Search

Background: Upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) has been associated with longer overall survival (OS) in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in retrospective analyses. The aim of the CAIRO4 study was to investigate whether the addition of upfront PTR to systemic therapy resulted in a survival benefit in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of their primary tumor., Patients and Methods: This randomized phase III trial was conducted in 45 hospitals in The Netherlands and Denmark. Eligibility criteria included previously untreated mCRC, unresectable metastases, and no severe symptoms of the primary tumor. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to upfront PTR followed by systemic therapy or systemic therapy without upfront PTR. Systemic therapy consisted of first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab in both arms. Primary endpoint was OS in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01606098., Results: Between August 2012 and February 2021, 206 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 204 patients were included (n = 103 without upfront PTR, n = 101 with upfront PTR) of whom 116 were men (57%) with median age of 65 years (interquartile range 59-71 years). Median follow-up was 69.4 months. Median OS in the arm without upfront PTR was 18.3 months (95% confidence interval 16.0-22.2 months) compared with 20.1 months (95% confidence interval 17.0-25.1 months) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.32). The number of grade 3-4 events was 71 (72%) in the arm without upfront PTR and 61 (65%) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.33). Three deaths (3%) possibly related to treatment were reported in the arm without upfront PTR and four (4%) in the upfront PTR arm., Conclusions: Addition of upfront PTR to palliative systemic therapy in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of the primary tumor does not result in a survival benefit. This practice should no longer be considered standard of care., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Fluoropyrimidines (FPs) are an essential part of the majority of systemic regimens in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). The use of the oral FP S-1 has been approved by the European Medicines Agency as monotherapy or in combination with oxaliplatin or irinotecan, with or without bevacizumab, for the treatment of patients with metastatic CRC in whom it is not possible to continue treatment with another FP due to hand-foot syndrome (HFS) or cardiovascular toxicity (CVT). Subsequently, this indication has been included in the 2022 ESMO guidelines for metastatic CRC. Recommendations for use in daily practice are not available., Patients and Methods: Based on peer-reviewed published data on the use of S-1 in Western patients with metastatic CRC who switched from infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine to S-1 for reasons of HFS or CVT, recommendations for its use were formulated by an international group of medical oncologists with expertise in the treatment of metastatic CRC and a cardio-oncologist., Results: In patients who experience pain and/or functional impairment due to HFS during treatment with capecitabine or infusional 5-FU, a switch to S-1 is recommended without prior dose reduction of capecitabine/5-FU. S-1 should preferably be initiated at full dose when HFS has decreased to grade ≤1. In patients with cardiac complaints, in whom an association with capecitabine or infusional 5-FU treatment cannot be excluded, capecitabine/5-FU should be discontinued and a switch to S-1 is recommended., Conclusions: These recommendations should guide clinicians in daily practice in the treatment of patients with metastatic CRC with FP-containing regimens., Competing Interests: Disclosure CJAP reports an advisory role for Nordic Pharma. VH reports honoraria from Merck, Amgen, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, SIRTEX, Terumo, OncoSil, Nordic Pharma, Seagen; and research funding from Merck, Amgen, Roche, Sanofi, Boehringer-Ingelheim, SIRTEX, and Servier. TM reports an advisory role for Nordic Pharma, Perspectum, and AstraZeneca. CC reports honoraria from Amgen, Bayer, Servier, Merck-Serono, MSD, Organon, Pierre-Fabre, Roche, and Nordic Pharma; research grants from Merck-Serono, Bayer, and Servier. EVC reports participation in advisory boards for AbbVie, ALX, Amgen, Array, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi, GSK, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck KGaA, Mirati, Novartis, Nordic, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Takeda, Terumo, Taiho, and Zymeworks; and research grants from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche, and Servier paid to his institution. RM reports advisory board fees from Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, F. Hoffmann–La Roche, Ipsen Biopharm, Janssen Biotech, Merck, and Pfizer; and clinical trial fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. GB reports advisory role for Amgen, Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Merck, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Ipsen; and lecture fees from Amgen, Bayer, GSK, Merck, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, and Roche. TA reports honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pierre Fabre, Roche/Vantana, Sanofi, and Servier; consulting or advisory roles for Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GamaMabs Pharma, Gritstone Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Nordic Pharma, Pierre Fabre, Seagen, and Servier; and Transgène speaker’s bureaus for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Seagen, and Servier; travel and accommodation expenses from Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; and nonremunerated activities for the ARCAD Foundation and GERCOR Group. PO reports honoraria from/advisory role for Amgen, Astra Zeneca/Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai/Ewopharma, Fresenius, Incyte, Janssen, Merck, Merck, Sharp & Dome, Nordic Drugs/Pharma, Nutricia, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier; research support to institution from Amgen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier; and nonremunerated activities with Colores, Duodecim, ESMO faculty, ESMO scientific committee, ESMO guidelines committee, ASCO/ESMO global curriculum, and the ESMO Lines of therapy project. PP reports advisory role for Servier, Nordic Pharma, and MSD; and research funding for institution from Servier, Nordic Drugs, Shire, Merck, Egetis, Isofol, Lilly, Roche, Merck-Serono, Amgen, and Celgene. AJT has declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Treating older adults with cancer is increasingly important in modern oncology practice. However, we currently lack the high-quality evidence needed to guide optimal management of this heterogeneous group. Principally, historic under-recruitment of older adults to clinical trials limits our understanding of how existing evidence can be applied to this group. Such uncertainty is particularly prevalent in the management of colon cancer (CC). With CC being most common in older adults, many patients also suffer from frailty, which is recognised as being strongly associated with poor clinical outcomes. Conducting clinical trials in older adults presents several major challenges, many of which impact the clinical relevance of results to a real-world population. When considering this heterogeneous group, it may be difficult to define the target population, recruit participants effectively, choose an appropriate trial design, and ensure participants remain engaged with the trial during follow-up. Furthermore, after overcoming these challenges, clinical trials tend to enrol highly selected patient cohorts that comprise only the fittest older patients, which are not representative of the wider population. FOxTROT1 was the first phase III randomised controlled trial to illustrate the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in the treatment of CC. Patients receiving NAC had greater 2-year disease-free survival compared to those proceeding straight to surgery. Outcomes for older adults in FOxTROT1 were similarly impressive when compared to their younger counterparts. Yet, this group inevitably represents a fitter subgroup of the older patient population. FOxTROT2 has been designed to investigate NAC in a full range of older adults with CC, including those with frailty. In this review, we describe the key challenges to conducting a robust clinical trial in this heterogeneous patient group, highlight our strategies for overcoming these challenges in FOxTROT2, and explain how we hope to provide clarity on the optimal treatment of CC in older adults., Competing Interests: Disclosure ZC has received grants from Celgene, MSD, Amgen, and Takeda (via institution). MS has received a grant from Yorkshire Cancer Research to support provision of a clinical trial (via institution). MB has received payment/honoraria from Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, Amgen, and Servier, is Co-lead of Audit for the National Bowe Cancer Audit (England and Wales), and author of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Colorectal Cancer Guideline. JR has received grants from Bristol Meyers Squibb, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, Servier, HUB Organoids, and Cleara Biotech (via institution), consulting fees from Bayer, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Merck-Serono, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, and Servier (via institution), payment/honoraria from Bristol Meyers Squibb, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, and Servier (via institution), and support for attending meetings from Servier. JR is also a member of advisory boards for the PelvEx and MEND-IT trials, and a member of the ONCODE clinical advisory board. CP has received consulting fees from Nordic Pharma (via institution). JT has received payment/honoraria from Astellas Pharma Inc., Bristol Meyers Squibb, MSD, Merck & Co., Roche, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, Novartis, and Servier, support for attending meetings from Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, MSD, and Servier, and is a member of advisory boards for Bristol Meyers Squibb, MSD, Merck & Co., Roche, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, Novartis, and Servier. JB has received grants from Cancer Research UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Medical Research Council, and Roche, and is Chair of the advisory board for the NIHR By-Band-Sleeve trial and the NIHR Health Technology Assessment General Funding Committee. DAC has received grants from Yorkshire Cancer Research (via institution) and support for attending meetings from Celgene. JFS has received consulting fees from Seagen, payment/honoraria from Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, Merck-Serono, and Servier, and support for attending meetings from Servier and Bristol Meyers Squibb. JFS is also a member of advisory boards for Elevation Oncology, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, and Zentalis Pharmaceuticals. JFS, JB, and DM have received support from Yorkshire Cancer Research for the FOxTROT 2 trial, on which this manuscript is based (via institution). All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Capecitabine- or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy is widely used in many solid tumours, but is associated with cardiotoxicity. S-1 is a fluoropyrimidine with low rates of cardiotoxicity, but evidence regarding the safety of switching to S-1 after 5-FU- or capecitabine-associated cardiotoxicity is scarce., Patients and Methods: This retrospective study (NCT04260269) was conducted at 13 centres in 6 countries. The primary endpoint was recurrence of cardiotoxicity after switch to S-1-based treatment due to 5-FU- or capecitabine-related cardiotoxicity: clinically meaningful if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval (CI; by competing risk) is not including 15%. Secondary endpoints included cardiac risk factors, diagnostic work-up, treatments, outcomes, and timelines of cardiotoxicity., Results: Per protocol, 200 patients, treated between 2011 and 2020 [median age 66 years (range 19-86); 118 (59%) males], were included. Treatment intent was curative in 145 (73%). Initial cardiotoxicity was due to capecitabine (n = 170), continuous infusion 5-FU (n = 22), or bolus 5-FU (n = 8), which was administered in combination with other chemotherapy, targeted agents, or radiotherapy in 133 patients. Previous cardiovascular comorbidities were present in 99 (50%) patients. Cardiotoxic events (n = 228/200) included chest pain (n = 125), coronary syndrome/infarction (n = 69), arrhythmia (n = 22), heart failure/cardiomyopathy (n = 7), cardiac arrest (n = 4), and malignant hypertension (n = 1). Cardiotoxicity was severe or life-threatening in 112 (56%) patients and led to permanent capecitabine/5-FU discontinuation in 192 (96%). After switch to S-1, recurrent cardiotoxicity was observed in eight (4%) patients (95% CI 2.02-7.89, primary endpoint met). Events were limited to grade 1-2 and occurred at a median of 16 days (interquartile range 7-67) from therapy switch. Baseline ischemic heart disease was a risk factor for recurrent cardiotoxicity (odds ratio 6.18, 95% CI 1.36-28.11)., Conclusion: Switching to S-1-based therapy is safe and feasible after development of cardiotoxicity on 5-FU- or capecitabine-based therapy and allows patients to continue their pivotal fluoropyrimidine-based treatment., Competing Interests: Disclosure PO, SK, PP, TS, JJMK, JEF, CHS, HS, RR, PH, LMS, EH, AÅ, MB, HH, RMD, MOR, RR, GL, RK, PF, AJK, EvW, CJAP, and BG report grants, personal fees, or non-financial support from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly, Eisai, Erytech Pharma, Fresenius, Incyte, Janssen-Cilag, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Nordic Drugs, Nordic Pharma, Nordic Group, Nutricia, Pierre-Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Sobi, or Varian. Data sharing The data collected for this study can be made available to others in de-identified form after all primary and secondary endpoints have been published, in the presence of a data transfer agreement, and if the purpose of use complies with Finnish and European legislation. Requests for data sharing can be made to the corresponding author, including a proposal that must be approved by the steering committee., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Intermittent systemic anti-cancer therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) may improve quality of life without compromising overall survival (OS). We aimed to use individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) from multiple randomised controlled trials evaluating intermittent strategies to inform clinical practice. We also aimed to validate whether thrombocytosis as a predictive biomarker identified patients with significantly reduced OS receiving a complete treatment break., Patients and Methods: An IPDMA of intermittent strategy impact on survival was undertaken, including all relevant trials in which data were available. Intermittent strategies were classified into two groups: a planned stopping of all therapy ("treatment break strategy"; 6 trials; 2,907 patients) or to the same treatment omitting oxaliplatin ("maintenance strategy"; 3 trials; 1,271 patients). The primary analysis sample was of patients successfully completing induction therapy. Additionally, a pre-planned analysis of the predictive value of thrombocytosis on survival under a continuous versus an intermittent strategy was undertaken., Results: All trials had comparable inclusion criteria. The overall IPDMA of intermittent therapy versus continuous therapy demonstrated no detriment in OS (HR = 1.03 [95% CI 0.93-1.14]), whether from complete break (HR 1.04 [95% CI 0.87-1.26]) or maintenance strategies (HR 0.99 [95% CI 0.87-1.13]). Thrombocytosis was confirmed as a marker of poor prognosis in aCRC, but did not predict for OS detriment from treatment break strategies (interaction HR = 0.97 [95% CI 0.66-1.40] compared to continuous therapy)., Conclusion: The highest levels of evidence from this IPDMA indicate no detriment in survival for patients receiving an intermittent therapy strategy, either for maintenance or complete break strategies. Although, thrombocytosis is confirmed as a marker of poor prognosis, it is not predictive of poor outcome for patients treated with intermittent therapy. An intermittent chemotherapy strategy can therefore be applied irrespective of baseline platelet count and does not result in inferior OS compared to continuous chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: We designed an open-label, noncomparative phase II study to assess the safety and efficacy of first-line treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab (TT-B) and capecitabine plus bevacizumab (C-B) in untreated patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who were not candidates for combination with cytotoxic chemotherapies., Patients and Methods: From 29 April 2016 to 29 March 2017, 153 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either TT-B (N = 77) or C-B (N = 76). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The primary PFS analysis was performed after 100 events (radiological progression or death) were observed. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), quality of life (QoL; QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires), and safety., Results: Median (range) duration of treatment was 7.8 (6.0-9.7) months and 6.2 (4.1-9.1) months in the TT-B and C-B groups, respectively. Median (range) PFS was 9.2 (7.6-11.6) and 7.8 (5.5-10.1) months, respectively. Median (range) OS was 18 (15.2 to NA) and 16.2 (12.5 to NA) months, respectively. QoL questionnaires showed no relevant changes over time for either treatment. Therapies were well tolerated. Patients receiving TT-B had more grade ≥3 neutropenia (47% versus 5% with C-B). Patients receiving C-B had more grade ≥3 hand-foot syndrome (12% versus 0% with TT-B) and grade ≥3 diarrhea (8% versus 1% with TT-B), consistent with the known safety profiles of these agents., Conclusion: TT-B treatment showed promising clinical activity in untreated patients with unresectable mCRC ineligible for intensive therapy, with an acceptable safety profile and no clinically relevant changes in QoL., Clinical Trial Information: NCT02743221 (ClinicalTrials.gov)., Competing Interests: Disclosure EVC has received research funding from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck, Merck KgaA, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier; and has attended advisory board for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche, Servier. ID has received research funding from AstraZeneca Pharma Poland, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Immutep, Janssen-Cilag, Merck, MorphoSys, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Servier, Tesaro. MPS has attended advisory boards and chaired meeting for Roche, Merck, Servier, Amgen, Sanofi, and Eisai. PP has received research funding from Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Merck KgaA, Roche, Taiho, Nordic drugs, and Servier. GA has received research funding from Servier and Bayer; has attended advisory boards for Servier, Bayer, Amgen, Sanofi, Merck Serono, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Roche; and has received travel expense and accommodation from Servier, Bayer, Amgen, and Roche. CB has attended advisory boards for Roche, Servier, and Sanofi; and has received a research grant from Roche. RG-J has received research funding from Servier. CJAP has an advisory role for Servier. AJVdW, MF, DS, HK, and have received research funding from Servier. PG-A has attended advisory boards and chaired meeting for Roche, Merck, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, and Servier. HW has received honoraria, attended advisory boards, received travel grants and/or speaker for BMS, Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Biotheranostics, Bayer, Servier, Merck-Serono KGaA, Sirtex Medical, Sanofi-Aventis, Celgene, Array; has received research funding from Sirtex Medical, Merck Serono, Pfizer, Merck; and charitable/grants from CRUK, MRC, BRC-Imperial, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), and CUP Foundation. AF has received compensation for participation to Advisory Boards and Research Grants to his institution from Amgen, Bayer, Merck, MSD, Roche, Lilly, Servier, and Bristol Meyers Squibb. AK, AE, PA, and NA are employees of Servier. The views expressed in the submitted article are the authors' own and not an official position of the institution or funder., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The phase 3 CAIRO3 study showed that capecitabine plus bevacizumab (CAP-B) maintenance treatment after six cycles capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients is effective, without compromising quality of life. In this post hoc analysis with updated follow-up and data regarding sidedness, we defined subgroups according to RAS/BRAF mutation status and mismatch repair (MMR) status, and investigated their influence on treatment efficacy., Patients and Methods: A total of 558 patients with previously untreated mCRC and stable disease or better after six cycles CAPOX-B induction treatment were randomised to either CAP-B maintenance treatment (n = 279) or observation (n = 279). Upon first progression, patients were to receive CAPOX-B reintroduction until second progression (PFS2, primary end point). We centrally assessed RAS/BRAF mutation status and MMR status, or used local results if central assessment was not possible. Intention-to-treat stratified Cox models adjusted for baseline covariables were used to examine whether treatment efficacy was modified by RAS/BRAF mutation status., Results: RAS, BRAF mutations, and MMR deficiency were detected in 240/420 (58%), 36/381 (9%), and 4/279 (1%) patients, respectively. At a median follow-up of 87 months (IQR 69-97), all mutational subgroups showed significant improvement from maintenance treatment for the primary end point PFS2 [RAS/BRAF wild-type: hazard ratio (HR) 0.57 (95% CI 0.39-0.84); RAS-mutant: HR 0.74 (0.55-0.98); V600EBRAF-mutant: HR 0.28 (0.12-0.64)] and secondary end points, except for the RAS-mutant subgroup regarding overall survival. Adjustment for sidedness instead of primary tumour location yielded comparable results. Although right-sided tumours were associated with inferior prognosis, both patients with right- and left-sided tumours showed significant benefit from maintenance treatment., Conclusions: CAP-B maintenance treatment after six cycles CAPOX-B is effective in first-line treatment of mCRC across all mutational subgroups. The benefit of maintenance treatment was most pronounced in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type and V600EBRAF-mutant tumours., Clinicaltrials.gov Number: NCT00442637., (© The Author 2017. 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.)

Traditionally, the efficacy of cancer treatment in patients with advance or metastatic disease in clinical studies has been studied using overall survival and more recently tumor-based end points such as progression-free survival, measurements of response to treatment. However, these seem not to be the relevant clinical end points in current situation if such end points were no validated as surrogate of overall survival to demonstrate the clinical efficacy. Appropriate, meaningful, primary patient-oriented and patient-reported end points that adequately measure the effects of new therapeutic interventions are then crucial for the advancement of clinical research in metastatic colorectal cancer to complement the results of tumor-based end points. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is effectively an evaluation of quality of life and its relationship with health over time. HRQoL includes the patient report at least of the way a disease or its treatment affects its physical, emotional and social well-being. Over the past few years, several phase III trials in a variety of solid cancers have assessed the incremental value of HRQoL in addition to the traditional end points of tumor response and survival results. HRQoL could provide not only complementary clinical data to the primary outcomes, but also more precise predictive and prognostic value. This end point is useful for both clinicians and patients in order to achieve the dogma of precision medicine. The present article examines the use of HRQoL in phase III metastatic colorectal cancer clinical trials, outlines the importance of HRQoL assessment methods, analysis, and results presentation. Moreover, it discusses the relevance of including HRQoL as a primary/co-primary end point to support the progression-free survival results and to assess efficacy of treatment in the advanced disease setting., (© The Author 2017. 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: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common side-effect of capecitabine. S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine with comparable efficacy to capecitabine in gastrointestinal cancers but associated with a lower incidence of HFS in Asian patients. This study compares the incidence of HFS between S-1 and capecitabine as first-line treatment in Western metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients., Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated mCRC and planned treatment with fluoropyrimidine monochemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 orally for patients <70 years; 1000 mg/m2 for patients ≥70 years, twice daily on days 1-14) or S-1 (30 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14) in 3-weekly cycles, with bevacizumab optional in both groups. The primary endpoint was the incidence of any grade HFS, as assessed by both physicians and patients (diaries). Secondary endpoints included grade 3 HFS, other toxicities, relative dose intensity, progression-free survival, response rate and overall survival., Results: A total of 161 patients were randomized in 27 centres. The incidence of any grade HFS as assessed by physicians was 73% in the capecitabine group (n = 80) and 45% in the S-1 group (n = 80) [odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.31 (0.16-0.60), P = 0.0005]. The incidence of grade 3 HFS was 21% and 4% (P = 0.003), respectively. Patient-assessed any grade HFS was 84% and 58%, respectively (P = 0.004). Grade 3 anorexia was more common in the S-1 group (3% versus 13%, P = 0.03). Median relative dose intensity was 88% in the capecitabine group and 95% in the S-1 group (P = 0.026). There were no statistically significant differences in median progression-free survival, response rate and overall survival rates., Conclusion: Treatment with S-1 in Western mCRC patients is associated with a significantly lower incidence of HFS compared with capecitabine, with comparable efficacy., Clinicaltrials.gov Registration Number: NCT01918852., (© The Author 2017. 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.)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in Western countries. Over the last 20 years, and the last decade in particular, the clinical outcome for patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) has improved greatly due not only to an increase in the number of patients being referred for and undergoing surgical resection of their localised metastatic disease but also to a more strategic approach to the delivery of systemic therapy and an expansion in the use of ablative techniques. This reflects the increase in the number of patients that are being managed within a multidisciplinary team environment and specialist cancer centres, and the emergence over the same time period not only of improved imaging techniques but also prognostic and predictive molecular markers. Treatment decisions for patients with mCRC must be evidence-based. Thus, these ESMO consensus guidelines have been developed based on the current available evidence to provide a series of evidence-based recommendations to assist in the treatment and management of patients with mCRC in this rapidly evolving treatment setting., (© 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 discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME)., Patients and Methods: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 × 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 × 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39)., Conclusion: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence rate. However, this trial did not complete planned accrual., Registration Number: Dutch Colorectal Cancer group, CKTO 2003-16, ISRCTN36266738., (© 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.)

Introduction: Treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of colorectal cancer (CRC) origin is relatively ineffective and associated with morbidity. This raises the question whether we should focus on prevention of the development of PC. We determined the feasibility of adjuvant laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in a short stay setting., Methods: A prospective single centre pilot study was conducted between January 2011 and July 2012. Ten patients at risk of developing PC of CRC origin were included. Laparoscopic HIPEC using Mitomycin-C (90 min; inflow temperature 42-43 °C) was performed within several weeks after primary resection of CRC and was considered feasible when postoperative hospital stay was three days or shorter in at least six patients, and if a maximum of one conversion and one re-admission within 30 days occurred., Results: HIPEC was performed after a median of 6 weeks (range 3-9 weeks). Postoperatively, five patients were discharged at day one, four patients at day two and one patient at day three. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis resulted in small bowel injury in one patient, but no conversion to open surgery and no postoperative complications were observed. One patient was readmitted within 30 days due to a clostridium infection. The postoperative course was uneventful for the remaining patients., Conclusion: Adjuvant laparoscopic HIPEC appeared to be feasible in a short stay setting based on this small pilot study. The necessity of adhesiolysis determines the complexity of the procedure and requires an operating team with experience in minimally invasive abdominal surgery., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The study 20050181 demonstrated significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS), objective response, and a nonsignificant trend toward increased overall survival (OS) with panitumumab-FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI alone for second-line wild-type (WT) KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Updated long-term data from a prespecified descriptive analysis are reported., Patients and Methods: Patients receiving one prior mCRC treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to panitumumab (6.0 mg/kg)-FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks. Co-primary end points (PFS and OS) were prospectively analyzed by tumor KRAS status., Results: One thousand one hundred and eighty-six patients were randomly assigned. In patients with WT KRAS tumors, panitumumab-FOLFIRI significantly improved PFS versus FOLFIRI [median 6.7 versus 4.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69, 0.97]; P = 0.023]. A trend toward longer OS was observed (median 14.5 versus 12.5 months; HR 0.92 [95% CI 0.78, 1.10]; P = 0.37). Response rates improved from 10% to 36% (P < 0.0001). From post hoc analyses in patients receiving prior oxaliplatin-bevacizumab, panitumumab-FOLFIRI improved PFS (median 6.4 versus 3.7 months; HR 0.58 [95% CI 0.37, 0.90]; P = 0.014). PFS and OS appeared longer for worst-grade skin toxicity of 2-4, versus 0-1 or FOLFIRI. Safety results were as previously reported and consistent with the known toxicities with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy., Conclusions: These data confirm the primary efficacy and safety findings of this trial and support panitumumab-FOLFIRI as a second-line treatment of WT KRAS mCRC.

Background: We previously reported results of a prospective trial evaluating the significance of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This secondary analysis assessed the relationship of the CTC number with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and overall survival., Patients and Methods: Patients with mCRC had CTCs measured at baseline and specific time points after the initiation of new therapy. Patients with a baseline CEA value ≥ 10 ng/ml and CEA measurements within ± 30 days of the CTC collection were included., Results: We included 217 patients with mCRC who had a CEA value of ≥ 10 ng/ml. Increased baseline CEA was associated with shorter survival (15.8 versus 20.7 months, P = 0.012). Among all patients with a baseline CEA value of ≥ 25 ng/ml, patients with low baseline CTCs (<3, n = 99) had longer survival than those with high CTCs (≥ 3, n = 58; 20.8 versus 11.7 months, P = 0.001). CTCs added prognostic information at the 3-5- and 6-12-week time points regardless of CEA. In a multivariate analysis, CTCs at baseline but not CEA independently predicted survival and both CTCs and CEA independently predicted survival at 6-12 weeks., Conclusions: This study demonstrates that both CEA and CTCs contribute prognostic information for patients with mCRC.

Background: This study investigates the possible benefits of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with non-resectable colorectal liver metastases., Methods: This phase II study, originally started as a phase III design, randomly assigned 119 patients with non-resectable colorectal liver metastases between systemic treatment (n = 59) or systemic treatment plus RFA ( ± resection) (n = 60). Primary objective was a 30-month overall survival (OS) rate >38% for the combined treatment group., Results: The primary end point was met, 30-month OS rate was 61.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 48.2-73.9] for combined treatment. However, 30-month OS for systemic treatment was 57.6% (95% CI 44.1-70.4), higher than anticipated. Median OS was 45.3 for combined treatment and 40.5 months for systemic treatment (P = 0.22). PFS rate at 3 years for combined treatment was 27.6% compared with 10.6% for systemic treatment only (hazard ratio = 0.63, 95% CI 0.42-0.95, P = 0.025). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 16.8 months (95% CI 11.7-22.1) and 9.9 months (95% CI 9.3-13.7), respectively., Conclusions: This is the first randomized study on the efficacy of RFA. The study met the primary end point on 30-month OS; however, the results in the control arm were in the same range. RFA plus systemic treatment resulted in significant longer PFS. At present, the ultimate effect of RFA on OS remains uncertain.

Background: Although systemic therapies have shown to result in survival benefit in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), outcomes in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) are poor. No data are available on outcomes of current chemotherapy schedules plus targeted agents in mCRC patients with PC., Methods: Previously untreated mCRC patients treated with chemotherapy in the CAIRO study and with chemotherapy and targeted therapy in the CAIRO2 study were included and retrospectively analysed according to presence or absence of PC at randomisation. Patient demographics, primary tumour characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and occurrence of toxicity were evaluated., Results: Thirty-four patients with PC were identified in the CAIRO study and 47 patients in the CAIRO2 study. Median OS was decreased for patients with PC compared with patients without PC (CAIRO: 10.4 versus 17.3 months, respectively (p ≤ 0.001); CAIRO2: 15.2 versus 20.7 months, respectively (p < 0.001)). Median number of treatment cycles did not differ between patients with or without PC in both studies. Occurrence of major toxicity was more frequent in patients with PC treated with sequential chemotherapy in the CAIRO study as compared to patients without PC. This was not reflected in reasons to discontinue treatment. In the CAIRO2 study, no differences in major toxicity were observed., Conclusion: Our data demonstrate decreased efficacy of current standard chemotherapy with and without targeted agents in mCRC patients with PC. This suggests that the poor outcome cannot be explained by undertreatment or increased susceptibility to toxicity, but rather by relative resistance to treatment., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pharmacogenetic markers related to drug metabolism and mechanisms of action could help to better select patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) for treatment. Genetic interaction analysis is used as a rational tool to study the contribution of polygenic variation in relation to drug response., Patients and Methods: A selection of 17 polymorphisms in genes encoding drug targets, pathway molecules and detoxification enzymes was analyzed in 279 previously untreated mCRC patients treated with capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B). Multifactor dimensionality reduction analysis was used to identify a genetic interaction profile for progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Median PFS was 10.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.4-12.4] months. A genetic interaction profile consisting of the TYMS enhancer region and VEGF +405G>C polymorphisms was significantly associated with PFS. Median PFS was 13.3 (95% CI 11.4-15.3) and 9.7 (95% CI 7.6-11.8) months for the beneficial and unfavorable genetic profiles, respectively, corresponding to a hazards ratio for PFS of 1.58 (95% CI 1.14-2.19). None of the studied polymorphisms were individually associated with PFS., Conclusions: Our results support a genetic interaction between the TYMS enhancer region and VEGF +405G>C polymorphisms as a predictor of the efficacy of CAPOX-B in mCRC patients.

Background: To compare the median overall survival of patients with isolated nonresectable liver metastases in comparable groups of patients treated with either isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) with melphalan or systemic chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Colorectal cancer patients with isolated liver metastases, who underwent IHP, were included in this study. The control group consisted of a subgroup of colorectal cancer patients with liver metastases only, who were enrolled in the randomized CApecitabine, IRinotecan, Oxaliplatin (CAIRO) phase III study., Results: Ninety-nine patients were treated with IHP, and 111 patients were included in the control group. All patient characteristics were comparable except for age. Median follow-up was 78.1 months for IHP versus 54.7 months in the control group. Median overall survival was 25.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.4-30.6] months for IHP and 21.7 (95% CI 19.6-23.8) months for systemic treatment and did not differ significantly (P = 0.29). Treatment-related mortality was 2% for the systemic treatment and 6% for IHP (P = 0.11)., Conclusion: Compared with a patient group with comparable characteristics treated with systemic chemotherapy, IHP does not provide a benefit in overall survival in patients with isolated nonresectable colorectal liver metastases. Currently, the use of IHP cannot be advocated outside the scope of clinical studies.

Background: Early predictive markers for response are needed for advanced colorectal cancer (ACC) patients. We assessed the value of circulating tumour cells (CTC) in ACC patients treated with chemotherapy plus targeted agents (CAIRO2 phase III trial) and compared the results with computed tomography (CT) imaging., Materials and Methods: CTC were determined at baseline and at different time points during treatment. Patients were stratified into low (less than three CTC per 7.5 ml of blood) or high CTC (three or more CTC per 7.5 ml of blood)., Results: A total of 467 patients were assessable for CTC analysis. Among them, 129 patients (29%) with high baseline CTC had a significantly decreased progression-free survival [PFS; hazard ratio (HR) 1.5] and overall survival (OS; HR 2.2) compared with 322 patients with low baseline CTC. This difference remained statistically significant during treatment. The sensitivity and specificity of high CTC at baseline for the prediction of progressive disease on CT imaging were 16.7% and 70.1%, respectively, and of high CTC at 1-2 weeks after the start of treatment 20.0% and 95.1%, respectively. The combined analysis of CTC and CT imaging provided a more accurate outcome assessment than either modality alone., Conclusions: The CTC count before and during treatment independently predicts PFS and OS in ACC patients treated with chemotherapy plus targeted agents and provides additional information to CT imaging.

Background: Early and correct assessment of treatment-related mortality is highly important in clinical cancer trials. However, no data are available on the quality of safety monitoring., Patients and Methods: An on-site review was carried out by the study coordinators of the individual charts of all patients participating in the Capecitabine-Irinotecan-Oxaliplatin (CAIRO) study who had died within 30 days of the last administration of study drugs when death was accompanied by any other event than disease progression. The relationship between treatment and death was categorized as unrelated, remote, possible, or probable and submitted to an independent data monitoring committee (IDMC). These results were then compared with the initial assessment of the local investigator., Results: Forty of 820 patients qualified for review. The relationship between cause of death and study drugs was changed in 26 patients (65%). A major protocol violation (MPV) was identified in 12 of 14 patients with a probable relationship between cause of death and study treatment., Conclusions: There was little agreement between the relation as assessed by the local investigator compared with the IDMC. A quality control improves the assessment of safety results and the observed MPVs underscore the importance of educating medical staff and patients.

Background: We demonstrated that circulating tumor cell (CTC) number at baseline and follow-up is an independent prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This analysis was undertaken to explore whether patient and treatment characteristics impact the prognostic value of CTCs., Patients and Methods: CTCs were enumerated with immunomagnetic separation from the blood of 430 patients with mCRC at baseline and on therapy. Patients were stratified into unfavorable and favorable prognostic groups based on CTC levels of > or = 3 or <3 CTCs/7.5 ml, respectively. Subgroups were analyzed by line of treatment, liver involvement, receipt of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, or bevacizumab, age, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS)., Results: Seventy-one percent of deaths have occurred. Median follow-up for living patients is 25.8 months. For all patients, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for unfavorable compared with favorable baseline CTCs is shorter (4.4 versus 7.8 m, P = 0.004 for PFS; 9.4 versus 20.6 m, P < 0.0001 for OS). In all patient subgroups, unfavorable baseline CTC was associated with inferior OS (P < 0.001). In patients receiving first- or second-line therapy (P = 0.003), irinotecan (P = 0.0001), having liver involvement (P = 0.002), >/=65 years (P = 0.0007), and ECOG PS of zero (P = 0.04), unfavorable baseline CTC was associated with inferior PFS., Conclusion: Baseline CTC count is an important prognostic factor within specific subgroups defined by treatment or patient characteristics.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is biologically a heterogeneous disease, which may affect response to drug therapy. We investigated the correlation of genome-wide DNA copy number profiles of primary tumors with response to systemic chemotherapy in advanced CRC., Patients and Methods: DNA was isolated from formaldehyde-fixed paraffin-embedded primary tumors of 32 patients with advanced CRC, which were selected based on either a good response (n = 16) or a poor response (n = 16) to first-line combination therapy with capecitabine and irinotecan. High-resolution DNA copy number profiles were obtained by means of 30 K oligonucleotide-based array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH)., Results: Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis of the aCGH data revealed two clusters of 19 and 13 tumors, respectively, and cluster membership showed a significant correlation with response status (P < 0.03). The nonresponders had fewer chromosomal alterations compared with the responders, in particular less losses were found (P < 0.03). Most prominent differences between the two groups were losses of regions 18p11.32-q11.2 (P < 0.02) and 18q12.1-q23 (P < 0.03), which were more frequently observed in responders., Conclusions: Differences in DNA copy number profiles of primary CRCs are associated with response to systemic combination chemotherapy with capecitabine and irinotecan. Responders overall had more chromosomal alterations, especially loss of chromosome 18.

Background: Targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor or the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has shown efficacy in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC), but no data are available on the combination of these strategies with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment. The CAIRO2 study evaluates the effect of adding cetuximab, a chimeric mAb against EGFR, to capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of ACC., Patients and Methods: In all, 755 patients were randomly assigned between treatment with capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab with or without cetuximab. The primary end point is progression-free survival. We here present the toxicity results in the first 400 patients that entered the study., Results: The incidence of overall grade 3-4 toxicity was significantly higher in arm B compared with arm A (81% versus 72%, P = 0.03). This difference is fully attributed to cetuximab-related skin toxicity. The addition of cetuximab did not result in an increase of gastrointestinal toxicity or treatment-related mortality., Conclusions: The addition of cetuximab to capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of ACC appears to be safe and feasible. No excessive or unexpected toxicity in the cetuximab-containing treatment arm was observed.

A patient is presented who was treated with neoadjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy followed by hepatic resection complicated by fatal liver failure. Histopathological examination revealed hepatic veno-occlusive disease, which is an infrequent reported side effect of oxaliplatin.

The outcome of patients with advanced colorectal cancer has significantly improved in the past decade because of the development of new treatment strategies. The Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG) is a national multidisciplinary clinical research group in The Netherlands. The 3 CAIRO studies of the DCCG address clinically relevant questions in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: the benefit of combination versus sequential therapy, targeting vascular endothelial growth factor and epidermal growth factor receptor, and the role of maintenance therapy. This article presents the outline of these studies and summarizes the current results.

Background: The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the value of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for early assessment of chemotherapy response in patients with advanced colorectal cancer., Methods: Dynamic FDG-PET was carried out before and at 2 (n = 50) and 6 months (n = 19) after the start of treatment. Quantitative Patlak analysis [metabolic rate of glucose (MRGlu)] and a simplified method to measure glucose metabolism [standardized uptake value (SUV)] were evaluated. The predictive value of changes in glucose metabolism was assessed with Cox proportional regression analysis. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates., Results: There was an increase in the rates of death (P = 0.049 for DeltaMRGlu PET1-2; P = 0.017 for DeltaSUV PET1-2; P = 0.032 for DeltaMRGlu PET1-3; P = 0.048 for DeltaSUV PET1-3) and progression (P = 0.026 for DeltaMRGlu PET1-2; P = 0.035 for DeltaSUV PET1-2; P = 0.041 for DeltaMRGlu PET1-3; P = 0.081 for DeltaSUV PET1-3) associated with worse response as assessed by PET on Cox proportional regression analysis. The OS and PFS analysis showed a significant predictive value at broad ranges of DeltaMRGlu and DeltaSUV cut-off levels., Conclusion: The degree of chemotherapy-induced changes in tumor glucose metabolism is highly predictive for patient outcome. The use of FDG-PET for therapy monitoring seems clinically feasible since simplified methods (SUV) are sufficiently reliable.

Background: The current study focuses on the prognostic value of pretreatment metabolic activity in metastases as measured with [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), as an indicator of survival in colorectal cancer., Patients and Methods: In a prospective series of 152 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, of whom 67 were treated with resection of metastases and 85 with chemotherapy, standardized uptake values (SUV) as measured with FDG-PET, were calculated prior to treatment. Survival probabilities were estimated by Cox proportional regression analysis. For Kaplan-Meier analysis SUV was stratified by the median value. Survival differences were assessed using the log-rank test., Results: SUV in metastases was a significant predictor for overall survival (hazard ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.30, P = 0.002), independent of the subsequent treatment. According to the median value of the patient population a low (SUV <4.26) and high uptake group (SUV >4.26) was defined. The median survival and the 2- and 3-year survival rates were 32 months, 59% and 45%, respectively, in the low-uptake group and 19 months, 37% and 28%, respectively, in the high-uptake group (P = 0.017)., Conclusion: A significant survival benefit was observed in patients with low FDG uptake in metastases of colorectal cancer.

Background: Results on overall survival in randomised studies of mono- versus combination chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer patients may have been biased by an imbalance in salvage treatments. This is the first randomised study that evaluates sequential versus combination chemotherapy with a fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan and oxaliplatin., Patients and Methods: A total of 820 patients were randomised between first-line capecitabine, second-line irinotecan and third-line capecitabine + oxaliplatin (arm A) versus first-line capecitabine + irinotecan, and second-line capecitabine + oxaliplatin (arm B). The primary end point was overall survival. We present the results of an interim analysis on the safety data in the first 400 patients., Results: In first-line the incidence of grade 3-4 diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting and febrile neutropenia was significantly higher in arm B. However, when toxicity over all lines was considered only grade 3 hand-foot syndrome occurred more frequently in arm A (12% versus 6%, respectively, P = 0.041). The incidence of cardiovascular toxicity was low. In two out of five patients with sudden death (one in arm A, four in arm B) cardiovascular risk factors were present., Conclusions: Both treatment arms had an acceptable safety profile. These data imply that the results on survival will be the major determinant for the selection of either strategy. Capecitabine plus irinotecan appears to be a feasible first-line treatment for patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma.

Background: Dendritic cells (DCs) are the professional antigen-presenting cells of the immune system. As such they are currently used in clinical vaccination protocols in cancer patients., Patients and Methods: We evaluated the ability of mature DCs pulsed with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-peptide to induce CEA-specific T cell responses in patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. CEA-specific T cell reactivity was monitored in peripheral blood, biopsies of vaccination sites and post-treatment DTH skin tests, and when available also in resected abdominal lymph nodes and tumor tissue., Results: Ten patients were vaccinated intradermally and intravenously with CEA-peptide pulsed mature DCs three times prior to resection of liver metastases. High numbers of CEA-specific T cells were detected in post-treatment DTH biopsies in seven out of 10 patients, which produced high amounts of interferon (IFN)-gamma upon stimulation with CEA-loaded target cells. These responses were not found in biopsies of first vaccination sites, indicating a de novo T cell induction or at least a strong potentiation by the vaccine. In addition, CEA-specific T cells were detected in a resected lymph node in one patient, but not in peripheral blood or tumor tissue., Conclusions: Vaccination with CEA-peptide loaded mature DCs induced potent CEA-specific T cell responses in advanced colorectal cancer patients. In this study, antigen-specific T cell responses were readily detected in DTH skin tests, much less in abdominal lymph nodes, and not in peripheral blood and tumor tissue.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety profile of irinotecan in combination with capecitabine, to identify a recommended dose and to determine the response rate and time to disease progression. In addition, we aimed to explore the pharmacokinetic parameters of irinotecan and capecitabine when used in different sequences of administration, with irinotecan infusion either prior to or after the first intake of capecitabine., Patients and Methods: One hundred patients were included: 43 patients were recruited into an extended phase I trial of alternating escalation in dose of both drugs where irinotecan was administered intravenously (i.v) on day 1 after first intake of capecitabine taken from days 1-14 twice daily, with cycles repeated every 3 weeks. After the determination of recommended dose a further 57 patients were treated in a phase II evaluation with the reverse sequence of drugs on day 1. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed in patients treated at the recommended dose in two cohorts of patients in which the sequence of the first administration of each drug was reversed., Results: The MTD of the combination was determined as irinotecan 300 mg/m2, with capecitabine 2000 mg/m2/day. Dose limiting toxicities were neutropenia and diarrhoea. The recommended dose is irinotecan intravenous (i.v.) 250 mg/m2 day 1 and capecitabine 2000 mg/m2/day days 1-14, every 3 weeks. Treatment was well tolerated, with diarrhoea the most common serious toxicity. Response rate in the phase II cohort was 42% [95% confidence interval (CI) 29% to 56%]. Median duration of response was 7.7 months (95% CI 7.5-8.9). Median time to progression was 8.3 months (95% CI 5.8-10). No significant effect on irinotecan pharmacokinetics was observed whatever the intake of capecitabine before or after irinotecan infusion. An effect of irinotecan on capecitabine and some capecitabine metabolites was observed, but irinotecan did not effect 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) pharmacokinetics., Conclusions: Irinotecan in combination with capecitabine is a well tolerated regimen with an activity comparable to, but more convenient than, irinotecan-5-FU i.v. combinations in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. The pharmacokinetic data suggest that the sequence of administration does not impact significantly on the metabolism of the two drugs.

E7070 is a synthetic chloro-indolyl sulphonamide that is being developed as an anti cancer agent. In this phase II study, 28 patients with metastatic melanoma received 700 mg/m(2) of E7070 as a 60-min infusion repeated every 3 weeks. Although therapy was well tolerated, with one patient receiving 14 courses of treatment, there were only minor responses on independent radiological review. E7070 does not warrant further development as a single agent for the treatment of metastatic melanoma.

With more data on the use of oxaliplatin and irinotecan available, and the recent approval of two signal transduction inhibitors for patients with advanced colorectal cancer, there are now many treatment options to choose from. From the current regimens no straightforward choice can be made that provides any patient with the optimal chance for prolonged survival with the least side-effects. The current data concerning timing and duration of chemotherapy, combination or sequential therapy, preference of agents for first-line treatment, oral fluoropyrimidines, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for irresectable liver metastases, and the use of signal transduction inhibitors are reviewed.

Background: CCI-779 is a novel ester of the immunosuppressive agent sirolimus that exerts cytostatic effects by the inhibition of the translation of cell-cycle regulatory proteins. We investigated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) of CCI-779 in combination with leucovorin (LV) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients with advanced solid tumors., Patients and Methods: Patients were treated with LV at 200 mg/m(2) as a 1-h i.v. infusion directly followed by continuous 24-h i.v. infusion of 5-FU, in the first patient at 2000 mg/m(2) and in subsequent patients at 2600 mg/m(2). CCI-779 was administered directly prior to LV as a 30-min i.v. infusion at a starting dose of 15 mg/m(2) beginning at day 8 and escalated in subsequent cohorts of patients. One cycle consisted of six weekly administrations followed by 1 week of rest. Blood samples were drawn to assess PK of CCI-779 as well as its effect on steady-state 5-FU exposures., Results: Twenty-eight patients entered the study, the majority having tumor types for which 5-FU is used as a treatment. CCI-779 doses of 15, 25, 45 and 75 mg/m(2) were investigated. Skin toxicity (rash) was prominent at all dose levels examined. Stomatitis was the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) for 75 mg/m(2) doses of CCI-779. Subsequently the cohort at 45 mg/m(2) was expanded to a total of 15 patients, and at this dose level two treatment-related deaths occurred due to mucositis with bowel perforation. Based on the toxicities observed, it was decided to discontinue the study. Partial responses were observed in three patients with gastrointestinal tumors. No pharmacokinetic interaction between CCI-779 and 5-FU was observed., Conclusions: The safety profiles of CCI-779 and 5-FU/LV suggest an overlap of drug-related toxicities, and the administration of these drugs at these doses and schedule resulted in unacceptable toxicity and therefore cannot be recommended. If CCI-779 is to be used in combination with 5-FU/LV, other doses or schedules of administration will need to be explored.

Currently-used systems to predict prognosis in patients with solid epithelial tumours after surgical resection of the tumour do not give any guarantees for the individual patient. In this respect the clinical relevance of the presence of disseminated tumour cells in blood and bone marrow has been frequently studied. Because of growing awareness that information on merely the presence of disseminated tumour cells is not sufficient for prognostic and therapeutic purposes, attention for characterization of disseminated tumour cells has increased. Numerous reviews have already been published on the detection and clinical relevance of disseminated tumour cells. Therefore, this paper will mainly focus on the biological significance of these cells and discusses the (in)efficiency of the metastatic process, the genotypic and phenotypic characteristics of disseminated tumour cells, and their structure of appearance. Despite the fact that information gained on the several individual aspects is substantial, it did not render any solid solutions for individual patient management yet. Hence, a combined approach of several aspects of disseminated tumour cells together with characteristics and behaviour of the primary tumour is needed to substantially improve our knowledge on the role of disseminated tumour cells in the complex process of tumour metastasis.

Background: Two randomised studies were performed with trimetrexate (TMTX) as a biochemical modulator of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC), one in Europe and one in the United States. Both studies were similarly designed to detect a statistically significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS), however, was later adopted as the primary outcome measure for approvability of agents for first-line treatment of ACC. Therefore, an integrated analysis of survival data from the European and USA trials was performed to detect a clinically relevant difference in survival., Patients and Methods: The experimental arm was identical in both studies and consisted of TMTX 110 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) followed 24 h later by i.v. LV 200 mg/m2/5-FU 500 mg/m2 plus oral LV rescue. The 5-FU dose in the control arm was 600 mg/m2 in the European study and 500 mg/m2 in the USA study, and the USA study was placebo-controlled. Treatment was given weekly for 6 weeks every 8 weeks., Results: A total of 746 patients were analysed. Median OS was 13.0 months for 5-FU/LV and 14.6 months for TMTX/5-FU/LV (P = 0.15; Wilcoxon). Median PFS was 4.4 months and 5.4 months, respectively (P = 0.07; Wilcoxon)., Conclusions: The addition of TMTX to a weekly regimen of 5-FU/LV does not improve the outcome for patients with ACC.

Background: Trimetrexate (TMTX) is a biochemical modulator of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV). Phase II trials have shown promising activity of 5-FU/LV/TMTX in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (ACC). This trial evaluated the effect of TMTX in combination with 5-FU/LV as first-line treatment in ACC., Patients and Methods: Patients with ACC were randomised to receive either intravenous LV 200 mg/m2/5-FU 600 mg/m2 or TMTX 110 mg/m2 followed 24 h later by LV 200 mg/m2/5-FU 500 mg/m2 plus oral LV rescue. Both schedules were given weekly for 6 weeks every 8 weeks. Patients were evaluated for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tumour response, quality of life (QoL) and toxicity., Results: A total of 365 patients were randomised. A statistically significant prolongation of median PFS was seen in patients treated with TMTX/5-FU/LV compared with 5-FU/LV (5.4 months versus 4.1 months, respectively; P = 0.03), and a trend towards a significant benefit for OS (13.4 months versus 10.5 months, respectively; P = 0.08). Tumour response, QoL and toxicity were comparable between the two arms. Diarrhoea was the most frequently occurring grade 3 or 4 toxicity (22% and 30%, respectively)., Conclusions: The addition of TMTX to a weekly regimen of 5-FU/LV results in a small but significant improvement in PFS without adding toxicity or worsening QoL in patients with ACC.

Currently the data from 12 randomised phase III trials investigating the role of interferon-alpha (IFNalpha) in patients with stage II-III high-risk melanoma are available. The most prominent differences between these trials concern the dose of IFNalpha, the duration of IFNalpha administration, and the stage of disease. Some of these trials have not yet reached maturity, but despite this the positive results from some immature trials have attracted considerable attention. When only data from mature trials is considered, one may conclude that the use of high-dose IFNalpha does prolong disease-free survival (DFS) but not overall survival (OS). Combined data from low-dose IFNalpha trials does not suggest a benefit in either DFS or OS. A trial with intermediate-dose IFNalpha is still immature. Therefore currently the routine use of IFNalpha cannot be recommended outside the scope of clinical trials.

Background: E7070 is a novel antitumor sulfonamide which blocks the cell in G1 phase. A phase I study was initiated to investigate the toxicity, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetics of this compound when administered intravenously at a daily times five schedule once every three weeks., Patients and Methods: Patients with solid tumors not amenable to standard forms of therapy were eligible. E7070 was administered to cohorts of 3-6 patients per dose level, the starting dose was 10 mg/m2/day. Dose escalation was performed according to a Fibonacci-like scheme., Results: Thirty-three patients entered the study. At E7070 doses of 200 and 160 mg/m2/day dose-limiting toxicities occurred, which consisted of febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia. diarrhea, skin folliculitis, asthenia, and stomatitis. The pharmacokinetic profile of E7070 at this schedule is non-linear with increasing dose. A partial response was observed in a patient with heavily pretreated breast cancer. Disease stabilizations and some minor responses were also documented., Conclusions: Myelosuppression is the predominant toxicity of E7070. Clinical efficacy with E7070 was observed. The recommended dose for further studies at this daily times five schedule is 130 mg/m2/day.

Background: In phase II studies, irinotecan is active in metastatic colorectal cancer, but the overall benefit has not been assessed in a randomised clinical trial., Methods: Patients with proven metastatic colorectal cancer, which had progressed within 6 months of treatment with fluorouracil, were randomly assigned either 300-350 mg/m2 irinotecan every 3 weeks with supportive care or supportive care alone, in a 2:1 ratio., Findings: 189 patients were allocated irinotecan and supportive care and 90 supportive care alone. The mean age of the participants was 58.8 years; 181 (65%) were men and 98 (35%) were women. WHO performance status was 0 in 79 (42%) patients, 1 in 77 (41%) patients, and 2 in 32 (17%) patients. Tumour-related symptoms were present in 134 (71%) patients and weight loss of more than 5% was seen in 15 (8%) patients. With a median follow-up of 13 months, the overall survival was significantly better in the irinotecan group (p=0.0001), with 36.2% 1-year survival in the irinotecan group versus 13.8% in the supportive-care group. The survival benefit, adjusted for prognostic factors in a multivariate analysis, remained significant (p=0.001). Survival without performance-status deterioration (p=0.0001), without weight loss of more than 5% (p=0.018), and pain-free survival (p=0.003) were significantly better in the patients given irinotecan. In a quality-of-life analysis, all significant differences, except on diarrhoea score, were in favour of the irinotecan group., Interpretation: Our study shows that despite the side-effects of treatment, patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer, and for whom fluorouracil has failed, have a longer survival, fewer tumour-related symptoms, and a better quality of life when treated with irinotecan than with supportive care alone.

Pancreatic cancer is associated with an extremely poor prognosis. Even after resection with curative intent, the 5-year survival rates usually do not exceed 5%, and neither radiotherapy (RT) nor chemotherapy (CT) improve long term survival. Because of the poor outcome of patients with localized disease, studies should be directed to selected patients who benefit from surgery and from combined treatment of surgery with chemo-irradiation. Future developments in the treatment of locoregionally confined pancreatic cancer will have to focus on treatment modalities which improve the local tumor control as well as the control of occult distant disease. Combined CT/RT seems to be the most promising approach for these patients. However, to date there are more questions than clearcut answers about what such a multimodality treatment should look like. This concerns the selection of patients, the dosages, time schedules, and routes of administration of CT and RT. Last but not least, there is a need for more effective CT in pancreatic cancer. New drugs and multiple drug combinations should be studied in patients who are not candidates for multimodality treatment because of distant metastases. Well designed trials that address these issues are urgently needed in the forthcoming years.