Search

Background: Ampullary carcinoma (AC) is a rare and severe gastrointestinal cancer with a disease recurrence rate of around 40% after curative-intent surgery and for which the main prognostic factors and adjuvant treatment decision remain a matter of debate., Patients and Methods: The FFCD-AC cohort is a French nationwide prospective cohort, which included patients with non-metastatic resected AC. The primary objective of this study was to describe prognostic factors associated with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) so as to propose a user-friendly score to better estimate the risk of recurrence. The secondary objective was to study the benefit of adjuvant therapy in terms of DFS and OS., Results: Three hundred and seventy patients with resected AC were included. Median follow-up was 40.6 months. Median age was 68.5 years (32.0-87.0 years), 53.8% of patients were male and 56.1%/37.4%/6.5% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1/2, respectively. Pathological subtype was intestinal/pancreatobiliary/mixed-undetermined in 29.5%/40.5%/30.0% of patients, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was carried out in 61% of patients. In multivariable analysis, stage III tumor [hazard ratio (HR) 2.86, (95% confidence interval {95% CI}: 1.89-4.17), P < 0.0001], high tumor grade [HR 2.51, (95% CI: 1.42-4.43), P = 0.002] and non-intestinal subtype [HR 1.58, (95% CI: 1.00-2.49), P = 0.052] were associated with shorter DFS. A score based on these three parameters divided patients into low (n = 83), intermediate (n = 133) and high risk (n = 96) with median DFS not reached (NR)/73.1/15.2 months and a median OS NR/86.1/38.2 months, respectively. After propensity score matching, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with longer DFS [HR 0.57, (95% CI: 0.45-0.72), P < 0.0001] in the cohort., Conclusion: Our integrated score based on three easy-to-collect items-lymph node invasion, tumor grade and non-intestinal subtypes-seems highly prognostic in resected AC and needs to be confirmed in an external validation dataset to help adjuvant treatment decision making., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Early-stage anal squamous cell carcinomas (ASCC) are usually treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT), with good outcomes. Radiotherapy (RT) alone might be sufficient while reducing toxicity., Methods: Patients included in the French prospective FFCD-ANABASE and treated for T1-2N0 ASCC between 2015/01 and 2020/04 were divided into CRT and RT groups. Clinical outcomes and toxicity were reported. Propensity score matching was conducted for 105 pairs of patients., Results: 440 patients were analyzed: 261 (59.3 %) in the CRT group and 179 (40.7 %) in the RT group. The median follow-up was 35.7 months. Patients receiving CRT were younger, had better Performance Status (PS) and larger tumors. No statistical difference was observed for 3-year Disease-free survival (85.3 % vs 83 %, p = 0.28), Overall survival (89.6 % vs 94.8 %, p = 0.69) and Colostomy-free survival (84.5 % vs 87.2 %, p = 0.84) between CRT and RT groups, respectively. Propensity score-matched analysis confirmed these findings. Treatment interruptions were significantly more frequent in the CRT group (36.3 % vs 21.9 %, p = 0.0013), resulting in an Overall Treatment Time (OTT) extended by 7 days. Grade 3 CTCAE v4.0 toxicities were more prevalent in the CRT group (46 % vs 19 %, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Adding chemotherapy to radiotherapy did not significantly improve outcomes for T1-2N0 ASCC in our study, but increased toxicity and OTT., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Precision medicine trials disrupted the paradigm of randomized controlled trials in large populations. Patient selection may be based on molecular alterations rather than on primary tumor location. In small patient populations, the growth modulation index (GMI) has been developed to evaluate treatment efficacy by using each patient as its own control. The FFCD 0307 randomized phase III trial compared two sequences of chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer, which represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the relevance of the GMI., Patients and Methods: In the FFCD 0307 trial, patients with advanced gastric cancer were randomized between two chemotherapy sequences [ECX followed by FOLFIRI at disease progression (arm A) versus FOLFIRI followed by ECX (arm B)]. GMI was defined as the ratio of the progression-free survival on second treatment (PFS2) to the time to progression on first treatment (TTP1). Sequence benefit was defined as a GMI exceeding 1.3 (GMI-high). GMI was correlated with overall survival (OS). OS1 and OS2 were measured from first randomization and second-line failure to death., Results: Four hundred and sixteen patients were randomized (209 in arm A, 207 in arm B). One hundred and seventy-five patients (42%) received the two sequences and were assessable for GMI (97 in arm A, 79 in arm B). The median GMI was higher in arm A than in arm B (0.62 versus 0.47, P = 0.04). Patients with a high GMI had a longer OS1 (median 14.9 versus 11.5 months, NS). Median OS2 was doubled in the GMI-high group (3.4 versus 1.6 months, NS)., Conclusion: GMI analyses suggest that ECX followed by FOLFIRI might represent a better therapeutic strategy than FOLFIRI followed by ECX. High GMI was associated with prolonged survival., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: To examine the relationship between carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) kinetics and prognosis in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients receiving first-line chemotherapy in the PRODIGE9 trial., Methods: Associations between monthly CEA measurements within 6 months since baseline and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using a joint-latent class-mixed model. A validation set was used to test our prognosis model. Correlations between CEA trajectories (classes) and baseline characteristics were also investigated., Results: Three classes were identified. Class 1 had low baseline CEA with small variations. Class 2 had high baseline CEA with a rapid decrease reaching the same CEA level at 6 months as in class 1. Class 3 had high baseline CEA with a transient decrease followed by an increase to reach, at 6 months, the same CEA level as at baseline. Six-month PFS was significantly lower in class 3 than in classes 1 and 2 (57% vs. 91% and 93% respectively; p<0.01). Class 3 was significantly associated with ECOG 2 status, a high LDH level and non-resected primary tumor., Discussion: Variations in CEA kinetics correlate with prognosis in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for mCRC. We propose here a user-friendly application to classify CEA trajectory., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest DS, MH, KLM and OB have no conflict of interest to declare TA declared Honoraria from Sanofi, Roche, Amgen, Servier, Pierre Fabre and Astra Zeneca ; Consultancy / Advisory role for Bioven, Pierre Fabre, MSD and Sirtec ; Travel accommodations from Roche. CL has received personnal fees of Amgen, Bayer, Ipsen and Pierre Fabre; Consultancy /Advisory role for Advanced Accelerator Applications, Novartis; Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis, Bayer, Sanofi/Aventis, Merck Serono and Ipsen JT has received personal fees from Amgen, Roche, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, MSD, Sanofi, Servier, Shire, and non-financial support from Amgen, Merck Serono, and Roche OB has received personal fees from Amgen, Apmonia Therapeutics, Bayer, Merck, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi and Servier VB reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Merck Serono, personal fees and non-financial support from Bayer, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, non-financial support from Sanofi, personal fees and non-financial support from Ipsen, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck MSD, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from Novartis, and personal fees and non-financial support from Amgen outside the submitted work. JMP has received personnal fees of Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi, Amgen, Lilly, Servier, Bayer; Consultancy / Advisory role for Roche, Merck Serono, Amgen, Servier, Bayer and Sanofi; Research Funding: Roche, Merck Serono; Travel Accommodations/Expenses: Roche, Merck Serono, Bayer, Servier, Sanofi and Amgen JB has received personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Shire, and non-financial support from Amgen, Merck Serono, and Roche LD has received personal fees of Amgen, BMS, Servier, Oseus and Mylan JMG has received personal fees from Abbvie, Janssen Cilag, MSD, Sanofi and Takeda, and non-financial support from Fresinius Kabi and Pfizer, (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

A substantial proportion of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma have to face up, sooner or later, to systemic therapy. The current standards as first line systemic therapies are either atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) plus bevacizumab (anti-VEGF), or durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) plus tremelimumab (anti-CTLA-4). However, the median overall survival remains below 20 months, and a minority of patients become long-term survivors. Of interest in immune-oncology strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma, the objective response seems to be the most reliable surrogate marker of better overall survival. TRIPLET-HCC (NCT05665348) is a multicentre, randomised, open-label phase II-III trial designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of the triple combination by the addition of ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) to atezolizumab/bevacizumab, versus the double atezolizumab/bevacizumab combination. The main inclusion criteria are histologically proven BCLC-B/C HCC without previous systemic therapy. The primary objective of the phase II is the objective response rate in the triple arm, and OS in the triple versus double arms in the phase III. Secondary endpoints common to the phases II and III are the comparisons of progression-free survival, objective response rates, tolerance and quality of life. In addition, genetic and epigenetic studies from tissue and circulating DNA/RNA will be conducted to assess their prognostic or predictive value., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest • B.G. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS, Bayer, Ipsen, and received research grant from Roche. • C.C. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for Ipsen, Gilead, Abbvie, Intercept and received research grant from Gilead. • D.T. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, Ipsen, MSD, BMS, Servier, Sirtex Medical, Novartis and AMGEN • E.A.: Consulting: BMS, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Roche, Ipsen, Incyte, Servier, Boston Scientific, AAA; Travel expense: IPSEN, MSD • H.S. report lecture fee, board membership, or consultancy from Amgen, Fresenius, IPSEN, Actial, Astellas, Danone, THAC, Biose, BiomX, Eligo, Immusmol, Adare, Nestle, Ferring, MSD, Bledina, Pfizer, Biocodex, BMS, Bromatech, Gilead, Janssen, Mayoli, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Abbvie, has stocks from Enterome bioscience and is co-founder of Exeliom Biosciences. • J.C.N. has received research grants from Ipsen and Bayer. • J.E.: Consulting: MSD, Eisai, BMS, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Roche, Ipsen, Basilea, Merck Serono, Incyte, Servier, Beigene, Taiho, Boston Scientific; Travel expense: Amgen; Research funding (institutional): BMS, Beigene, Boston Scientific • J.F.B.: Bayer, Ipsen, Esai, Astra-Zeneca, Roche, BMS, Servier, Incyte, Tahio Oncology • J.M.P. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for Roche, AstraZeneca, Eisai, MSD, Bayer, Ipsen, Lilly • K.L.M.: No conflict of interests • M.A. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Bayer and Roche. • M.B. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for Bayer, AstraZeneca, Roche, Ipsen, MSD, BMS, Servier, Sirtex Medical, Eisai, Taiho • M.G.: No conflict of interests • P.M. has participated in consulting and/or advisory boards for Roche, AstraZeneca, Eisai, MSD, Bayer, Ipsen, and received research grants from Genosciences and Ipsen. • P.L.P.: is a consultant/advisory board member for Merck Serono, AstraZeneca Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Biocartis, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pierre Fabre, Servier, and MSD. • T.A.: has participate in consulting and/or advisory boards for Servier, Pierre Fabre, MSD and BMS and received grant from Amgen, (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have high efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with microsatellite instability (MSI) but not in microsatellite stable (MSS) tumour due to the low tumour mutational burden. Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) could enhance neoantigen production thus triggering systemic anti-tumoral immune response (abscopal effect). In addition, Oxalipatin can induce immunogenic cell death and Bevacizumab can decrease the exhaustion of tumour infiltrating lymphocyte. In combination, these treatments could act synergistically to sensitize MSS mCRCs to ICI SIRTCI is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, phase II, non-comparative single-arm study evaluating the efficacy and safety of SIRT plus Xelox, Bevacizumab and Atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1) in patients with liver-dominant MSS mCRC. The primary objective is progression-free survival at 9 months. The main inclusion criteria are patients with MSS mCRC with liver-dominant disease, initially unresectable disease and with no prior oncologic treatment for metastatic disease. The trial started in November 2020 and has included 10 out of the 52 planned patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2022 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients ≥ 70 years old constitute 40% of patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). Ramucirumab plus Paclitaxel is a therapeutic option validated in the second-line treatment of advanced GC, but as older patients are at higher risk of severe toxicity, due to comorbidities and/or frailty, we aimed to evaluate second-line Ramucirumab alone or combined with Paclitaxel in terms of overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL) in patients ≥ 70 years-old with advanced GC., Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-comparative, prospective phase II clinical trial, the main inclusion criteria are: patients ≥ 70 years old, with advanced GC having progressed after first-line chemotherapy or in the six months following the last administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, with WHO performance status <2. They are randomized to receive either ramucirumab alone (arm A) or ramucirumab plus Paclitaxel (arm B). The primary endpoint is 6-month OS and QoL evaluated with the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 questionnaire. The secondary endpoints include other parameters of QoL, time to definitive deterioration (TTDD) in QoL and TTDD in autonomy, treatment toxicities, other parameters of survival and disease control, identification of geriatric and nutritional prognostic scores and predictive factors of treatment safety and efficacy. OS of 60% is expected at 6 months (H0:40%). Using a Simon-minimax design, with one-sided α risk of 2% and 80% power for OS, and considering 5% lost to follow-up, it is necessary to randomize 56 patients in each arm., Perspectives: As older patients are at higher risk of chemotherapy toxicity, ramucirumab alone could be an interesting alternative to Paclitaxel plus ramucirumab, as a second-line therapy for patients ≥ 70 years old with advanced GC, and needs to be evaluated., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest EB, KLM, RB, PLP, BG, DLTA, LMD, RG, MM, CLouvet and CLepage declare no conflicts of interest with regard to this article. TA received honoraria as a speaker or advisory board member from Sirtec, Amgen, Pierre Fabre, Astra, Servier, Bioven, Sanofi, Roche and received travel allowances or subscriptions to congresses from Roche. TL received advisory board fees from Amgen, Servier, Sanofi, Merck-Serono and honoraria from Amgen, Servier, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Astra Zeneca, Ipsen. ES declares competing interests with Bayer, BMS, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, Pierre Fabre Oncology, Roche, MSD, Merck. MPG received travel allowances from Roche, Servier, MSD, Amgen, Ipsen, Sanofi and received advisory board fees from Sanofi, BMS, Amgen, Servier. DT received honoraria as a speaker or advisory board member from Amgen, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and Servier and received travel allowances or subscriptions to congresses from Merck, Pierre Fabre and Sanofi. AL received honoraria as a speaker or advisory board member from AAA, Amgen, Astellas, Bayer, BMS, HalioDx, Incyte, Ipsen, Leo-pharma Merck, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Servier and Viatris, received travel allowances or subscriptions to congresses from Boehringer, Ipsen, Mylan, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche and Servier, and received research funding (paid to the institution) from Bayer, Lilly and Novartis., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The real impact of bevacizumab maintenance as single agent in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains unclear. SAKK-41/06 and PRODIGE-9 failed to demonstrate the non-inferiority and superiority of bevacizumab versus no maintenance, respectively, while AIO-KRK-0207 showed the non-inferiority of maintenance bevacizumab versus bevacizumab and fluoropyrimidines for time to strategy failure., Methods: Bibliography electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for English published clinical trials prospectively randomizing mCRC patients to receive bevacizumab maintenance or not after first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Individual patients' data (IPD) were provided by investigators for all included trials. Primary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), both from the start of induction and maintenance. Univariate and multivariate analyses for PFS and OS were performed., Results: Three phase III studies - PRODIGE-9, AIO-KRK-0207 and SAKK-41/06 - were included. Considering the different timing of randomization, IPD of patients not progressed during induction and starting maintenance phase entered the analysis. 909 patients were included, 457 (50%) received bevacizumab maintenance. Median PFS from induction start was 9.6 and 8.9 months in bevacizumab group versus no maintenance group, respectively (HR 0.78; 95%CI: 0.68-0.89; p < 0.0001). Subgroups analysis for PFS showed a significant interaction according for RAS status (p = 0.048), with a maintenance benefit limited to RAS wild-type patients. No difference in terms of OS was observed., Conclusions: Despite the statistically significant PFS improvement for bevacizumab maintenance, the absolute benefit appears limited. Subgroup analysis shows a differential effect of bevacizumab maintenance in favor of RAS wild-type patients. Considering these results, maintenance therapy with fluoropyrimidine with or without bevacizumab remains the first option. Single agent bevacizumab maintenance can be considered in selected cases, such as cumulative toxicity or patient's refusal, in particular for RAS wild-type patients., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: FOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) + aflibercept improves median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Our aim was to investigate efficacy and tolerability of this combination in the first line., Patients and Methods: Patients with untreated documented mCRC received aflibercept plus FOLFIRI every 14 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity in an open, phase II single-arm, multicenter trial. The primary endpoint was the 6-month PFS rate. Secondary endpoints were OS and tolerability. A 2-step Simon design was used with H 0 : 55% and H 1 = 75%. Data were analyzed in intention to treat., Results: Forty-one patients were included, and 40 were analyzed (1 consent withdrawal) in 9 French centers between October 2014 and February 2017. The median age was 65 years (range, 46-81 years), 55% had ≥ 2 metastatic sites, and 50% and 15% had RAS and BRAF mutations, respectively. Twenty-two (54.5%; 95% confidence interval, 38.9%-68.5%) patients were alive and non-progressive at 6 months. FOLFIRI + aflibercept was considered ineffective, resulting in the cessation of inclusions. The median follow-up was 34 months. The overall response rate was 55%, and the disease control rate was 80%. The median duration of treatment was 5.3 months; the median PFS and OS were 8.2 and 18.6 months, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events were mainly gastrointestinal (47.5%) and vascular (32.5%). Of the patients, 87.5% had at least 1 dose modification., Conclusion: Although the primary objective was not met, first-line FOLFIRI + aflibercept for mCRC leads to median PFS and OS close to those reported with classical doublet and targeted agents, but with significant toxicities needing dose reduction., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Adjuvant treatment for stage II colon cancer remains debated. Finding a tool to select patients at risk for disease recurrence may help the clinical decision. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been reported recently as a potential predictive marker for disease recurrence. We thus aim to test its ability to better select stage II colon cancer patients for adjuvant therapy., Methods: This national, phase III trial (NCT00002019-000935-15) conducted in more than 100 centers in France, plans to screen around 2640 patients in order to randomize (2:1; minimization method) 198 ctDNA positive patients. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with ECOG performance status ≤1 with R0 surgical resection of a pT3-T4aN0 colon or high rectum adenocarcinoma will be randomized within 63 days after curative-intent surgery, to adjuvant mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², leucovorin 400 mg/m², and 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2 then 5FU Continuous infusion 2.4 g/m²) every two weeks for 12 cycles or observation. Patients will be followed for maximum 7 years. A gain of 17.5% in 3-yr disease free survival (DFS) is expected (42.5% in the experimental arm vs. 25% in the control arm; HR:0.62; α, 5% [two-sided log-rank test]; 1-β, 80%). Secondary endpoints include 2-yr DFS, overall survival, and toxicity. Recruitement began End of January 2020., (Copyright © 2020 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is the main cause of early severe toxicities induced by fluoropyrimidines (FP). The French Group of Clinical Oncopharmacology (GPCO)-Unicancer and the French Pharmacogenetics Network (RNPGx) initiated two surveys, one addressed to oncologists, the other to biologists, in order to evaluate routine practices regarding DPD deficiency screening at national level, as well as compliance, motivations and obstacles for implementation of these tests. These anonymized online surveys were performed with the logistic assistance of the Francophone Federation of Digestive Oncology (FFCD) and the support of numerous medical and biological societies. The surveys were conducted in 2016-2017 before the creation of the French INCa/HAS expert panel, which contributed to the drafting of rules and recommendations for DPD deficiency screening published in December 2018. In all, 554 questionnaires from clinicians were analyzed (23% participation) and 35 from biologists. The main arguments raised by clinicians for justifying the limited practice of DPD deficiency screening were: the lack of recommendations from medical societies or Health Authorities, delays in obtaining results, and the lack of adequate reimbursement by the health insurance system. The goal of these surveys was to provide the French Health Authorities with an overview on nationwide DPD-deficiency screening practices and thus help to design recommendations for the standardization and improvement of the management and safety of cancer patients receiving FP-based chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2019 Société Française du Cancer. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is standard of care for radically resected stage III colon cancer and an accepted option for high-risk stage II. Two recent retrospective studies strongly suggested that low-dose aspirin used (100 mg/d) after surgical resection of colorectal cancer with a PIK3CA mutation could act as a targeted therapy with a major protective effect on the risk of recurrence. We propose a double-blind randomized phase III study to evaluate aspirin (100 mg/d during 3 years or until recurrence) versus placebo. Main inclusion criteria are patients aged 18 or 20, stage III or high risk stage II. The primary endpoint of the study is 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). Hypotheses are to improve 3-years DFS from placebo: 72% to aspirin: 83% (HR = 0.56). 94 events and 264 patients with PIK3CA mutation are required. The secondary endpoints are DFS at 5 years, the overall survival rate at 5 years, grade 3-4 severe bleeding., (Copyright © 2017 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with gastroenteropancreatic (GEP), metastatic or locally advanced, non-resectable, grade 3 poorly-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) are treated with cisplatin (or carboplatin)-etoposide in first-line palliative chemotherapy (CT1). However, nearly all patients will develop resistance and there is no standard second-line treatment., Aim: PRODIGE 41-BEVANEC is an academic randomized, phase II study designed to evaluate the efficacy of bevacizumab in combination with FOLFIRI after failure of CT1 in unknown primary NEC and GEP-NEC., Materials and Methods: The main eligibility criteria are age ≥18 years, metastatic (synchronous or metachronous) or locally advanced, non-resectable, grade 3 GEP-NEC, and documented progressive disease during or after CT1 therapy., Results: A total of 124 patients will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 5 mg/kg bevacizumab with FOLFIRI, or FOLFIRI alone, every 14 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The hypothesis is to demonstrate a 6-month overall survival for at least 50% of the patients in bevacizumab arm versus 35% in the control arm (FOLFIRI alone). Secondary endpoints are objective response, response duration, progression-free survival, toxicity, and biochemical response., Conclusion: The study is currently opened in France (NCT02820857). The first patient was randomized on September 6, 2017., (Copyright © 2017 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with metastatic or locally advanced, non-resectable, grade 1 or 2 well-differentiated duodeno-pancreatic (WDDP) NETs are treated following European guidelines. Patients (Pts) with aggressive disease, i.e. progressive and/or symptomatic metastases and/or with significant hepatic invasion (>30-50%), and/or bone metastases, anti-tumour therapy should receive systemic combination of chemotherapy once disease control is obtained., Aim(s): The aim is to stop chemotherapy until progression. REMINET is an academic randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II/III study designed to evaluate lanreotide (LAN) as maintenance treatment after L1 chemotherapy in G1-G2 WDDP NET., Materials and Methods: Main eligibility criteria: adults pts with a metastatic (synchronous or metachronous) or locally advanced, non-resectable, grade 1 or 2 WDDP NETs and documented control disease after L1 therapy at least 4 weeks prior to randomization., Results: 222 patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive 120mg LAN or placebo, every 28 days, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The aim of the phase II part is to demonstrate a 6-months PFS >45% in LAN arm. Secondary endpoints are PFS according to central review, overall survival, safety and quality of life. A bio-bank of frozen blood will be constituted., Conclusion: The study is currently open in France, Germany, Belgium, United Kingdom and Ireland. A total of 25 patients are randomized (NCT02288377)., (Copyright © 2017 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: RAS mutations have been shown to confer resistance to anti- epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment. We analysed the results of the PETACC8 trial (cetuximab + FOLFOX vs FOLFOX) in full RAS and BRAF wildtype (WT) patients (pts) with resected stage III colon cancer., Patients and Methods: Exons 2, 3 and 4 of KRAS and NRAS, and BRAF exons 11 and 15, were sequenced using the Ampliseq colon-lung cancer panel version 2, in PETACC8 trial pts who consented to translational research. The impact of cetuximab on time to recurrence (TTR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was investigated in pts with tumours harbouring RAS and BRAF WT, and RAS mutations. The prognostic value of each individual mutation was also tested., Results: Among the 2559 pts analysed, 745 pts (29%) were known to have KRAS exon 2 mutations and 163 pts (6.4%) the BRAF V600E mutation. Of the remaining 1651 pts, 1054 were assessed by NGS, showing that a further 227 pts (21%) had KRAS exon 2, 3, 4 or NRAS exon 2, 3, 4 mutations, and that 46 pts (4.4%) had a newly diagnosed BRAF mutation. Cetuximab added to FOLFOX did not significantly improve TTR, DFS or OS in pts with RAS WT or RAS and BRAF WT tumours (HR 0.77-1.03, all P > 0.05). Cetuximab addition was not either significantly deleterious in RAS mutant pts or in pts with rare RAS or BRAF mutations. In the overall trial population, NRAS and KRAS codon 61 mutations were the only rare mutations with the same pejorative prognostic value as KRAS exon 2 or BRAF V600E mutations., Conclusion: Though not significant, the clinically relevant 0.76 adjusted HR observed for DFS in favour of adding cetuximab to FOLFOX, in full RAS and BRAF WT stage III colon cancer pts, may justify a new randomized controlled trial testing EGFR inhibitors in this setting., Clinical Trial Number: This is an ancillary study of the PETACC8 trial: EUDRACT 2005-003463-23., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The prognostic value of KRAS mutations in colon adenocarcinoma is controversial. We examined this question as an ancillary study of the PETACC8 phase III trial., Patients and Methods: We analyzed the prognostic impact of KRAS exon 2 mutations in stage III colon cancer patients (n = 1657) receiving adjuvant FOLFOX ± cetuximab therapy included in the PETACC8 trial. Patients with BRAF-mutated cancers were excluded and, as no difference was found for time to recurrence (TTR) and disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms, both were pooled for analysis. Associations with TTR and DFS were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model., Results: KRAS mutations were found in 638 of 1657 tumors and linked to shorter TTR (P < 0.001). However, when specific mutations were compared with wild-type, codon 12 mutations [hazard ratio (HR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35-2.04; P < 0.001] but not codon 13 (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.85-1.79; P = 0.26) were significantly associated with shorter TTR, independently of other covariates. The interaction test showed that, regarding tumor location (distal versus proximal), KRAS genotype affects differently on recurrence (P = 0.02) and DFS (P = 0.042). Subgroup analysis showed that KRAS only affected TTR and DFS in distal tumors (n = 1043; 692 wild type; 351 mutated), with an increased risk of relapse (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.51-2.56; P < 0.0001) for KRAS codon 12 mutations and a borderline significance for codon 13 mutations (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.00-2.56; P = 0.051)., Conclusion: KRAS exon 2 mutations are independent predictors of shorter TTR in patients with resected stage III distal colon cancers receiving adjuvant therapy. Future clinical trials in the adjuvant setting should consider both the tumor location and KRAS mutations as important stratification factors., Clinical Trial Number: This is an ancillary study of the PETACC8 trial: EUDRACT 2005-003463-23., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)