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: Pembrolizumab has shown improved progression-free survival versus chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer. However, the treatment's effect on overall survival in this cohort of patients was unknown. Here, we present the final overall survival analysis of the KEYNOTE-177 study., Methods: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was done in 193 academic medical centres and hospitals in 23 countries. We recruited patients aged at least 18 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who had previously untreated microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of four using an interactive voice response system or integrated web response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks or to the investigator's choice of intravenous mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 on day 1, leucovorin 400 mg/m 2 on day 1, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m 2 bolus on day 1 followed by a continuous infusion of 1200 mg/m 2 per day for 2 days on days 1-2) or intravenous FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m 2 on day 1, leucovorin 400 mg/m 2 on day 1, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m 2 bolus on day 1 followed by a continuous infusion of 1200 mg/m 2 per day for 2 days on days 1-2), every 2 weeks with or without intravenous bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous weekly cetuximab (first dose 400 mg/m 2 , then 250 mg/m 2 for every subsequent dose). Patients receiving chemotherapy could cross over to pembrolizumab for up to 35 treatment cycles after progression. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. KEYNOTE-177 is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02563002, and is no longer enrolling patients., Findings: Between Feb 11, 2016, and Feb 19, 2018, 852 patients were screened, of whom 307 (36%) were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n=153) or chemotherapy (n=154). 93 (60%) patients crossed over from chemotherapy to anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 therapy (56 patients to on-study pembrolizumab and 37 patients to off-study therapy). At final analysis (median follow-up of 44·5 months [IQR 39·7-49·8]), median overall survival was not reached (NR; 95% CI 49·2-NR) with pembrolizumab vs 36·7 months (27·6-NR) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74; 95% CI 0·53-1·03; p=0·036). Superiority of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for overall survival was not demonstrated because the prespecified α of 0·025 needed for statistical significance was not achieved. At this updated analysis, median progression-free survival was 16·5 months (95% CI 5·4-38·1) with pembrolizumab versus 8·2 months (6·1-10·2) with chemotherapy (HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·45-0·79). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 33 (22%) of 153 patients in the pembrolizumab group versus 95 (66%) of 143 patients in the chemotherapy group. Common adverse events of grade 3 or worse that were attributed to pembrolizumab were increased alanine aminotransferase, colitis, diarrhoea, and fatigue in three (2%) patients each, and those attributed to chemotherapy were decreased neutrophil count (in 24 [17%] patients), neutropenia (22 [15%]), diarrhoea (14 [10%]), and fatigue (13 [9%]). Serious adverse events attributed to study treatment occurred in 25 (16%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and in 41 (29%) patients in the chemotherapy group. No deaths attributed to pembrolizumab occurred; one death due to intestinal perforation was attributed to chemotherapy., Interpretation: In this updated analysis, although pembrolizumab continued to show durable antitumour activity and fewer treatment-related adverse events compared with chemotherapy, there was no significant difference in overall survival between the two treatment groups. These findings support pembrolizumab as an efficacious first-line therapy in patients with microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer., Funding: MSD., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interests LAD Jr reports membership on the board of directors of Personal Genome Diagnostics and Jounce Therapeutics; honoraria for consulting and advisory role to Personal Genome Diagnostics, 4Paws, and Neophore; uncompensated advisory and consulting role for Merck Sharp & Dohme; clinical trial funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme; and patents for circulating tumour DNA analyses and mismatch repair deficiency for diagnosis and therapy with checkpoint blockade from Johns Hopkins University, the latter licensed to Personal Genome Diagnostics and Qiagen (some licenses and relationships are associated with equity or royalty payments directly to Johns Hopkins and LAD Jr); and equity in 4Paws, Personal Genome Diagnostics, Jounce Therapeutics, Thrive Earlier Detection and Neophore; his spouse holds equity in Amgen. The terms of all these arrangements are being managed by Johns Hopkins and Memorial Sloan Kettering in accordance with their conflict of interest policies. K-KS reports honoraria including compensation for travel, accommodation, and expenses from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Guardant Health, Daiichi-Sankyo, Innovent Biologics, Merck KGaA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mirati Therapeutics, Roche, and Servier; and Institutional Funding for Research from Adaptimmune Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Merck KGaA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche. T-WK reports clinical trial funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Merck Serono. BVJ, DS, MB, and PG report clinical trial funding paid to institution funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme. LHJ reports research funding to the institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme, 2cureX, Incyte, and Bristol Myers Squibb. CP reports research funding to the institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme; and a consulting and advisory role to Bayer, Nordic Pharma, and Servier. RG-C reports clinical trial funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Roche, Servier, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Bayer, and Pharma Mar; and honoraria from Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Servier, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Bayer, Pharma Mar, AAA, Advandz Pharma, Midatech Pharma, and Pierre Fabre. CdlF reports clinical trial funding paid to institution funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme; a consulting and advisory role for Merck Sharp & Dohme (ESMO 2019). FR reports clinical trial funding paid to institution funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, Merck-Serono, Amgen, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Servier, and Lilly; a consulting and advisory role for Roche, Merck-Serono, Amgen, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Servier, Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Bristol Myers Squibb; honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, Merck-Serono, Amgen, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Servier, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and non-financial support from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, Merck-Serono, Amgen, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, and Servier. Exrts clinical trial funding paid to institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Sanofi; honoraria from Amgen, Sanofi, Servier, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pierre Fabre, and Hoffman La Roche; and non-financial support from Amgen, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Hoffman La Roche. DTL serves on advisory boards for Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Janssen; has received research funding from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Aduro Biotech, Curegenix, Medivir, Nouscom, and AbbVie; has received speaking honoraria from Merck; and is an inventor of licensed intellectual property related to technology for mismatch repair deficiency for diagnosis and therapy (WO2016077553A1) from Johns Hopkins University. The terms of these arrangements are being managed by Johns Hopkins. TY reports grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme for the submitted work; and grants from Ono, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Chugai, Parexel International, Taiho, Amgen, and Sumitomo Dainippon, outside the submitted work; WYZ, DF, and PM are employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck, and hold stock in Merck. TA reports honoraria from Amgen, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Clovis, Gritstone Oncology, GSK, Haliodx, Kaleido Biosciences, Merck, Pierre Fabre, Roche/Ventana, Sanofi, Transgene, Seagen, and Servier; and compensation for travel, accommodation, and expenses from Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bristol Myers Squibb., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: To better select patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) for an optimal selection of treatment strategy (i.e. local, systemic or combined treatment) new prognostic models are warranted. In the last decade, radiomics has emerged as a field to create predictive models based on imaging features. This systematic review aims to investigate the current state and potential of radiomics to predict clinical outcomes in patients with CRLM., Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, according to PRISMA guidelines. Original studies reporting on radiomics predicting clinical outcome in patients diagnosed with CRLM were included. Clinical outcomes were defined as response to systemic treatment, recurrence of disease, and survival (overall, progression-free, disease-free). Primary outcome was the predictive performance of radiomics. A narrative synthesis of the results was made. Methodological quality was assessed using the radiomics quality score., Results: In 11 out of 14 included studies, radiomics was predictive for response to treatment, recurrence of disease, survival, or a combination of outcomes. Combining clinical parameters and radiomic features in multivariate modelling often improved the predictive performance. Different types of individual features were found prognostic. Noticeable were the contrary levels of heterogeneous and homogeneous features in patients with good response. The methodological quality as assessed by the radiomics quality score varied considerably between studies., Conclusion: Radiomics appears a promising non-invasive method to predict clinical outcome and improve personalized decision-making in patients with CRLM. However, results were contradictory and difficult to compare. Standardized prospective studies are warranted to establish the added value of radiomics in patients with CRLM., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade has clinical benefit in microsatellite-instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch-repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors after previous therapy. The efficacy of PD-1 blockade as compared with chemotherapy as first-line therapy for MSI-H-dMMR advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer is unknown., Methods: In this phase 3, open-label trial, 307 patients with metastatic MSI-H-dMMR colorectal cancer who had not previously received treatment were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive pembrolizumab at a dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks or chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil-based therapy with or without bevacizumab or cetuximab) every 2 weeks. Patients receiving chemotherapy could cross over to pembrolizumab therapy after disease progression. The two primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival., Results: At the second interim analysis, after a median follow-up (from randomization to data cutoff) of 32.4 months (range, 24.0 to 48.3), pembrolizumab was superior to chemotherapy with respect to progression-free survival (median, 16.5 vs. 8.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.80; P = 0.0002). The estimated restricted mean survival after 24 months of follow-up was 13.7 months (range, 12.0 to 15.4) as compared with 10.8 months (range, 9.4 to 12.2). As of the data cutoff date, 56 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 69 in the chemotherapy group had died. Data on overall survival were still evolving (66% of required events had occurred) and remain blinded until the final analysis. An overall response (complete or partial response), as evaluated with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, was observed in 43.8% of the patients in the pembrolizumab group and 33.1% in the chemotherapy group. Among patients with an overall response, 83% in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 35% of patients in the chemotherapy group, had ongoing responses at 24 months. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 22% of the patients in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 66% (including one patient who died) in the chemotherapy group., Conclusions: Pembrolizumab led to significantly longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy when received as first-line therapy for MSI-H-dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer, with fewer treatment-related adverse events. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme and by Stand Up to Cancer; KEYNOTE-177 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02563002.)., (Copyright © 2020 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

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: Increasing evidence suggests that severe skeletal muscle index (SMI) loss (sarcopenia) is associated with poor overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, but its mechanisms are unknown. We recently found, using data of the randomized phase 3 CAIRO3 study, that SMI loss was related with shorter time to disease progression and overall survival during first-line maintenance treatment with capecitabine + bevacizumab (CAP-B) or observation and during more intensive capecitabine + oxaliplatin + bevacizumab (CAPOX-B) reintroduction treatment. As a potential risk factor for reduced survival, we explored whether sarcopenia and SMI loss were associated with dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during CAP-B and CAPOX-B., Methods: Sarcopenia status and SMI loss were assessed by using consecutive computed tomography scans. DLTs were defined as any dose delay/reduction/discontinuation of systemic treatment because of reported CTCAE (version 3.0) toxicities at the start or during treatment. Poisson regression models were used to study whether sarcopenia and body mass index (BMI) at the start of treatment and SMI and BMI loss during treatment were associated with DLTs., Results: One hundred eighty-two patients (mean age 63.0 ± 8.8 years, 37% female) received CAP-B, and 232 patients (mean age 63.0 ± 9.0 years, 34% female) received CAPOX-B. At the start of CAP-B and CAPOX-B, 54% and 46% of patients were sarcopenic, respectively. Mean BMI was lower in sarcopenic patients, although patients were on average still overweight (sarcopenic vs. non-sarcopenic at the start of CAP-B 25.0 ± 3.9 vs. 26.7 ± 4.1 and CAPOX-B 25.8 ± 3.8 vs. 27.1 ± 3.8 kg/m 2 ). Sarcopenia at the start of CAP-B was not associated with DLTs [relative risk 0.87 (95% confidence interval 0.64-1.19)], whereas patients with >2% SMI loss had a significantly higher risk of DLTs [1.29 (1.01-1.66)]. At the start of subsequent CAPOX-B, 25% of patients received a dose reduction, and the risk of dose reduction was significantly higher for patients with preceding SMI loss [1.78 (1.06-3.01)] or sarcopenia [1.75 (1.08-2.86)]. After the received dose reductions, sarcopenia or SMI loss was not significantly associated with a higher risk of DLTs during CAPOX-B [sarcopenia vs. non-sarcopenic: 0.86 (0.69-1.08) and SMI loss vs. stable/gain: 0.83 (0.65-1.07)]. In contrast, BMI (loss) at the start or during either treatment was not associated with an increased risk of DLTs., Conclusions: In this large longitudinal study in metastatic colorectal cancer patients during palliative systemic treatment, sarcopenia and/or muscle loss was associated with an increased risk of DLTs. BMI was not associated with DLTs and could not detect sarcopenia or SMI loss. Prospective (randomized) studies should reveal whether normalizing chemotherapeutic doses to muscle mass or muscle mass preservation (by exercise and nutritional interventions) increases chemotherapeutic tolerance and improves survival., (© 2019 The Authors Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.)

Indication for primary tumour resection (PTR) in asymptomatic metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients is unclear. Previous retrospective analyses suggest a survival benefit for patients who underwent PTR. The aim was to evaluate the prognostic value of PTR in patients with synchronous mCRC by analysis of recent large RCTs including systemic therapy with modern targeted agents. Individual patient data (IPD) of 3423 patients enrolled into 8 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with first-line systemic therapy in the ARCAD (Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive) database were analysed. The number of patients with unresected synchronous mCRC, resected synchronous mCRC and metachronous mCRC was 710 (21%), 1705 (50%) and 1008 (29%), respectively. Adjusting for age, gender, performance status (PS) and prior chemotherapy, the unresected group had a significantly worse median overall survival (16.4 m) compared with the synchronous resected (22.2 m; hazard ratio [HR] 1.60, 95% CI 1.43-1.78) and metachronous (22.4 m; HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.58-2.07) groups. Similarly, median progression-free survival was significantly worse for the unresected group compared with the synchronous resected (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.19-1.44) and metachronous (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.30-1.66) groups. In a multivariate analysis, the observed associations remained significant. This largest IPD analysis of mCRC trials to date demonstrates an improved survival in synchronous mCRC patients after PTR. These results may be subject to bias since reasons for (non)resection were not available. Until results of ongoing RCTs are available, both upfront PTR followed by systemic treatment and upfront systemic treatment are considered appropriate treatment strategies., (Copyright © 2017 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.)

Introduction: Performance status (PS) is an established prognostic factor in patients with advanced cancer and is usually scored by the treating physician. The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire as reported by cancer patients is a validated tool to assess quality of life (QoL). Subjectivity plays a role in both assessments, and data on a direct comparison are scarce., Methods: We compared the prognostic value for overall survival (OS) of the WHO PS to the baseline physical function scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (QLQ-C30 PF) in a prospective randomised phase 3 trial in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC), the CAIRO study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the baseline QLQ-C30 PF. QLQ-C30 PF was considered 'good' if the score was more than 66.7% and 'poor' if 66.7% or less. Results were validated in a subsequent phase 3 study in ACC, the CAIRO2 study., Results: The median OS for patients with a 'good' QLQ-C30 PF and a 'poor' PF in patients with WHO PS 0 was 20.3 months (n = 300) and 10.4 months (n = 44), in patients with WHO PS 1 16.8 months (n = 125) and 10.1 months (n = 63), and in patients with WHO PS 2 16.2 months (n = 11) and 9.9 months (n = 12), respectively. In a Cox regression model which included other prognostic factors, 'good' versus 'poor' QLQ-C30 PF was significantly prognostic for OS (0.57 95% confidence interval: 0.46-0.72), but not WHO PS. These results were confirmed in the CAIRO2 study., Conclusions: We demonstrate in ACC patients that PF, as assessed by patients using the EORTC QLQ-C30, is superior in terms of prognostic value to WHO PS as scored by physicians. Our data support to include the results of baseline EORTC QLQ-C30 PF instead of WHO PS as a stratification parameter in oncology trials., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Intravenous administration of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) for decades. The availability of oral capecitabine has improved the tolerability in monotherapy schedules, and has simplified combination schedules. Since then, other oral drugs have proven efficacy in this setting., Areas Covered: We review the available evidence and most recent data concerning oral drugs with proven efficacy in mCRC, including capecitabine, S-1, trifluridine-tipiracil (TAS-102) and regorafenib., Expert Opinion: The use of capecitabine is widely implemented in the care of mCRC. However, with recent data supporting its prolonged use, the relatively high incidence of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) may impair quality of life. In Asian populations, S-1 is associated with equivalent efficacy but lower incidence of HFS compared to capecitabine. Further studies evaluating the effects of S-1 in Western populations are needed. Both regorafenib and TAS-102 improve the overall survival of patients in whom all other treatment options have failed. Since only a subset of patients appears to benefit, future studies to identify predictive biomarkers are needed.

Purpose: Despite expanding options for systemic treatment, survival for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains limited and individual response is difficult to predict. In search of pre-treatment predictors, pharmacogenetic research has mainly used a candidate gene approach. Genome wide association (GWA) studies offer the benefit of simultaneously analyzing a large number of SNPs, in both known and still unidentified functional regions. Using a GWA approach, we searched for genetic markers affecting progression free survival (PFS) in mCRC patients treated with first-line capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B), with or without cetuximab., Patients and Methods: 755 patients were included in the CAIRO2-trial, a multicenter phase III trial, randomizing between first-line treatment with CAPOX-B versus CAPOX-B plus cetuximab. Germline DNA and complete clinical information was available from 553 patients and genome wide genotyping was performed, using Illumina's OmniExpress beadchip arrays, with 647,550 markers passing all quality checks. Another 2,202,473 markers were imputated by using HapMap2. Association with PFS was analysed using a Cox proportional hazards model., Results: One marker, rs885036, associated significantly with PFS (P = 2.17x10(-8)) showing opposite effects on PFS depending on treatment arm. The minor allele was associated with increased PFS in patients receiving cetuximab. A cluster of markers located on chromosome 8 associated with PFS, irrespective of treatment arm (P-values of 2.30x10(-7) to 1.04x10(-6))., Conclusion: This is the first GWA study to find SNPs affecting PFS in mCRC patients treated with CAPOX-B, either with or without cetuximab. Rs885036 is a potential predictive marker for cetuximab efficacy. These markers need to be validated in independent treatment cohorts.

Background: Bevacizumab prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We analysed the protein expression levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) ligands and receptors to determine their prognostic and predictive effects., Methods: We graded expression of VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D, VEGF-R1, and VEGF-R2 to assess whether overexpression predicted bevacizumab resistance in samples from 268 of 471 patients randomised to capecitabine (C), capecitabine and bevacizumab (CB), or CB and mitomycin (CBM) in the MAX trial and extended the analysis to the CAIRO-2 population., Results: Patients with low expression of VEGF-D (0, 1þ) benefited from bevacizumab treatment (PFS hazard ratio (HR) (C vs CBþCBM), 0.21; 95% CI, 0.08–0.55; overall survival (OS) HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.13–0.90). Patients with higher VEGF-D expression received less benefit (VEGF-D 2þ PFS HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45–1.00; OS HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52–1.30; VEGF-D 3þ PFS HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50–1.17; OS HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.79–2.09) (P interaction o0.05). In CAIRO-2, there was no difference in PFS or OS according to VEGF-D expression., Conclusions: The predictive value of VEGF-D expression for bevacizumab may depend on the chemotherapy backbone used. Further evaluation is required before clinical utilisation.

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.)

Background: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of colorectal cancer (CRC) origin is associated with poor outcome. This systematic review evaluates the available evidence about adjuvant (hyperthermic) intraperitoneal chemotherapy ((H)IPEC) to prevent the development of PC., Methods: A systematic search of literature was conducted in August 2013 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database for studies on (H)IPEC to prevent PC in patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC., Results: Seven comparative studies and five cohort studies were selected. Treatment schedules varied between repeated fluoropyrimidine-based IPEC administration in the ambulatory setting to intra-operative (H)IPEC procedures using mitomycin-C or oxaliplatin. The reported rates of major complications related to adjuvant (H)IPEC was low. Four out of five evaluable comparative studies reported a significant difference in the incidence of PC in favour of (H)IPEC. All three comparative studies reporting on survival after intra-operative (H)IPEC showed a significant survival benefit in favour of the experimental arm. Substantial heterogeneity in patient selection, treatment protocols, and treatment effect evaluation among studies was observed., Conclusions: The currently available evidence about adjuvant (H)IPEC in high-risk CRC is limited and subject to bias, but points towards improved oncological outcome and supports further randomised studies.

Aim: The aim of this study is to describe local tumour control after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and surgical resection (RES) of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) in two independent European Organisations for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) studies., Background: Only 10-20% of patients with newly diagnosed CLM are eligible for curative RES. RFA has found a place in daily practice for unresectable CLM. There are no prospective trials comparing RFA to RES for resectable CLM., Methods: The CLOCC trial randomised 119 patients with unresectable CLM between RFA (±RES)+adjuvant FOLFOX (±bevacizumab) versus FOLFOX (±bevacizumab) alone. The EPOC trial randomised 364 patients with resectable CLM between RES±perioperative FOLFOX. We describe the local control of resected patients with lesions ≤4 cm in the perioperative chemotherapy arm of the EPOC trial (N=81) and the RFA arm of the CLOCC trial (N=55)., Results: Local recurrence (LR) rate for RES was 7.4% per patient and 5.5% per lesion. LR rate for RFA was 14.5% per patient and 6.0% per lesion. When lesion size was limited to 30 mm, LR rate for RFA lesions was 2.9% per lesion. Non-local hepatic recurrences were more often observed in RFA patients than in RES patients, 30.9% and 22.3% respectively. Patients receiving RFA had a more advanced disease., Conclusions: LR rate after RFA for lesions with a limited size is low. The local control per lesion does not appear to differ greatly between RFA and surgical resection. This study supports the local control of RFA in patients with limited liver metastases. Future studies should evaluate in which patients RFA could be an equal alternative to liver resection., (Copyright © 2013 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: In patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM) there is limited knowledge about the occurrence of radiological heterogeneity in response to chemotherapy., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed in the CAIRO and CAIRO II studies on the incidence of intermetastatic heterogeneity in patients with CLM and its association with survival. Mixed response (MR) was defined as >30% difference in individual lesion response, with all lesions showing a similar behaviour; true mixed response (TMR) as two lesions showing progression versus response; homogeneous response (HR) as similar behaviour of all lesions. Patients were classified according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) categories (partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), complete response (CR)) and then subdivided into MR and TMR in order to compare survival., Results: In the CAIRO and CAIRO II studies, 140 and 150 patients with liver-only disease were identified. 73/290 (25.2%) patients showed MR, and 25/290 (8.6%) patients TMR, and 192/290 (66.2%) patients HR. Overall survival (OS) at 1-4 years was significantly higher for the homogeneous partial responders category compared to other response categories. Median OS was 22.0 months for the entire population. In the partial response category, patients with MR showed significant poorer survival compared to patients with HR (median OS 23.7 versus 36.0 months, respectively, p=0.019). Multivariate analysis identified four independent predictors for OS: serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level (p=0.002), number of first-line chemotherapy cycles (p=0.001), resection of primary tumour (p=0.001) and response category (p=0.012)., Conclusion: Radiological heterogeneity is present in approximately 35% of patients with CLM. Partial responders according to the RECIST criteria, show a significant poorer survival if classified as heterogeneous partial responder compared to homogeneous partial responders., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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: The role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of patients with esophageal or esophagogastric-junction cancer is not well established. We compared chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery with surgery alone in this patient population., Methods: We randomly assigned patients with resectable tumors to receive surgery alone or weekly administration of carboplatin (doses titrated to achieve an area under the curve of 2 mg per milliliter per minute) and paclitaxel (50 mg per square meter of body-surface area) for 5 weeks and concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Gy in 23 fractions, 5 days per week), followed by surgery., Results: From March 2004 through December 2008, we enrolled 368 patients, 366 of whom were included in the analysis: 275 (75%) had adenocarcinoma, 84 (23%) had squamous-cell carcinoma, and 7 (2%) had large-cell undifferentiated carcinoma. Of the 366 patients, 178 were randomly assigned to chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery, and 188 to surgery alone. The most common major hematologic toxic effects in the chemoradiotherapy-surgery group were leukopenia (6%) and neutropenia (2%); the most common major nonhematologic toxic effects were anorexia (5%) and fatigue (3%). Complete resection with no tumor within 1 mm of the resection margins (R0) was achieved in 92% of patients in the chemoradiotherapy-surgery group versus 69% in the surgery group (P<0.001). A pathological complete response was achieved in 47 of 161 patients (29%) who underwent resection after chemoradiotherapy. Postoperative complications were similar in the two treatment groups, and in-hospital mortality was 4% in both. Median overall survival was 49.4 months in the chemoradiotherapy-surgery group versus 24.0 months in the surgery group. Overall survival was significantly better in the chemoradiotherapy-surgery group (hazard ratio, 0.657; 95% confidence interval, 0.495 to 0.871; P=0.003)., Conclusions: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy improved survival among patients with potentially curable esophageal or esophagogastric-junction cancer. The regimen was associated with acceptable adverse-event rates. (Funded by the Dutch Cancer Foundation [KWF Kankerbestrijding]; Netherlands Trial Register number, NTR487.).

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: Peripheral sensory neurotoxicity is a frequent and potentially debilitating side effect of oxaliplatin treatment. Calcium and magnesium (Ca/Mg) infusions are frequently used to prevent this toxicity. However, concerns about a negative impact of Ca/Mg infusions on outcome have been raised. We retrospectively assessed the effect of Ca/Mg infusions on the incidence of neurotoxicity and on clinical outcome in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC) patients treated in the phase III CAIRO2 study., Materials and Methods: Seven hundred and fifty five previously untreated ACC patients were randomised between treatment with capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab or the same combination with the addition of cetuximab. Patients were retrospectively divided into two groups: patients in the Ca/Mg(+) group received Ca/Mg at least during their first treatment cycle, and patients in the Ca/Mg(-) group did not., Results: Seven hundred and thirty two patients were evaluable for this analysis. The Ca/Mg(+) group consisted of 551 patients, the Ca/Mg(-) group consisted of 181 patients. The incidence of all grade neurotoxicity in the Ca/Mg(+) group and the Ca/Mg(-) group was 85% and 92%, respectively (p = 0.02), and the incidence of grade ≥ 2 neurotoxicity was 40% and 45%, respectively (p = 0.22). The median PFS in the Ca/Mg(+) versus Ca/Mg(-) group was 10.1 versus 10.7 months (p = 0.92), the median OS was 19.8 versus 20.7 months (p = 0.10), and the response rate was 43.1% versus 50% (p = 0.11), respectively., Conclusions: In this largest retrospective analysis to date we observed that Ca/Mg infusions significantly reduced all grade oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity. Ca/Mg infusions did not affect the clinical efficacy of treatment., (Crown Copyright © 2010. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dendritic cell (DC) vaccination has been shown to induce anti-tumour immune responses in cancer patients, but so far its clinical efficacy is limited. Recent evidence supports an immunogenic effect of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Pre-clinical data indicate that the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy may result in an enhanced anti-cancer activity. Most studies have focused on the immunogenic aspect of chemotherapy-induced cell death, but only few studies have investigated the effect of chemotherapeutic agents on the effector lymphocytes of the immune system., Methods: Here we investigated the effect of treatment with oxaliplatin and capecitabine on non-specific and specific DC vaccine-induced adaptive immune responses. Stage III colon cancer patients receiving standard adjuvant oxaliplatin/capecitabine chemotherapy were vaccinated at the same time with keyhole limpet haemocyanin (KLH) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-peptide pulsed DCs., Results: In 4 out of 7 patients, functional CEA-specific T-cell responses were found at delayed type hypersensitivity (DTH) skin testing. In addition, we observed an enhanced non-specific T-cell reactivity upon oxaliplatin administration. KLH-specific T-cell responses remained unaffected by the chemotherapy, whereas B-cell responses were diminished., Conclusion: The results strongly support further testing of the combined use of specific anti-tumour vaccination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy.

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: Asparagine-glycine-arginine-human tumour necrosis factor (NGR-hTNF) is a vascular targeting agent exploiting a tumour-homing peptide (NGR) that selectively binds to aminopeptidase N/CD13, overexpressed on tumour blood vessels. Significant preclinical synergy was shown between low doses of NGR-TNF and doxorubicin., Methods: The primary aim of this phase I trial was to verify the safety of low-dose NGR-hTNF combined with doxorubicin in treating refractory/resistant solid tumours. Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics (PKs), pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity. In all 15 patients received NGR-hTNF (0.2-0.4-0.8-1.6 microg m(-2)) and doxorubicin (60-75 mg m(-2)), both given intravenously every 3 weeks., Results: No dose-limiting toxicity occurred and the combination was well tolerated. Around two cases of neutropenic fevers, lasting 2 days, and two cases of cardiac ejection-fraction drops, one asymptomatic and the other symptomatic, were registered. Only 11% of the adverse events were related to NGR-hTNF and were short-lasting and mild-to-moderate in severity. There was no apparent PK interaction and the shedding of soluble TNF-receptors did not increase to 0.8 microg m(-2). One partial response (7%), at dose level 0.8 microg m(-2), and 10 stable diseases (66%), lasting for a median duration of 5.6 months, were observed., Conclusions: NGR-hTNF plus doxorubicin was administered safely and showed promising activity in patients pre-treated with anthracyclines. The dose level of 0.8 microg m(-2) NGR-hTNF plus doxorubicin 75 mg m(-2) was selected for phase II development.

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.

A Valine residue at position 105 of the GSTP1 protein results in decreased enzyme activity. As nuclear GSTP1 activity decreases irinotecan cytotoxicity, Val-allele carriers may benefit more from irinotecan chemotherapy. Our aim was to investigate the association of GSTP1 genotype with treatment outcome of irinotecan. Progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity were determined in 267 metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) patients who were treated with first-line capecitabine (CAP) plus irinotecan (CAPIRI), or CAP single agent in a prospective randomised phase III trial (CAIRO). GSTP1 genotype was determined by Pyrosequencing. Patients receiving CAP showed a PFS of 6.6 (Ile/Ile), 6.0 (Ile/Val) and 6.5 months (Val/Val); compared to 7.0 (Ile/Ile), 8.8 (Ile/Val) and 9.2 months (Val/Val) with CAPIRI. Median PFS was 2.7 months longer in Val-allele carriers treated with CAPIRI compared to CAP (P=0.005). Patients with the Ile/Ile genotype showed similar PFS with CAPIRI and CAP (7.0 compared to 6.6 months, P=0.972). Toxicity did not differ significantly among genotypes. GSTP1 codon 105 polymorphism may be predictive for the response to irinotecan-based chemotherapy in patients with MCRC, with the Val-allele being associated with a better outcome. Ile/Ile genotype patients do not appear to benefit from the addition of irinotecan to CAP.

The aim of the study was to investigate the associations between UGT1A1(*)28 genotype and (1) response rates, (2) febrile neutropenia and (3) dose intensity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan. UGT1A1(*)28 genotype was determined in 218 patients receiving irinotecan (either first-line therapy with capecitabine or second-line as monotherapy) for metastatic colorectal cancer. TA(7) homozygotes receiving irinotecan combination therapy had a higher incidence of febrile neutropenia (18.2%) compared to the other genotypes (TA(6)/TA(6) : 1.5%; TA(6)/TA(7) : 6.5%, P=0.031). TA(7) heterozygotes receiving irinotecan monotherapy also suffered more febrile neutropenia (19.4%) compared to TA(6)/TA(6) genotype (2.2%; P=0.015). Response rates among genotypes were not different for both regimens: combination regimen, P=0.537; single-agent, P=0.595. TA(7) homozygotes did not receive a lower median irinotecan dose, number of cycles (P-values >or=0.25) or more frequent dose reductions compared to the other genotypes (P-values for trend; combination therapy: 0.62 and single-agent: 0.45). Reductions were mainly (>80%) owing to grade >or=3 diarrhoea, not (febrile) neutropenia. TA(7)/TA(7) patients have a higher incidence of febrile neutropenia upon irinotecan treatment, but were able to receive similar dose and number of cycles compared to other genotypes. Response rates were not significantly different.

In advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) the clinical benefit of a platinum-based doublet is only modest, therefore, attenuated dosed three-drug combinations are investigated. We hypothesized that with adequate support a full dosed chemotherapy triplet is feasible. The study was designed as a dose finding study of paclitaxel in chemotherapy-naive patients. Paclitaxel was given as a 3-h infusion on day 1, followed by fixed doses of teniposide (or etoposide) 100mg/m(2) days 1, 3, 5 and cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) day 1 every 3 weeks. As myelotoxicity was expected to be the dose-limiting toxicity, prophylactic G-CSF and antibiotic support was evaluated. Indeed, paclitaxel 120 mg/m(2) resulted in dose-limiting neutropenia, despite G-CSF support. Teniposide/etoposide day 1, 3, 5 was less myelotoxic compared to day 1, 2, 3. G-CSF support allowed paclitaxel dose-escalation to 250 mg/m(2). The addition of prophylactic antibiotics enabled dose-escalation to 275 mg/m(2) without reaching MTD. In conclusion, G-CSF and antibiotics prophylaxis enables the delivery of a full dosed chemotherapy triplet in previously untreated NSCLC patients.

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.

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: Chemoimmunotherapy for patients with metastatic melanoma is associated with high toxicity, and only a subset of patients will benefit. This randomised phase II study was performed with the primary objective of exploring whether two cycles of dacarbazine monotherapy could select the subset of patients that would benefit most from more intensive chemoimmunotherapy., Patients and Methods: Patients with metastatic melanoma were randomised to either receive chemoimmunotherapy with dacarbazine, cisplatin, interferon-alpha and interleukin-2 (arm A) or initial treatment with two cycles of dacarbazine monotherapy followed irrespective of response by the same 4-drug regimen of chemoimmunotherapy (arm B). Chemoimmunotherapy was continued in the absence of disease progression for a maximum of four cycles. Primary end-point was the disease stabilisation rate., Results: A total of 93 patients were randomised, and 89 patients were eligible. Disease stabilisation (complete/partial response or stable disease) was achieved in 19 patients (42.2%) in arm A and 9 patients (20.5%) in arm B. In arm B 32 of the 44 patients continued chemoimmunotherapy after two cycles of dacarbazine. Of 20 patients with progressive disease (PD) after two cycles of dacarbazine in arm B, only 2 patients achieved an objective response. Median overall survival (OS) in arms A and B was 10.5 months and 9.5 months, respectively., Conclusions: Despite a lower initial stabilisation rate, the strategy of starting with 2 courses of DTIC prior to a 4-drug regimen led to comparable median overall survival. Only few transient responses were achieved with the 4-drug regimen in patients with disease progression on DTIC, suggesting frequent cross resistance. Two cycles of dacarbazine monotherapy cannot be recommended to select patients for more intensive chemoimmunotherapy.

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.

Recurrent medulloblastoma carries a poor prognosis. Long-term survival has been obtained with high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation and secondary irradiation. A 21-year-old woman with recurrent medulloblastoma after previous chemotherapy and radiotherapy is presented. The patient was treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation. She developed a severe treatment-related encephalopathy which affected her quality of life and neurocognitive functioning for the rest of her life. Possible causative factors are discussed and central nervous system toxicity by high-dose chemotherapy in brain tumour patients is reviewed. Case reports on severe central nervous system toxicity have been reported, but data from prospective studies on neurocognitive functioning are not available. These data strongly support a systematic long-term follow-up of brain tumour patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy with emphasis on neurocognitive function tests.

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.

Colorectal cancer is a frequently occurring malignancy in the western world. In the Netherlands, there are more than 9000 new patients annually. Approximately half of the patients die of their disease within 5 years. In 2004, several therapeutic studies were presented, the results of which may have a positive impact on the prognosis of a large proportion of patients. This concerns the adjuvant treatment of stage II and III colon carcinoma and the palliative systemic treatment of distant metastases of colorectal carcinoma. In stage II colon carcinoma, the absolute benefit of adjuvant treatment is 3-4%. This must be balanced against the burden of such treatment. Adjuvant treatment with fluorouracil-folinic acid-oxaliplatin is indicated in stage III colon carcinoma and should be considered for patients with stage II colon cancer in whom the prognosis is unfavourable. For patients for whom treatment with fluorouracil-folinic acid-oxaliplatin does not seem suitable, adjuvant treatment with capecitabine is indicated. Treatment with bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, in combination with chemotherapy is considered to be standard practice in first-line treatment. Together with the expected rise in the incidence of colorectal cancer, these developments will have a significant impact on healthcare, both in terms of organization and budget.

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.

Fifty-seven patients with MAGE-3-positive measurable metastatic cancer, most of them with melanoma, were vaccinated with escalating doses of a recombinant MAGE-3 protein combined with a fixed dose of the immunological adjuvant SBAS-2, which contained MPL and QS21. The immunisation schedule included 4 intramuscular (i.m.) injections at 3-week intervals. Patients whose tumour stabilised or regressed after 4 vaccinations received 2 additional vaccinations at 6-week intervals. The vaccine was generally well tolerated. Among the 33 melanoma patients who were evaluable for tumour response, we observed 2 partial responses, 2 mixed responses and 1 stabilisation. Time to progression in these 5 patients varied from 4 to 29 months. In addition, a partial response lasting 10 months was observed in 1 of the 3 metastatic bladder cancer patients included. None of the tumour responses described above involved visceral metastases. Immunological responses to the vaccine will be reported separately.

The aim of this study was to define prognostic factors for survival, and especially for long-term survival in a mature data-set of patients with stage IV melanoma treated within a randomised trial of cytokine-based protocols. Long-term follow-up data on patients enrolled into a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial comparing interferon-alpha (IFNalpha) plus interleukin-2 (IL-2) with or without cisplatin were collected. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to define prognostic factors for survival. The characteristics of patients alive at 2 and 5 years after randomisation were compared with the entire cohort using the chi(2) test. The minimum potential follow-up of the 131 evaluable patients was 5 years. 18 patients (14%) were alive 2 years after randomisation, and 11 (8%) 5 years after randomisation. Pretreatment performance status (PS), serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and tumour mass were significant predictors for survival, whereas site of metastases and number of sites were non-significant. PS and LDH were the only independent prognostic factors. All except 1 patient alive at 2 and 5 years had a pretreatment PS of 100%, and only three long-term survivors had elevated pretreatment LDH. There was no association between the site of metastases and long-term survival. Response to treatment was a major predictor for long-term survival, whereas addition of cisplatin did not impact upon overall survival probability or on long-term survival. The probability of long-term survival in stage IV melanoma patients after IL-2-based treatments is governed by pretreatment PS, serum LDH and response to treatment. Site of metastases, the basis for the M-subcategories of the new AJCC staging system, was not informative in this study.

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.

Objectives: To determine the response rate and factors correlated with response of oligodendroglial tumors to procarbazine, lomustine (CCNU), and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy., Design: Retrospective, observational multicenter study., Methods: Patients treated with PCV or intensified PCV chemotherapy for a recurrent oligodendroglial tumor after surgery and radiation therapy with measurable disease were retrospectively evaluated for response. A 50% reduction in cross-sectional enhancing tumor area was considered a partial response. Stabilized or responding patients received six cycles of PCV unless unacceptable toxicity occurred., Results: Fifty-two patients were included; median time to progression (MTP) for the entire group was 10 months. In 17% of patients a complete response (MTP, 25 months) was obtained, and in 46% a partial response (MTP, 12 months) was obtained. Median overall survival was 20 months. Although treatment was discontinued for toxicity in seven patients, it was generally well tolerated. The intensified PCV regimen was more toxic. Patients initially presenting with seizures and patients with tumor necrosis in histologic specimens had a better response rate in contrast to patients who had their first relapse within 1 year of first treatment (surgery and radiation therapy)., Conclusions: Oligodendroglial tumors are chemosensitive, but most patients will have relapsed after 12 to 16 months. New studies must aim at improving initial treatment and second-line chemotherapy.

Purpose: In patients with stage IV melanoma, durable responses have been reported with treatment regimens that involve high-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2). We analyze long-term results of 631 melanoma patients from 12 institutions who had received IL-2 alone, in combination with interferon alfa 2a or 2b (IFNalpha), or with cytotoxic drugs., Methods: Case records that contained pretreatment parameters, response data, and updated survival information were collected. After univariate analysis, the multivariate evaluation of the impact of pretreatment parameters on response and survival was performed by logistic regression and Cox's regression, respectively., Results: Patients were divided into four groups according to treatment: IL-2 alone (n=117), IL-2 and chemotherapy (n=49), IL-2 and IFNalpha (n=153), and IL-2, chemotherapy, and IFNalpha (n=312). The median survival of all patients was 10.5 months and the 2- and 5-year survival rates were 19.9% and 10.4%, respectively. Independent prognostic factors for response and survival were entirely different, treatment group being the only significant factor for response, and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), metastatic site, and performance predicting survival. The addition of IFNalpha to IL-2 was associated with prolonged survival, but the effect of additional chemotherapy was less obvious., Conclusion: Serum LDH, metastatic site, and performance status are useful stratification factors for randomized trials in metastatic melanoma. The improved long-term survival rates observed in melanoma patients treated with IL-2/IFNalpha-containing regimens are notable in contrast to the reported 5-year survival rates of 2% to 6% achieved with chemotherapy, but because selection bias cannot be ruled out, the impact of IL-2, as well as all other components of the treatment regimens, on survival needs to be confirmed in prospective randomized trials.

Purpose: This article reviews the currently available data on phase II and III trials regarding the efficacy of recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2)-based regimens in the treatment of stage IV melanoma, and discusses the rationale and outcome of past and currently ongoing rIL-2-based chemo-immunotherapy phase III trials conducted by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Melanoma Cooperative Group., Patients and Methods: In the first EORTC-MCG phase III trial, stage IV melanoma patients were stratified on the basis of serum lactate dehydrogenase levels and tumor burden and randomized to receive rIL-2 (decrescendo regimen) plus interferon-alpha (IFN-alpha) plus or minus cisplatin. In the second trial, which is still ongoing, patients are being randomized to receive dacarbazine plus cisplatin plus IFN-alpha plus or minus rIL-2. These studies are designed to address the relative impact of cisplatin and rIL-2, respectively, on response and survival., Results: The addition of cisplatin to immunotherapy (rIL-2 plus IFN-alpha) doubled the response rate from 18% to 35%, but had no impact on survival. The second trial is still ongoing, and no data is available yet on the contribution of rIL-2 to response and survival., Conclusions: Review of the literature and the outcome of our first trial indicate that the addition of single-agent cisplatin or polychemotherapy regimens to immunotherapy with rIL-2 and/or IFN-alpha can dramatically improve response rates. However, what impact, if any, these regimens have on overall survival is not known at this time. We could not demonstrate a survival benefit in the cisplatin-containing arm in spite of the increased response rate. Chemotherapy may yield only short-term responses, whereas immunotherapy appears to yield durable complete responses in a subset of patients. Further randomized phase III studies are needed to identify the essential components in combination regimens and to determine whether the toxicity associated with these regimens is outweighed by potential cure or a significant survival benefit.

S9788 is a new triazineaminopiperidine derivate capable of reversing multidrug resistance (MDR) in cells resistant to chemotherapeutic agents such as doxorubicin. It does not belong to a known class of MDR revertants, but its action involves the binding of P-glycoprotein. Thirty-eight evaluable patients with advanced colorectal or renal cell cancer were treated with doxorubicin alone (16 patients) followed after disease progression with combination treatment of doxorubicin plus S9788 (12 patients) or upfront with the combination of doxorubicin plus S9788 (22 patients). S9788 was given i.v. as a loading dose of 56 mg m-2 over 30 min followed by doxorubicin given at 50 mg m-2 as a bolus infusion. Thereafter, a 2-h infusion of S9788 was administered at escalating doses ranging from 24 to 120 mg m-2 in subsequent cohorts of 4-10 patients. Pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated that concentrations of S9788 that are known to reverse MDR in vitro were achieved in patients at non-toxic doses. Compared with treatment with doxorubicin alone, treatment with the combination of doxorubicin and S9788 produced a significant increase in the occurrence of WHO grade 3-4 granulocytopenia. Treatment with S9788 was cardiotoxic as it caused a dose-dependent and reversible increase in corrected QT intervals as well as clinically non-significant arrhythmias on 24- or 48-h Holter recordings. Although clinically relevant cardiac toxicities did not occur, the study was terminated as higher doses of S9788 may increase the risk of severe cardiac arrhythmias. Twenty-nine patients treated with S9788 plus doxorubicin were evaluable for response, and one patient, who progressed after treatment with doxorubicin alone, achieved a partial response. We conclude that S9788 administered at the doses and schedule used in this study results in relevant plasma concentrations in humans and can safely be administered in combination with doxorubicin.

High response rates in patients with metastatic melanoma have been achieved with combination chemoimmunotherapy. A response rate of 62% in 45 patients has been reported for treatment with dacarbazine, bleomycin, vincristine, lomustine (BOLD) plus interferon alpha (IFN-alpha). We conducted a multicentre phase II study to confirm these results. Melanoma patients with distant metastases were treated as outpatients with dacarbazine 200 mg m(-2) on days 1-5, vincristine 1 mg m(-2) on days 1 and 4, bleomycin 15 mg on days 2 and 5 i.v. and lomustine 80 mg orally on day 1, repeated every 4 weeks. IFN-alpha-2b was initiated s.c. on day 8 at 3 MU daily for 6 weeks, and 6 MU t.i.w. thereafter. Forty-three patients entered the study. The median number of metastatic sites was three (range 1-5), and 81% of patients had visceral metastases. Nine patients had brain metastases, and seven patients were systemically pretreated. Among the 41 patients that were evaluable for response, the response rate was 27% (95% CI 14-3%), with one complete and ten partial remissions. The response rate in 25 previously untreated patients without brain metastases was 40% (95% CI 21-61%). Median duration of response was 6 (range 2-14+) months; median overall survival was 5 (1-26) months. The main toxicity was malaise/fatigue. We confirm that BOLD plus IFN-alpha has activity in metastatic melanoma. The lower response rate in our study compared with the previous report is probably related to patient selection, as in the previous study 46% of patients had stage III disease, whereas all our patients had stage IV disease, which is associated with a worse prognosis.