Search

Purpose Preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is expected to increase the rate of curative resection and complete histological response. In this trial, we investigated the efficacy of a neoadjuvant CRT regimen in gastric adenocarcinoma (NCT01565109 trial). Materials and Methods Patients with stage IB to IIIC gastric adenocarcinoma, endoscopy ultrasound and computed tomography-scan diagnosed, were eligible for this phase II trial. Neoadjuvant treatment consisted of 2 cycles of chemotherapy with DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil [5FU]) followed by preoperative CRT with oxaliplatin, continuous 5FU and radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions of 1.8 Gy, 5 fractions per week for 5 weeks) administered before surgery. R0-resection rate, pathological complete response (pathCR) rate, and survival (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) were evaluated as primary endpoints. Results Among 33 patients included, 32 patients (97%) received CRT and 26 (78.8%) were resected (R0 resection for all patients resected). Among resected patients, we report pathCR in 23,1% and pathologic major response (tumor regression grade 2 according to Mandard's classification) in 26,9%. With a median follow-up duration of 5.82 years (range, 0.4 to 9.24 years), the estimated median OS for all 33 patients was not reached; 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 85%, 61%, and 52%, respectively. Among resected patients, those whose histological response was tumor grade regression (TRG) 1-2 had significantly better OS and PFS rates than those with a TRG 3-4-5 response (p=0.019 and p=0.016, respectively). Conclusion Promising results from trials involving preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgery in gastric cancer need to be further evaluated in a phase III trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Triplet DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-flurouracil) and doublet CP/CF (carboplatin and paclitaxel/cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) regimens were prospectively evaluated in advanced squamous anal cell carcinoma (SCCA), and validated as standard treatments. Even though the high efficacy and good tolerance of DCF regimen were confirmed in 3 independent prospective trials, doublet CP regimen is still recommended in several guidelines based in its better safety profile with similar efficacy compared to CF regimen. We performed a propensity score-adjusted method with inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) and matched case control (MCC) comparison among patients with metastatic or non-resectable locally advanced recurrent SCCA, treated with chemotherapy as first line regimen. The primary endpoint was the overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS). 247 patients were included for analysis. 154 patients received DCF and 93 patients received a doublet regimen. The median OS was 32.3 months with DCF and 18.3 months with doublet regimens (HR 0.53, 95%CI 0.38–0.74; p = 0.0001), and the median PFS was 11.2 months with DCF versus 7.6 months with doublet regimens (HR 0.53, 95%CI 0.39–0.73; p < 0.0001). The hazard ratios by IPTW and MCC analyses were 0.411 (95% CI, 0.324–0.521; p < 0.0001) and 0.406 (95% CI, 0.261–0.632; p < 0.0001) for OS, and 0.466 (95% CI, 0.376–0.576; p < 0.0001) and 0.438 (95% CI, 0.298–0.644; P < 0.0001) for PFS. The triplet DCF regimen provides a high and significant benefit in OS and PFS over doublet regimens, and should be considered as upfront treatment for eligible patients with advanced SCCA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Treatment strategies in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) are complex and need to be balanced against previous treatments received for the primary rectal cancer. Radiotherapy is an important component of treatment in LRRC. However, there is little high‐quality evidence on the role of reirradiation in this cohort. Therefore, the aim of this trial is to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by pelvic reirradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone on the rate of curative surgery (R0) in previously irradiated patients with LRRC. Method: GRECCAR 15 is a prospective, multicentre, open‐label, outcome assessor‐blinded, superiority randomized controlled phase III clinical trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by pelvic reirradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with LRRC previously irradiated for the primary cancer. Adult patients (>18 years old) with a histologically proven resectable LRRC, who have previously received pelvic radiotherapy for their primary rectal cancer at a dose of 25–50.4 Gy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of <2 will be eligible to participate. The pelvic reirradiation will consist of conformational intensity‐modulated external irradiation, delivering a dose of 30.6 Gy with concomitant chemotherapy using capecitabine. The primary outcome of this trial is the R0 resection rate. Overall, GRECCAR 15 aims to recruit 186 patients to detect an absolute difference of 20% in the R0 resection rate with 80% power and 5% two‐sided significance level. Conclusion: The GRECCAR 15 trial is the first, definitive, phase III trial to investigate reirradiation in LRRC. The results of this trial will inform definitively the neoadjuvant treatment strategy in previously irradiated patients and assess whether there is any associated benefit of reirradiation in combination with induction chemotherapy in improving R0 resection rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. More than half of the cases of metastatic colorectal cancer harbor a RAS mutation; however, the time to obtain RAS status might be long enough to consider delayed anti‐EGFR treatment. This article reports on the two main treatment strategies for these cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is frequent among elderly patients. However, in the era of new targeted therapies, little is known about real-life mCRC treatment in this population. This study aimed to describe elderly mCRC patients and the current real-life treatment practices. mCRC patients aged ≥65 years were identified using the registry of multidisciplinary team meetings, mandatory for all cancer patients, held between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014 at the Bordeaux University Hospital. Data were collected from medical records using a standardized questionnaire. Treatment type was defined as follows: at least one anticancer medication administered vs. best supportive care (BSC). A total of 78 patients were included; median age was 74 years and the M/F sex ratio 1.6. Eleven patients (14.1%) were referred to a geriatric oncology consultation. One patient died before treatment initiation, 28 (35.9%) had BSC, and 49 (62.8%) were treated with anticancer medications: 20 (25.6%) had chemotherapy combined with a targeted therapy, and 28 (35.9%) chemotherapy alone (one missing data for treatment). Compared to patients treated with anticancer medications, BSC patients were older ( P < 0.0001) and had more often metachronous metastases ( P = 0.01), more comorbidities ( P = 0.05), and a greater number of concomitant medications ( P = 0.004). This study is one of the rare investigations providing insight to treatment practices in all elderly mCRC patients, not just those who receive anticancer medications. Our results suggest that efforts must be pursued to better integrate geriatric oncology in daily clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prognosis impact of positive margins after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) in patients treated with modern effective chemotherapy has not been elucidated. The objective was to compare oncologic outcomes after R0 and R1 resections in the era of modern effective chemotherapy. Methods: Between 1999 and 2010, all consecutive patients undergoing liver resection for CLM were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with extrahepatic metastases, macroscopic residual tumor, treated with combined radiofrequency, or not treated with chemotherapy were excluded. Survival and recurrence after R0 (tumor-free margin >0 mm) and R1 resections were analyzed. Results: Among 466 patients undergoing hepatectomy for CLM, 191 were eligible. Of them, 164 (86 %) received preoperative chemotherapy and 105 (55 %) received postoperative chemotherapy. R1 resection (10 %) was comparable in patients treated or not by preoperative chemotherapy. R1 status was associated with more intrahepatic recurrences. Overall survival (OS) (44 vs. 61 %; p = 0.047) and disease-free survival (DFS) (8 vs. 26 %; p = 0.082) were lower in patients after R1 compared to R0 resection (32 months of median follow-up). Preoperative chemotherapy and major hepatectomy were prognostic factors of survival, whereas postoperative chemotherapy was a protective factor from recurrences. In patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy, OS and DFS were similar between R1 and R0 resections (40 vs. 55 %, p = 0.104 and 9 vs. 22 %, p = 0.174, respectively). Conclusion: In the era of modern effective chemotherapy, R1 resection leads to more intrahepatic recurrences but did not affect OS in selected patient responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Postoperative chemotherapy protects from recurrences whatever the margin resection status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Glutathione S-transferase P1 (GSTP1) and excision-repair cross-complementing repair deficiency group 2 protein (ERCC2 or XPD) may modulate the activity of platinum derivatives. The SNPs, Ile105Val for GSTP1 and Lys751Gln for ERCC2, may affect the efficiency of oxaliplatin in patients treated with an oxaliplatin-based regimen for metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Patients & Methods: A total of 107 patients treated with first-line chemotherapy, 59 with an oxaliplatin-based regimen and 48 with an irinotecan-based regimen, were included retrospectively. GSTP1 and ERCC2 genotypes were identified on DNA samples extracted from paraffin blocks containing either normal tissue (nodes) or tumor tissue. We analyzed treatment response, event-free and overall survival. Results: GSTP1 genotype distribution was Ile/Ile 58%, Ile/Val 35% and Val/Val 7%. ERCC2 genotype distribution was Lys/Lys 49%, Lys/Gln 44%, Gln/Gln 7%. Event-free and overall survivals were not significantly different as a function of the GSTP1 genotype, whatever the treatment received. Event-free survival was significantly different as a function of the ERCC2 genotype only in patients receiving oxaliplatin: patients having at least one variant allele had a shorter median event-free survival (6 months) than those having no variant allele (11.6 months, p = 0.008). This difference was maintained for median overall survival (15.6 vs 25.3 months, p = 0.016). Using univariate analysis, ERCC2 genotype, hemoglobinemia and carbohydrate antigen 19.9 plasma levels were significantly related to overall and event-free survival in patients receiving oxaliplatin. Conclusion: The ERCC2 genotype appears as an important predictive factor of the survival of patients treated with oxaliplatin in first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Early tumour shrinkage has been associated with improved survival in patients receiving cetuximab-based systemic chemotherapy for liver metastases from colorectal cancer (LM-CRC). We tested this hypothesis for previously treated LM-CRC patients receiving cetuximab (500 mg/m 2 ) and triplet hepatic artery infusion (HAI) within European trial OPTILIV. Methods Irinotecan (180 mg/m 2 ), 5-fluorouracil (2800 mg/m 2 ) and oxaliplatin (85 mg/m 2 ) were given as chronomodulated or conventional delivery. Patients were retrospectively categorised as early responders (complete or partial RECIST response after three courses) or non-early responders (late or no response). Prognostic factors were determined using multivariate logistic or Cox regression models. Results Response was assessed in 57 of 64 registered patients (89%), who had previously received one to three prior systemic chemotherapy protocols. An early response occurred at 6 weeks in 16 patients (28%; 9 men, 7 women), aged 33–76 years, with a median of 12 liver metastases (LMs) (2–50), involving five segments (1–8). Ten patients had a late response, and 31 patients had no response. Grade 3–4 fatigue selectively occurred in the non-early responders (0% versus 26%; p = 0.024). Early tumour response was jointly predicted by chronomodulation—odds ratio (OR): 6.0 (1.2–29.8; p = 0.029)—and LM diameter ≤57 mm—OR: 5.3 (1.1–25.0; p = 0.033). Early tumour response predicted for both R0-R1 liver resection—OR: 11.8 (1.4–100.2; p = 0.024) and overall survival—hazard ratio: 0.39 (0.17–0.88; p = 0.023) in multivariate analyses. Conclusions Early tumour response on triplet HAI and systemic cetuximab predicted for complete macroscopic liver resection and prolonged survival for LM-CRC patients within a multicenter conversion-to-resection medicosurgical strategy. Confirmation is warranted for early response on HAI to guide decision making. Protocol numbers : EUDRACT 2007-004632-24 NCT00852228 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is no standard second-line treatment after platinum–etoposide chemotherapy for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, and FOLFIRI alone, in this setting. We did a randomised, non-comparative, open-label, phase 2 trial (PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC) at 26 hospitals in France. We included patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma or neuroendocrine carcinoma of unknown primary origin, documented progressive disease during or after first-line platinum–etoposide chemotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; block size of three), without stratification, to receive FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, calcium folinate 400 mg/m2 or levofolinate 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h) plus bevacizumab 5 mg/kg or FOLFIRI alone, intravenously, every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was overall survival at 6 months after randomisation, evaluated in the modified intention-to-treat population (all enrolled and randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI). This study is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02820857. Between Sept 5, 2017, and Feb 8, 2022, 150 patients were assessed for eligibility and 133 were enrolled and randomly assigned: 65 to the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 68 to the FOLFIRI group. 126 patients (59 in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 67 in the FOLFIRI group) received at least one cycle of FOLFIRI and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 83 (66%) of whom were male and 43 (34%) were female, and the median age of the patients was 67 years (IQR 58–73). The primary tumour location was colorectal in 38 (30%) of 126 patients, pancreatic in 34 (27%), gastro-oesophageal in 22 (17%), and unknown in 23 (18%). After a median follow-up of 25·7 months (95% CI 22·0–38·2), 6-month overall survival was 53% (80% CI 43–61) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group and 60% (51–68) in the FOLFIRI group. Grade 3–4 adverse events that occurred in at least 5% of patients were neutropenia (eight [14%] patients), diarrhoea (six [10%]), and asthenia (five [8%]) in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group, and neutropenia (seven [10%]) in the FOLFIRI group. One treatment-related death (ischaemic stroke) occurred in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group. The addition of bevacizumab did not seem to increase the benefit of FOLFIRI with regard to overall survival. FOLFIRI could be considered as a standard second-line treatment in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. French Ministry of Health and Roche SAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is a rare disease often diagnosed at a localised stage. For locally advanced recurrence or metastatic disease, DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) demonstrated high efficacy and became one of the standard regimens. However, there is no standard of care in the second line. In the Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 prospective trials, 115 patients with advanced SCCA were treated with a DCF regimen in the first line. In these studies, second-line data were registered per protocol. After a median follow-up of >40 months, at progression, 73 patients received a second-line (L2) treatment. In this L2 population, median overall survival (mOS) was 13.5 months (95%CI 9.4–19.8), and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.7 months (3.4–7.3) in L2. Fourteen patients presented an oligometastatic progression and were treated with an ablative treatment (surgery or radiotherapy); mOS was 48.3 months (NE–NE), and mPFS was 31.3 months (23.2–NE). Fifty-nine patients received a systemic treatment (chemotherapy or immunotherapy); mOS was 11 months (8.4–15.4) and mPFS was 4.9 months (3.3–7). The most frequent chemotherapy regimens were the reintroduction of DCF, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI and mitomycin plus fluoropyrimidine. No significant difference was observed between regimens (p = 0.26). Six patients received anti-PD1/L1-based immunotherapy. Second-line treatments are effective in patients with SCCA. Ablative treatment is feasible and is probably the best option for patients with oligometastatic progression. If this is not possible, systemic therapy by an anti-PD1/L1 immunotherapy or chemotherapy can be recommended. Reintroduction of DCF, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI or mitomycin-C plus fluoropyrimidine are possible options. • There is no validated standard treatment in second-line in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. • Curative-intent ablative treatment should be recommended whenever is possible. • Chemotherapy in second-line is a valid option. • Modified docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil reintroduction, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI, or mitomycin-C + 5-fluorouracil can be recommended. • Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) immunotherapy demonstrated some efficacy in second-line. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Chemoradiotherapy (CHRT) is often advocated for locally-advanced biliary tract cancer (LABTC). However there was not comparative study with chemotherapy alone (CH). Patients and methods Patients with hilar or extrahepatic non-metastatic, LABTC could be included in this phase II trial. The inclusion criteria required World Health Organisation (WHO) performance status ⩽2, bilirubinemia ⩽50 μM/L after biliary drainage if necessary, and possibility of external radiotherapy. Fluorouracil (5 FU) infusion and cisplatin, were given in association to radiotherapy (50 Gy) in the CHRT arm. Gemcitabine + oxaliplatin (GEMOX) was planned for 6 months in the CH arm. End-points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity and rate of biliary complications. Results The trial was closed before completion due to slow recruitment. Eighteen and 16 patients were included in the CHRT and CH arms, respectively. Median follow up was 27.9 months (±2.8). Grade III–IV toxicities were mostly haematological (23% and 25%), and gastrointestinal (11% and 6%), in the CHRT and CH arm, respectively. Biliary complications occurred in 28% of patients in the CHRT arm and 44% of patients in the CH arm (risk ratio (RR): 1.60 [0.65–3.92]). Median PFS was 5.8 months in the CHRT group and 11.0 months in the CH group (hazard ratio (HR): 0.65 [0.32–1.33]). Median OS was 13.5 months in the CHRT group and 19.9 months in the CH group (HR: 0.69 [0.31–1.55]). Conclusions Combination of gemcitabine plus cisplatin seems to be at least as efficient as chemoradiotherapy (50 Gy plus 5 FU and cisplatin) in LABTC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]