Search

PURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430 ). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine.

Introduction and Background: Salmonella-IL2 (Saltikva) is an attenuated strain of orally administered Salmonella that carries the human gene for IL-2 that colonizes the tumor microenvironment and locally releases IL-2 without any untoward effects. Following significant anti-tumor responses during preclinical study in multiple tumor models; a Phase I trial in humans found a single dose to be not toxic and elevated the Natural Killer T cell populations in patients with advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Additionally, a Phase I multiple dose trial in companion dogs with metastatic osteosarcoma demonstrated a 22% complete response rate. A Phase II trial was performed studying the addition of Salmonella-IL2 to standard of care chemotherapy for stage 4 metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods: A Health Canada and local IRB approved, non-randomized, two-arm study in patients with Stage 4 metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas is currently underway. The goal is to recruit 30 patients per arm; Arm 1: Salmonella-IL2 with FOLFIRINOX and Arm 2: Salmonella-IL2 with Gemcitabine/Abraxane. The primary outcome is overall survival with secondary outcomes of response determined by CT imaging using RECIST 1.1 criteria and biomarker data. Outcomes were compared to patients with stage 4 metastatic pancreatic cancer administered FOLFIRINOX (n=37) or Gemcitabine/Abraxane (n=24) from 4 years prior to starting this trial (2016-2020) at the study site and to historical controls from the published literature. Salmonella-IL2 is orally administered concomitantly with the administration of the prescribed chemotherapy according to arm of enrollment. 109 cfu of attenuated Salmonella-IL2 was administered orally after ingestion of a gastric acid neutralizing agent and followed with 200ml of an isotonic crystalloid fluid. Results: A total of 28 patients have been enrolled into this clinical trial. 20 patients were administered Salmonella-IL2 orally every 2 weeks with FOLFIRINOX; mean age 59.4 (32-73) years; 12(60%) women, and 8 (40%) men. 8 patients were administered Salmonella-IL2 with Gemcitabine/Abraxane every 2/3 weeks; mean age is 68.8 (56-82); 6 (66.7%) women and 3 (33.3%) men. Median survival in the FOLFIRINOX arm was 24 months compared to 11.1 months in published historical controls and 13.1 months site specific controls (n=37) (P Conclusion: Addition of Salmonella-IL2 to FOLFIRINOX for stage 4 metastatic pancreatic cancer results in the near doubling of median survival when compared to historical and site-specific controls receiving FOLFIRNOX only. These findings strongly indicate that a larger pivotal phase 3 multicenter trial is warranted. Citation Format: Petr Kavan, Daniel A. Saltzman, Jule Muegge, Jordan Moradian, Gerald Batist. Addition of Salmonella-IL2 to FOLFIRINOX for metastatic stage 4 pancreatic cancer nearly doubles median survival [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT035.

Background: BOLD-100 is a first-in-class ruthenium-based anticancer agent in Phase 1b/2a clinical development for the treatment of advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancers in combination with FOLFOX. BOLD-100 demonstrated synergy in established preclinical models in combination with various anticancer therapies, particularly in resistant cell lines. In the first interim analysis of the phase 1b dose-escalation component of the clinical trial, BOLD-100 plus FOLFOX was well-tolerated in patients (pts) with advanced GI solid cancers. Methods: This is a prospective, Phase 1b dose-escalation (Part A) and Phase 2a dose-expansion (Part B) study of BOLD-100 in combination with FOLFOX for colorectal (CRC), pancreatic (PDAC), gastric (GC) and biliary tract (BTC) cancers. Pts receive BOLD-100 with FOLFOX on day 1 of each 14-day cycle. In Part A, pts were enrolled in a 3+3 design to determine the combination recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), with BOLD-100 dose-escalation (420, 500 and 625 mg/m2). Part B comprises 4 cohorts treated at the RP2D of 625 mg/m2 until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective of Part B is to evaluate the efficacy of BOLD-100 in three clinical endpoints (PFS, OS, and ORR). Bayesian modelling is used to continually reassess these endpoints; the posterior probability of superiority to a historical landmark for each endpoint. Results: As of 31 Dec 2022, 17 pts with advanced metastatic colorectal cancer median age 62 years were treated. Pts received a median of 4 prior systemic therapies, 14 had received prior FOLFOX and 16 (94%) were enrolled with stage IV disease. Median number of cycles completed was 7 (range 1-12). Median PFS was 4.7 [2.9,8.6] months, median OS 9.8 [5.2,22] months, and ORR 13% [3,36] compared to the historical benchmark of 2.0 months, 7.1 months, and 1.6% respectively for similar patients treated with approved standard of care. Two pts achieved a partial response and 11 pts had stable disease for an overall disease control rate of 87% (13/15 [64%,97%]). This compares favorably to the historical control 44%. 16 pts reported 1 or more treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), most commonly neutrophil count decreased (n=9, 52.9%), fatigue (n=6, 35.3%), pyrexia (n=4, 23.5%), platelet count decreased (n=4, 23.5%) and decreased appetite (n=4, 23.5%). Most of the AEs were grade (G) 1-2. 12 G3 AEs were observed (mostly neutrophil count decreased [8]). Conclusion: BOLD-100 plus FOLFOX is an active and well-tolerated treatment regimen in the heavily pre-treated metastatic CRC trial population. There were no new safety signals. PK and PD data are forthcoming. The preliminary mPFS, mOS, ORR and DCR data in this interim analysis demonstrate significant improvement over the currently available approved therapies. Citation Format: Jennifer Spratlin, Grainne O'Kane, Do-Youn Oh, Sun Young Rha, Elaine McWhirter, Elena Elimova, Petr Kavan, Moon Ki Choi, Dae Won Kim, Rachel Goodwin, J Randolph Hecht, Seung Tae Kim, Dong-Hoe Koo, Khalif Halani, E Russell McAllister, Michelle Jones, Malcolm Snow, Yasmin Lemmerick, Gonzalo Spera, Jim Pankovich. BOLD-100-001 (TRIO039): a phase 1b/2a dose-escalation study of BOLD-100 in combination with FOLFOX chemotherapy in patients with pre-treated advanced colorectal cancer: interim efficacy, safety and tolerability analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT149.

Scott Owen,1 Scheryll Alken,2,3 Jad Alshami,1 Marie-Christine Guiot,1,4 Petr Kavan,1 David A Reardon,5 Thierry Muanza,1,4,6 Neil Gibson,7 Karine Pemberton,8 Flavio Solca,9 Agnieszka Cseh10 ,†Frank Saran2,11 1Clinical Research Unit, Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada; 2Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK; 3St James’s Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; 4Neuropathology Division, Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada; 5Center for Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; 6Radiation Oncology, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada; 7Drug Metabolism & Pharmacokinetics, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Biberach, Germany; 8Medical Department, Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd., Bracknell, UK; 9Department of Pharmacology, Boehringer Ingelheim RCV GmbH & Co. KG, Vienna, Austria; 10Department of Medical Affairs, Boehringer Ingelheim International, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany; 11Department of Blood and Cancer, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand†Agnieszka Cseh passed away in May 2021Correspondence: Frank Saran, Auckland City Hospital, Cancer and Blood Service, Building 8, 99 Park Road, Grafton, Private Bag 92024, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand, Tel +64 09 623 6046, Email FSaran@adhb.govt.nzAbstract: Glioblastoma is an aggressive form of central nervous system tumor. Recurrence rates following primary therapy are high, and few second-line treatment options provide durable clinical benefit. Aberrations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are observed in up to 57% of glioblastoma cases and EGFR overexpression has been identified in approximately 60% of primary glioblastomas. In preclinical studies, afatinib, a second-generation ErbB blocker, inhibited cell proliferation in cells harboring mutations commonly found in glioblastoma. In two previous Phase I/II studies of afatinib plus temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma, limited efficacy was observed; however, there was notable benefit in patients with the EGFR variant III (EGFRvIII) mutation, EGFR amplification, and those with loss of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN). This case series report details treatment histories of three long-term responders from these trials. Next-generation sequencing of tumor samples identified alterations in a number of cancer-related genes, including mutations in, and amplification of, EGFR. Tumor samples from all three patients shared favorable prognostic factors, eg O6-methylguanine-DNA methyl-transferase (MGMT) gene promoter methylation; however, negative prognostic factors were also observed, suggesting that these shared genetic features did not completely account for the favorable responses. The genetic profile of the tumor from Patient 1 showed clear differences from the other two tumors: lack of involvement of EGFR aberrations but with a mutation occurring in PTPN11. Preclinical studies showed that single-agent afatinib and temozolomide both separately inhibit the growth of tumors with a C-terminal EGFR truncation, thus providing further rationale for combining these two agents in the treatment of glioblastomas harboring EGFR aberrations. These findings suggest that afatinib may provide treatment benefit in patients with glioblastomas that harbor ErbB family aberrations and, potentially, other genetic aberrations. Further studies are needed to establish which patients with newly diagnosed/recurrent glioblastomas may potentially benefit from treatment with afatinib.Keywords: next-generation sequencing, long-term response, EGFR, genetic aberrations

Background: To date, the role of adjuvant systemic therapy in stages ii and iii colon cancer remains a topic of interest and debate. The objective of the present review was to assess the most recent data, specifically addressing methods of risk stratification, duration of therapy, and future directions. Methods: PubMed and medline were searched for literature pertinent to adjuvant chemotherapy in either stage ii or stage iii colorectal cancer. Summary: Locoregional disease, histopathology, age, laterality, and a number of other biologic and molecular markers appear to have a role in disease risk stratification. The duration of adjuvant therapy for stage iii disease can vary based on risk factors, but use of adjuvant therapy and duration of therapy in stage ii disease remain controversial. Future directions should include genomic assays and improved study design to provide concrete evidence about the duration of adjuvant folfox or capox and about other types of chemotherapy and immunotherapy.

PURPOSE KEYNOTE-164 (NCT02460198) evaluated the antitumor activity of pembrolizumab in previously treated, metastatic, microsatellite instability–high/mismatch repair–deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS This phase II open-label study involved 128 centers worldwide. Eligible patients were age ≥ 18 years and had metastatic MSI-H/dMMR CRC treated with ≥ 2 prior lines of standard therapy, including fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan with or without anti–vascular endothelial growth factor/epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody (cohort A) or ≥ 1 prior line of therapy (cohort B). MSI-H/dMMR status was assessed locally. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. The primary end point was objective response rate by RECIST version 1.1 by independent central review. Secondary end points were duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, safety, and tolerability. RESULTS A total of 124 patients with MSI-H/dMMR CRC (61 in cohort A, 63 in cohort B) enrolled. At data cutoff, median follow-up was 31.3 months (range, 0.2-35.6 months) for cohort A and 24.2 months (range, 0.1-27.1 months) for cohort B. Objective response rate was 33% (95% CI, 21% to 46%) and 33% (95% CI, 22% to 46%), respectively, with median duration of response not reached in either cohort. Median PFS was 2.3 months (95% CI, 2.1 to 8.1 months) and 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.1 to 18.9 months). Median overall survival was 31.4 months (95% CI, 21.4 months to not reached) and not reached (95% CI, 19.2 months to not reached). Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 10 patients (16%) in cohort A and 8 (13%) in cohort B, with the most common occurring in ≥ 2 patients being pancreatitis, fatigue, increased alanine aminotransferase, and increased lipase (2 patients each; 3%) in cohort A. CONCLUSION Pembrolizumab is effective with a manageable safety profile in patients with MSI-H/dMMR CRC.

Background: We explored image-guided adaptive endorectal brachytherapy patients electing non-operative management for rectal cancer. We present the first pre-planned interim analysis. Methods: In this open-label phase II–III randomized study, patients with operable cT2-3ab N0 M0 rectal cancer received 45 Gy in 25 fractions of pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with 5-FU/Capecitabine. They were randomized 1:1 to receive either an EBRT boost of 9 Gy in 5 fractions (Arm A) or three weekly adaptive brachytherapy (IGAEBT) boosts totaling 30 Gy (Arm B). Patient characteristics and toxicity are presented using descriptive analyses; TME-free survival between arms with the intention to treat the population is explored using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: A total of 40 patients were in this analysis. Baseline characteristics were balanced; acute toxicities were similar. Complete clinical response (cCR) was 50% (n = 10/20) in Arm A and 90% in Arm B (n = 18/20). Median follow-up was 1.3 years; 2-year TME-free survival was 38.6% (95% CI: 16.5–60.6%) in the EBRT arm and 76.6% (95% CI: 56.1–97.1%) in the IGAEBT arm. Conclusions: Radiation intensification with IGAEBT is feasible. This interim analysis suggests an improvement in TME-free survival when comparing IGAEBT with EBRT, pending confirmation upon completion of this trial.

Background Therapeutic resistance is the main cause of death in metastatic colorectal cancer. To investigate genomic plasticity, most specifically of metastatic lesions, associated with response to first‐line systemic therapy, we collected longitudinal liver metastatic samples and characterized the copy number aberration (CNA) landscape and its effect on the transcriptome. Methods Liver metastatic biopsies were collected prior to treatment (pre, n = 97) and when clinical imaging demonstrated therapeutic resistance (post, n = 43). CNAs were inferred from whole exome sequencing and were correlated with both the status of the lesion and overall patient progression‐free survival (PFS). We used RNA sequencing data from the same sample set to validate aberrations as well as independent datasets to prioritize candidate genes. Results We identified a significantly increased frequency gain of a unique CN, in liver metastatic lesions after first‐line treatment, on chr18p11.32 harboring 10 genes, including TYMS, which has not been reported in primary tumors (GISTIC method and test of equal proportions, FDR‐adjusted p = 0.0023). CNA lesion profiles exhibiting different treatment responses were compared and we detected focal genomic divergences in post‐treatment resistant lesions but not in responder lesions (two‐tailed Fisher's Exact test, unadjusted p ≤ 0.005). The importance of examining metastatic lesions is highlighted by the fact that 15 out of 18 independently validated CNA regions found to be associated with PFS in this study were only identified in the metastatic lesions and not in the primary tumors. Conclusion This investigation of genomic‐phenotype associations in a large colorectal cancer liver metastases cohort identified novel molecular features associated with treatment response, supporting the clinical importance of collecting metastatic samples in a defined clinical setting., Graphical Abstract and Graphical Headlights Liver metastatic lesions from colorectal cancer patients were collected before and after first‐line standard chemotherapy and comprehensively profiled with the objective to assess the genomic impact of systemic therapy and investigate association with response and survival. This study allowed identification of novel CNAs having an impact on the transcriptome with a potential prognostic value in patients with colorectal cancer.

Background: Quality of life (qol) is important for oncology patients, especially for those with late-stage disease. The present study was initiated to address the lack of published prospective data about the qol benefits of trifluridine/tipiracil (ftd/tpi) compared with best supportive care (bsc) in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc). Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional, non-interventional study used multidimensional validated scales to evaluate patient-reported qol in two study cohorts of patients and also to measure differences in mcrc-related symptoms and pain in a real-world clinical setting. Results: Our findings demonstrate that patients with refractory mcrc report better overall qol when treated with ftd/tpi than with bsc alone. In that population, statistically significant differences in mean qol measures favoured ftd/tpi over bsc for physical symptom distress, psychological distress, activity impairment, overall valuation of life, and symptomatology. The overall better qol for patients receiving ftd/tpi implies that treatment was well tolerated and was associated with a lower symptom burden. No significant differences for pain were observed between the groups. Conclusions: This study suggests that ftd/tpi is a well-tolerated option for the treatment of patients with refractory mcrc, showcasing the value of capturing real-world qol data in routine clinical practice.

Lenvatinib is an oral multikinase inhibitor indicated for the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). In the Phase III REFLECT trial, lenvatinib was noninferior in the primary endpoint of overall survival versus sorafenib, the only systemic therapy funded in Canada prior to the introduction of lenvatinib. Lenvatinib also demonstrated statistically significant improvement compared to sorafenib in secondary endpoint progression-free survival, time to progression, and objective response rate. The aim of this analysis was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib versus sorafenib for the first-line treatment of patients with uHCC from a Canadian perspective. A cost-utility analysis was conducted using partitioned survival modelling, with health states representing progression-free disease, progressed disease, and death. Health effects were measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were represented in Canadian dollars. Clinical inputs were derived from the REFLECT trial, with outcomes extrapolated using parametric survival models. EQ-5D data collected in REFLECT were used to determine health state utility values, and estimates of resource use came from a survey of clinicians. The model predicted incremental costs of-$5,021 and incremental QALYs of 0.17, making lenvatinib dominant over sorafenib. The model demonstrates lenvatinib to be a cost-effective use of resources versus sorafenib in Canada for the treatment of uHCC. Overall costs are lower compared with sorafenib, while health benefits are greater, with modelled progression-free and overall survival extended by 4.1 and 2.6 months in the lenvatinib arm, respectively.

Background: Selection and sequencing of treatment regimens for individual patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) is driven by maintaining reasonable quality of life and extending survival, as well as by access to and cost of therapies. The objectives of the present study were to describe, for patients with mcrc, attrition across lines of systemic therapy, patterns of therapy and their timing, and KRAS status. Methods: A retrospective chart review at 6 Canadian academic centres included sequential patients who were diagnosed with mcrc from 1 January 2009 onward and who initiated first-line systemic treatment for mcrc between 1 January and 31 December 2009. Death was included as a competing risk in the analysis. Results: The analysis included 200 patients who started first-line therapy. The proportions of patients who started second-, third-, and fourth-line systemic therapy were 70%, 30%, and 15% respectively. Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab was the most common first-line combination (66%). The most common first-line regimen was folfiri plus bevacizumab. KRAS testing was performed in 103 patients (52%), and 38 of 68 patients (56%, 19% overall) with confirmed KRAS wild-type tumours received an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (egfri), which was more common in later lines. Most KRAS testing occurred after initiation of second-line therapy. Conclusions: In the modern treatment era, a high proportion of patients receive at least two lines of therapy for mcrc, but only 19% receive egfri therapy. Earlier KRAS testing and therapy with an egfri might allow a greater proportion of patients to access all 5 active treatment agents.

Assessment of the clinical benefit of cancer treatments can be highly subjective, influenced by both perspective and context. Such assessments are required in regulatory and policy decision-making, but consistency between jurisdictions is often lacking. Clear and consistent standards for determining when a treatment offers a meaningful benefit, relative to the current standard of care, can help to address issues of equity and transparency in health technology assessment. For metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC), no standardized Canadian definition of clinically meaningful benefit has yet been proposed. Colorectal Cancer Canada therefore convened a group of medical oncologists expert in colorectal cancer to review the literature about clinical significance. The resulting consensus is intended to apply to any therapeutic agent being considered in the setting of chemotherapy-refractory MCRC. It was agreed that overall survival is the appropriate measure of clinical efficacy in chemorefractory MCRC. As quantitative targets for efficacy, an improvement of 2 months or more in median overall survival or a hazard ratio for survival of 0.75 or lower (or both) are proposed as the threshold for clinically meaningful benefit. That threshold could be influenced by a treatment’s effect on quality of life. Treatment toxicity is also relevant to the assessment of clinical benefit in this setting, specifically when significant differences in treatment tolerability are evident.

Background According to the IDEA trial, 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy should remain the treatment standard in stage III T4 or N2 colon cancer. The relatively poor survival in this high-risk subgroup—a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of 65%—and the potential synergistic efficacy of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin, and irinotecan suggest that FOLFIRINOX may be a regimen of particular interest in this setting. Patients and Methods This multicenter international phase 3 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02967289 ) being conducted in 49 centers in France and Canada plans to randomize (1:1; minimization method) 640 patients aged 18 to 70 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1. Randomization occurs within 42 days (with treatment initiated within 56 days) after curative-intent R0 surgical resection of a pT4N1 or pT1-4N2 colon adenocarcinoma. Patients will be randomized to receive adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, and 5-FU 2.4 g/m2 over 46 hours) or modified FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2, then 2.4 g/m2 over 46 hours) every 2 weeks for 24 weeks (12 cycles). Patients will be followed for 5 years after the end of adjuvant chemotherapy. A gain of 9% in 3-year DFS (primary end point) is expected (74% in the experimental arm vs. 65% in the control arm; α, 5% [2-sided log-rank test]; 1-β, 80%). Secondary end points of this study include 2-year DFS, overall survival, and toxicity.

This study evaluated safety and quality of life in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer undergoing treatment with aflibercept and FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan). Most patients treated with this combination experienced either improvement or stability in quality of life scores. Aflibercept plus FOLFIRI is tolerable in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with a safety profile similar to that seen in previous studies of these individual medications. Background: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the safety profile of aflibercept and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) provided with aflibercept access before marketing authorization. Patients and Methods: Patients received aflibercept followed by FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient/investigator decision to discontinue. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated, and HRQL was assessed at baseline, cycle 3, and every other cycle using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-CR29, and EuroQol 5-Dimensions 3-Levels questionnaires (NCT01571284). Results: Overall, 779 adult patients with mCRC, who received >= 1 prior oxaliplatin-based regimen and had disease progression during or following their last administration of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, were enrolled. At data cutoff, all patients had discontinued treatment, mainly owing to disease progression (51.7%). The most common TEAEs of any grade were diarrhea (61.6%), hypertension (48.4%), and nausea (43.3%). The most common grade 3/4 TEAEs were hypertension (24.1%), neutropenia (23.1%), and diarrhea (15.3%). Clinically meaningful changes in HRQL were reported for all measures. Most patients either had an improvement in their HRQL scores or remained stable during the treatment period based on patient-reported outcomes. Conclusion: The data from this study support the tolerability of the combination of aflibercept and FOLFIRI in a setting that more closely approximates real life in patients with mCRC who failed to respond to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, and also suggest an improvement in HRQL.

Despite lack of a true comparative study, the folfox (5-fluorouracil&ndash, leucovorin&ndash, oxaliplatin) and capox (capecitabine&ndash, oxaliplatin) regimens are believed to be similar in their efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of stage iii colorectal cancer. However, that belief has been disputed, because real-life data suggest that the capox regimen is more toxic, leading to more frequent reductions in the delivered dose intensity&mdash, thus raising questions about the effect of dose intensity on clinical outcomes. A retrospective data review for two Canadian institutions, the Segal Cancer Centre and the Tom Baker Cancer Centre, considered patients diagnosed with stage iii colorectal cancer during 2006&ndash, 2013. Primary endpoints were dose intensity and toxicity, with a secondary endpoint of disease-free survival. The study enrolled 180 eligible patients (80 at the Segal Cancer Centre, 100 at the Tom Baker Cancer Centre). Of those 180 patients, 75 received capox, and 105 received mfolfox6. In the capox group, a significant dose reduction was identified for capecitabine compared with 5-fluorouracil in mfolfox6 group (p = 0.0014). Similarly, a significant dose reduction was observed for oxaliplatin in mfolfox6 compared with oxaliplatin in capox (p = 0.0001). Compared with the patients receiving capox, those receiving mfolfox6 were twice as likely to experience a treatment delay of more than 1 cycle-length (p = 0.03855). Toxicity was more frequent in patients receiving mfolfox6 (nausea: 30% vs. 18%, diarrhea: 47% vs. 24%, peripheral sensory neuropathy: 32% vs. 3%). At a median follow-up of 40 months, preliminary data showed no difference in disease-free survival (p = 0.598). Pooled data from both institutions were also separately analyzed, and no significant differences were found. Our results support the use of capox despite a lack of head-to-head randomized trial data.

Single-agent regorafenib is approved in Canada and in the US for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who have failed previous lines of therapy1. Identification of prognostic biomarkers is crucial to ensure the best therapeutic strategies for mCRC patients. The goal of this clinical study (NCT01949194) was to explore putative molecular signatures of response and resistance to regorafenib in metastatic tumors and serial blood samples. We used a multi-omics approach to profile metastatic tumor tissues and serial blood samples from 47 mCRC patients who received single-agent regorafenib as second-line therapy after failing first-line therapy with an oxaliplatin or irinotecan-containing regimen with or without bevacizumab. Whole exome sequencing was performed to assess both the mutational and copy number (CN) landscapes of metastatic tissues from 29 patients and the transcriptome was interrogated using RNA sequencing. A 14-gene panel was used to profile serial plasma samples. Molecular aberrations were then correlated with lesion-specific treatment response using RECIST 1.1 and progression free survival (PFS) to investigate potential associations.The copy number aberration (CNA) landscape of metastatic tumors was assessed using Nexus Copy Number Software and 20 significant focal aberrations were identified using Genomic Identification of Significant Target in Cancer (GISTIC) test (q-bound Citation Format: Karen Gambaro, Maud Marques, Suzan McNamara, Mathilde Couetoux du Tertre, Cyrla Hoffert, Archana Srivastava, Sophie Mathieu, Anna schab, Thierry Alcindor, Adrian Langleben, Lucas Sideris, Mahmoud Adbelsalam, Mustapha Tehfe, Gerald Batist, Petr Kavan. A Phase II exploratory study to identify biomarkers prognostic of clinical response to regorafenib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have failed first-line therapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 4325.

Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibition has not shown activities in advanced refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), other than in those patients who are microsatellite-instability high (MSI-H).To evaluate whether combining programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibition improved patient survival in metastatic refractory CRC.A randomized phase 2 study was conducted in 27 cancer centers across Canada between August 2016 and June 2017, and data were analyzed on October 18, 2018. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum; received all available standard systemic therapies (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab if appropriate; cetuximab or panitumumab if RAS wild-type tumors; regorafenib if available); were aged 18 years or older; had adequate organ function; had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and measurable disease.We randomly assigned patients to receive either 75 mg of tremelimumab every 28 days for the first 4 cycles plus 1500 mg durvalumab every 28 days, or best supportive care alone (BSC) in a 2:1 ratio.The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and a 2-sided P.10 was considered statistically significant. Circulating cell-free DNA from baseline plasma was used to determine microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutation burden (TMB).Of 180 patients enrolled (121 men [67.2%] and 59 women [32.8%]; median [range] age, 65 [36-87] years), 179 were treated. With a median follow-up of 15.2 months, the median OS was 6.6 months for durvalumab and tremelimumab and 4.1 months for BSC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 90% CI, 0.54-0.97; P = .07). Progression-free survival was 1.8 months and 1.9 months respectively (HR, 1.01; 90% CI, 0.76-1.34). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were significantly more frequent with immunotherapy (75 [64%] patients in the treatment group had at least 1 grade 3 or higher adverse event vs 12 [20%] in the BSC group). Circulating cell-free DNA analysis was successful in 168 of 169 patients with available samples. In patients who were microsatellite stable (MSS), OS was significantly improved with durvalumab and tremelimumab (HR, 0.66; 90% CI, 0.49-0.89; P = .02). Patients who were MSS with plasma TMB of 28 variants per megabase or more (21% of MSS patients) had the greatest OS benefit (HR, 0.34; 90% CI, 0.18-0.63; P = .004).This phase 2 study suggests that combined immune checkpoint inhibition with durvalumab plus tremelimumab may be associated with prolonged OS in patients with advanced refractory CRC. Elevated plasma TMB may select patients most likely to benefit from durvalumab and tremelimumab. Further confirmation studies are warranted.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02870920.

Management of anticoagulant therapy for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients is complex because of an increased risk of recurrent VTE and major bleeding complications in those patients relative to the general population. Subgroups of patients with cancer also show variation in their risk for recurrent VTE and adverse bleeding events. Accordingly, a committee of 10 Canadian clinical experts developed the consensus risk- stratification treatment algorithm presented here to provide guidance on tailoring anticoagulant treatment choices for the acute and extended treatment of symptomatic and incidental VTE, to prevent recurrent VTE, and to minimize the bleeding risk in patients with cancer. During a 1-day live meeting, a systematic review of the literature was performed, and a draft treatment algorithm was developed. The treatment algorithm was refined through the use of a Web-based platform and a series of online teleconferences. Clinicians using this treatment algorithm should consider the bleeding risk, the type of cancer, and the potential for drug–drug interactions in addition to informed patient preference in determining the most appropriate treatment for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis. Anticoagulant therapy should be regularly reassessed as the patient’s cancer status and management change over time.

The annual Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference 2017 was held in St. John&rsquo, s, Newfoundland and Labrador, 28&ndash, 30 September. Experts in radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, and cancer genetics who are involved in the management of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses multiple topics in the management of gastric, rectal, and colon cancer, including &#9632, identification and management of hereditary gastric and colorectal cancer (crc), &#9632, palliative systemic therapy for metastatic gastric cancer, optimum duration of preoperative radiation in rectal cancer&mdash, that is, short- compared with long-course radiation, management options for peritoneal carcinomatosis in crc, implications of tumour location for treatment and prognosis in crc, and &#9632, new molecular markers in crc.

Background Pembro, a PD-1 inhibitor, confers durable benefit in many tumor types but has limited efficacy in non–microsatellite instability–high (MSI-high)/pMMR mCRC. Chemotherapies that include 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin and irinotecan, which are commonly used to treat mCRC, may modulate intrinsic tumor immunogenicity and sensitize tumors to immunotherapy agents. In the phase 1b KEYNOTE-651 study (NCT03374254), pembro + mFOLFOX7 (cohort B) or pembro + FOLFIRI (cohort D) was evaluated in patients with non–MSI-high/pMMR mCRC. Methods Patients were ≥18 years with non–MSI-high/pMMR mCRC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1, and no prior systemic chemotherapy for stage IV mCRC (cohort B) or 1 prior therapy including a fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin-based regimen (cohort D). Patients received pembro 200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W) + mFOLFOX7 (oxaliplatin [85 mg/m2]; leucovorin [400 mg/m2]; 5-FU [2400 mg/m2]) Q2W (cohort B) or pembro 200 mg Q3W + FOLFIRI (irinotecan [180 mg/m2]; leucovorin [400 mg/m2]; 5-FU [2400 mg/m2]) Q2W (cohort D). Primary objectives were safety/tolerability and establishment of the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D); the secondary objective was objective response rate. Results At data cutoff (Feb 18, 2019), 15 patients in cohort B and 16 in cohort D started treatment; median follow-up was 6.8 months (cohort B) and 5.7 months (cohort D). Treatment was discontinued in 4 patients (27%) in cohort B (adverse event [AE], n = 1 [7%]; PD, n = 3 [20%]) and 9 patients (56%) in cohort D (AEs, PD, patient withdrawal; n = 3 [19%] each). There was 1 dose-limiting toxicity in cohort D: grade 3 small-intestinal obstruction. See RP2Ds for cohorts B and D in the Methods section. All patients had ≥1 treatment-related AE (TRAE). Grade 3 TRAEs occurred in 8 patients each in cohort B (53%) and cohort D (50%), most commonly anemia and neutropenia (13% each) in cohort B and neutropenia, diarrhea, fatigue, and leukopenia (13% each) in cohort D. There were no grade 4-5 TRAEs. Efficacy results will be presented. Conclusions Pembro in combination with mFOLFOX7 or FOLFIRI was safe and tolerable in patients with mCRC. Clinical trial identification NCT03374254; Release date: December 15, 2017. Editorial acknowledgement Jacqueline Kolston, PhD, of the ApotheCom pembrolizumab team (Yardley, PA, USA); Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Legal entity responsible for the study Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, and Array BioPharma. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, and Array BioPharma. Disclosure R. Kim: Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): BMS; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Lilly; Research grant / Funding (institution): Eisai. J. Kortmansky: Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche. L. Wong: Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc./Astellas US, Inc.; Research grant / Funding (institution): BeiGene, Ltd; Research grant / Funding (institution): Exelixis, Inc.; Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Research grant / Funding (institution): NovoCure, Inc.; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pierre Fabre Medicament; Research grant / Funding (institution): PledPharma AB; Research grant / Funding (institution): SynCore Biotechnology Co., Ltd.; Research grant / Funding (institution): Halozyme, Inc.; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pharmacyclics, Inc.; Research grant / Funding (institution): TESARO; Research grant / Funding (institution): EMD Serono; Research grant / Funding (institution): Array. M. Tehfe: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (self): Celgene; Honoraria (self): Ipsen; Advisory / Consultancy: BMS; Advisory / Consultancy: Takeda; Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Taisho. J.J. Li: Full / Part-time employment: Merck & Co., Inc. M. Lee: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Merck & Co., Inc. C. Mayo: Full / Part-time employment: Merck & Co., Inc. P. Marinello: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Merck & Co., Inc. E. Chiorean: Advisory / Consultancy: Ipsen; Advisory / Consultancy: Eisai; Advisory / Consultancy: Halozyme; Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Seattle Genetics; Advisory / Consultancy: Array; Advisory / Consultancy: Five Prime; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim; Research grant / Funding (institution): Celgene; Research grant / Funding (institution): Incyte; Research grant / Funding (institution): Lilly; Research grant / Funding (institution): AstraZeneca; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Halozyme; Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Research grant / Funding (institution): BMS; Research grant / Funding (institution): Ignyta/Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Stemline; Research grant / Funding (institution): Macrogenetics. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

There are few effective treatments for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). We present a patient with recurrent GBM who achieved a prolonged response to treatment with afatinib, an irreversible ErbB family blocker, plus temozolomide. A 58-year-old female patient was diagnosed with multifocal primary GBM. After surgical resection, first-line therapy comprised radiotherapy and temozolomide. Following disease progression after 3 temozolomide cycles, the patient entered a phase I/II clinical trial of afatinib (20–40 mg daily for 28 days) plus temozolomide (50 mg/m2 every 21/28 days). Next-generation sequencing analysis of the brain tumor specimen was performed. At the last assessment, 63 treatment cycles had been completed and the patient had survived for ~5 years since recurrence. Significant disease regression was observed after 5 cycles and was maintained during long-term follow-up. Adverse events were consistent with the known tolerability profile of afatinib and were managed by treatment interruption/dose reduction. The patient had several epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) aberrations, including gene amplification and EGFRvIII positivity. Three somatic mutations were identified, including an unprecedented extracellular-domain substitution (D247Y). The patient has survived ~6-fold longer than normally expected in patients with recurrent GBM. The complex EGFR genotype may underlie sustained response to afatinib plus temozolomide.

Summary Background Rindopepimut (also known as CDX-110), a vaccine targeting the EGFR deletion mutation EGFRvIII, consists of an EGFRvIII-specific peptide conjugated to keyhole limpet haemocyanin. In the ACT IV study, we aimed to assess whether or not the addition of rindopepimut to standard chemotherapy is able to improve survival in patients with EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with glioblastoma from 165 hospitals in 22 countries. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed glioblastoma confirmed to express EGFRvIII by central analysis, and had undergone maximal surgical resection and completion of standard chemoradiation without progression. Patients were stratified by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer recursive partitioning analysis class, MGMT promoter methylation, and geographical region, and randomly assigned (1:1) with a prespecified randomisation sequence (block size of four) to receive rindopepimut (500 μg admixed with 150 μg GM-CSF) or control (100 μg keyhole limpet haemocyanin) via monthly intradermal injection until progression or intolerance, concurrent with standard oral temozolomide (150–200 mg/m 2 for 5 of 28 days) for 6–12 cycles or longer. Patients, investigators, and the trial funder were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in patients with minimal residual disease (MRD; enhancing tumour 2 post-chemoradiation by central review), analysed by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01480479. Findings Between April 12, 2012, and Dec 15, 2014, 745 patients were enrolled (405 with MRD, 338 with significant residual disease [SRD], and two unevaluable) and randomly assigned to rindopepimut and temozolomide (n=371) or control and temozolomide (n=374). The study was terminated for futility after a preplanned interim analysis. At final analysis, there was no significant difference in overall survival for patients with MRD: median overall survival was 20·1 months (95% CI 18·5–22·1) in the rindopepimut group versus 20·0 months (18·1–21·9) in the control group (HR 1·01, 95% CI 0·79–1·30; p=0·93). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events for all 369 treated patients in the rindopepimut group versus 372 treated patients in the control group were: thrombocytopenia (32 [9%] vs 23 [6%]), fatigue (six [2%] vs 19 [5%]), brain oedema (eight [2%] vs 11 [3%]), seizure (nine [2%] vs eight [2%]), and headache (six [2%] vs ten [3%]). Serious adverse events included seizure (18 [5%] vs 22 [6%]) and brain oedema (seven [2%] vs 12 [3%]). 16 deaths in the study were caused by adverse events (nine [4%] in the rindopepimut group and seven [3%] in the control group), of which one—a pulmonary embolism in a 64-year-old male patient after 11 months of treatment—was assessed as potentially related to rindopepimut. Interpretation Rindopepimut did not increase survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Combination approaches potentially including rindopepimut might be required to show efficacy of immunotherapy in glioblastoma. Funding Celldex Therapeutics, Inc.

Background Standard therapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma is radiotherapy plus temozolomide. In this phase 3 study, we evaluated the effect of the addition of bevacizumab to radiotherapy–temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Methods We randomly assigned patients with supratentorial glioblastoma to receive intravenous bevacizumab (10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks) or placebo, plus radiotherapy (2 Gy 5 days a week; maximum, 60 Gy) and oral temozolomide (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area per day) for 6 weeks. After a 28-day treatment break, maintenance bevacizumab (10 mg per kilogram intravenously every 2 weeks) or placebo, plus temozolomide (150 to 200 mg per square meter per day for 5 days), was continued for six 4-week cycles, followed by bevacizumab monotherapy (15 mg per kilogram intravenously every 3 weeks) or placebo until the disease progressed or unacceptable toxic effects developed. The coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival. Results A total of 458 patients were assigned to the bevacizumab group, and 463 patients to the placebo group. The median progression-free survival was longer in the bevacizumab group than in the placebo group (10.6 months vs. 6.2 months; stratified hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 0.74; P

Importance Previous communication has reported significant improvement in overall survival (OS) when using doxorubicin plus sorafenib in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular cancer (HCC). Objective To determine if doxorubicin added to sorafenib therapy improves OS, with stratification for locally advanced and metastatic disease. Design, Setting, and Participants This unblinded randomized phase 3 clinical trial was led by Alliance in collaboration with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group–American College of Radiology Imaging Network, Canadian Cancer Trials Group, and Southwest Oncology Group. It was launched in February 2010 and completed in May 2015; data were also analyzed during this time frame. Patients with histologically proven advanced HCC, no prior systemic therapy, Child-Pugh grade A score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 (later amended to 0-1), and adequate hematologic, hepatic, renal, and cardiac function were eligible. The OS primary end point had a final analysis planned with 364 events observed among 480 total patients with 90% power to detect a 37% increase in median OS. Interventions or Exposures Patients received either 60 mg/m2of doxorubicin every 21 days plus 400 mg of sorafenib orally twice daily or the sorafenib alone, adjusted to half doses for patients with bilirubin levels of 1.3 to 3.0 mg/dL. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was OS, and progression-free survival (PFS) was a secondary end point. Results Of 356 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 62 (10.1) years, and 306 (86.0%) were men. Although it was planned to include 480 patients, the study was halted after accrual of 356 patients (180 patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and 176 with sorafenib alone) with a futility boundary crossed at a planned interim analysis. Median OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.3-10.8 months) in the doxorubicin plus sorafenib arm and 9.4 months (95% CI, 7.3-12.9 months) in the sorafenib alone arm (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83-1.31). The median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.4-4.9 months) in the doxorubicin plus sorafenib arm and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.5 months) in the sorafenib alone arm (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.16). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia adverse events occurred in 61 (36.8%) and 29 (17.5%) patients, respectively, being treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib vs 1 (0.6%) and 4 (2.4%) patients treated with sorafenib. Conclusions and Relevance This multigroup study of the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib therapy did not show improvement of OS or PFS in patients with HCC. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT01015833

Background FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and Gemcitabine with nab-Paclitaxel (GN) are both proven to be superior to Gemcitabine in first line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). However, there has been no phase 3 randomized controlled trials to prove FFX is superior to GN in APC. This population-based cohort study was conducted to compare efficacy and safety profiles of the two standard regimens in APC. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated all newly diagnosed patients (pts) with APC who received either FFX or GN as first line therapy during 2010-2018 at three Canadian institutions. The primary objective was to assess survival. Secondary objective was to compare safety profile of the two regimens. Kaplan Meier method and log-rank test were used for survival curves. Results There were 231 eligible pts identified: 143 received FFX and 88 received GN. FFX pts were slightly younger than GN (median age: 62 (IQR: 56-67) vs 66 (IQR: 58-73) respectively). There were predominantly more males: FFX 89 (62.2%) vs GN 46 (52.3%). WHO performance status (PS) of 0 were 38 (28.4%) vs 14 (16.5%) and 1 were 90 (67.2%) vs 65 (76.5%) respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) of FFX was 5.5 months (mts) (95% CI: 5.0-6.7) vs 5.1 mts (95% CI: 3.8-7.1) with GN (p = 0.37). The median overall survival (OS) with FFX was 9.3 mts (95% CI: 7.5 – 11.1) vs. 10.2 mts (95% CI: 6.8-11.3) with GN (p = 0.81). On multivariate analysis chemotherapy regimen was not correlated with PFS or OS. There were more grade 3-4 toxicity in FFX vs GN group: diarrhea – 22 (15.4%) vs 3 (3.4%) (p = 0.004), nausea – 20 (14%) vs 6 (6.8%), vomiting – 13 (9.1%) vs 6 (6.8%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN) – 8 (5.6%) vs 3 (3.4%), thrombocytopenia – 28 (19.6%) vs 5 (5.7%) (p = 0.003) respectively. Gr 3-4 neutropenia rates were similar in both regimens: 23 (16%) in FFX vs 15 (17%) in GN. Conclusions Our results revealed that FFX or GN had comparable survival and safety profiles. Given lower Gr 3-4 toxicity profile of GN regimen, GN is likely preferable choice for majority of pts. FFX could be reserved for young high performance pts. Legal entity responsible for the study Segal Cancer Centre Jewish General Hospital. Funding Has not received any funding. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Great advances in analytical technology coupled with accelerated new drug development and growing understanding of biological challenges, such as tumor heterogeneity, have required a change in the focus for biobanking. Most current banks contain samples of primary tumors, but linking molecular signatures to therapeutic questions requires serial biopsies in the setting of metastatic disease, next-generation of biobanking. Furthermore, an integration of multidimensional analysis of various molecular components, that is, RNA, DNA, methylome, microRNAome and post-translational modifications of the proteome, is necessary for a comprehensive view of a tumor's biology. While data using such biopsies are now regularly presented, the preanalytical variables in tissue procurement and processing in multicenter studies are seldom detailed and therefore are difficult to duplicate or standardize across sites and across studies. In the context of a biopsy-driven clinical trial, we generated a detailed protocol that includes morphological evaluation and isolation of high-quality nucleic acids from small needle core biopsies obtained from liver metastases. The protocol supports stable shipping of samples to a central laboratory, where biopsies are subsequently embedded in support media. Designated pathologists must evaluate all biopsies for tumor content and macrodissection can be performed if necessary to meet our criteria of >60% neoplastic cells and

BACKGROUND Irinotecan is cytotoxic in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). SN-38 (10-hydroxy-7-ethyl-camptothecin) is the active metabolite of irinotecan. Attachment of polyethylene glycol (PEG) polymer chains (pegylation) to SN-38 (EZN-2208) increases the solubility, exposure, and half-life of SN-38. Preclinical studies demonstrated superior in vitro efficacy of EZN-2208 when it was tested in irinotecan-refractory human CRC cell lines. METHODS Patients with metastatic or locally recurrent CRC who had previously received 5-flurouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin, and irinotecan were assigned to receive EZN-2208 monotherapy (9 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for patients with KRAS-mutant tumors only [arm A]), and patients with KRAS wild-type tumors were randomized (2:1) to receive either EZN-2208 plus cetuximab (400 mg/m2 loading dose on day 1 followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly starting on day 8 [arm B]) or irinotecan 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 21 days plus cetuximab at the same doses indicated above (arm C). RESULTS The overall response rate and progression-free survival were 0% and 1.8 months, respectively, in arm A; 10.7% and 4.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.2-5.8 months), respectively, in arm B; and 14.3% and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.1-5.8 months), respectively, in arm C. EZN-2208 was well tolerated in combination with cetuximab. No statistically significant difference in survival was observed between arm B (9.8 months; 95% CI, 7.2-11.2 months) and arm C (9.1 months; 95% CI, 6.0-13.0 months). CONCLUSIONS EZN-2208, either as monotherapy or in combination with cetuximab, was well tolerated in patients with refractory CRC. Overall survival and progression-free survival were similar in the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm and the EZN-2208 arm. Cancer 2013;119:4223–4230. © 2013 American Cancer Society.

Background:Bevacizumab, a humanized recombinant anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibody, was approved in Canada in 2010 for the treatment of high-grade glioma. We report the effectiveness and safety of bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas at a single institution.Methods:Twenty-seven consecutive patients with high-grade glioma (anaplastic glioma and glioblastoma) at first or subsequent relapse were treated with bevacizumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints were objective response rate, six month PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety profile.Results:The clinical benefit rate (complete and partial responses plus stable disease) was 59%. Median PFS was 4.3 (95% CI, 3.0-10.9) months, with a six month PFS rate of 43%. Median OS after current relapse was 8.9 (95% CI, 5.8-not reached) months. Ten episodes of grade 3/4 adverse events were observed in nine patients, including fatigue (n = 3), thrombocytopenia (n = 4), and myelotoxicity, febrile neutropenia, and pulmonary embolism (each n = 1).Conclusions:We consider the efficacy and safety profile of bevacizumab is comparable to other cohorts of patients treated for recurrent high-grade glioma at other international institutions.

The use of bevacizumab in the management of glioblastoma multiforme (gbm) remains controversial. In Canada, bevacizumab is approved for the treatment of recurrent gbm. We describe a pattern of progression across treatment lines in gbm. During 2008&ndash, 2014, 64 patients diagnosed with gbm were treated with bevacizumab at McGill University hospitals. Of those patients, 30 (46.9%) received bevacizumab in the first line (B1L), and 34 (53.1%) received it in the second line and beyond (B2L+). The average length of treatment with bevacizumab was 24.4 weeks (range: 0&ndash, 232.7 weeks). The patterns of progression were categorized as local, distant, diffuse, multifocal, or multi-pattern. Local progression was seen in 46.7% of B1L patients and 26.5% of B2L+ patients, distant in 3.3% and 2.9%, diffuse in 20% and 47%, multifocal in 10% and 8.8%, and multi-pattern in 3.3% and 11.8%. No differences between the groups were observed for the distant (p = 0.3) or diffuse (p = 0.4) patterns. Grades 3 and 4 adverse events in the B1L and B2L+ groups were fatigue (33.3% vs. 17.6% respectively), hypertension (26.7% vs. 5.9%), thrombocytopenia (26.7% vs. 11.8%), neutropenia (26.7% vs. 11.8%), anemia (23.3% vs. 11.8%), leucopenia (20% vs. 8.8%), deep vein thrombosis (23.3% vs. 5.9%), seizure (16.7% vs. 8.8%), brain hemorrhage (6.7% vs.

The annual Eastern Canadian Colorectal Cancer Consensus Conference held in Montreal, Quebec, 17&ndash, 19 October 2013, marked the 10-year anniversary of this meeting that is attended by leaders in medical, radiation, and surgical oncology. The goal of the attendees is to improve the care of patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies. Topics discussed during the conference included pancreatic cancer, rectal cancer, and metastatic colorectal cancer.

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer related deaths primarily due to its resistance to current treatments. Studies aiming at understanding mechanisms of resistance have largely investigated the genomic landscape of primary tumors at diagnosis. However, selective pressures during therapy can lead to the expansion of resistant clones and tumor heterogeneity. This highlights the need to characterize the molecular changes of metastasis over time of treatment and response to decipher tumor evolution and therapeutic resistance mechanisms. Methods: Metastatic liver tissue samples were collected at baseline (pre-biopsies) and at the time of resistance (post-biopsies) in responder and non-responder CRC patients undergoing the same first-line treatment. Paired pre/post biopsies were collected from 14 patients including 4 patients with multiple post-biopsies to assess temporal and spatio-temporal tumor heterogeneity following treatment exposure. Biopsies were profiled using exome and transcriptome sequencing as well as high-density Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) array analysis to capture chromosomal anomalies, loss of heterozygosity and copy number (CN) variations. Results: Profiling of 45 samples with both high-density SNP array and exome sequencing revealed 97.4% similarity between both technologies in the identification of genes targeted by copy number changes. Using chemo-naïve biopsies, we identified 120 CN gains and 47 CN loss that were significantly associated with patient progression free survival. Integrative analysis with transcriptome data revealed that only 10% of the genomic CN gains and 17% of the CN loss correlated with their gene expression levels. Based on CN variants comparison between paired pre/post treatment samples, we found high temporal intra-patient heterogeneity over time of treatment. Interestingly, we observed a relationship between heterogeneity and tumor response; showing that acquired resistant tumors have the highest temporal variations. Conclusion: This study, using a multi-omic approach to profile serial liver metastatic samples in CRC patients, highlights the genomic changes in tumor composition after treatment exposure and constitutes an innovative approach to identify clinical biomarkers and molecular signatures of resistance. Citation Format: Mathilde Couetoux du Tertre, Maud Marques, Karen Gambaro, Michael Witcher, Benoit Samson, Bernard Lespérance, Yoo-Joung Ko, Richard Dalfen, Eve St-Hilaire, Lucas Sidéris, Félix Couture, Sabine Tejpar, Ronald Burkes, Mohammed Harb, Errol Camlioglu, Adrian Gologan, Vincent Pelsser, André Constantin, Suzan McNamara, Petr Kavan, Claudia Kleinman, Gerald Batist. Genomic profiling in serial metastatic colorectal tumors identifies copy number alterations and spatio temporal intra-patient heterogeneity profiles associated with clinical response. Q-CROC-01: NCT00984048 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-231.

Background Surgery remains the only curative option for patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM). Perioperative chemotherapeutic strategies have become increasingly popular in the treatment of CRLM. Although the role of bevacizumab (Bev) in this setting remains unclear, its widespread use has raised concerns about the use of Bev as part of perioperative chemotherapy. Methods We retrospectively reviewed all patients who received Bev and underwent liver resection between July 2004 and July 2008 at the McGill University Health Center. Chemotherapy-related toxicity, response to chemotherapy, surgical morbidity and mortality, liver function and survival data were assessed. Results A total of 35 patients were identified. Of these, 26 (74.3%) patients received oxaliplatin-based cytotoxic chemotherapy, six (17.1%) received irinotecan-based therapy and the remainder received both agents. A total of 17 patients (48.6%) underwent portal vein embolization prior to resection and 12 (34.3%) underwent staged resection for extensive bilobar disease. A median of six cycles of preoperative Bev were administered. Nine patients (25.7%) experienced grade 3 or higher chemotherapy-related toxicities. Four events were deemed to be related to Bev. The overall response rate was 65.7% (complete and partial response). One patient progressed on therapy, but this did not prevent R0 resection. The incidence of postoperative morbidity was 42.3%. A total of 21.7% of complications were Clavien grade 3 or higher. There were no perioperative mortalities. There were no cases of severe sinusoidal injury or steatohepatitis. The Kaplan–Meier estimate of 4-year survival was 52.5%. Conclusions These data confirm the safety of chemotherapy regimens which include Bev in the perioperative setting and demonstrate that such perioperative chemotherapy in patients with CRLM does not adversely affect patient outcome. There was no increase in perioperative morbidity compared with published rates. The addition of Bev to standard chemotherapy may improve response rates, which may, in turn, impact favourably on patient survival.