Search

Few studies have explored the association between baseline characteristics and the occurrence of early toxicities in patients treated with first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Individual patient data of 2190 patients enrolled in 10 prospective FFCD (Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive) trials were analysed. Severe early toxicity was defined as the occurrence of grade ≥III toxicity within 3 months after initiation of chemotherapy (ET3). Patients received monotherapy based on 5-FU (n = 1068), a cytotoxic doublet (n = 395) or tritherapy with a cytotoxic doublet plus anti-VEGF agent or a cytotoxic triplet (n = 727). The patients received 5-FU (100%), Irinotecan (39.6%), Oxaliplatin (13.4%), Bevacizumab (29.6%) or Aflibercept (1.8%). ET3 occurred in 244 patients (22.8%) with monotherapy, 248 patients (62.8%) with doublet and 392 patients (53.9%) with tritherapy. The most frequent ET3s were related to biological abnormalities and/or gastrointestinal, general and vascular disorders. The prognostic factors for the occurrence of an ET3 in multivariate analysis were a performance status of 2 rather than 0–1 (OR 2.57; 95% CI [1.16, 5.73]; p = 0.02), tritherapy versus monotherapy (OR 2.31; 95% CI [0.84, 6.33]; p = 0.02), alkaline phosphatase > 300 UI/l (OR 3.07; 95% CI [1.79, 5.27]; p < 0.001) and non-resected primary tumour versus resection (OR 1.59; 95% CI [1.06, 2.39]; p = 0.02). Median overall survival in patients without ET3 was significantly longer than that in patients with ET3 (HR 0.87; 95% CI [0.80–0.96]; p = 0.004). ET3 is frequent whatever the treatment regimen and is associated with certain baseline characteristics. The clinical impact of ET3 on prognosis in mCRC warrants further investigation. • Severe drug toxicity has a negative impact on prognosis in metastatic colorectal cancer. • Early toxicity within 3 months after first-line regimen initiation may be a key factor. • Early grade III or more toxicity is a new prognostic marker. • Some baseline characteristics are associated with ET3 occurrence. • Early grade III or more toxicity correlates with poorer overall survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anal squamous cell carcinoma is associated with multiple risk factors, including infection with human papillomavirus and human immunodeficiency virus, immunosuppression, multiple sex partners, receptive anal sex and tobacco smoking. The aim of our study was to identify prognostic factors associated with poor outcomes after radiotherapy for anal cancer. We analysed retrospectively the medical records of 171 patients treated by (chemo)radiotherapy for non-metastatic anal cancer in our institution from 2000 to 2015. Patients and tumour characteristics, treatments (chemotherapy, radiotherapy [RT] and surgery) and outcomes were reported. Colostomy-free survival (CRF), disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) at 5 years were studied. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed by logistic regression to determine factors associated with poor progression-free survival (PFS). Patients' characteristics were as follows: median age, 62 years (range = 36–89); gender, 45 men (26%) and 126 women (74%); HIV serology, positive: 21 patients (12%); tobacco smoking, 86 patients (50%), among whom 28 patients and 58 patients were current and former smokers, respectively. Tumours were classified as locally limited (T1–2, N0, M0) for 86 patients (50%) and locally advanced (T3–4 or N+, M0) for 85 patients (50%). The median total dose was 64.4 Gy (range = 54–76.6), and 146 patients were treated by concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Factors associated with poor PFS in univariate analysis were as follows: tumour size >4 cm, lymph node involvement, tobacco smoking, no initial surgical excision and anal warts at diagnosis. In multivariate analysis, only tobacco smoking status was significantly associated with poor PFS (hazard ratio = 2.85, 95% confidence interval [1.25–6.50], p = 0.013). Five-year PFS for non-smokers, former smokers and current smokers was 88.1%, 76.7% and 73.8%, respectively (p = 0.038). Tobacco smoking was also associated with poor overall survival (p = 0.03), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS; p = 0.05) and CFS (p = 0.02). Tobacco smoking status is associated with poor OS, LRFS, PFS and CFS in patients treated for anal cancer by high RT dose ± chemotherapy. • The patients's smoking status is associated with increased risk for anal cancer recurrence, colostomy and death. • The patient's smoking history (current smoker; ex-smoker; never smoker) is also associated with patient's outcome. • The patient's smoking status overcomes all prognostic factors in anal cancer treated by radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Baseline circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a potential prognostic marker in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, few studies have compared ctDNA with the usual prognostic factors, and no ctDNA cut-off has been proposed for daily use in clinical practice. Chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRC were prospectively included. Plasma samples were collected at diagnosis and analysed centrally by both NGS and methylation digital PCR. Baseline patient and disease characteristics, treatment regimens, and secondary surgeries were collected. The restricted cubic spline method was used to define the optimal cut-off of ctDNA mutated allelic frequency (MAF). Prognostic values were assessed on overall survival (OS) using Cox models. From July 2015 to December 2016, 412 patients were included. ctDNA was undetectable in 83 patients (20%). ctDNA was an independent prognostic marker for OS considering the whole study population. The optimal cut-off for ctDNA MAF was 20% with median OS of 16.0 and 35.8 months for patients with MAF ≥20% and<20%, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% confidence intervals: 0.31–0.51; P < 0.0001). The independent prognostic value of ctDNA MAF at 20% was confirmed in subgroups defined by RAS/BRAF status or resectability of metastases. Combining ctDNA MAF and carcinoembryonic antigen levels allowed us to define three different prognostic groups with median OS of 14.2, 21.1, and 46.4 months (P < 0.0001). ctDNA with a MAF cut-off of 20% improves prognostication of chemotherapy-naïve mCRC patients and may be useful in the future for individualised therapeutic decisions and as a stratification factor in clinical trials. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02502656 • ctDNA at baseline was a strong prognostic biomarker. • An optimal mutated allelic frequency (MAF) cut-off of 20% was defined. • Prognostic value of ctDNA was found in all subgroups. • CEA and ctDNA MAF had an independent prognostic value and are not correlated. • CEA and MAF combination classified patients in three prognostic subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), RAS and BRAF mutations are currently determined by tumor sample analysis. Here, we report BRAF mutation status analysis in paired tumor tissue and plasma samples of mCRC patients included in the AGEO RASANC prospective cohort study. Four hundred and twenty-five patients were enrolled. Plasma samples were analyzed by next-generation sequencing (NGS). When no mutation was identified, we used two methylated specific biomarkers (digital droplet PCR) to determine the presence or absence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Patients with conclusive ctDNA results were defined as those with at least one mutation or one methylated biomarker. The kappa coefficient and accuracy were 0.79 (95% CI: 0.67–0.91) and 97.3% (95% CI: 95.2–98.6%) between the BRAF status in plasma and tissue for patients with available paired samples (n = 405), and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80–0.99) and 98.5% (95% CI: 96.4–99.5%) for those with conclusive ctDNA (n = 323). The absence of liver metastasis was the main factor associated to inconclusive ctDNA results. In patients with liver metastasis, the kappa coefficient was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.81–1.00) and accuracy was 98.6% (95% CI, 96.5–99.6%). We demonstrate satisfying concordance between tissue and plasma BRAF mutation detection, especially in patients with liver metastasis, arguing for plasma ctDNA testing for routine BRAF mutation analysis in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]