Search

Background: Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy negatively affects the quality of life for patients with gastrointestinal cancers and may cause neuropathic pain. Measures of peripheral nerve structure or function, such as intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) during treatment could reduce neuropathy severity through individualized dose reduction. Objective: The aim was to evaluate the predictive values of IENFD, quantitative sensory testing (QST), and nerve conduction studies (NCS) for significant neuropathy and neuropathic pain. Methods: Fifty-five patients were examined prospectively before, during, and six months following treatment using skin biopsies, QST and NCS. Clinically significant neuropathy six months after treatment was defined as reduced Total Neuropathy Score of more than five and neuropathic pain was assessed according to International Association for the Study of Pain criteria. Results: Thirty patients had a clinically significant neuropathy, and 14 had neuropathic pain. Vibration detection threshold (VDT) before treatment was correlated with clinically significant neuropathy six months after treatment (OR 0.54, p = 0.01) and reductions in cold detection threshold (CDT) after 25% of treatment (OR 1.38, p = 0.04) and heat pain threshold (HPT) after 50% of treatment (OR 1.91, p = 0.03) with neuropathic pain. Cut off values of 5 for baseline VDT and changes of more than –0.05 °C and –0.85 °C in CDT and HPT were estimated. Sensitivity and specificity was low to moderate. There was no correlation between changes in IENFD or NCS and significant neuropathy or neuropathic pain. Conclusions: Vibration detection thresholds and thermal detection thresholds may be useful for prediction of clinically significant and painful neuropathy, respectively. However, low to moderate sensitivity and specificity may limit the predictive value in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify patterns of palliative chemotherapy (CTh) and the associated overall survival (OS) in patients with pancreatic cancer, with specific focus on age.METHODS: Between May 1, 2011, and April 30, 2016, 4260 patients were registered in the Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database. The 1715 patients receiving palliative CTh were retrieved. Age was grouped into less than 70, 70 to less than 75, and 75 years or more.RESULTS: Of the 1715 patients receiving first-line CTh, 586 (34%) underwent second-line CTh and 151 (9%) third-line CTh. First-line gemcitabine resulted in a significant worse survival compared with combination CTh, hazard ratio 1.51. For combination CTh, OS differed between the age groups, P < 0.01. The median OS in the less than 70 years (n = 547), 70 to less than 75 years (n = 163), and 75 years or more (n = 67) groups were 9.3, 9.6, and 7.2 months, respectively. No differences in survival were observed among patients receiving first-line gemcitabine (P = 0.35).CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are useful in treatment-related decision making in patients with pancreatic cancer. A significant survival benefit was observed for all patients after first-line combination CTh. The effect of combination CTh was most prominent among patients aged less than 75 years. By age, no differences in survival were observed in those receiving gemcitabine.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is treated with cetuximab 250 mg/m2 administered weekly over 1 hour or biweekly (q2w) over 3.5 hours when combined with irinotecan. This prospective study investigated cetuximab 500 mg/m2 plus irinotecan 180 mg/m2 administered q2w over 1.5 hours independent of RAS or BRAF mutation status in mCRC patients in a third-line setting. The intention-to-treat population included 181 patients. No patients had complete response, 18% had partial responses (PR) and 48% stable disease (SD). For cetuximab, a relative dose intensity of ≥90% was reached in 78% and for irinotecan in 67% of the patients. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were pain (17%), fatigue (9%), neutropenia (8%), diarrhea (8%), rash (8%), infection (7%) and hypersensitivity (3%). No deaths occurred. Next-generation sequencing in 96.7% of the patients revealed that 50.3% had RAS and BRAFV600E wild type (WT), with a mutation type (MT) in 45.1% of the RAS and 4.4% of the BRAFV600E genes. In patients with RAS-WT and RAS-MT tumors, a PR was obtained in 32% and 4% (P = .000003) and an SD in 43% and 53%, respectively, with a superior PFS (6.2 vs 3.7 months; hazard ratio [HR] 2.12, P = .00001) and OS (12.9 vs 8.8 months; HR 1.71, P = .0008). Treatment efficacy was poor in 7.4% of patients with an RAS mutation outside KRAS exon 2 and in 38% of patients with KRAS exon 2 mutations. Administration of cetuximab and irinotecan q2w, shortening treatment time from 3.5 to 1.5 hours, is recommended as standard therapy.

Introduction Electrostatic precipitation Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has shown superior penetration depth and tissue uptake compared to standard PIPAC. We investigated the feasibility and objective tumor response to ePIPAC with 1 min of precipitation in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). Materials and methods Patients with PM from various abdominal cancers were included in an amendment to the ongoing prospective PIPAC-OPC2 trial. Colorectal and appendiceal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with PM from other primaries were treated with a combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin. Three ePIPAC procedures were planned in each patient including repeated peritoneal biopsies for response evaluation. After emission to the peritoneal cavity, the aerosolized chemotherapeutics were precipitated for 1 min followed by immediate exsufflation and abdominal closure. Histological regression from the first to the third ePIPAC was evaluated according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and compared to data from the PIPAC-OPC1 trial. Complications and toxicities were recorded according to Dindo-Clavien and CTCAE. Results Sixty-five ePIPAC procedures were performed in 33 patients (median 2, range 1–6). Ten patients were eligible for response evaluation based on biopsies from the first and third ePIPAC procedure. Four patients had disease progression, four patients had regressive disease, and two patients had stable disease according to PRGS. No life threatening adverse reactions and no mortality was observed following ePIPAC. Conclusion One minute ePIPAC was feasible and safe, but the histological tumor response was insufficient compared to standard PIPAC directed therapy with 30 min passive diffusion time.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with the BRAF V600E mutation have a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of 4 to 6 months after failure of initial therapy. Inhibition of BRAF alone has limited activity because of pathway reactivation through epidermal growth factor receptor signaling. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled 665 patients with BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer who had had disease progression after one or two previous regimens. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive encorafenib, binimetinib, and cetuximab (triplet-therapy group); encorafenib and cetuximab (doublet-therapy group); or the investigators' choice of either cetuximab and irinotecan or cetuximab and FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) (control group). The primary end points were overall survival and objective response rate in the triplet-therapy group as compared with the control group. A secondary end point was overall survival in the doublet-therapy group as compared with the control group. We report here the results of a prespecified interim analysis. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 9.0 months in the triplet-therapy group and 5.4 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.70; P

Upper gastrointestinal malignancies have a poor prognosis. There is no consensus on how patients should be followed after surgery. The authors hypothesized that a structured follow-up programme including endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and [After surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinomas in the gastro-oesophageal junction, stomach or pancreas, patients were randomized 1 : 1 to standard clinical assessment in the outpatient clinic at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months after operation, or clinical assessment plus imaging including [In total, 183 patients were enrolled, including 93 who underwent standard follow-up and 90 who had follow-up plus imaging. A recurrence was detected in 84 patients within 2 years after surgery (42 in each group), including 33 of 42 patients in the imaging group who were asymptomatic. Some 25 of 42 patients in the imaging group and 14 of 42 in the standard group received chemotherapy (P = 0·028). Although survival after detection of recurrence in asymptomatic patients was significantly longer than that for symptomatic patients (P 0·001), overall survival from date of surgery in the two treatment groups was comparable.Follow-up after surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer with EUS and PET/CT leads to detection of more asymptomatic cancer recurrences and patients referred for treatment without prolonging overall survival. Registration number: NCT02209415 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).Las neoplasias del tracto digestivo superior tienen un mal pronóstico. No existe consenso sobre en qué pacientes debe indicarse un seguimiento tras la cirugía. Se estableció la hipótesis de que un programa de seguimiento estructurado en el que se incluía ecoendoscopia (endosonography, EUS) y 18F-FDG-PET/CT detecta recidivas del cáncer logrando que más pacientes sean elegibles para tratamiento. MÉTODOS: Después de cirugía con intención curativa para adenocarcinomas de la unión gastroesofágica, estómago o páncreas, los pacientes fueron aleatorizados 1:1 a evaluación clínica estándar en consultas externas a los 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, y 24 meses postoperatorios o evaluación clínica más pruebas de diagnóstico por la imagen en las que se incluían 18F-FDG-PET/CT y EUS. La variable principal fue el número de pacientes que recibieron tratamiento oncológico para la recidiva. Las variables secundarias fueron la supervivencia global y libre de progresión, supervivencia tras la recidiva, la detección de recidivas locorregionales aisladas (isolated loco-regional recurrences, ILR) y factores de riesgo que afectan a la supervivencia.En total se reclutaron 183 pacientes, incluyendo 93 pacientes sometidos a un seguimiento estándar (controles) y 90 pacientes con seguimiento y pruebas de imagen. Se detectó recidiva en 84 pacientes dentro de los primeros dos años tras la cirugía (42 pacientes en cada grupo), incluyendo 33 de 42 pacientes (78%) en el grupo con pruebas de imagen que estaban asintomáticos. Veinticinco de 42 pacientes (60%) del grupo con pruebas de imagen y 14 de 42 pacientes (33%) del grupo control recibieron quimioterapia (P = 0,03). Aunque la supervivencia tras la detección de la recidiva en pacientes asintomáticos fue significativamente más larga en comparación con los pacientes sintomáticos (P 0,001), la supervivencia global desde la fecha de la cirugía en las dos ramas del tratamiento fue comparable. CONCLUSIÓN: El seguimiento tras la cirugía del cáncer gastrointestinal del tracto superior con EUS y PET-CT permite detectar más recidivas asintomáticas de la enfermedad y derivar a los pacientes para tratamiento sin que ello prolongue la supervivencia global.

We have previously published an article describing the protocol for a clinical, non-randomized phase II study (Eudract no. 2013-001648-79) [1], which aimed to provide proof of concept for introduci...

This research letter describes unexpected and unacceptable local toxicity manifesting as abdominal pain after adjuvant pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with 92 mg/m2 oxaliplatin in the PIPAC-OPC3 study. It is not clear whether the toxicity is dose- or drug-dependent (or both), but the preliminary data suggest that tolerability is improved by dose reduction to 46 mg/m2.

Adjuvant therapy is add-on treatment after microscopic radical resection (R0 resection) with the aim to increase the chance for cure. In the adjuvant situation, patients with colon and rectal cancer are treated differently. Pre- and postoperative (chemo)radiation for rectal cancer is discussed in Chap. 18. The scientific support for adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer [1, 2] is much less than in colon cancer. After preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and surgery for patients with rectal cancer, adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemotherapy did not improve overall survival, disease-free survival, or distant recurrences [1, 2]. However, patients with a tumour 10–15 cm from the anal verge and patients who did not receive preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy may benefit from adjuvant therapy and may be treated as a patient with colon cancer. However, in the metastatic situation, patients with colon and rectal cancer are treated as one group.

Every year, almost 1.4 million new patients are diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide, and more than 0.7 million patients will die due to the disease [1]. At the time of diagnosis, around 20% of the patients have synchronous metastases, but totally, nearly 50% of patients will at some point develop metastatic disease (mCRC).

In this study we investigated the use of cancer cell protein expression of ABCG2 to predict efficacy of systemic first-line irinotecan containing therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). From a Danish national cohort, we identified 119 mCRC patients treated with irinotecan containing therapy in first-line setting. Among these, 108 were eligible for analyses. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) analyses were performed on the primary tumor tissue in order to classify samples as high or low presence of ABCG2 protein. Data were then associated with patient outcome (objective response (OR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)). ABCG2 protein expression in the basolateral membrane was high (score 3+) in 33% of the patients. Exploratory analyses revealed a significant interaction between ABCG2 score, adjuvant treatment and OR (p = 0.041) in the 101 patients with evaluable disease. Patients with low ABCG2 (score 0&ndash, 2) and no prior adjuvant therapy had a significantly higher odds ratio of 5.6 (Confidence Interval (CI) 1.68&ndash, 18.7, p = 0.005) for obtaining OR. In contrast, no significant associations between ABCG2 expression and PFS or OS were found. These results suggest that measurement of the ABCG2 drug efflux pump might be used to select patients with mCRC for irinotecan treatment. However, additional studies are warranted before conclusions regarding a clinical use can be made. Moreover, patients with high ABCG2 immunoreactivity could be candidates for specific ABCG2 inhibition treatment in combination with irinotecan.

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) represents a novel approach to deliver intraperitoneal chemotherapy. We report our experience with PIPAC in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC). Data from GC patients (n = 20) included in the prospective PIPAC-OPC1 and PIPAC-OPC2 studies are reported. All patients had received prior systemic chemotherapy. The mean peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 10.5 (range 0-39) and nine patients had diffuse GC. PIPAC with cisplatin 7.5 mg/m2 and doxorubicin 1.5 mg/m2 were administered at 4-6-week intervals. Outcome criteria were objective tumour response, survival and adverse events. Twenty patients had 52 PIPAC procedures with a median follow-up of 10.4 months (3.3-26.5). Median survival from the time of PM diagnosis and after the first PIPAC procedure was 11.5 months and 4.7 months, respectively. Fourteen patients had repeated PIPAC (> 2), and the objective tumour response according to the histological peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) was observed in 36%, whereas 36% had stable disease. Ten patients completed the three prescheduled sessions (per protocol group) and 40% of those displayed an objective tumour response, while 20% had stable disease. Only minor postoperative complications were noted, and none were considered causally related to the PIPAC treatment. PIPAC with low-dose cisplatin and doxorubicin can induce a quantifiable objective tumour response in selected patients with PM from GC. Survival data are encouraging and warrant further clinical studies.

Background Nationwide register data on the effect of primary treatment on survival in an unselected population of patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) have not been reported before. The study aim was to investigate the overall survival (OS) related to initial treatment with resection, chemotherapy, or best supportive care (BSC) in all patients diagnosed with PC in Denmark from 2011 to 2016. Methods From 1 May 2011 to 30 April 2016, 4260 patients with PC were identified in the Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database. Ninety-seven patients (2%) were excluded, 56 because of treatment with preoperative chemotherapy, 39 because of incorrect registration of diagnosis or treatment, and 2 because of loss to follow-up; thus, 4163 patients were included. Results The 718 patients (17%) receiving resection had a median overall survival (mOS) of 21.9 months (range 20.0–24.2). In the chemotherapy group of 1746 patients (42%), those treated with FOLFIRINOX had the longest mOS of 10.0 months (9.2–11.0), whereas those treated with gemcitabine had the shortest mOS of 5.1 months (4.8–5.6). The 1697 patients (41%) receiving BSC had a mOS of only 1.6 months (1.5–1.7). Conclusions The resected PC cohort had an OS comparable with that reported in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The mOS of the chemotherapy-treated patients was slightly shorter compared with the results from RCTs and reflects the unselected population in this study. During the last decade, a larger fraction of patients received anticancer treatment, but the BSC group was still large and showed extremely poor OS.

Bevacizumab; Teràpia intensiva; Càncer colorectal metastàtic Bevacizumab; Terapia intensiva; Cáncer colorrectal metastásico Bevacizumab; Intensive therapy; Metastatic colorectal cancer 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. This study was funded by Servier and Taiho.

Importance: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic cancer following neoadjuvant combination treatment with folinic acid, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) is unclear.Objective: To assess the association of adjuvant chemotherapy with overall survival (OS) in patients after pancreatic cancer resection and neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment.Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018. An existing cohort of patients undergoing resection of pancreatic cancer after FOLFIRINOX was updated and expanded for the purpose of this study. All consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic surgery after at least 2 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy for nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer were retrospectively identified from institutional databases. Patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer were eligible for this study. Patients with in-hospital mortality or who died within 3 months after surgery were excluded.Exposures: The association of adjuvant chemotherapy with OS was evaluated in different subgroups including interaction terms for clinicopathological parameters with adjuvant treatment in a multivariable Cox model. Overall survival was defined as the time starting from surgery plus 3 months (moment eligible for adjuvant therapy), unless mentioned otherwise.Results: We included 520 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 61 [53-66] years; 279 [53.7%] men) from 31 centers in 19 countries. The median number of neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX was 6 (interquartile range, 5-8). Overall, 343 patients (66.0%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 68 (19.8%) received FOLFIRINOX, 201 (58.6%) received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, 14 (4.1%) received capecitabine, 45 (13.1%) received a combination or other agents, and 15 (4.4%) received an unknown type of adjuvant chemotherapy. Median OS was 38 months (95% CI, 36-46 months) after diagnosis and 31 months (95% CI, 29-37 months) after surgery. No survival difference was found for patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy vs those who did not (median OS, 29 vs 29 months, univariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.28; P = .93). In multivariable analysis, only the interaction term for lymph node stage with adjuvant therapy was statistically significant: In patients with pathology-proven node-positive disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival (median OS, 26 vs 13 months; multivariable HR, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.22-0.75]; P = .004). In patients with node-negative disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with improved survival (median OS, 38 vs 54 months; multivariable HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.35-2.10; P = .73).Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and resection of pancreatic cancer was associated with improved survival only in patients with pathology-proven node-positive disease. Future randomized studies should be conducted to confirm this finding.

TPS4664 Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the deadliest form of cancer with a 5-year survival of less than 5% for patients with metastatic disease. Despite improvements over the past years, with the introduction of FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, the majority has disease progression within 6 months after start of first line treatment. The NAPOLI trial was the first phase III study showing that patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer that progressed after treatment with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy benefitted from second line treatment. Patients received liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) either as a single agent or in combination with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV), or 5-FU/LV alone. Patients treated with both nal-IRI and 5-FU/LV experienced a median overall survival (mOS) of 6.1 months versus 4.2 months for the 5-FU/LV group. Recently, two Japanese studies (GEST and JASPAC 01) reported on the use of S-1 in patients with PDAC. In patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC, S-1 was non-inferior compared to gemcitabine in terms of mOS (8.8 months for gemcitabine versus 9.7 months for S-1). In the adjuvant setting, S-1 showed superior mOS compared to gemcitabine, 46.5 and 25.5 months respectively, HR for mortality of S-1 compared with gemcitabine was 0.57 (95% CI 0.44–0.72). In view of these results, the objective of this NAPAN study is to compare the progression free survival (PFS) of nal-IRI plus S-1, with nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV in a Western study population for second line treatment of PDAC. Methods: This is a multi-center, open label, randomized phase II trial. Patients ≥ 18 years of age with histologically or cytologically confirmed PDAC, previously treated with gemcitabine (-based) therapy, or progression within 6 months of adjuvant gemcitabine-based treatment are eligible. After a safety run-in of the nal-IRI plus S-1 regimen, patients will be randomized between nal-IRI plus S-1 and nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV. Primary endpoint of the run-in phase is to determine dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of nal-IRI when co-administered with fixed dose S-1. The primary endpoint of the phase II part is to determine the efficacy of the treatment arms in terms of PFS. Secondary endpoints include OS, response rate according to RECIST 1.1, adverse events according to CTC version 5.0 and Quality of life. Until now 2 of the planned 120 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT03986294 .

Background Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI, also known as TAS-102) prolongs OS in patients with chemorefractory mCRC. Inspired by the results of C-TASK FORCE (Kuboki 2017), we designed an investigator-initiated randomized trial in the last setting in mCRC patients demonstrating improved PFS and OS in patients receiving bevazicumab combined with TAS-102 as compared to patients treated with TAS-102 alone (Pfeiffer WCGI 2019). In the last line setting half of patients will not benefit from therapy as they have PD at the first evaluation performed after 2 months of therapy. In the present study we included an early response evaluation after 1 month of therapy aiming to identify patients not having any effect of therapy. In addition, we evaluated plasma CEA as a marker of response. Methods The main inclusion criteria were: histologically confirmed and chemo-refractory mCRC; PD during or after therapy with FU, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and EGFR-inhibitor (RASwt); prior treatment with bevacizumab was allowed; PS 0-1. In arm A: FTD/TPI 35 mg/m²/dose bid from days 1-5 and 8-12; in arm B the same dose of FTD/TPI with bevacizumab (5 mg/kg), days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Response evaluation performed during treatment at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and every 8 weeks thereafter. CEA was tested at baseline and at every 2. cycle. Results 93 patients with chemo-refractory mCRC were randomized from Sep. 2017 to Oct. 2018. The median PFS was significantly improved from 2.6 months (arm A) to 4.6 months (arm B) with a HR 0.45 (95% CI, 0.29-0.72; P = 0.001). Median OS was significantly prolonged from 6.7 months (arm A) to 9.4 months (arm B) with HR 0.55 (95% CI, 0.32-0.94; P = 0.03) (Pfeiffer WCGI 2019). Sub-group analyses including predictive markers for early progression will presented. Conclusions FTD/TPI in combination with bevacizumab prolong PFS and OS and is a new option in patients with chemo-refractory mCRC. Predictive markers for early progression are ongoing and will be presented. Clinical trial identification 2016-005241-23. Legal entity responsible for the study Per Pfeiffer. Funding Servier. Disclosure C. Qvortrup: Research grant / Funding (institution): Servier. P. Pfeiffer: Research grant / Funding (institution): Servier; Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine has been standard of care in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PC) for almost two decades. Randomized, primarily Japanese, studies have shown promising efficacy when combined with S-1 (GemS-1); however, no data are published in Caucasian patients. We report the first study with a combination of GemS-1 in an unselected cohort of Caucasian PC patients.METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we analyzed efficacy and toxicity prospectively.RESULTS: From July 2012 to July 2014, 64 patients received at least one cycle of GemS-1. 16 patients started therapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine (GemCap) but switched to GemS-1 after median 3 cycles of GemCap due to toxicity (hand-foot syndrome). 48 patients received GemS-1 as initial therapy. For the complete cohort, median age was 68 years (range 44-80); 22 patients (34%) had locally advanced PC; 42 patients (66%) had metastatic disease. Five patients had received prior adjuvant therapy with gemcitabine and 9 pts had received prior first-line therapy. The most common adverse event was fatigue (86%), however, only grade 3 in 3%. Five patients (8%) developed febrile neutropenia. Median PFS was 8.1 (95% CI 6.9-9.0) months and median OS was 11.7 (95% CI 10.7-13.1) months in the whole GemS-1 population. In the 48 patients starting with GemS-1, median PFS was 7.7 (95% CI 6.7-8.9) months and median OS was 11.5 (95% CI 9.7-12.3) months.CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and S-1 is safe and associated with promising efficacy in a Caucasian population; however, this needs to be confirmed in prospective clinical trials.

Quality of life data from randomized trials are lacking in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In the randomized NORDIC9-study, reduced-dose S1+oxaliplatin (SOx) showed superior efficacy compared to full-dose S1 monotherapy. We hypothesized that treatment with SOx does not result in inferior quality of life. Patients with mCRC aged ≥70 years and that were not a candidate for standard combination chemotherapy were included and randomly assigned to receive either S1 or SOx. The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was completed at baseline, after 9, and 18 weeks. The primary endpoint was global Quality of Life (QoL) at 9 weeks. For statistical analysis, a non-inferiority design was chosen applying linear mixed effects models for repeated measurements. The results were interpreted according to statistical significance and anchor-based, clinically relevant between-group minimally important differences (MID). A total of 160 patients aged (median (Interquartile range (IQR))) 78 years (76-81) were included. The QLQ-C30 questionnaire was completed by 150, 100, and 60 patients at baseline, at 9, and 18 weeks, respectively. The difference at 9 weeks in global QoL was 6.85 (95%CI-1.94; 15.65) and 7.37 (0.70; 14.05) in the physical functioning domain in favor of SOx exceeding the threshold for MID. At 18 weeks, the between-group MID in physical functioning was preserved. Dose-reduced combination chemotherapy may be recommended in vulnerable older patients with mCRC, rather than full-dose monotherapy.

e16228 Background: Interleukin-1 Receptor Accessory Protein (IL1RAP) is expressed on cancer and stromal cells in many solid tumors. CAN04 is a fully humanized IgG1 targeting IL1RAP blocking IL-1α and β signaling and triggering ADCC. As monotherapy, CAN04 has been administered without reaching MTD up to 15mg/kg. We report initial data from CAN04 in combination with NG in pts with pancreatic cancer (PDAC). Methods: Primary objective was to determine safety and tolerability of CAN04 in combination with standard NG as first line treatment in pts with locally advanced/metastatic PDAC. Secondary objectives included establishing preliminary efficacy. Tumor responses were evaluated according to RECIST/iRECIST. Results: 36 patients (pts) received at least 1 dose of CAN04: median age 62 yrs (46-87), 47% women, 94% stage IV, 8% had received prior adjuvant therapy; 59% ECOG 0, 41% ECOG 1. Dosing was initiated at 5mg/kg, escalated to 7.5mg/kg (n = 8) which was considered above MTD due to hematological toxicity, followed by expansion at 5mg/kg. Infusion related reactions (IRRs) were seen primarily with CAN04 priming dose of 0.5 mg/kg (25% G1, 25% G2, 3% G3). G3 or higher AEs (all/related) were dominated by hematological toxicity and reported in 89%/72% of pts (see table). SAEs were reported in 67% pts (44% G3/G4), in 33% considered related (19% G3/G4). 33% of pts discontinued due to AEs: 4 deterioration of general condition, 2 IRR, 2 bilirubin elevation, 1 bile duct obstruction, 1 hemolytic uremic syndrome, 1 pancreatitis, 1 asthenia, 1 decreased appetite, 1 pneumonitis. There were 3 on treatment deaths: disease progression, gastrointestinal obstruction and cholangitis. For the mITT efficacy analysis (n = 31), 5 pts were excluded: 3 discontinued before receiving NG (2 consent withdrawals after IRRs, tumor related physical deterioration) and 2 did not complete Cycle 1 due to cholangitis and GI obstruction respectively. 12 pts (39%) had confirmed or unconfirmed PR as best response, 8 (26%) more showed SD and 9 (29%) had PD. Six pts underwent PD confirmation: 3 pts had prolonged immune unconfirmed PD (iUPD) by iRECIST and > 50% decreases in CA19-9 and were on treatment for 4.5 (ongoing), 6 and 8 months, respectively. Clinical benefit rate (PR+SD+prolonged iUPD): 74%. At the time of this analysis, 12 pts (38%) are ongoing. Median duration of response is currently 7.5 months (1.8-13.8 months). Conclusions: The clinical benefit rate of CAN04 in combination with NG is encouraging (74%). The G3/G4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia rate is higher than expected for NG alone. Expansion cohorts at lower CAN04 doses have been initiated. Clinical trial information: NCT03267316. [Table: see text]

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a disease of older age, but there is a relative lack of knowledge about effects of chemotherapy in older patients as they are under-represented in clinical trials. Little data can guide whether the strategy in older mCRC patients should be a sequential full-dose monotherapy chemotherapy approach or a dose-reduced combination chemotherapy approach. The oral 5FU prodrug S-1 seems to have less side effects than capecitabine and should be an optimal drug for older patients, but few data are available. Improved geriatric assessments are needed to select which older patients should receive therapy. Methods: The NORDIC 9 trial is a Nordic multicenter randomized phase II study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 30 mg/m2 twice daily days 1-14 every 3 weeks, followed by second line irinotecan 250-350 mg/m2 iv day 1 every 3 weeks or 180-250 mg/m2 iv day 1 every 2 weeks) with reduced dose combination therapy (S-1 20 mg/m2 days 1-14 + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 iv day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by second line S-1 20 mg/m2 days 1-14 + irinotecan 180 mg/m2 day 1 every 3 week) for older patients (≥70 years) with mCRC who are not candidates for full-dose standard combination therapy. Additional bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) is optional in first-line. Blood samples and tumor tissue will be collected to investigate predictive markers. Geriatric screening tools (G-8, VES-13, Timed-Up-and-Go and Handgrip strength), Charlson Comorbidty Index and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) will be evaluated as predictors of efficacy and toxicity. The target sample size is 150 patients. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival and secondary endpoints are time-to-failure of strategy, overall survival, response rate, toxicity, and correlations between biomarkers, pre-treatment characteristics and geriatric assessments. Discussion: The study will add knowledge on how to treat older mCRC patients who are not candidates for standard combination therapy. Furthermore it may provide understanding of efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in older cancer patients and thus offer a better chance for tailored treatment strategies in these patients. Trial registration: EU Clinical Trial Register, EudraCT no. 2014-000394-39. Registered 05 May 2014.

BACKGROUND: The NORDIC-VII study is a randomised phase III trial of cetuximab plus continuous or intermittent fluorouracil, folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX) vs FLOX alone in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. The present report presents an updated and final survival analysis with BRAF and extended RAS mutational status, 5 years after the primary analysis.METHODS: A total of 566 patients were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population of the NORDIC-VII study. Updated survival status was obtained from 176 patients who were alive in the primary survival analyses. Samples from 223 tumours previously found to be KRAS (exon 2) and BRAF (V600E) wild-type, were re-analysed for KRAS (exons 3 and 4) and NRAS (exons 2-4) mutations.RESULTS: Including the extended RAS analyses, RAS and BRAF mutational status was available from 457 patients (81% of the ITT population). RAS was mutated in 46% and BRAF in 12% of the tumours. RAS and BRAF, if mutated, were negative prognostic factors. The updated analyses confirmed the finding of the primary report that cetuximab did not provide any additional benefit when added to FLOX in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours, neither on progression-free nor overall survival. However, the outcomes in a subset of patients, which, after the first eight treatment cycles, received cetuximab alone, suggested a beneficial effect of cetuximab monotherapy.CONCLUSIONS: Adding cetuximab to Nordic FLOX did not provide any clinical benefit, but the data suggested an effect of cetuximab monotherapy in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours in the NORDIC-VII cohort. The data were compatible with a negative interaction between cetuximab and the Nordic FLOX chemotherapy backbone.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 (trifluridine-tipiracil) has shown a significant overall survival benefit compared with placebo in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Inspired by the encouraging results of a small phase 1-2 study, C-TASK FORCE, which evaluated the combination of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer, we aimed to compare the efficacy of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab versus TAS-102 monotherapy in patients receiving refractory therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer .METHODS: This investigator-initiated, open-label, randomised, phase 2 study enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic colorectal from four cancer centres in Denmark. The main inclusion criteria were histopathologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer refractory or intolerant to a fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and cetuximab or panitumumab (only for RAS wild-type), and WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Previous therapy with bevacizumab, aflibercept, ramucirumab, or regorafenib was allowed but not mandatory. Participants were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) in block sizes of two, four, or six by a web-based tool to receive oral TAS-102 (35 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-5 and 8-12 every 28 days) alone or combined with intravenous bevacizumab (5 mg/kg on days 1 and 15) until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient decision to withdraw. Treatment assignment was not masked, and randomisation was stratified by institution and RAS mutation status. The primary endpoint was investigator-evaluated progression-free survival. All analyses were based on intention to treat. This trial is registered with EudraCT, 2016-005241-23.FINDINGS: From Aug 24, 2017, to Oct 31, 2018, 93 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to TAS-102 (n=47) or TAS-102 plus bevacizumab (n=46). The clinical cut-off date was Feb 15, 2019, after a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 6·8-14·0). Median progression-free survival was 2·6 months (95% CI 1·6-3·5) in the TAS-102 group versus 4·6 months (3·5-6·5) in the TAS-102 plus bevacizumab group (hazard ratio 0·45 [95% CI 0·29-0·72]; p=0·0015). The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse event was neutropenia (18 [38%] of 47 in the TAS-102 monotherapy group vs 31 [67%] of 46 in the TAS-102 plus bevacizumab group). Serious adverse events were observed in 21 (45%) patients in the TAS-102 group and 19 (41%) in the TAS-102 plus bevacizumab group. No deaths were deemed treatment related.INTERPRETATION: In patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer, TAS-102 plus bevacizumab, as compared with TAS-102 monotherapy, was associated with a significant and clinically relevant improvement in progression-free survival with tolerable toxicity. The combination of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab could be a new treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer and could be a practice-changing development.FUNDING: Servier.

The Multicenter phase III comparison of cisplatin/S-1 with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma study (FLAGS) and the Diffuse Gastric and Esophagogastric Junction Cancer S-1 Trial (DIGEST) have shown that patients with advanced gastric cancer treated with S-1/Cisplatin (CS) have similar overall survival (OS) compared to 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin (CF). The purpose of this analysis was to identify patients who may specifically benefit from CS using meta-enrichment analysis of the combined two datasets. Eleven clinico-pathological factors were selected and a high response enrichable population was determined. The efficacy of CS in the combined data set of 1365 patients (n = 1019 from FLAGS and n = 346 from DIGEST) was analyzed. We identified 683 patients (n = 374 from CS, n = 309 from CF) as the high response enrichable population who were classified as those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) 1, more than two metastatic sites and low neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (log(NL ratio)). In the high response enrichable population, the median OS in the CS group was 241 days compared to 210 days in the CF group (hazard ratio 0.776, 95% confidence interval 0.658 to 0.915, p-value 0.004). Through meta-enrichment analysis, the high response enrichable population to CS was identified. Our findings show the clinical importance of selecting the appropriate treatment based on specific patient characteristics.

Background: Older or vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer are seldom included in randomised trials. The multicentre NORDIC9 trial evaluated reduced-dose combination chemotherapy compared with full-dose monotherapy in older, vulnerable patients. Methods: This randomised, open-label phase 2 trial was done in 23 Nordic oncology clinics and included patients aged 70 years or older with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer who were not candidates for full-dose combination chemotherapy. Patients were block randomised (1:1) using a web-based tool to full-dose S-1 (30 mg/m 2 orally twice daily on days 1–14 every 3 weeks) followed by second-line treatment at progression with irinotecan (250 mg/m 2 intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks or 180 mg/m 2 intravenously on day 1 every 2 weeks) or reduced-dose combination chemotherapy with S-1 (20 mg/m 2 orally twice daily on days 1–14) and oxaliplatin (100 mg/m 2 intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks) followed by second-line treatment at progression with S-1 (20 mg/m 2 orally twice daily on days 1–14) and irinotecan (180 mg/m 2 intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks). Use of bevacizumab (7·5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of each cycle) was optional. Treatment allocation was not masked and randomisation was stratified for institution and bevacizumab. The primary outcome was progression-free survival. Survival analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done on the treated population. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2014-000394-39, and is closed to new participants. Findings: From March 9, 2015, to Oct 11, 2017, 160 patients with a median age of 78 years (IQR 76–81) were randomly assigned to full-dose monotherapy (n=83) or reduced-dose combination chemotherapy (n=77). At data cutoff (Sept 1, 2018; median follow-up 23·8 months [IQR 18·8–30·9]), 81 (98%) patients in the full-dose monotherapy group and 71 (92%) patients in the reduced-dose combination group had progressed or died. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with reduced-dose combination chemotherapy (6·2 months [95% CI 5·3–8·3]) than with full-dose monotherapy (5·3 months [4·1–6·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72 [95% CI 0·52–0·99]; p=0·047). Toxicity was evaluated in 157 patients who received treatment. Significantly more patients in the full-dose monotherapy group (51 [62%] of 82 patients) experienced at least one grade 3–4 adverse event than in the reduced-dose combination group (32 [43%] of 75 patients; p=0·014). Grade 3–4 diarrhoea (12 [15%] vs two [3%]; p=0·018), fatigue (ten [12%] vs three [4%]; p=0·083), and dehydration (five [6%] vs none; p=0·060) were more frequent in the full-dose monotherapy group than in the reduced-dose combination group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in three patients during first-line treatment and three patients during second-line treatment (two in the full-dose monotherapy group vs one in the reduced-dose combination group in both cases). Interpretation: Reduced-dose combination chemotherapy with S-1 and oxaliplatin for older, vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was more effective and resulted in less toxicity than full-dose monotherapy with S-1. Reduced-dose combination chemotherapy could be a preferred treatment for this population. Funding: Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Nordic Group, the Danish Cancer Society, the Swedish Cancer Society, Academy of Geriatric Research (AgeCare), and Region of Southern Denmark.

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection is the standard treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC). Randomized clinical trials using gemcitabine have shown a median overall survival (mOS) of 2 years and a 5-year survival rate of 15-20%. However, the effect of gemcitabine outside these trials is less clear. We examined the effect of postoperative gemcitabine on survival in an unselected cohort of patients receiving curative resection for PC in Denmark during a five-year period. Material and methods: From 1 May 2011 to 30 April 2016, 731 patients treated with curative resection were identified in the Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database (DPCD). Thirty patients died within 10 weeks postoperatively; 78 received other regimens or preoperative chemotherapy and were excluded. Of the remaining 623 patients, the chemotherapy (CT) group (n = 409, 66%) received gemcitabine within 10 weeks after resection, whereas the non-chemotherapy (NCT) group (n = 214, 34%) did not receive CT within 10 weeks. Results: CT patients were slightly younger than NCT patients but did not otherwise differ in baseline characteristics. The CT group showed a mOS of 24 months (95% CI; 21–27) and a 5-year survival rate of 22% (95% CI; 17–27); the NCT group had a mOS of 22 months (95% CI; 16–26, p = .27) and a 5-year survival rate of 26% (95% CI; 19–34, p = .66). Most patients (415/623) had lymph node metastases. Of these patients, those in the CT group (n = 280) had significantly longer mOS [20 months (95% CI; 18–24)] than those in the NCT group (n = 135) [14 months (95% CI; 11–17)]. Conclusions: In this national Danish cohort of PC patients undergoing resection between 2011 and 2016, the survival after postoperative gemcitabine was similar to that reported in previous clinical trials. However, the survival advantage of postoperative gemcitabine was limited to patients with lymph node metastases.

676 Background: TASCO1 is a phase II study which evaluated the safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil + bevacizumab (TT-B) and capecitabine + bevacizumab (C-B) in first-line unresectable mCRC patients non-eligible for intensive therapy. Promising activity was shown on progression-free survival with TT-B (9.2 months) and C-B (7.8 months). Here we present the Quality of Life (QoL) analysis of the two treatment arms. Methods: In TASCO1, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive TT-B (n = 76) on a four-week cycle or C-B (n = 77) on a three-week cycle. QoL was assessed in TASCO1 at baseline and at each 12 weeks thereafter, until discontinuation of study treatment, using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires. Responses were described separately in each arm using descriptive statistics. Results: For QLQ-C30, 121 patients completed baseline questionnaire. No clinically relevant difference was observed on treatment in mean change of score from baseline for the global health status, functioning scales, and for most of the symptom scales, except for nausea/vomiting and diarrhoea (worsening in the TT-B group and stable in the C-B group for both symptoms), fatigue (stable in the TT-B group and worsening in the C-B), loss appetite (worsening in the two groups) and insomnia (improvement in the two groups). For QLQ-CR29, 117 patients completed baseline questionnaire. No clinically relevant difference on treatment was observed in mean change of score from baseline for most of items except for the following: hair loss, trouble with taste (worsening for both symptoms in the TT-B group while stable for hair loss and improvement for trouble with taste in the C-B group), sore skin, dry mouth (stable in the TT-B group and worsening in the C-B group for both symptoms), and anxiety (stable in the TT-B group and improvement in the C-B group). Conclusions: The Global Health Scale was maintained in Trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab arm as well as in the capecitabine+bevacizumab arm. No clinically relevant difference from baseline was observed over time in both groups except for few sub-scales. Clinical trial information: NCT02743221.

637 Background: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI, also known as TAS-102) is approved for the use in patients with chemorefractory mCRC. Inspired by the encouraging results of a small phase I/II study, C-TASK FORCE, evaluating the combination of FTD/TPI and bevacizumab in chemorefractory mCRC patients (Kuboki et al, 2017), we designed the present randomized trial. Methods: This randomized study enrolled as planned 80 mCRC patients. The main inclusion criteria were: histologically confirmed and chemorefractory mCRC; PD during or after therapy with fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, EGFR-inhibitor (RAS wildtype), and bevacizumab was optional; PS 0-1. In arm A, FTD/TPI was administered orally at the dose of 35 mg/m²/dose bid from day 1 to day 5 and from day 8 to day 12 and in arm B the same dose of FTD/TPI was combined with bevacizumab at a dose of 5 mg/kg on day 1 and on day 15 of a 28-day treatment cycle. The primary endpoint was to increase progression-free survival (PFS) from 1.8 months to 3.8 months. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: Eighty patients with chemorefractory mCRC were randomized from September 2017 to August 2018. The median PFS was significantly improved from 2.6 months (arm A) to 5.9 months (arm B) with a hazard ratio (HR) 0.51 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.92; P < 0.03) and median OS was significantly improved from 7.3 months (arm A) to 10.3 months (arm B) with HR 0.42 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.99; P < 0.05). After median follow-up for OS of 5.6 months, 57 patients were alive at September 7th, 2018. Therapy was well tolerated with adverse events as expected, patients receiving FTD/TPI + bevacizumab had more grade 3-4 neutropenia (56% in arm B vs 30% in arm A, p = 0.03) and three patients in arm B (vs zero in arm A ) developed febrile neutropenia. SAEs were observed in 13 (arm A) and 11 patients (arm B), respectively. Conclusions: In patients with chemorefractory mCRC, FTD/TPI + bevacizumab, as compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy, was associated with a significant and clinical relevant improvement in PFS and OS with tolerable toxicity. Clinical trial information: 2016-005241-23.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease where prognosis is dependent both on tumor biology and host factors. Total circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has shown to harbor prognostic information in mCRC, although less is known about the biological correlates of cfDNA levels in this patient group. The primary objective was to evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment cfDNA in patients receiving the first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for mCRC, by using a predefined upper limit of normal (ULN) from a cohort of presumed healthy individuals. The secondary objective was to model cfDNA levels as a function of predefined tumor and host factors.PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective post hoc study based on a prospective multicenter phase III trial, the NORDIC-VII study. DNA was purified from 547 plasma samples and cfDNA quantified by a droplet digital PCR assay (B2M, PPIA) with controls for lymphocyte contamination. Main clinical end point was overall survival (OS).RESULTS: cfDNA was quantified in 493 patients, 54 were excluded mainly due to lymphocyte contamination. Median cfDNA level was 7673 alleles/ml (1050-1 645 000) for B2M and 5959 alleles/ml (555-854 167) for PPIA. High cfDNA levels were associated with impaired outcome; median OS of 16.6 months for levels above ULN and 25.9 months for levels below ULN (hazard ratio = 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.51-2.21, P CONCLUSION: cfDNA holds promise as a minimally invasive and clinically relevant prognostic biomarker in mCRC before initiating first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and may be a complex entity associated with tumor burden, liver metastases and systemic inflammatory response.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00145314.

Background and purpose: Assessment of the severity of chronic peripheral neuropathy during oxaliplatin treatment is based on symptoms. Efforts to adjust the total dose of oxaliplatin to prevent severe neuropathy can be complicated by the worsening of neuropathy symptoms following treatment. Objective measures of the structure and function of peripheral nerves during early phases of treatment may aid in determining the optimal oxaliplatin dose in individual patients. Intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD) has been suggested as an early marker of peripheral neuropathy. Methods: Sixty patients were examined before treatment and following 25% and 50% of the total planned oxaliplatin dose. Fifty-five of them were also examined at completion of chemotherapy and 6 months later. IENFD in skin biopsies from the distal leg, nerve conduction studies and quantitative sensory testing at the dorsum of the foot were performed. Forty-six healthy subjects were examined at baseline and after 6 and 52 weeks for comparison. Results: Intraepidermal nerve fibre density was not reduced during treatment. Sural nerve amplitude and conduction velocity, vibration detection thresholds, mechanical detection threshold and cold detection threshold were significantly reduced during treatment. Compared to reference values and spontaneous changes in healthy subjects, the largest proportions of patients with deterioration were found for vibration detection thresholds followed by nerve conduction studies, mechanical detection threshold, cold detection threshold and IENFD. Conclusions: Significant changes were most pronounced for measures of large nerve fibre function, especially vibration sensation. Skin biopsies do not seem to provide a clinically relevant objective measure of peripheral nerve deterioration during oxaliplatin treatment.

BackgroundPressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a drug-delivery method for patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). The study objective was to investigate whether PIPAC is possible in an outpatient setting.MethodsData was extracted from the prospective PIPAC-OPC2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03287375). Patients with PM were treated by cisplatin and doxorubicin (PIPAC C/D), except patients with colorectal PM, who were treated by oxaliplatin (PIPAC OX). Patients were evaluated concerning the suitability for carrying out the PIPAC procedure in an out- patient setting. The preconditions for outpatient surgery were that the patient should be (1) freely mobilized, (2) adequately pain-relieved, (3) have untroubled urination and (4) without anxiety or discomfort caused by leaving the hospital.ResultsDuring the study period, 106 PIPAC procedures (79 PIPAC C/D, 27 PIPAC OX) were performed in 41 patients with gastrointestinal or ovarian PM. Ninety percent (37/41) of the patients were pretreated with systemic chemotherapy. Eight patients (20%) received bidirectional chemotherapy. Twenty-four percent (10/41) of the first PIPAC procedures were completed in an outpatient setting, which increased to 65% (13/20) in PIPAC no 3 (p=0.008). In the PIPAC C/D cohort, 28% and 80% of the PIPACs were performed in the outpatient setting at PIPAC 1 and 3 respectively, contrasting to only 11% and 20% in the PIPAC OX group. No readmissions after outpatient care. Postoperative morphine administration was more frequent in the PIPAC OX group.ConclusionsThe PIPAC procedure can be performed in an outpatient setting. The critical component for success is pain control.

14 Background: Our phase II randomized study was conducted in patients with previously untreated unresectable mCRC not eligible to receive standard oxaliplatin- or irinotecan- based chemotherapy regimens. The results of the primary study analysis were reported earlier and demonstrated a promising efficacy in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and an acceptable safety profile for the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil + bevacizumab (E. Van Cutsem et al. Ann. Oncol. 2020). Here we present the final end-of-study analysis on the overall survival (OS). Methods: Eligible patients were randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either trifluridine/tipiracil administered orally at 35 mg/m²/dose bid from days 1-5 and days 8-12, and bevacizumab at 5 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day treatment cycle (TT-B), or capecitabine administered orally at 1250 or 1000 mg/m²/dose bid (according to the patient’s status) from days 1-14 and bevacizumab at 7.5 mg/kg on day 1 of a 21-day treatment cycle (C-B). Cycles were repeated until documented disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or investigator’s/patient’s decision. Following the treatment discontinuation, all patients were followed for OS until the end-of-study, which was defined as the date of the withdrawal visit for the last patient. In the absence of death confirmation or for patients alive as of the end-of-study date, survival time was censored at the date of their last study follow-up. For the OS analysis the HR and the corresponding 2-sided 80% and 2-sided 95% CIs for TT-B versus C-B were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard model adjusting for the stratification factors based on IWRS data. OS was summarized using Kaplan-Meier curves and further characterized in terms of the median and survival probabilities at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months along with the corresponding 2-sided 80% and 2-sided 95% CI (Brookmeyer and Crowley CI for median and Kalbfleisch and Prentice CI for survival probabilities). Results: From April 2016 to March 2017, 153 patients were randomized and followed until end-of-study on September 1, 2020. Twenty-one patients, 11 from TT-B and 10 from C-B, were alive and censored for the analysis. Median OS was 22.31 months in TT-B and 17.67 months in C-B with HR 0.78 (95% CI, 0.55, 1.10). Survival probability at 18 months in TT-B was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.50, 0.72), and 0.47 (95% CI, 0.35, 0.57) in C-B. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated earlier a median PFS of 9.2 months for TT-B and 7.8 months for C-B when administered to patients with previously untreated unresectable mCRC ineligible for standard combination chemotherapy. The final study analysis performed on OS, the main secondary endpoint, provided further evidence for TT-B as a noteworthy valuable regimen in this population settings. Clinical trial information: NCT02743221.

Oral fluoropyrimidines have been available for more than 10 years. Capecitabine is well established in treating solid tumors in Europe. S-1 (Teysuno®), an oral formulation containing the 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) prodrug tegafur and the two enzyme modulators gimeracil and oteracil, has not been available in non-Asia countries until recently. In Japan, S-1 in combination with cisplatin is the recommended first-line treatment in patients with gastric cancer. In Europe, the first trials with S-1 were disappointing due to high unacceptable incidences of adverse events. Pharmacokinetic studies showed differences in Asian and Caucasian patients; therefore, a new non-Asian study program was initiated, which led to the pivotal phase 3 trial First-Line Advanced Gastric Cancer Study (FLAGS). In FLAGS, 1,053 patients with advanced gastric cancer from 24 non-Asian countries were enrolled. S-1 plus cisplatin showed no overall survival (OS) benefit when compared to 5-FU plus cisplatin. The primary endpoint superior OS was not met but better tolerability was shown. A post hoc noninferiority OS and safety analysis showed that S-1 plus cisplatin has the same efficacy as 5-FU plus cisplatin but a more favorable safety profile. This led to the approval of S-1 in combination with cisplatin in gastric cancer in Europe in 2011. This article reviews the mode of action of S-1, pivotal study results from an EU point of view, and future perspectives.

Oxaliplatin resistance in colorectal cancers (CRC) is a major medical problem, and predictive markers are urgently needed. Recently, miR-625-3p was reported as a promising predictive marker. Herein, we show that miR-625-3p functionally induces oxaliplatin resistance in CRC cells, and identify the signalling networks affected by miR-625-3p. We show that the p38 MAPK activator MAP2K6 is a direct target of miR-625-3p, and, accordingly, is downregulated in non-responder patients of oxaliplatin therapy. miR-625-3p-mediated resistance is reversed by anti-miR-625-3p treatment and ectopic expression of a miR-625-3p insensitive MAP2K6 variant. In addition, reduction of p38 signalling by using siRNAs, chemical inhibitors or expression of a dominant-negative MAP2K6 protein induces resistance to oxaliplatin. Transcriptome, proteome and phosphoproteome profiles confirm inactivation of MAP2K6-p38 signalling as one likely mechanism of oxaliplatin resistance. Our study shows that miR-625-3p induces oxaliplatin resistance by abrogating MAP2K6-p38-regulated apoptosis and cell cycle control networks, and corroborates the predictive power of miR-625-3p., Oxaliplatin resistance in colorectal cancers is a major clinical problem, and predictive markers are urgently needed. Here, the authors show that miR-625-3p expression reduces the sensitivity of colorectal cancer cells to oxaliplatin by targeting the kinase MAP2K6, an activator of the MAPK14 pathway.

Background: An aging population will increase the number of older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, there is limited knowledge about treatment in older patients as they are under-represented in clinical trials. The oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 is associated with a lower rate of adverse events than capecitabine and may therefore be a suitable drug for elderly. However, data on the use of S-1 in Caucasian mCRC patients are lacking/scarce. Material and methods: In the present study we evaluated safety and the efficacy of S-1 alone or in combination with oxaliplatin (SOx) or irinotecan (IRIS) in older mCRC patients. Patients who received at least one cycle of S-1 (first-line therapy), SOx (mainly first-line therapy) or IRIS (second-line therapy) were included. Results: From June 2012 to December 2014, 71 older patients received ≥1 cycle of either S-1 (n = 9), SOx (n = 44) or IRIS (n = 18) for mCRC. Median age was 76 years and most patients had a WHO performance status of 0 (32%) or 1 (56%). All patients were evaluable for response and safety. In the SOx group, 18 (41%) and 20 patients (45%) had partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD), respectively (disease control rate 86%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.5 months and median overall survival (OS) was 18.5 months. In the S-1 group (median age 82 years), PR was 22%, median PFS 6.4 months and median OS 15.8 months. In the IRIS group, PR was 28%, median PFS 7.8 months and the median OS 16.5 months. In general, therapy was well tolerated; main non-hematological toxicities were fatigue and diarrhea. Conclusion: S-1 monotherapy, SOx and IRIS were well tolerated for older patients with mCRC and could become alternative regimens in older mCRC patients. These regimens are now further evaluated in the randomized ongoing NORDIC9 trial.

Background MicroRNAs (miRs) are small non-coding RNAs. Circulating miRs in plasma are deregulated in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The aim was to find prognostic circulating miRs for overall survival (OS) in patients with mCRC treated with chemotherapy and cetuximab. Methods A prospective biomarker study was conducted. A full plasma miR-panel was tested with TaqMan Human MicroRNA assay in 151 patients treated with 3rd line irinotecan and cetuximab (Discovery cohort, Biweekly study). Significant miRs were validated with Fluidigm arrays, in 95 patients, treated with 1st line chemotherapy and cetuximab (Validation cohort, NORDIC-7.5 study1). Cox regression analysis was conducted, and multivariate analyses performed with adjustment for sidedness, number of metastatic sites, RAS/BRAF mutation status, age and performance status. Consecutive samples after 3 months of treatment were available for 117 and 86 patients in the discovery and validation cohorts, respectively. Results Baseline high expression of miR-1247 in the discovery and validation cohorts, was significantly associated with short OS (hazard ratio [HR]) = 2.33, p = 0.0005) based on the multivariate analysis in the validation cohort. High miR-1290 expression after 3 months was prognostic for short progression free-survival (HR = 1.57, p = 0.0465) in both cohorts. In both cohorts, we found a statistically significant decrease in, miR-1290 (p = 0.0051), miR-200b (p = 0.036), and miR-375 (p = 0.00005), from baseline to 3 month-sample, in patients with partial/complete (n = 78) response compared to patients with progressive disease (n = 72). Conclusions High expression of miR-1247 was prognostic for short OS in the multivariate analysis in a discovery and validation cohort of patients treated with chemotherapy and cetuximab in both first and third line. A decrease in miR-1247 and miR-1290 during treatment was associated with favorable response. 1Pfeiffer et al, Clin Colorectal Cancer 2015. Legal entity responsible for the study Jakob Vasehus Scho. Funding Has not received any funding. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background Cetuximab (cet) improves efficacy of first-line FOLFIRI in pts with RAS/RAFwt metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Triplet chemotherapy improves efficacy further but with increased toxicity. Alternating FOLFIRI/FOLFOX is a different way to administer all 3 cytotoxic drugs. We report the updated results from Nordic 8, a multi-centre, randomised trial comparing cet with FOLFIRI (arm A) or with FOLFIRI alternating with FOLFOX (arm B). Methods In this investigator initiated randomised trial, 173 chemo-naive mCRC patients received cet with FOLFIRI or cet with FOLFIRI (2 cycles) alternating with FOLFOX until PD. Main inclusion criteria were PS 0 or 1, RASwt and ESMO group 1-3 (prior to April 2014 only ESMO group 1 when 36 patients had been included)). The primary endpoint was RR (increase from 60% to 75%) and secondary endpoints were PFS, OS and safety. All endpoints were evaluated by the local investigator. Results From May 2012 to May 2018, 173 patients were randomized. Median age was 64 years (25% were at least 70 years), female 34%, PS 0 61%, ESMO group 1/2/3 64%/23%/13%. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups. Median duration of therapy was 6.2 months in both arms and patients received a median of 11 and 12 cycles, respectively, without any difference in dose-intensity. In arm A and B overall RR was 69% and 78% (p = 0.17), median PFS was 11.9 (arm A) and 11.8 months (arm B) (HR 1.10; p = 0.60), and median OS was 40.7 and 39.2 months (HR 1.05; p = 0.82), respectively. Most important grade ≥ 3 adverse events were neutropenia (15% vs 17%), rash (9% vs 15%), diarrhoea (7% vs 11%), fatigue (7% vs 7%), and febrile neutropenia (3% vs 1%); 20% in arm B experienced neuropathy grade 2 (no grade 3). Final and updated PFS and OS with sub-group analysis will be presented. Conclusions Cet every two weeks in combination with FOLFIRI or alternating FOLFIRI/FOLFOX is well tolerated with high RR and long OS. We recommend FOLFIRI + cet every 2 weeks in patients with RAS and BRAFwt mCRC. Clinical trial identification 2011-004188-65. Legal entity responsible for the study Nordic Biomodulation Group. Funding Merck. Disclosure C. Kersten: Research grant / Funding (institution), Licensing / Royalties, Relationship is unrelated to this study: Merck KGaA. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

BackgroundPeritoneal metastasis (PM) is the second most common site of recurrence in colon cancer (CC) patients and accounts for approximately one-third of all recurrences. Patients with T4 or intraperitoneal perforated colon cancers have an increased risk of developing PM, and since manifest PM is difficult to treat, high-risk patients should be offered prophylactic treatment. Here, we propose a study of adjuvant oxaliplatin administered as pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC OX) in patients with high-risk colon cancer (T4, perforated tumors, ovarian metastasis).MethodsPIPAC-OPC3 CC is a non-randomized, non-blinded phase 2 cohort study designed to treat high-risk colon cancer patients with adjuvant PIPAC-directed therapy. Based on an expected 90 % peritoneal recurrence-free survival with adjuvant PIPAC against the estimated 75 % without, 60 patients are needed (α: 0.05, power: 0.8). Eligible patients will receive two PIPAC treatments with oxaliplatin (92 mg/m2) at 4–6 week intervals. During laparoscopy, the peritoneum is biopsied at two locations, and peritoneal lavage with 500 mL of saline and laparoscopic ultrasound is performed. The patients are screened for adverse medical events and surgery-related complications after each PIPAC procedure. After the second PIPAC procedure, the patients will be examined in the outpatient clinic and followed with CT scans 12, 24 and 36 months after resection. The primary outcome of the PIPAC-OPC3 CC trial is to evaluate if PIPAC-directed adjuvant therapy can reduce the risk of PM. Secondary outcomes include the number of conversions from positive to negative peritoneal lavage cytology after one PIPAC procedure, completion rate of two adjuvant PIPAC treatments, toxicity and complication rate and recurrence-free and overall survival rates after 1, 3 and 5 years.ResultsIt is expected that PIPAC-directed adjuvant therapy can provide an absolute risk reduction of 15 % regarding the development of PM in high-risk colon cancer patients, and that this may result in increased survival rates. We expect that free intraperitoneal tumor cells (FITC) may be detected by peritoneal lavage performed just prior to the administration of PIPAC-directed therapy, and that this treatment may convert FITC-positive patients to a FITC-negative status.ConclusionsThis study may provide important knowledge to be used in designing additional studies on PIPAC in the adjuvant setting of other primary cancers.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03280511 (2017-09-12). European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) 2017-002637-37.

Background: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is a common endpoint in both gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal cancers, and PC is treated as other systemic metastases - unfortunately with disappointing results and considerable side-effects. Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new method of applying traditional chemotherapy, and preliminary data indicate that PIPAC is safe, able to stabilize or improve quality of life, and can induce an objectively measurable reduction in disease burden in PC. Methods: PIPAC-OPC2 is a prospectively controlled Phase II, single center, one-arm, open-label clinical trial investigating the treatment effect of PIPAC in patients with histological or cytological proven PC from gastrointestinal, ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer. Eligible patients will receive PIPAC in series of three using a combination of doxorubicin (1.5 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin 7.5 mg/m(2)) for non-colorectal cancer patients (PIPAC C/D), and oxaliplatin (92 mg/m(2)) in patients with PC of colorectal origin (PIPAC OX). Patients are monitored by: (1) repeated measurements of the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) in biopsies obtained from metal clips marked areas, (2) Quality-of-Life (QoL) questionnaires, (3) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and (4) Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI). Adverse events and surgical complications will be recorded according to the 30 days definition. Results: The primary outcome of PIPAC-OPC2 is to evaluate if PIPAC can induce major or complete response (PRGS 1 or 2) within a series of three PIPAC procedures. Secondarily this study investigates changes in QoL and MRI as a staging and response evaluation tool. The secondary outcomes will be used to create a model that may predict which of the patients will benefit from PIPAC treatment. Conclusions: It is expected that PIPAC directed therapy can induce major or complete response in 50% of patients with PC of colorectal origin and in 30 % of patients with PC of non-colorectal origin - and at the same time stabilize or even improve quality of life. This trial may provide data regarding the utility of MRI as a staging and response evaluation tool in patients with PC. Background: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is a common endpoint in both gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal cancers, and PC is treated as other systemic metastases - unfortunately with disappointing results and considerable side-effects. Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new method of applying traditional chemotherapy, and preliminary data indicate that PIPAC is safe, able to stabilize or improve quality of life, and can induce an objectively measurable reduction in disease burden in PC. Methods: PIPAC-OPC2 is a prospectively controlled Phase II, single center, one-arm, open-label clinical trial investigating the treatment effect of PIPAC in patients with histological or cytological proven PC from gastrointestinal, ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer. Eligible patients will receive PIPAC in series of three using a combination of doxorubicin (1.5 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin 7.5 mg/m(2)) for non-colorectal cancer patients (PIPAC C/D), and oxaliplatin (92 mg/m(2)) in patients with PC of colorectal origin (PIPAC OX). Patients are monitored by: (1) repeated measurements of the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) in biopsies obtained from metal clips marked areas, (2) Quality-of-Life (QoL) questionnaires, (3) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and (4) Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI). Adverse events and surgical complications will be recorded according to the 30 days definition. Results: The primary outcome of PIPAC-OPC2 is to evaluate if PIPAC can induce major or complete response (PRGS 1 or 2) within a series of three PIPAC procedures. Secondarily this study investigates changes in QoL and MRI as a staging and response evaluation tool. The secondary outcomes will be used to create a model that may predict which of the patients will benefit from PIPAC treatment. Conclusions: It is expected that PIPAC directed therapy can induce major or complete response in 50% of patients with PC of colorectal origin and in 30 % of patients with PC of non-colorectal origin - and at the same time stabilize or even improve quality of life. This trial may provide data regarding the utility of MRI as a staging and response evaluation tool in patients with PC.

Background: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a laparoscopy-guided administration of aerosolized chemotherapy. PIPAC seems to improve objective tumor response, survival and quality of life in patients with peritoneal metastasis. We assessed feasibility and efficacy of PIPAC in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). Methods: Patients were included in a prospective PIPAC protocol. Patients with colorectal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with other primary tumors were treated with cisplatin and doxorubicin. Any chemotherapy exposure for healthcare workers was monitored by environmental and biological sampling. Feasibility was quantified by completion and complication rates. Response evaluation was documented by the peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) and by peritoneal lavage cytology. Biopsy sites were marked by clips. Quality of life questionnaires were collected at baseline and after 60, 120 and 180 days. Results: A total of 35 patients with PM were treated with a median of three PIPAC procedures (range 1–9). Intraperitoneal access and completion of PIPAC was achieved in all patients. Few complications and adverse events were noted. There was no risk of chemotherapy exposure for healthcare workers. The mean PRGS was reduced significantly and a reduction of the PRGS was seen in 67% of the patients. Conversion from positive to negative cytology was achieved in 23% of the patients. Quality of life was stabilized from baseline to day 60. Conclusions: PIPAC is feasible and well tolerated, may stabilize the quality of life in patients with end-stage PM and may induce histological and cytological regression. This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02320448].

Claudin-2 is a trans-membrane protein—component of tight junctions in epithelial cells. Elevated claudin-2 expression has been reported in colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to investigate the expression patterns of claudin-2 in human CRC samples and analyze its association with clinical characteristics and treatment outcome. TMAs of primary tumors from two cohorts of metastatic CRC (mCRC) were used. Claudin-2 IHC staining was evaluated in a semi-quantitative manner in different regions and cell types. Claudin-2 expression was also analyzed by immunofluorescence in primary cultures of human CRC cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs). Initial analyses identified previously unrecognized expression patterns of claudin-2 in CAFs of human CRC. Claudin-2 expression in CAFs of the invasive margin was associated with shorter progression-free survival. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the survival associations occurred among cases that received 5-FU+oxaliplatin combination treatment, but not in patients receiving 5-FU±irinotecan. The finding was validated by analyses of the independent cohort. In summary, previously unreported stromal expression of claudin-2 in CAFs of human CRC was detected together with significant association between high claudin-2 expression in CAFs and shorter survival in 5-FU+oxaliplatin-treated mCRC patients. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00428-017-2263-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new laparoscopic administration of chemotherapy for peritoneal metastasis (PM). PIPAC is repeated every 5th week, and seems to stabilize or improve quality of life, and might improve survival. So far, PIPAC has been well tolerated. With this paper, we aim to highlight a potential severe adverse reaction, as we describe the first cases of severe peritoneal sclerosis (SPS) caused by PIPAC. Patients with isolated PM were included in a prospective PIPAC protocol. Following insufflation of normothermic CO2, laparoscopy was performed at an intraabdominal pressure of 12 mmHg. After peritoneal lavage and quadrant biopsies of the PM, the patients were treated with oxaliplatin 92 mg/m2 (flowrate 0.5 ml/s, maximum pressure of 200 per square inch). Treatment related toxicity was evaluated after 2 weeks. Response was evaluated histologically by the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and cytologically by analysis of the lavage fluid. In a series of 24 PIPAC patients treated with oxaliplatin, two patients developed SPS. Patient one had a mucinous adenocarcinoma of the appendix with PM, the mean PRGS was reduced from 2.75 to 1.75 during the course of therapy. Patient two had an appendiceal goblet cell carcinoid with a dominating mucinous adenocarcinoma component with PM, the mean PRGS was reduced from 2.00 to 1.67. Repeated applications of PIPAC with oxaliplatin can lead to SPS.

BACKGROUND: In the NORDIC-7.5 trial, how cetuximab might safely and conveniently be added to an intermittent treatment strategy in patients with prospectively selected Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog wild type (KRASwt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was investigated. Patients were treated in a multicenter phase II trial with cetuximab in combination with the Nordic bolus FLOX (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and folinic acid) for 4 months followed by maintenance cetuximab.PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had KRASwt, nonresectable mCRC, no previous chemotherapy, and Eastern Cooperative Group performance status of 0 to 2. Patients received 8 courses of Nordic FLOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) over 1 hour on day 1, and 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) as a bolus injection, followed 30 minutes later with bolus folinic acid 60 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2). Cetuximab was administered every 2 weeks at a dose of 500 mg/m(2) for 16 weeks followed by cetuximab as maintenance therapy until disease progression.RESULTS: Between July 2008 and September 2010, 152 KRASwt patients were included. The response rate was 62% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54%-69%), median progression-free survival was 8.0 months (95% CI, 7.5-8.9) and median overall survival was 23.2 (95% CI, 18.1-27.4) months. Twenty-one patients (14%) had later R0-resection of metastasis. FLOX with cetuximab was reintroduced in 47 of 85 patients (55%). The most common Grade 3/4 nonhematologic adverse events were diarrhea in 14 patients (9%), skin rash in 13 patients (9%), infection without neutropenia in 11 patients (7%), and fatigue in 11 patients (7%).CONCLUSION: In a prospectively selected KRASwt population, biweekly cetuximab was safely integrated in an intermittent chemotherapy strategy and might have added to a longer chemotherapy-free interval. However, the combination of biweekly cetuximab with chemotherapy needs to be validated in trials using FOLFOX (oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin) or FOLFIRI (irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin).