Search

PURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430 ). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine.

Background Worst-case, typical, and best-case scenarios for survival, based on simple multiples of an individual's expected survival time (EST), estimated by their oncologist, are a useful way of formulating and explaining prognosis. We aimed to determine the accuracy and prognostic significance of oncologists’ estimates of EST, and the accuracy of the resulting scenarios for survival time, in advanced gastric cancer. Materials and Methods Sixty-six oncologists estimated the EST at baseline for each of the 152 participants they enrolled in the INTEGRATE trial. We hypothesized that oncologists’ estimates of EST would be unbiased (∼50% would be longer or shorter than the observed survival time [OST]); imprecise ( Results Oncologists’ estimates of EST were unbiased (45% were shorter than the OST, 55% were longer); imprecise (29% were within 0.67–1.33 times observed); moderately discriminative (Harrell's C-statistic 0.62, p = .001); and an independently significant predictor of OS (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.83–0.95; p = .001) in a Cox model including performance status, number of metastatic sites, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥3, treatment group, age, and health-related quality of life (EORTC-QLQC30 physical function score). Scenarios for survival time derived from oncologists’ estimates were remarkably accurate: 9% of patients died within a quarter of their EST, 57% lived within half to double their EST, and 12% lived three times their EST or longer. Conclusion Oncologists’ estimates of EST were unbiased, imprecise, moderately discriminative, and independently significant predictors of OS. Simple multiples of the EST accurately estimated worst-case, typical, and best-case scenarios for survival time in advanced gastric cancer. Implications for Practice Results of this study demonstrate that oncologists’ estimates of expected survival time for their patients with advanced gastric cancer were unbiased, imprecise, moderately discriminative, and independently significant predictors of overall survival. Simple multiples of the expected survival time accurately estimated worst-case, typical, and best-case scenarios for survival time in advanced gastric cancer.

Background: Pattern of spread in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is variable and may reflect different biology in subsets of patients. This is a retrospective study to explore the outcome of patients with mCRC based on their site of metastasis at diagnosis and to explore the association between tumor characteristics [KRAS/RAS, BRAF, mismatch repair (MMR) status, site of primary] and the site of metastasis. Methods: Patients from two Australian databases were divided into six groups based on site of metastasis at time of diagnosis of metastatic disease; lung-only, liver-only, lymph node-only or any patients with brain, bone or peritoneal metastases. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) of each cohort compared with the rest of the population. A Mantel–Haenszel chi-squared test used to explore the association between site of metastasis and selected tumor characteristics. Results: Five thousand nine hundred and sixty-seven patients were included. In a univariate analysis,median OS was significantly higher when metastases were limited to lung or liver and shorter for those with brain, bone or peritoneal metastases (p

Background AGOC has a poor prognosis with limited benefits from treatments following failure of chemotherapy (CT). Regorafenib (BAY 73-4506)(REG) is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor targeting kinases involved in angiogenesis (VEGFR1-3, TIE-2), tumor microenvironment (PDGFR-β, FGFR), and oncogenesis (RAF, RET and KIT). INTEGRATE (phase 2) demonstrated REG effectiveness in prolonging PFS in AGOC pts, with a positive OS trend and less toxicity than other REG trials at the same doses. REG was effective across all regions/subgroups, with regional differences noted in magnitude of effect. INTEGRATE II (phase 3) will explore whether REG is effective in prolonging survival in all patients, and in the Asian sub-population Methods International randomised phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 2:1 (REG:placebo)(PBO) randomisation and stratification by tumour location, geographic region, and prior VEGF inhibitors. Histologically confirmed AGOC patients, with evaluable metastatic or locally advanced disease refractory to/relapsed following at least 2 lines of CT, will receive best supportive care plus 160mg REG or matched placebo orally on days 1-21 of each 28 day cycle until disease progression or prohibitive adverse events. Primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints: PFS, response rate, quality of life, safety, identification of prognostic/predictive biomarkers for study endpoints, and REG PK across geographical regions. 350 patients (50% from Asia, with at least 50 patients to be recruited from Japan) randomized in a 2:1 ratio will provide 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) for OS of 0.67 with a 2-sided α of 0.05 assuming PBO median survival is 4.5 mos. The sample size accommodates an interim analysis undertaken once 2/3 of required events have occurred. Results 27 ANZ, 8 Canadian, 15 Korean, 5 Taiwanese, and 2 Japanese sites have been activated with 106 patients enrolled. Remaining Japanese/US sites expected to activate through Q1/Q2 2019.

Background: Perioperative chemotherapy improves outcome in resectable colorectal liver-only metastasis (CLM). This study aimed to evaluate perioperative CAPOX (capecitabine-oxaliplatin) plus bevacizumab in patients with poor-risk CLM not selected for upfront resection. Patients and methods: Poor-risk CLM was defined as follows: more than four metastases, diameter >5 cm, R0 resection unlikely, inadequate viable liver function if undergoing upfront resection, inability to retain liver vascular supply, or synchronous colorectal primary presentation. Patients underwent baseline computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or positron emission tomography (PET) for staging and received neoadjuvant CAPOX plus bevacizumab, with resectability assessed every four cycles. Primary end point was radiological objective response rate (ORR). Results: Forty-six patients were recruited, of which 91% underwent PET to ensure metastases confined to liver. Following neoadjuvant CAPOX plus bevacizumab, the ORR was 78% (95% confidence interval 63% to 89%). This allowed 12 of 30 (40%) patients with initial nonsynchronous unresectable CLM to be converted to resectability. In addition, 10 of 15 (67%) patients with synchronous resectable CLM underwent liver resection, with four additional patients being observed alone due to excellent response to neoadjuvant therapy. No grade 3-4 perioperative complications were seen. Conclusion: Neoadjuvant CAPOX plus bevacizumab resulted in a high response rate for patients with CLMs with poor-risk features not selected for upfront resection and converted 40% of patients to resectability.

In spite of advances made in the management of the other more common cancers of the gastrointestinal tract, significant progress in the treatment of pancreatic cancer remains elusive, more so with the recent negative results of several much anticipated randomized trials. Gemcitabine has been a standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer since it was shown a decade ago to result in a superior clinical benefit response and survival compared with bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Since then, clinical trials have explored the pharmacokinetic modulation of gemcitabine by fixed dose administration and the combination of gemcitabine with other cytotoxics or the biological 'targeted' agents. Against a background of numerous negative randomized trials of gemcitabine-based combination treatment, two trials have recently reported modest survival improvements with the use of combination treatment: the United Kingdom National Cancer Research GEMCAP trial of gemcitabine with the orally administered precursor of 5-FU-capecitabine and the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group PA.3 trial in which the tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib was used with gemcitabine. This review will summarize the results of several recent randomized trials of combination treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer and discuss their implications for clinical practice and for future research in this disease.