Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial

Background: When cure is impossible, cancer treatment should focus on both length and quality of life. Maximisation of time without toxic effects could be one effective strategy to achieve both of these goals. The COIN trial assessed preplanned treatment holidays in advanced colorectal cancer to achieve this aim. Methods: COIN was a randomised controlled trial in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. Patients received either continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination (arm A), continuous chemotherapy plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent (arm C) chemotherapy. In arms A and B, treatment continued until development of progressive disease, cumulative toxic effects, or the patient chose to stop. In arm C, patients who had not progressed at their 12-week scan started a chemotherapy-free interval until evidence of disease progression, when the same treatment was restarted. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and B is described in a companion paper. Here, we compare arms A and C, with the primary objective of establishing whether overall survival on intermittent therapy was non-inferior to that on continuous therapy, with a predefined non-inferiority boundary of 1·162. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. Findings: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to continuous and 815 to intermittent therapy). Median survival in the ITT population (n=815 in both groups) was 15·8 months (IQR 9·4—26·1) in arm A and 14·4 months (8·0—24·7) in arm C (hazard ratio [HR] 1·084, 80% CI 1·008—1·165). In the per-protocol population (arm A, n=467; arm C, n=511), median survival was 19·6 months (13·0—28·1) in arm A and 18·0 months (12·1—29·3) in arm C (HR 1·087, 0·986—1·198). The upper limits of CIs for HRs in both analyses were greater than the predefined non-inferiority boundary. Preplanned subgroup analyses in the per-protocol population showed that a raised baseline platelet count, defined as 400 000 per µL or higher (271 [28%] of 978 patients), was associated with poor survival with intermittent chemotherapy: the HR for comparison of arm C and arm A in patients with a normal platelet count was 0·96 (95% CI 0·80—1·15, p=0·66), versus 1·54 (1·17—2·03, p=0·0018) in patients with a raised platelet count (p=0·0027 for interaction). In the per-protocol population, more patients on continuous than on intermittent treatment had grade 3 or worse haematological toxic effects (72 [15%] vs 60 [12%]), whereas nausea and vomiting were more common on intermittent treatment (11 [2%] vs 43 [8%]). Grade 3 or worse peripheral neuropathy (126 [27%] vs 25 [5%]) and hand—foot syndrome (21 [4%] vs 15 [3%]) were more frequent on continuous than on intermittent treatment. Interpretation: Although this trial did not show non-inferiority of intermittent compared with continuous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer in terms of overall survival, chemotherapy-free intervals remain a treatment option for some patients with advanced colorectal cancer, offering reduced time on chemotherapy, reduced cumulative toxic effects, and improved quality of life. Subgroup analyses suggest that patients with normal baseline platelet counts could gain the benefits of intermittent chemotherapy without detriment in survival, whereas those with raised baseline platelet counts have impaired survival and quality of life with intermittent chemotherapy and should not receive a treatment break.

Intermittent chemotherapy plus either intermittent or continuous cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with KRAS wild-type advanced colorectal cancer (COIN-B): a randomised phase 2 trial

Background: Advanced colorectal cancer is treated with a combination of cytotoxic drugs and targeted treatments. However, how best to minimise the time spent taking cytotoxic drugs and whether molecular selection can refine this further is unknown. The primary aim of this study was to establish how cetuximab might be safely and effectively added to intermittent chemotherapy.

Methods: COIN-B was an open-label, multicentre, randomised, exploratory phase 2 trial done at 30 hospitals in the UK and one in Cyprus. We enrolled patients with advanced colorectal cancer who had received no previous chemotherapy for metastases. Randomisation was done centrally (by telephone) by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation with a random element. Treatment allocation was not masked. Patients were assigned (1:1) to intermittent chemotherapy plus intermittent cetuximab or to intermittent chemotherapy plus continuous cetuximab. Chemotherapy was FOLFOX (folinic acid and oxaliplatin followed by bolus and infused fluorouracil). Patients in both groups received FOLFOX and weekly cetuximab for 12 weeks, then either had a planned interruption (those taking intermittent cetuximab) or planned maintenance by continuing on weekly cetuximab (continuous cetuximab). On RECIST progression, FOLFOX plus cetuximab or FOLFOX was recommenced for 12 weeks followed by further interruption or maintenance cetuximab, respectively. The primary outcome was failure-free survival at 10 months. The primary analysis population consisted of patients who completed 12 weeks of treatment without progression, death, or leaving the trial. We tested BRAF and NRAS status retrospectively. The trial was registered, ISRCTN38375681.

Findings: We registered 401 patients, 226 of whom were enrolled. Results for 169 with KRAS wild-type are reported here, 78 (46%) assigned to intermittent cetuximab and 91 (54%) to continuous cetuximab. 64 patients assigned to intermittent cetuximab and 66 of those assigned to continuous cetuximab were included in the primary analysis. 10-month failure-free survival was 50% (lower bound of 95% CI 39) in the intermittent group versus 52% (lower bound of 95% CI 41) in the continuous group; median failure-free survival was 12·2 months (95% CI 8·8–15·6) and 14·3 months (10·7–20·4), respectively. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were skin rash (21 [27%] of 77 patients vs 20 [22%] of 92 patients), neutropenia (22 [29%] vs 30 [33%]), diarrhoea (14 [18%] vs 23 [25%]), and lethargy (20 [26%] vs 19 [21%]).

Interpretation: Cetuximab was safely incorporated in two first-line intermittent chemotherapy strategies. Maintenance of biological monotherapy, with less cytotoxic chemotherapy within the first 6 months, in molecularly selected patients is promising and should be validated in phase 3 trials.

Selecting the best targeted agent in first-line treatment of unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer:does the bench have the answers?

For physicians facing patients with organ-limited metastases from colorectal cancer, tumor shrinkage and sterilization of micrometastatic disease is the main goal, giving the opportunity for secondary surgical resection. At the same time, for the majority of patients who will not achieve a sufficient tumor response, disease control remains the predominant objective. Since FOLFOX or FOLFIRI have similar efficacies, the challenge is to define which could be the most effective targeted agent (anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF) to reach these goals. Therefore, a priori molecular identification of patients that could benefit from anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies (i.e. the currently approved targeted therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer) is of critical importance. In this setting, the KRAS mutation status was the first identified predictive marker of response to anti-EGFR therapy. Since it has been demonstrated that tumors with KRAS mutation do not respond to anti-EGFR therapy, KRAS status must be determined prior to treatment. Thus, for KRAS wild-type patients, the choices that remain are either anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR. In this review, we present the most updated data from translational research programs dealing with the identification of biomarkers for response to targeted therapies.

The addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer: results of the MRC COIN trial.

Background: In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival.
Methods: In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448.
Findings: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3—29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4—30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87—1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0—12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1—13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82—1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5—27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5—24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5—31·7).
Interpretation: This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended.

Targeted therapies in the treatment of advanced/metastatic NSCLC

The treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved substantially during the last years. Chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment and prolongs survival with a positive impact on quality of life. However, we seem to have reached a plateau of activity in the treatment of NSCLC. Recently, the addition of bevacizumab or cetuximab to chemotherapy doublets has improved the outcome in selected patients with advanced NSCLC. Furthermore, the use of erlotinib and gefitinib is an alternative for second line treatment. Advances in our understanding of molecular biology of cancer and mechanisms of tumourigenesis have further enabled the discovery of several potential molecular targets and development of novel 'targeted therapies'. The purpose of this study is to review current data on the role of targeted therapies in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Sequential treatment with flavopiridol synergistically enhances pyrrolo-1,5-benzoxazepine-induced apoptosis in human chronic myeloid leukaemia cells including those resistant to imatinib treatment

The Bcr-Abl kinase inhibitor, imatinib mesylate, is the front line treatment for chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML), but the emergence of imatinib resistance has led to the search for alternative drug treatments and the examination of combination therapies to overcome imatinib resistance. The pro-apoptotic PBOX compounds are a recently developed novel series of microtubule targeting agents (MTAs) that depolymerise tubulin. Recent data demonstrating enhanced MTA-induced tumour cell apoptosis upon combination with the cyclin dependent kinase (CDK)-1 inhibitor flavopiridol prompted us to examine whether this compound could similarly enhance the effect of the PBOX compounds. We thus characterised the apoptotic and cell cycle events associated with combination therapy of the PBOX compounds and flavopiridol and results showed a sequence dependent, synergistic enhancement of apoptosis in CML cells including those expressing the imatinib-resistant T315I mutant. Flavopiridol reduced the number of polyploid cells formed in response to PBOX treatment but only to a small extent, suggesting that inhibition of endoreplication was unlikely to play a major role in the mechanism by which flavopiridol synergistically enhanced PBOX-induced apoptosis. The addition of flavopiridol following PBOX-6 treatment did however result in an accelerated exit from the G2/M transition accompanied by an enhanced downregulation and deactivation of the CDK1/cyclin B1 complex and an enhanced degradation of the inhibitor of apoptosis protein (IAP) survivin. In conclusion, results from this study highlight the potential of these novel series of PBOX compounds, alone or in sequential combination with flavopiridol, as an effective therapy against CML.

Improving a regional chemotherapy service by learning from deaths occurring within 30 days of treatment with systemic anti-cancer therapy.

Background: Outwith clinical trials, patient outcomes specifically related to SACT (systemic anti-cancer therapy) are not well reported despite a significant proportion of patients receiving active treatment at the end of life. The NCEPOD reviewing deaths within 30 days of SACT found SACT caused or hastened death in 27% of cases.

Method: Across the Northern Ireland cancer network, 95 patients who died within 30 days of SACT for solid tumours were discussed at the Morbidity and Mortality monthly meeting during 2013. Using a structured template, each case was independently reviewed, with particular focus on whether SACT caused or hastened death.

Results: Lung, GI and breast cancers were the most common sites. Performance status was recorded in 92% at time of final SACT cycle (ECOG PS 0-2 89%).

In 57% the cause of death was progressive disease. Other causes included thromboembolism (13%) and infection (5% neutropenic sepsis, 6% non-neutropenic sepsis). In 26% with death from progressive disease, the patient was first cycle of first line treatment for metastatic disease. In the majority discussion regarding treatment aims and risks was documented. Only one patient was receiving SACT with curative intent, who died from appropriately managed neutropenic sepsis.

A definitive decision regarding SACT's role in death was made in 60%: in 49% SACT was deemed non-contributory and in 11% SACT was deemed the cause of death. In 40% SACT did not play a major role, but a definitive negative association could not be made.

Conclusion: Development of a robust review process of 30-day mortality after SACT established a benchmark for SACT delivery for future comparisons and identified areas for SACT service organisation improvement. Moreover it encourages individual practice reflection and highlights the importance of balancing patients' needs and concerns with realistic outcomes and risks, particularly in heavily pre-treated patients or those of poor performance status.

Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial

Background
Primary angle-closure glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. In early-stage disease, intraocular pressure is raised without visual loss. Because the crystalline lens has a major mechanistic role, lens extraction might be a useful initial treatment.

Methods
From Jan 8, 2009, to Dec 28, 2011, we enrolled patients from 30 hospital eye services in five countries. Randomisation was done by a web-based application. Patients were assigned to undergo clear-lens extraction or receive standard care with laser peripheral iridotomy and topical medical treatment. Eligible patients were aged 50 years or older, did not have cataracts, and had newly diagnosed primary angle closure with intraocular pressure 30 mm Hg or greater or primary angle-closure glaucoma. The co-primary endpoints were patient-reported health status, intraocular pressure, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year gained 36 months after treatment. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN44464607.

Findings
Of 419 participants enrolled, 155 had primary angle closure and 263 primary angle-closure glaucoma. 208 were assigned to clear-lens extraction and 211 to standard care, of whom 351 (84%) had complete data on health status and 366 (87%) on intraocular pressure. The mean health status score (0·87 [SD 0·12]), assessed with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions questionnaire, was 0·052 higher (95% CI 0·015–0·088, p=0·005) and mean intraocular pressure (16·6 [SD 3·5] mm Hg) 1·18 mm Hg lower (95% CI –1·99 to –0·38, p=0·004) after clear-lens extraction than after standard care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £14 284 for initial lens extraction versus standard care. Irreversible loss of vision occurred in one participant who underwent clear-lens extraction and three who received standard care. No patients had serious adverse events.

Interpretation
Clear-lens extraction showed greater efficacy and was more cost-effective than laser peripheral iridotomy, and should be considered as an option for first-line treatment.

A Phase II Biomarker-Embedded Study of Lapatinib plus Capecitabine as First-line Therapy in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Gastric Cancer

An exploratory phase II biomarker-embedded trial (LPT109747; NCT00526669) designed to determine the association of lapatinib-induced fluoropyrimidine gene changes with efficacy of lapatinib plus capecitabine as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma independent of tumor HER2 status. Tumor biopsies obtained before and after 7-day lapatinib (1,250 mg) to analyze changes in gene expression, followed by a 14-day course of capecitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily, 14/21 days) plus lapatinib 1,250 mg daily. Blood samples were acquired for pharmacokinetic analysis. Primary clinical objectives were response rate (RR) and 5-month progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives were overall survival (OS), PFS, time to response, duration of response, toxicity, and identification of associations between lapatinib pharmacokinetics and biomarker endpoints. Primary biomarker objectives were modulation of 5-FU-pathway genes by lapatinib, effects of germline SNPs on treatment outcome, and trough steady-state plasma lapatinib concentrations. Sixty-eight patients were enrolled; (75% gastric cancer, 25% gastroesophageal junction). Twelve patients (17.9%) had confirmed partial response, 31 (46.3%) had stable disease, and 16 (23.9%) had progressive disease. Median PFS and OS were 3.3 and 6.3 months, respectively. Frequent adverse events included diarrhea (45%), decreased appetite (39%), nausea (36%), and fatigue (36%). Lapatinib induced no changes in gene expression from baseline and no significant associations were found for SNPs analyzed. Elevated baseline HER3 mRNA expression was associated with a higher RR (33% vs. 0%; P = 0.008). Lapatinib plus capecitabine was well tolerated, demonstrating modest antitumor activity in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The association of elevated HER3 and RR warrants further investigation as an important player for HER-targeted regimens in combination with capecitabine

BRCA1 and implications for response to chemotherapy in ovarian cancer

Objectives: Treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains a challenge, despite advances in surgery and chemotherapy. Hereditary ovarian cancer is primarily due to germline mutations in the BRCA1 tumour suppressor gene. In addition, sporadic EOC tumours display signi?cant of loss of BRCA1 function due to epigenetic inactivation of the BRCA1 gene. This article reviews the preclinical and clinical evidence to support a role for BRCA1 as a potential predictive biomarker of response to both platinum and taxane based chemotherapy in EOC.

Methods: We conducted a Medline and Pubmed search for reports between 1990 and 2008 using the search terms: BRCA1 and hereditary ovarian cancer, BRCA1 and sporadic ovarian cancer, ovarian cancer and chemotherapy, ovarian cancer and taxanes, ovarian cancer and platinums, ovarian cancer and clinical response, BRCA1 and DNA damage, BRCA1 and DNA repair, BRCA1 and mitotic checkpoint. If reports identi?ed by these criteria referred to other papers not in the initial search, then these were also reviewed if relevant to BRCA1 and ovarian cancer.

Results: The BRCA1 pathway plays a signi?cant role in the development of both hereditary and sporadic EOC. Evidence suggests that BRCA1 is a potential biomarker of response to platinum chemotherapy in EOC with BRCA1 de?ciency predicting for enhanced response. In contrast, initial evidence suggests that loss of BRCA1 function results in reduced response to antimicrotubule-based chemotherapy. The ability of BRCA1 to differentially modulate response to these agents involves loss of BRCA1 mediated DNA repair and mitotic checkpoint control, respectively.

Conclusions: Standard ?rst line treatment of EOC consists of a combination of platinum and taxane chemotherapy, however clinically useful biomarkers for predicting response to these agents have yet to be established. BRCA1 may prove useful as a biomarker in EOC for assigning chemotherapy treatments based on the presence or absence of BRCA1 function.

Philadelphia-Negative Classical Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: Critical Concepts and Management Recommendations From European LeukemiaNet

We present a review of critical concepts and produce recommendations on the management of Philadelphia-negative classical myeloproliferative neoplasms, including monitoring, response definition, first-and second-line therapy, and therapy for special issues. Key questions were selected according the criterion of clinical relevance. Statements were produced using a Delphi process, and two consensus conferences involving a panel of 21 experts appointed by the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) were convened. Patients with polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) should be defined as high risk if age is greater than 60 years or there is a history of previous thrombosis. Risk stratification in primary myelofibrosis (PMF) should start with the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for newly diagnosed patients and dynamic IPSS for patients being seen during their disease course, with the addition of cytogenetics evaluation and transfusion status. High-risk patients with PV should be managed with phlebotomy, low-dose aspirin, and cytoreduction, with either hydroxyurea or interferon at any age. High-risk patients with ET should be managed with cytoreduction, using hydroxyurea at any age. Monitoring response in PV and ET should use the ELN clinicohematologic criteria. Corticosteroids, androgens, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and immunomodulators are recommended to treat anemia of PMF, whereas hydroxyurea is the first-line treatment of PMF-associated splenomegaly. Indications for splenectomy include symptomatic portal hypertension, drug-refractory painful splenomegaly, and frequent RBC transfusions. The risk of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation-related complications is justified in transplantation-eligible patients whose median survival time is expected to be less than 5 years.