Search

Abstract Background Several randomized trials have indicated that combination chemotherapy applied in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) does not significantly improve overall survival when compared to the sequential use of cytotoxic agents (CAIRO, MRC Focus, FFCD 2000-05). The present study investigates the question whether this statement holds true also for bevacizumab-based first-line treatment including escalation- and de-escalation strategies. Methods/Design The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 trial is a two-arm, multicenter, open-label randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) versus capecitabine plus irinotecan plus bevacizumab (CAPIRI-Bev) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 bid for 14d (d1-14) plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm A) or capecitabine 800 mg/m2 BID for 14d (d1-14), irinotecan 200 mg/m2 (d1) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm B). Patients included into this trial are required to consent to the analysis of tumour tissue and blood for translational investigations. In Arm A, treatment escalation from Cape-Bev to CAPIRI-Bev is recommended in case of progressive disease (PD). In Arm B, de-escalation from CAPIRI-Bev to Cape-Bev is possible after 6 months of treatment or in case of irinotecan-associated toxicity. Re-escalation to CAPIRI-Bev after PD is possible. The primary endpoint is time to failure of strategy (TFS). Secondary endpoints are overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life. Conclusion The AIO KRK 0110 trial is designed for patients with disseminated, but asymptomatic mCRC who are not potential candidates for surgical resection of metastasis. Two bevacizumab-based strategies are compared: one starting as single-agent chemotherapy (Cape-Bev) allowing escalation to CAPIRI-Bev and another starting with combination chemotherapy (CAPIRI-Bev) and allowing de-escalation to Cape-Bev and subsequent re-escalation if necessary. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01249638 EudraCT-No.: 2009-013099-38

Perioperative treatment is a standard of care in locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) (gastric adenocarcinoma and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma). While preoperative treatment can be applied to the majority of patients, postoperative chemotherapy can be given only to a fraction. The NeoFLOT-study therefore investigates the application of prolonged neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Patients with T3, T4, and/or node-positive adenocarcinoma (GEC) were eligible for this multicenter phase II trial. NACT consisted of 6 cycles of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil 2600 mg/m2 and docetaxel 50 mg/m2 (FLOT) applied q 2 wks. Application of adjuvant chemotherapy was explicitly not part of the protocol. R0-resection rate was evaluated as a primary endpoint. Of 59 enrolled patients, 50 patients underwent surgery and were assessable for the primary endpoint. R0-resection rate was 86.0% (43/50). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was 20.0% (10/50) and a further 20% (10/50) of patients achieved near complete histological remission (<10% residual tumor). Among these very good responders, 85% (17/20) had intestinal type tumors, 10% (2/20) had diffuse and 5% (1/20) had mixed type tumors. After 3 cycles of NACT, 6.9% (4/58) of patients developed progressive disease. Median disease-free survival was 32.9 months. The 1-year survival-rate was 79.3%. Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia 29.3%, febrile neutropenia 1.7%, diarrhea 12.1% and mucositis 6.9%. This study indicates that intensified NACT with 6 cycles of FLOT is highly effective and tolerable in resectable GEC. Very good response (pCR and <10% residual tumor) was predominantly observed in patients with intestinal type tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. To evaluate progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) as potential surrogate endpoints (SEP) for overall survival (OS) in second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods. A systematic literature search of randomised trials of second-line chemotherapy for mCRC reported from January 2000 to July 2013 was performed. Correlation coefficients weighted by number of patients in the treatment arms between median PFS, ORR and DCR with median OS were estimated. Results. Twenty-three trials reflecting 10 800 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median PFS and OS across all trials were 4.5 months and 11.5 months and median ORR and DCR were 11.4% and 65%, respectively. PFS showed moderate correlation with OS [RPFS = 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.82]. In contrast, ORR only weakly correlated with OS (RORR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.38-0.72, n = 22). Despite a small number of studies (n = 10) reporting on DCR, moderate correlation with OS was observed (RDCR = 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.86). Conclusion. Based on the available trial-level data, PFS may serve as an appropriate SEP in second-line chemotherapy for mCRC. A small number of studies revealed moderate correlation of DCR with OS that justifies further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. This study investigated the impact of early tumor shrinkage (ETS) on progression-free- (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated within the AIO KRK 0104 trial as first-line therapy. Moreover, correlations of ETS with clinical characteristics and prognostic markers were evaluated. Patients and methods. In total, 121 patients were included into this analysis. Patients were treated with cetuximab combined with either CAPIRI or CAPOX. ETS at six weeks was defined as a relative change of ≥ 20% in the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions compared to baseline. Survival times were compared between patients with ETS ≥ 20% versus no-ETS. Results. ETS ≥ 20% was observed in 59% of all patients with KRAS wild-type tumors. In these patients ETS ≥ 20% was associated with higher overall response rate (82% vs. 19%, p < 0.001). Also, PFS (8.9 vs. 4.7 months, p < 0.001) and OS (31.6 vs. 15.8 months, p = 0.005) were significantly superior in ETS ≥ 20% of patients compared to no-ETS. In patients with KRAS mutant mCRC ETS ≥ 20% neither had an effect on PFS nor OS. Cetuximab-induced skin toxicity correlated with the occurrence of ETS ≥ 20% (p = 0.002). Conclusion. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumors treated with cetuximab plus capecitabine-based chemotherapy ETS ≥ 20% is an important predictor of favorable outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary We report the case of a young female lung transplant recipient with difficult-to-treat cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease. While treatment with intravenous (IV) ganciclovir failed due to antiviral drug resistance, a trial with foscarnet resulted in severe side effects. In addition, the patient received IV CMV-specific immune globulins as adjunctive therapy and leflunomide as experimental therapy. In this context, CMV-specific immune monitoring was performed and was successfully implemented in management decisions. The patient was screened for acquisition of an adaptive immune response, and antiviral prophylaxis and therapy was tailored according to results. This report highlights the impact of CMV-specific immune monitoring on individualized therapy for appropriate prophylaxis and management of CMV infection and diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several randomized trials have indicated that combination chemotherapy applied in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) does not significantly improve overall survival when compared to the sequential use of cytotoxic agents (CAIRO, MRC Focus, FFCD 2000-05). The present study investigates the question whether this statement holds true also for bevacizumab-based first-line treatment including escalation- and de-escalation strategies.Methods/design: The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 trial is a two-arm, multicenter, open-label randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) versus capecitabine plus irinotecan plus bevacizumab (CAPIRI-Bev) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) bid for 14d (d1-14) plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm A) or capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) BID for 14d (d1-14), irinotecan 200 mg/m(2) (d1) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm B). Patients included into this trial are required to consent to the analysis of tumour tissue and blood for translational investigations. In Arm A, treatment escalation from Cape-Bev to CAPIRI-Bev is recommended in case of progressive disease (PD). In Arm B, de-escalation from CAPIRI-Bev to Cape-Bev is possible after 6 months of treatment or in case of irinotecan-associated toxicity. Re-escalation to CAPIRI-Bev after PD is possible. The primary endpoint is time to failure of strategy (TFS). Secondary endpoints are overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life.Conclusion: The AIO KRK 0110 trial is designed for patients with disseminated, but asymptomatic mCRC who are not potential candidates for surgical resection of metastasis. Two bevacizumab-based strategies are compared: one starting as single-agent chemotherapy (Cape-Bev) allowing escalation to CAPIRI-Bev and another starting with combination chemotherapy (CAPIRI-Bev) and allowing de-escalation to Cape-Bev and subsequent re-escalation if necessary.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01249638 EudraCT-No.: 2009-013099-38. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine whether irinotecan plus oxaliplatin (mIROX) is superior to irinotecan plus infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin (FUFIRI) as first-line therapy of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and methods: A phase III, randomised, open-label multicentre study compared standard treatment with FUFIRI (irinotecan 80mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil 2000mg/m2, folinic acid 500mg/m2 weekly times 6) to mIROX using an identical schedule of irinotecan plus oxaliplatin 85mg/m2 applied on days 1, 15 and 29 of a 7-week cycle. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: A total of 479 eligible patients were randomly assigned. Progression-free survival was 7.2months in the mIROX arm and 8.2months in the FUFIRI arm [hazard ratio=1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94–1.37; P =0.178]. Comparable results were also obtained for overall survival time with 19months in the mIROX-arm and 22months in the FUFIRI-arm (hazard ratio=1.08, P =0.276). Both regimens induced an identical objective response rate (ORR) of 41%, but disease control rate (ORR plus stable disease) was significantly greater in the FUFIRI group (81% versus 68%, P =0.001). Most frequent grades 1–4 side-effects of mIROX and FUFIRI treatment were nausea (80% versus 73%) and delayed diarrhoea (79% versus 68%). Grades 3–4 toxicities were generally below 10%, except for diarrhoea which was more frequent in the mIROX-arm compared to the FUFIRI-arm (19% versus 30%, P =0.006) Conclusion: mIROX failed to show superior activity compared to high-dose 5-FU/folinic acid plus irinotecan. Due to better tolerability the combination of high-dose 5-FU/folinic acid and irinotecan remains a standard of care in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]