Search

Purpose: The primary aim was to evaluate changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a real-life population among younger (< 70 years) and older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) the first year of palliative chemotherapy. The secondary aims were to assess the impact of chemo-break on HRQoL and to report overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients with newly diagnosis of mCRC, ≥ 18 years and scheduled for first line palliative chemotherapy, were included in this multicentre longitudinal observational study. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (0-100) was filled in at baseline and every second month, and >20 points change was considered to be of a large clinical magnitude. Treatments, patient- and tumour characteristics were prospectively registered. Results: Totally 214 patients were included, and 146 were alive after one year. Four months after start of treatment, 40% reported large deteriorations in fatigue and 25% in physical functioning. Changes in global Qol, physical- and role functioning, fatigue, pain, nausea and vomiting were not significantly different between the age groups and reached baseline levels after one year. Patients on chemo-break reported significant improvements in several HRQoL domains. Median OS was 17.5 months [95% CI 14.4-20.5] with no difference between younger and older patients. Conclusion: Elderlypatients did not experience more deterioration in HRQoL than younger during the first year of palliative chemotherapy. Measures to mitigate the deterioration in fatigue and physical functioning observed during the first months of palliative treatment are warranted. Trial registration: NCT02395224 , March 23, 2015, retrospectively registered.

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, and a large proportion of the patients receive adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Most of these experience chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), affecting quality of life. Evidence to advise exercise to reduce CIPN is limited. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of an exercise intervention and data collection among CRC patients during adjuvant chemotherapy. Material and methods This non-randomized feasibility study included CRC patients admitted to adjuvant chemotherapy to an intervention consisting of supervised aerobic endurance, resistance, and balance exercises twice a week at the hospital in addition to home-based exercise once a week. A physiotherapist supervised the patients, and the intervention lasted throughout the period of adjuvant chemotherapy (12–24 weeks). Participants performed physical tests and filled in questionnaires at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results and conclusion Nineteen (63%) of 30 invited patients consented. A major barrier to recruit or consent to participation was long travel distance to the hospital. The completion rate of questionnaires and physical tests were near 100%. Seven participants dropped out, five before the intervention started. Median attendance to supervised exercise was 85%. There were no serious adverse events related to the intervention. Except for a planned higher intensity of endurance exercise, we found the intervention feasible and safe. Based on experiences in this study, some adjustments have been made for an upcoming randomized trial, including the supervised exercise taking place close to participants’ homes. © 2020 The Author(s). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer worldwide, with increasing numbers surviving and living with long-term side effects from treatment. Physical exercise during or after treatment may have several beneficial effects, but knowledge of CRC patients’ reflections on exercising during adjuvant therapy is limited. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of CRC patients participating in a supervised exercise program during adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: This study included CRC patients participating in two intervention studies with individually tailored and supervised combinations of endurance, resistance, and balance exercises during adjuvant chemotherapy. Semi-structured interviews performed at the beginning, during, and immediately after the intervention period from 15 participants were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Four main themes identified were “structuring life with cancer,” “motivation to exercise,” “training experiences,” and “effects of exercise.” Scheduled appointments gave structure to daily life and served as an external motivational factor. The individual adjustments of exercise gave a sense of security and helped improving adherence, especially when feeling depressed or fatigued. Common expectations were improvement of endurance and strength and counteracting negative effects of chemotherapy. Experienced positive effects from exercising, both mentally and physically, contributed to inner motivation and inspired continued exercising after the study period. Conclusion: This study offers important insights into CRC patients’ experiences of participating in a physical exercise program during adjuvant chemotherapy. Based on our findings, we recommend supervised and individually tailored physical exercise during adjuvant chemotherapy to this patient group. publishedVersion

NeoRes I is a randomized phase II trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of resectable cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Patients with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma, T1N1 or T2-3N0-1 and M0-M1a (AJCC 6th ed.), were randomized to receive three 3-weekly cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 and fluorouracil 750 mg/m2/24 hours, days 1-5 with or without the addition of concurrent radiotherapy 40 Gy, 2 Gy/fraction, 5 days a week, followed by esophageal resection with two-field lymphadenectomy. Primary endpoint was complete histopathological response rate in the primary tumor. Survival and recurrence patterns were evaluated as secondary endpoints. Between 2006 and 2013, 181 patients were enrolled in Sweden and Norway. All three chemotherapy cycles were delivered to 73% of the patients allocated to chemoradiotherapy and to 86% of the patients allocated to chemotherapy. 87% of those allocated to chemoradiotherapy received full dose radiotherapy. 87% in the chemoradiotherapy group and 86% in the chemotherapy group underwent tumor resection. Initial results showed that patients allocated to chemoradiotherapy more often responded with complete histopathological response in the primary tumor (28% vs. 9%). Treatment-related complications were similar between the groups although postoperative complications were more severe in the chemoradiotherapy group. This article reports the long-term results. Five-year progression-free survival was 38.9% (95% CI 28.9%-48.8%) in the chemoradiotherapy group versus 33.0% (95% CI 23.6%-42.7%) in the chemotherapy group, P = 0.82. Five-year overall survival was 42.2% (95% CI 31.9%-52.1%) versus 39.6% (95% CI 29.5%-49.4%), P = 0.60. There were no differences in recurrence patterns between the treatment groups. This is to our knowledge that the largest completed randomized trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophageal resection in patients with cancer in the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Despite a higher tumor tissue response in those who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, no survival advantages were seen. Consequently, the results do not support unselected addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a standard of care in patients with resectable esophageal cancer.

Background Neoadjuvant therapy improves long-term survival after oesophagectomy, treating oesophageal cancer, but the evidence to date is insufficient to determine which of the two main neoadjuvant therapy types, chemotherapy (nCT) or chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), is more beneficial. We aimed to compare the effects of nCT with those of nCRT. Patients and methods This multicentre trial, which was conducted in Sweden and Norway, recruited 181 patients with carcinoma of the oesophagus or the gastro-oesophageal junction who were candidates for curative-intended treatment. The primary end point was histological complete response after neoadjuvant treatment, which has been shown to be correlated with increased long-term survival. Study participants were randomized to nCT or nCRT, followed by surgery with two-field lymphadenectomy. Three cycles of platin/5-fluorouracil were administered in both arms, whereas 40 Gy of concomitant radiotherapy was added in the nCRT arm. Results The trial met the primary end point, histological complete response being achieved in 28% after nCRT versus 9% after nCT (P = 0.002). Lymph-node metastases were observed in 62% in the nCT group versus 35% in the nCRT group (P = 0.001). The R0 resection rate was 87% after nCRT and 74% after nCT (P = 0.04). There was no difference in overall survival between the treatment arms. Conclusion The addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy results in higher histological complete response rate, higher R0 resection rate, and a lower frequency of lymph-node metastases, without significantly affecting survival. clinicaltrials.gov NCT01362127 (https://clinicaltrials.gov; The full study protocol was registered in the Clinical Trials Database).

Background NeoRes I is a randomized phase II trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of resectable oesophageal cancer. Methods Patients with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma in the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction (Siewert type I and II), T1N1 or T2–3N0–1 and M0-M1a (AJCC 6th edition) were randomized to receive three 3-weekly cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 and fluorouracil 750 mg/m2/24 hours, days 1–5 with or without the addition of concurrent radiotherapy 40 Gy, 2 Gy/fraction, 5 days a week, followed by oesophageal resection with two-field lymphadenectomy. Primary endpoint was complete histopathological response rate. Survival and recurrence patterns were evaluated as secondary endpoints. Results Between 2008 and 2013, 181 patients were enrolled in 10 participating institutions in Sweden and Norway. Patients were well matched for pre-treatment characteristics T3: 64,1%, T2: 34,8%, T1: 1,1%. Adenocarcinoma: 72,4%, squamous cell carcinoma: 27,6%. Proximal/middle: 16,6%, distal: 65,2%, cardia (Siewert type II): 18,2%. Conclusion This is to our knowledge the largest completed randomized trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed be oesophageal resection in patients with cancer in the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction. We found no overall or progression-free survival advantages by adding radiotherapy, despite better tumour tissue response. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Purpose Curative treatment of esophageal cancer is accompanied by frequent and sometimes severe side effects. However, prospectively collected data on side effects are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate if pulmonary function and exercise capacity were affected in the acute setting after neoadjuvant treatment and if there were long-lasting effects after neoadjuvant treatment and surgery. We also aimed to investigate whether the addition of radiation therapy to chemotherapy would aggravate side effects. Methods and materials A cohort of 97 patients enrolled in the randomized NeoRes trial was used for the present analysis. The patients had been randomized to receive 3 cycles of cisplatin and fluorouracil with or without concurrent radiation therapy to 40 Gy. A cardiac stress test on a stationary bicycle and a spirometry were performed before and after neoadjuvant treatment and 1 to 2 years later after surgery provided that the cancer had not recurred. Results We found impairment in pulmonary function measured as vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in 1 second and a decrease in exercise capacity after neoadjuvant treatment and 1 to 2 years later after surgery. We did not detect any differences between patients treated with chemoradiation therapy and those treated with chemotherapy alone. Conclusions Multimodality treatment of esophageal cancer caused short-term and lasting impairments in pulmonary function and exercise capacity. The reductions were not aggravated by the addition of radiation therapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Background: microRNAs (miRNAs) exist in blood in an apparently stable form. We have explored whether serum miRNAs can be used as non-invasive early biomarkers of colon cancer. Methods: Serum samples from 30 patients with colon cancer stage IV and 10 healthy controls were examined for the expression of 375 cancer-relevant miRNAs. Based on the miRNA profile in this study, 34 selected miRNAs were measured in serum from 40 patients with stage I–II colon cancer and from 10 additional controls. Results: Twenty miRNAs were differentially expressed in serum from stage IV patients compared with controls (P

e14531 Background: This is an open label, non-randomized, multicenter phase I-II study with Docetaxel (Doc) given in combination with capecitabine (Cap) in patients (pts) with metastatic oesophageal cancer (mEC) or cancer in the cardia region (mCCR). Methods: In phase I, pts were treated with Cap day 1-14, 22-36 and Doc day 1, 8, 15, 22, 29. Cap was dose escalated from 1300 mg up to 1650mg/m2 per day according to modified Fibonacci design. The dose of Doc was fixed to 30mg/m2 in both Phase I-II. In Phase II 1650mg/m2 Cap was given. The primary objective in phase I was to define a dose of Cap recommended for the Phase II and to determine the feasibility and safety of this treatment. The primary objective in the phase II was to determine the response rate (RR), safety profile, quality of life and survival.The median age was 64.8 years, PS was 0 in 23 pts, I in 57 and II in 13 pts. The histology was as follows: 58 adenoca, 33 squamous cell ca and 2 poorly diff ca. Forty-three pts had previously been treated with chemotherapy, 41 with radiotherapy, 50 were chemotherapy-naive and 31 had underwent surgery. Results: From March 2006 to Oct 2010, 93 eligible pts with measurable disease were enrolled in the study. Fourteen were treated in phase I and 79 in phase II. Four pts (1 in ph I and 3 in ph II) did not receive any study treatment. Twenty-seven pts of 93 (29%) were not evaluable according to study protocol which included CT after 6 w of treatment due to rapid tumour progression and deterioration of general condition. RR was 29%, 2 CR and 25 PR, 15 pts (16%) had SD and 24 pts (26%) had PD. Median OS was 7.3 months (5.76-8.9) and median PFS was 4.2 months (2.3-4.7 months).Treatment related grad 3 or 4 toxicity was as follows: 60% of pts experienced any grade 3 or 4 toxicity, 30% related to infections, 24% had nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, mucositis

71 Background: The Norwegian Gastrointestinal Cancer Group (NGICG) conducted a phase II randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of FLOX and FLIRI as first line treatment in metastatic or locally advanced gastric cancer. At progression or unacceptable drug related toxicity, a crossover to the other treatment arm should be done, if second line chemotherapy was indicated. Methods: 66 patients from 6 treatment centers in Norway were randomized to FLOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on day 1, bolus 5-FU 500 mg/m2 and FA 60 mg/m2 on day 1 and 2, or FLIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m2 on day 1, bolus 5-FU 500 mg/m2 and FA 60 mg/m2 on day 1 and 2). Both treatments were repeated every second week. The primary endpoint was response rate (RR) and time to progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and safety data. Results: At the present time data from 63 patients are available for analysis. First-line treatment: FLOX (n = 32) versus (v.) FLIRI (n = 31): Complete response (CR) n = 0 in both arms, partial response (PR) n = 16 v. 9, stable disease (SD) n = 12 v. 13, progressive disease (PD) n = 3 v. 6, not assessable for evaluation n = 1 v. 3 patients. RR was 50 % in the FLOX arm v. 29 % in the FLIRI arm, p = not significant (n.s), Pearson Chi-Square test. Median TTP was 5 months (95 % CI 2.2-7.8) v. 4 months (95 % CI 2.2-5.8), p = n.s, median OS was 11 months (95 % CI 9.2-12.8 ) v. 10 months (95 % CI 5.7-14.3), p = n.s, Log Rank test. Patient characteristics were well balanced. Febrile neutropenia was present among 10 % of the patients in the FLOX arm versus 7 % in the FLIRI arm. Second line treatment: 30 patients received second line treatment with FLOX or FLIRI. Data regarding RR, TTP, OS and safety will be updated in December 2011. Conclusions: The FLOX and FLIRI regimens are well tolerated among patients with locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer. As first line treatment the FLOX regime had a higher RR of 50% v. 29% for the FLIRI regime, longer TTP; 5 v. 4 months and longer OS 11 v. 10 months, but the difference did not reach statistical significance.