95% negative predictive value (NPV)), population screening (95% sensitivity) or undifferentiated screening (100% sensitivity/NPV) without missed VNT. The tests provided three categories: missed VNT <5%, VNT 100% specificity (new category), both sparing endoscopies, and intermediate (endoscopy required).

RESULTS

Independent VNT predictors (etiology, sex, age, platelets, prothrombin index, albumin, ALT, liver stiffness) were included in two tests: VNT virus alcohol NAFLD test (VANT) and varice risk score (VARS). We report results of the whole population. Considering population screening, performances were, Baveno VI criteria: 24.1%, Anticipate: 24.7%, VariScreen: 35.3%, VANT: 40.2% (p<0.001 vs other tests). VANT spared 58.0% more endoscopies in the whole population than Baveno criteria in compensated advanced chronic liver diseases. Considering individual screening, VARS performance was, in all patients: 62.0% vs 42.9% for the expanded Baveno VI criteria (p<0.001), and, in NAFLD: 72.8% vs 65.1% for the NAFLD cirrhosis criteria (p<0.001). Considering undifferentiated screening, VARS performance was 12%. The VARS score estimated VNT probability from 0 to 100% (AUROC: 0.826).

CONCLUSION

VANT and VARS spared from 12% (undifferentiated screening) to 40% (population screening) or 62% (individual screening) of endoscopies in main-etiology patients without ascites.

Response to systemic treatments in advanced fibrolamellar carcinoma: A French multicenter retrospective cohort of the AGEO

e16194

Background: Fibrolamellar carcinomas (FLC) are rare hepatic malignancies affecting young patients without chronic liver disease, often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Few data are available regarding efficacy of systemic anti-tumor treatments. Main objective was to explore response according to RECIST 1.1 criteria in the first line setting in advanced FLC patients. Methods: This retrospective multicentric French cohort included 44 patients with advanced FLC who received at least one systemic treatment and had one morphological evaluation, performed every 2-3 months. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 24 years (range 13-62), 59.1% were female, 38% were at stage IVa (lymph node involvement) and 42% at stage IVb (metastatic involvement). Responses were analyzed in 42 patients, 7 receiving neoadjuvant treatment and 35 patients receiving a first line palliative treatment. There was no complete response, 14.3% (n = 5) had a partial response (PR), 37.1% (n = 13) had stable disease (SD) and 48.6% (n = 17) had progressive disease. GEMOX was the most prescribed regimen (n = 8) with a disease control rate (PR+SD) at 25% (PR = 12.5% and SD = 12.5%). Doxorubicine-platine was the second most prescribed association (n = 5) with a disease control rate at 80% (PR = 40% and SD = 40%). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors, i.e. sorafenib (n = 10) and sunitinib (n = 3) showed no response and a rate of SD of 40% and 33% respectively. The association of doxorubicine-platine plus sorafenib was used in 4 patients, with one PR and three SD. Only one patient received immunotherapy (nivolumab and ipilimumab), but progressed at first evaluation at two months. Median overall survival was 3.3 years. Five years overall survival was 35% (95%CI = 0.23-0.54). Patients who underwent surgery had a better prognosis (55 months vs 15.5 months). Unfortunately, disease relapsed quickly after surgery, with a median relapse-free survival of 11 months. Conclusions: Advanced fibrolamellar carcinomas have a low chemosensitivity to either cytotoxic chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Larger studies are warranted to define a standard of care for these rare tumors requiring treatment in an expert centre, either with a molecular screening.

Liver fibrosis staging by computed tomography: Prospective randomized multicentric evaluation of image analyses

AIM

Liver fibrosis staging is essential. We prospectively evaluated the liver fibrosis staging performance of computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

70 hepato-gastroenterology clinicians were randomized into three stratified groups with different image analyses of radiological semiology, i.e., on raw images (group 1) and on expert-annotated (group 2) and computerized-morphometry-enriched (group 3) images. Radiological fibrosis staging based on seven simple descriptors into four stages equivalent to Metavir stages (F0/1, F2, F3, F4=cirrhosis) was determined at baseline and after image analyses in 10 patients with chronic liver diseases (two per F) concordant for four independent fibrosis stagings including Metavir. 23,800 CT images were analysed, providing 1400 fibrosis stagings.

RESULTS

Fibrosis staging: overall (3 groups) accuracy (correct classification rate) was, baseline: 43%, post-analysis: 60% (p < 0.001) without significant progression in group 1 (6%, p = 0.207) contrary to groups 2 (34%, p < 0.001) and 3 (13%, p = 0.007). Cirrhosis diagnosis: overall accuracy was, baseline: 84%, post-analysis: 89% (p < 0.001) without significant progression in group 1 (0%, p = 1) contrary to groups 2 (8%, p = 0.009) and 3 (7%, p = 0.015). Baseline AUROCs were good (≥0.83) for marked fibrosis (F≥3 or cirrhosis) in all groups. Post-analysis AUROCs became excellent (≥0.89) in group 2 for all diagnostic targets (≥0.98 for F≥3 and cirrhosis) and in group 3 for cirrhosis. In post-analysis group 2, discrimination between all F was excellent (especially, F1 from F0) with an Obuchowski index at 0.87. Negative and positive predictive values for marked fibrosis were 98% and 95%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Simple CT descriptors accurately discriminate all Metavir liver fibrosis stages.

A predictive score of inadequate bowel preparation based on a self-administered questionnaire: PREPA-CO

INTRODUCTION

Inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy has a 20-30% rate and impedes on the quality of the procedure. The aim of this study was to develop a predictive score of inadequate bowel preparation, using a patient questionnaire on potential risk factors.

METHODS

In this single center study, consecutive patients with colonoscopy indication were enrolled. The primary outcome was inadequate bowel preparation defined by Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score <7 or a score ≤1 in any of the 3 colonic segments.

RESULTS

A total of 561 patients were included. Inadequate bowel preparation was seen in 25.0% of cases. Seven risk factors were selected into the prediction model of inadequate bowel preparation: diabetes or obesity, irregular physical activity, cirrhosis, use of antidepressants or neuroleptics, use of opiate medication, history of surgery and history of inadequate bowel preparation. The risk score, named PREPA-CO, had an AUROC of 0.621, adequately predicted bowel cleanliness in 68.3% of cases, with a specificity of 75.8% and a negative predictive value of 80.8%.

CONCLUSION

We developed a predictive score named "Prepa-Co", allowing the identification of patients at high risk of inadequate bowel preparation. In clinical practice, this score could help tailor the prescription of the preparation to the patient.

Maintenance therapies in metastatic pancreatic cancer: present and future with a focus on PARP inhibitors

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs) are now more effectively controlled using chemotherapy combinations such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (NabP) regimens with a subset of patients who achieve a sustained tumor stabilization or response. The next challenge is to design maintenance therapies that result in continued tumor control with minimal toxicity. Quality of life should always be a priority in these patients with prolonged survival. Gradually tapering off the intensity of chemotherapy by suppressing drug(s) in the combination is one option. Thus, maintenance with 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine as single agents after FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine-NabP induction, respectively, seems to be a promising approach to minimize neurotoxicity while maintaining efficacy. Another option is to introduce maintenance drug(s) with different anti-tumoral actions. The recent example of olaparib in patients with BRCA mutated PDAC provides a promising proof-of-concept of a switch maintenance strategy in this setting.

Withholding the Introduction of Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: Impact on Outcomes in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Tumors: A Multicenter AGEO Study (the WAIT or ACT Study)

BACKGROUND

Patients with RAS wild-type (WT) nonresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may receive either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) combined with first-line, 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Without the RAS status information, the oncologist can either start chemotherapy with bevacizumab or wait for the introduction of the anti-EGFR. Our objective was to compare both strategies in a routine practice setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective, propensity score-weighted study included patients with a RAS WT nonresectable mCRC, treated between 2013 and 2016 by a 5-FU-based chemotherapy, with either delayed anti-EGFR or immediate anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Primary criterion was overall survival (OS). Secondary criteria were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

A total of 262 patients (129 in the anti-VEGF group and 133 in the anti-EGFR group) were included. Patients receiving an anti-VEGF were more often men (68% vs. 56%), with more metastatic sites (>2 sites: 15% vs. 9%). The median delay to obtain the RAS status was 19 days (interquartile range: 13-26). Median OS was not significantly different in the two groups (29 vs. 30.5 months, p = .299), even after weighting on the propensity score (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.08, p = .2024). The delayed introduction of anti-EGFR was associated with better median PFS (13.8 vs. 11.0 months, p = .0244), even after weighting on the propensity score (HR = 0.74, 95% CI, 0.61-0.90, p = .0024). ORR was significantly higher in the anti-EGFR group (66.7% vs. 45.6%, p = .0007).

CONCLUSION

Delayed introduction of anti-EGFR had no deleterious effect on OS, PFS, and ORR, compared with doublet chemotherapy with anti-VEGF.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

For RAS/RAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, patients may receive 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In daily practice, the time to obtain the RAS status might be long enough to consider two options: to start the chemotherapy with bevacizumab, or to start without a targeted therapy and to add the anti-EGFR at reception of the RAS status. This study found no deleterious effect of the delayed introduction of an anti-EGFR on survival, compared with the introduction of an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor from cycle 1. It is possible to wait one or two cycles to introduce the anti-EGFR while waiting for RAS status.

Withholding anti-EGFR, the impact on outcome in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal tumors (WAIT or ACT trial)

626

Background: First line of RAS wild-type (WT) unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) can be doublet chemotherapy with an anti-VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor), or an anti-EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor). Waiting for RAS status, many oncologists initiate chemotherapy and add the anti-EGFR secondly. The objective was to compare the delayed introduction of the anti-EGFR to the immediate introduction of the anti-VEGF in first-line treatment of RAS WT mCRC. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort analysis from 2013 to 2016, multicentric with 28 health care centers. We included patients with RAS WT unresectable mCRC treated between 2013 and 2016 by a doublet chemotherapy with the anti-VEGF introduced immediately or with the anti-EGFR introduced at C2 or C3. Progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and response rate (RR) for the two cohorts were compared. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were estimated with cox regression models weighted on propensity score to deal with potential confounders. Results: A total of 262 patients were included, 129 in the immediate anti-VEGF group and 133 in the delayed anti-EGFR group. Median follow-up was 37.9 months. Ninety-two patients had the anti-EGFR introduced at C2, 40 at C3. The median delay of RAS analysis was 19 days (q1-q3: 13-26). Patients treated with anti-VEGFs were more likely men (68% versus 56%), with more metastatic sites ( > 2 sites: 15% versus 9%). A propensity score including the number of metastatic sites and a possible previous treatment was built. Delayed anti-EGFRs were associated with longer PFS compared to immediate anti-VEGFs: 13.8 versus 11.0 months, p = 0.0244. After weighting, delayed anti-EGFRs were still associated with better PFS: HR 0.74, 95%CI [0.61 – 0.90], p = 0.0024. OS was not different between the two arms (30.5 for anti-VEGF versus 29.9 months, p = 0.3934), even after weighting (HR 0.86, 95%CI [0.69 – 1.08], p = 0.2024). There was a better RR with delayed anti-EGFRs: 66.7% versus 45.6%, p = 0.0007. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that, while waiting for RAS status, the delayed introduction of the anti-EGFR is a valid option, compared to the immediate introduction of the anti-VEGF.

The combination of everolimus and zoledronic acid increase the efficacy of gemcitabine in a mouse model of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Background

Gemcitabine is a standard treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Many mechanisms are involved in gemcitabine resistance, such as reduced expression of the human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (hENT1) membrane transporter, deoxycytidine kinase deficiency, and changes in the signal transmission of mitogen-activity protein kinase (MAPK) and the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) pathways.

Aim

To evaluate the anti-tumor efficiency of blocking signaling pathways using combined action of gemcitabine, everolimus and zoledronic acid versus gemcitabine alone in a mouse subcutaneous xenograft.

Methods

Implantations of two human pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells lines (PANC1, K-ras mutated and gemcitabine-resistant; and BxPc3, wild-type K-ras and gemcitabine-sensitive) were performed on male athymic nude mice. The mice received different treatments: gemcitabine, gemcitabine plus everolimus, everolimus, gemcitabine plus zoledronic acid, everolimus plus zoledronic acid, or gemcitabine plus everolimus and zoledronic acid, for 28 days. We measured the tumor volume and researched the expression of the biomarkers involved in the signaling pathways or in gemcitabine resistance.

Results

In wild-type K-ras tumors, the combinations of gemcitabine plus everolimus; zoledronic acid plus everolimus; and gemcitabine plus zoledronic acid and everolimus slowed tumor growth, probably due to caspase-3 overexpression and reduced Annexin II expression. In mutated K-ras tumors, gemcitabine plus everolimus and zoledronic acid, and the combination of zoledronic acid and everolimus, decreased tumor volume as compared to gemcitabine alone, inhibiting the ERK feedback loop induced by everolimus.

Conclusion

The combination of zoledronic acid and everolimus has an antitumor effect and could increase gemcitabine efficacy.

Relationship Between the Expression of O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) and p53, and the Clinical Response in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Treated with FOLFIRINOX

BACKGROUND

To date, no predictive biomarker for the efficacy of FOLFIRINOX in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma has been demonstrated. Deficiency in O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) has been associated with a therapeutic response in endocrine tumors of the pancreas and the lack of expression of protein 53 (p53) could interfere with the action of MGMT.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of MGMT and p53 in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with FOLFIRINOX as a first-line treatment and to investigate their association with therapeutic response and survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The immunohistochemical expression of MGMT was recorded as present or absent and the expression of p53 was semi-quantitatively scored in 30 patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, at Angers Hospital in France between September 2011 and June 2015. Clinical and radiologic data were collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

The presence or absence of MGMT expression entailed no significant differences in response rate. Median values of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were lower in patients with MGMT expression, but sample size is too small to conclude that there is a statistically significant difference. No significant relationship for response rate and PFS was observed in relation with p53 expression. By contrast, patients with a strong tumor expression of p53 had a significantly lower OS compared to patients with no or weak expression of the protein (p = 0.027). There was a positive correlation between the expression of p53 and MGMT (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary findings suggest that for patients treated with FOLFIRINOX as a first-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the immunohistochemical evaluation of MGMT could not predict the clinical outcome; however, the survival was not significant probably because of the under-powered study (due to small sample size). A strong tumor expression of p53 is associated with a poor prognosis of OS.