Gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and 5-FU in advanced bile duct and gallbladder carcinoma: two parallel, multicentre phase-II trials.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) are active in biliary tract cancer and have a potentially synergistic mode of action and non-overlapping toxicity. The objective of these trials was to determine response, survival and toxicity separately in patients with bile duct cancer (BDC) and gallbladder cancer (GBC) treated with gemcitabine/oxaliplatin/5-FU chemotherapy. METHODS: Eligible patients with histologically proven, advanced or metastatic BDC (n=37) or GBC (n=35) were treated with gemcitabine (900 mg m(-2) over 30 min), oxaliplatin (65 mg m(-2)) and 5-FU (1500 mg m(-2) over 24 h) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Tumour response was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Response rates were 19% (95% CI: 6-32%) and 23% (95% CI: 9-37%) for BDC and GBC, respectively. Median survivals were 10.0 months (95% CI: 8.6-12.4) and 9.9 months (95% CI: 7.5-12.2) for BDC and GBC, respectively, and 1- and 2-year survival rates were 40 and 23% in BDC and 34 and 6% in GBC (intention-to-treat analysis). Major grade III and IV adverse events were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, elevated bilirubin and anorexia. CONCLUSION: Triple-drug chemotherapy achieves comparable results for response and survival to previously reported regimens, but with more toxicity.

An EORTC phase I itudy of bortezomib in combination with oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

The combination of oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX-4) is still a reference regimen in advanced colorectal cancer; however, the addition of new biologic compounds represents a significant way forward. Bortezomib is an inhibitor of proteasome, a multicatalytic enzyme complex that degrades several intracellular proteins. In this study, escalating doses of Bortezomib were administered along with the standard FOLFOX-4 doses, in order to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), toxicity profile and activity of the combination. Patients with advanced colorectal cancer, unpretreated for metastatic disease, were enroled in the study. Bortezomib starting dose was 1.3mg/m(2), which was to be escalated in the subsequent steps according to the toxicities observed after first cycle. Exploratory pharmacogenetics research was conducted by analysing the association between clinical outcomes and polymorphisms in candidate genes for response to each of the used drugs. Correlation between tumour marker changes and response was also investigated. One mg/m(2) (DL-1) was defined as being the maximum tolerated dose since only 1 DLT was observed in 6 patients. The main toxicities were haematologic, neuropathy, diarrhoea and fatigue. Amongst 13 evaluable patients, five had a partial response, five had a stable disease and three patients progressed. Two patients are long-term survivors after a combined chemosurgical approach. Further trials of the current combination may be justified.

Adjuvant Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin in Stage II to III Colon Cancer: Updated 10-Year Survival and Outcomes According to BRAF Mutation and Mismatch Repair Status of the MOSAIC Study.

PURPOSE: The MOSAIC (Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin/Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer) study has demonstrated 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 6-year overall survival (OS) benefit of adjuvant oxaliplatin in stage II to III resected colon cancer. This update presents 10-year OS and OS and DFS by mismatch repair (MMR) status and BRAF mutation. METHODS: Survival actualization after 10-year follow-up was performed in 2,246 patients with resected stage II to III colon cancer. We assessed MMR status and BRAF mutation in 1,008 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 9.5 years, 10-year OS rates in the bolus/infusional fluorouracil plus leucovorin (LV5FU2) and LV5FU2 plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) arms were 67.1% versus 71.7% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; P = .043) in the whole population, 79.5% versus 78.4% for stage II (HR, 1.00; P = .980), and 59.0% versus 67.1% for stage III (HR, 0.80; P = .016) disease. Ninety-five patients (9.4%) had MMR-deficient (dMMR) tumors, and 94 (10.4%) had BRAF mutation. BRAF mutation was not prognostic for OS (P = .965), but dMMR was an independent prognostic factor (HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.15 to 3.55; P = .014). HRs for DFS and OS benefit in the FOLFOX4 arm were 0.48 (95% CI, 0.20 to 1.12) and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.16 to 1.07), respectively, in patients with stage II to III dMMR and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.25 to 1.00) and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.31 to 1.42), respectively, in those with BRAF mutation. CONCLUSION: The OS benefit of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy, increasing over time and with the disease severity, was confirmed at 10 years in patients with stage II to III colon cancer. These updated results support the use of FOLFOX in patients with stage III disease, including those with dMMR or BRAF mutation.

Irinotecan and oxaliplatin: an overview of the novel chemotherapeutic options for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent malignancies in humans and an important cause of cancer death. Metastatic colorectal cancer remains incurable with available systemic therapeutic options. The most active cytotoxic drug against this malignancy, the antimetabolite 5-fluorouracil, was developed more than forty years ago, and as a single agent produces responses in only 10 to 15% of patients which in general last less than one year. Efforts to ameliorate these poor results resulted in the 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin combination, which enhances response rates about two-fold, without, however, significantly improving survival rates. The recent emergence of a handful of new 5-fluorouracil analogues and folate antagonists, as well as the topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan, and the third-generation platinum compound oxaliplatin, is likely to alter this gloomy scenario. These agents are at least as effective as 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma, both untreated and previously treated with 5-fluorouracil-based regimens. This has led to the approval of irinotecan as second-line treatment for 5-fluorouracil-refractory disease, while the use of oxaliplatin has been suggested for patients having a defective 5-fluorouracil catabolism. Recently, FDA approved the combination of irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin for first-line treatment of advanced colon cancer. Based on the synergistic preclinical antitumor effects of some of these agents, their meaningful single-agent activity, distinct mechanisms of cytotoxicity and resistance, and only partially overlapping toxicity profiles, effective combination regimens are now being developed, which are likely to lead to a new, more hopeful era for patients suffering from advanced colorectal carcinoma.

Serotonergic modulation in neuropathy induced by oxaliplatin: Effect on the 5HT(2C) receptor

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for colon cancer (AVANT): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial

Background: Bevacizumab improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess the use of bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma. Methods: Patients from 330 centres in 34 countries were enrolled into this phase 3, open-label randomised trial. Patients with curatively resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma were randomly assigned (1: 1: 1) to receive FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 200 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus plus 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) plus fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus plus 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion on day 2) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles; bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOX4 (every 2 weeks for 12 cycles) followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks); or bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg plus XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 2 weeks plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-15) every 3 weeks for eight cycles followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks). Block randomisation was done with a central interactive computerised system, stratified by geographic region and disease stage. Surgery with curative intent occurred 4-8 weeks before randomisation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed for all randomised patients with stage III disease. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00112918. Findings: Of the total intention-to-treat population (n=3451), 2867 patients had stage III disease, of whom 955 were randomly assigned to receive FOLFOX4, 960 to receive bevacizumab-FOLFOX4, and 952 to receive bevacizumab-XELOX. After a median follow-up of 48 months (range 0-66 months), 237 patients (25%) in the FOLFOX4 group, 280 (29%) in the bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 group, and 253 (27%) in the bevacizumab-XELOX group had relapsed, developed a new colon cancer, or died. The disease-free survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1.17 (95% CI 0.98-1.39; p=0.07), and for bevacizumab-XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1.07 (0.90-1.28; p=0.44). After a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the overall survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1.27 (1.03-1.57; p=0.02), and for bevacizumab-XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1.15 (0.93-1.42; p=0.21). The 573 patients with high-risk stage II cancer were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were neutropenia (FOLFOX4: 477 [42%] of 1126 patients, bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 416 [36%] of 1145 patients, and bevacizumab-XELOX: 74 [7%] of 1135 patients), diarrhoea (110 [10%], 135 [12%], and 181 [16%], respectively), and hypertension (12 [1%], 122 [11%], and 116 [10%], respectively). Serious adverse events were more common in the bevacizumab groups (bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 297 [26%]; bevacizumab-XELOX: 284 [25%]) than in the FOLFOX4 group (226 [20%]). Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving FOLFOX4, two receiving bevacizumab-FOLFOX4, and five receiving bevacizumab-XELOX. Interpretation: Bevacizumab does not prolong disease-free survival when added to adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III colon cancer. Overall survival data suggest a potential detrimental effect with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in these patients. On the basis of these and other data, we do not recommend the use of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with curatively resected stage III colon cancer.

Adding cetuximab to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK

BACKGROUND: To determine the activity and tolerability of adding cetuximab to the oxaliplatin and capecitabine (XELOX) combination in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a multicenter two-arm phase II trial, patients were randomized to receive oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks alone or in combination with standard dose cetuximab. Treatment was limited to a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with good performance status entered the trial. Objective partial response rates after external review and radiological confirmation were 14% and 41% in the XELOX and in the XELOX + Cetuximab arm, respectively. Stable disease has been observed in 62% and 35% of the patients, with 76% disease control in both arms. Cetuximab led to skin rash in 65% of the patients. The median overall survival was 16.5 months for arm A and 20.5 months for arm B. The median time to progression was 5.8 months for arm A and 7.2 months for arm B. CONCLUSION: Differences in response rates between the treatment arms indicate that cetuximab may improve outcome with XELOX. The correct place of the cetuximab, oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combinations in first-line treatment of MCC has to be assessed in phase III trials.

Effective treatment of advanced colorectal cancer by rapamycin and 5-FU/oxaliplatin monitored by TIMP-1

AIM: The mTOR-inhibitor rapamycin has shown antitumor activity in various tumors. Bedside observations have suggested that rapamycin may be effective as a treatment for colorectal carcinomatosis. METHODS: We established an orthotopic syngenic model by transplanting CT26 peritoneal tumors in Balb/C mice and an orthotopic xenograft model by transplanting SW620 peritoneal tumors in nu/nu mice. Expression levels of tissue inhibitor of matrix-metalloproteinases 1 (TIMP-1) in the tumor and serum was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: Rapamycin significantly suppressed growth of syngenic and xenografted peritoneal tumors. The effect was similar with intraperitoneal or oral rapamycin administration. Tumor suppression was further enhanced when rapamycin was combined with 5-fluorouracil and/or oxaliplatin. The combination treatment showed no acute toxicity. TIMP-1 serum levels correlated well (CC = 0.75; P < 0.01) with rapamycin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Rapamycin suppressed advanced stage colorectal cancer, even with oral administration. Combining rapamycin with current chemotherapy regimens significantly increased antitumor efficacy without apparent toxicity. The treatment efficacy correlated with serum TIMP-1 levels, suggesting its potential as a surrogate marker in future clinical trials.

Geographic variation in the utilization and survival associated with oxaliplatin chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer

Background: Overall objectives of this dissertation are to examine the geographic variation and socio-demographic disparities (by age, race and gender) in the utilization and survival of newly FDA-approved chemotherapy agents (Oxaliplatin-containing regimens) as well as to determine the cost-effectiveness of Oxaliplatin in a large nationwide and population-based cohort of Medicare patients with resected stage-III colon cancer. Methods: A retrospective cohort of 7,654 Medicare patients was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results – Medicare linked database. Multiple logistic regression was performed to examine the relationship between receipt of Oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy and geographic regions while adjusting for other patient characteristics. Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the effect of Oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy on the survival variation across regions using 2004-2005 data. Propensity score adjustments were also made to control for potential bias related to non-random allocation of the treatment group. We used Kaplan-Meier sample average estimator to calculate the cost of disease after cancer-specific surgery to death, loss-to follow-up or censorship. Results: Only 51% of the stage-III patients received adjuvant chemotherapy within three to six months of colon-cancer specific surgery. Patients in the rural regions were approximately 30% less likely to receive Oxaliplatin chemotherapy than those residing in a big metro region (OR=0.69, p=0.033). The hazard ratio for patients residing in metro region was comparable to those residing in big metro region (HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.49-2.28). Patients who received Oxalipaltin chemotherapy were 33% less likely to die than those received 5-FU only chemotherapy (adjusted HR=0.67, 95% CI: 0.41-1.11). KMSA-adjusted mean payments were almost 2.5 times higher in the Oxaliplatin-containing group compared to 5-FU only group ($45,378 versus $17,856). When compared to no chemotherapy group, ICER of 5-FU based regimen was $12,767 per LYG, and ICER of Oxaliplatin-chemotherapy was $60,863 per LYG. Oxaliplatin was found economically dominated by 5-FU only chemotherapy in this study population. Conclusion: Chemotherapy use varies across geographic regions. We also observed considerable survival differences across geographic regions; the difference remained even after adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics. The cost-effectiveness of Oxaliplatin in Medicare patients may be over-estimated in the clinical trials. Our study found 5-FU only chemotherapy cost-effective in adjuvant settings in patients with stage-III colon cancer.^

HER2 in high-risk rectal cancer patients treated in EXPERT-C, a randomized phase II trial of neoadjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with or without cetuximab.

BACKGROUND: HER2 is an established therapeutic target in breast and gastric cancers. The role of HER2 in rectal cancer is unclear, as conflicting data on the prevalence of HER2 expression in this disease have been reported. We evaluated the prevalence of HER2 and its impact on the outcome of high-risk rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant CAPOX and CRT±cetuximab in the EXPERT-C trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with available tumour tissue for HER2 analysis were included. HER2 expression was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in pre-treatment biopsies and/or surgical specimens (score 0-3+). Immunostaining was scored according to the consensus panel recommendations on HER2 scoring for gastric cancer. Tumours with equivocal IHC result (2+) were tested for HER2 amplification by D-ISH. Tumours with IHC 3+ or D-ISH ratio ≥2.0 were classified as HER2+. The impact of HER2 on primary and secondary end points of the study was analysed. RESULTS: Of 164 eligible study patients, 104 (63%) biopsy and 114 (69%) surgical specimens were available for analysis. Only 3 of 104 (2.9%) and 3 of 114 (2.6%) were HER2+, respectively. In 77 patients with paired specimens, concordance for HER2 status was found in 74 (96%). Overall, 141 patients were assessable for HER2 and 6 out of 141 (4.3%) had HER2 overexpression and/or amplification. The median follow-up was 58.6 months. HER2 was not associated with a difference in the outcome for any of the study end points, including in the subset of 90 KRAS/BRAF wild-type patients treated±cetuximab. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the low prevalence of expression as recorded in the EXPERT-C trial, HER2 does not appear to represent a useful therapeutic target in high-risk rectal cancer. However, the role of HER2 as a potential predictive biomarker of resistance to anti-EGFR-based treatments and a therapeutic target in anti-EGFR refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) warrants further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Register: 99828560.

Epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine with or without panitumumab for patients with previously untreated advanced oesophagogastric cancer (REAL3): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: EGFR overexpression occurs in 27-55% of oesophagogastric adenocarcinomas, and correlates with poor prognosis. We aimed to assess addition of the anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab to epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (EOC) in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label phase 3 trial (REAL3), we enrolled patients with untreated, metastatic, or locally advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma at 63 centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals) in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive up to eight 21-day cycles of open-label EOC (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21) or modified-dose EOC plus panitumumab (mEOC+P; epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21, and panitumumab 9 mg/kg on day 1). Randomisation was blocked and stratified for centre region, extent of disease, and performance status. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. After a preplanned independent data monitoring committee review in October, 2011, trial recruitment was halted and panitumumab withdrawn. Data for patients on treatment were censored at this timepoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00824785. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2008, and Oct 17, 2011, we enrolled 553 eligible patients. Median overall survival in 275 patients allocated EOC was 11.3 months (95% CI 9.6-13.0) compared with 8.8 months (7.7-9.8) in 278 patients allocated mEOC+P (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, 95% CI 1.07-1.76; p=0.013). mEOC+P was associated with increased incidence of grade 3-4 diarrhoea (48 [17%] of 276 patients allocated mEOC+P vs 29 [11%] of 266 patients allocated EOC), rash (29 [11%] vs two [1%]), mucositis (14 [5%] vs none), and hypomagnesaemia (13 [5%] vs none) but reduced incidence of haematological toxicity (grade ≥ 3 neutropenia 35 [13%] vs 74 [28%]). INTERPRETATION: Addition of panitumumab to EOC chemotherapy does not increase overall survival and cannot be recommended for use in an unselected population with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Amgen, UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.

Multicenter randomized phase II clinical trial comparing neoadjuvant oxaliplatin, capecitabine, and preoperative radiotherapy with or without cetuximab followed by total mesorectal excision in patients with high-risk rectal cancer (EXPERT-C).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the addition of cetuximab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy in high-risk rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with operable magnetic resonance imaging-defined high-risk rectal cancer received four cycles of capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CAPOX) followed by capecitabine chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant CAPOX (four cycles) or the same regimen plus weekly cetuximab (CAPOX+C). The primary end point was complete response (CR; pathologic CR or, in patients not undergoing surgery, radiologic CR) in patients with KRAS/BRAF wild-type tumors. Secondary end points were radiologic response (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety in the wild-type and overall populations and a molecular biomarker analysis. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-five eligible patients were randomly assigned. Ninety (60%) of 149 assessable tumors were KRAS or BRAF wild type (CAPOX, n = 44; CAPOX+C, n = 46), and in these patients, the addition of cetuximab did not improve the primary end point of CR (9% v 11%, respectively; P = 1.0; odds ratio, 1.22) or PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; P = .363). Cetuximab significantly improved RR (CAPOX v CAPOX+C: after chemotherapy, 51% v 71%, respectively; P = .038; after chemoradiation, 75% v 93%, respectively; P = .028) and OS (HR, 0.27; P = .034). Skin toxicity and diarrhea were more frequent in the CAPOX+C arm. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab led to a significant increase in RR and OS in patients with KRAS/BRAF wild-type rectal cancer, but the primary end point of improved CR was not met.