Search

Protection plans of lake waters are based on ecological and/or chemical targets, often simplified in terms of total phosphorus (TP) concentrations, customarily the depth-averaged ones at spring mixing for temperate environments. These target lake TP concentrations are then commonly employed to determine target external loading through reverse use of Vollenweider-OECD-type steady-state empirical models. Such models are also adopted in their direct form to estimate lake TP concentrations following hypothetical external load reductions. However, such approaches suffer from extreme parameterisation and often give inaccurate results. Process-based coupled ecological-hydrodynamic models offer a much wider flexibility and produce an extensive set of information, solving many of the issues of Vollenweider-OECD-type models. However, their application has been up to now restricted to single lakes due to calibration effort and data availability burdens. To overcome these obstacles, in this study we developed a simplified application of the process-based coupled model QWET over 9 lakes in Northern Italy, making use of the ParSAC automatic calibration tool and feeding the models only with general data available from public monitoring. QWET models were calibrated over past observations, simulating nutrient reduction scenarios for the near-future decades. The advantages over traditionally employed models for lake water protection planning at the regional scale were hence identified through a practical application, determining the strengths and limits of the herein-adopted simplified process-based approach over lakes with different features. Obtained results were also analysed considering the specific case study., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. We report 4-year results of the phase II randomized AtezoTRIBE study. Eligible patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) received first-line fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI)/bevacizumab (control group, n = 73) or FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab plus atezolizumab (experimental group, n = 145). We present overall survival (OS) and updated outcomes according to tumor immune-related biomarkers, both in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and the cohort of patients with proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors. Median follow-up was 45.2 months (IQR, 42.6-49.2). In the ITT population, median OS was 33.0 and 27.2 months for experimental and control groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78 [80% CI, 0.61 to 0.98]; P = .084). An interaction effect between Immunoscore Immune-Checkpoint (IC) and treatment arm was observed ( P , .089), with higher benefit from atezolizumab in the Immunoscore IC-high group. In the pMMR cohort (N = 202), median OS was 30.8 and 29.2 months for experimental and control groups, respectively (HR, 0.80 [80% CI, 0.63 to 1.02]; int , .089), with higher benefit from atezolizumab in the Immunoscore IC-high group. In the pMMR cohort (N = 202), median OS was 30.8 and 29.2 months for experimental and control groups, respectively (HR, 0.80 [80% CI, 0.63 to 1.02]; P = .117). Interactions between treatment group and tumor mutational burden (TMB) and Immunoscore IC were reported ( P int , .043 and .092, respectively), with patients bearing TMB-high and Immunoscore IC-high tumors deriving higher benefit from the addition of atezolizumab. First-line FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab plus atezolizumab improves OS in patients with mCRC. In the pMMR group, patients with Immunoscore IC-high and/or TMB-high tumors are identified as a subgroup of interest to further develop this treatment.

Background: To date, only two studies have compared the outcomes of patients with liver-limited BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) managed with resection versus systemic therapy alone, and these have reported contradictory findings., Methods: In this observational, international, multicentre study, patients with liver-limited BRAF V600E-mutated CRLMs treated with resection or systemic therapy alone were identified from institutional databases. Patterns of recurrence/progression and overall survival were compared using multivariable analyses of the entire cohort and a propensity score-matched cohort., Results: Of 170 patients included, 119 underwent hepatectomy and 51 received systemic treatment. Surgically treated patients had a more favourable pattern of recurrence with most recurrences limited to a single site, whereas diffuse progression was more common among patients who received systemic treatment (19 versus 44%; P = 0.002). Surgically treated patients had longer median overall survival (35 versus 20 months; P < 0.001). Hepatectomy was independently associated with better OS than systemic treatment alone (HR 0.37, 95% c.i. 0.21 to 0.65). In the propensity score-matched cohort, surgically treated patients had longer median overall survival (28 versus 20 months; P < 0.001); hepatectomy was independently associated with better overall survival (HR 0.47, 0.25 to 0.88)., Conclusion: BRAF V600E mutation should not be considered a contraindication to surgery for patients with resectable, liver-only CRLMs., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: To verify whether both doublet chemotherapy with a modified schedule of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX) and monochemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin (5-FU + LV) achieve satisfactory efficacy when both regimens are combined with panitumumab (PAN) as initial treatment of elderly patients with RAS / BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)., Patients and Methods: PANDA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02904031) was an open-label, randomized phase II noncomparative trial in previously untreated patients age 70 years and older with unresectable RAS / BRAF wild-type mCRC. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to mFOLFOX + PAN (arm A) or 5-FU + LV + PAN (arm B) for up to 12 cycles, followed by PAN maintenance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). In each arm, assuming a null hypothesis of median PFS time ≤ 6 months and target PFS ≥9.65, 90 patients per arm were needed to achieve 90% power and 5% type I error (one-sided Brookmeyer-Crowley test)., Results: Between July 2016 and April 2019, 91 patients were randomly assigned to arm A and 92 to arm B. At a median follow-up of 50.0 months (IQR, 45.6-56.4), median PFS was 9.6 and 9.0 months for arm A and B, respectively ( P < .001 in each arm). Overall response rate was 69% and 52%, whereas median overall survival was 23.5 and 22.0 months in arm A and B, respectively. The overall rate of grade >2 chemotherapy-related adverse events was 60% and 37%, respectively. Baseline G8 and Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients scores were prognostic, but they were not associated with efficacy and safety of the two arms., Conclusion: Both mFOLFOX and 5-FU + LV + PAN are reasonable options as initial therapy of elderly patients with RAS / BRAF wild-type mCRC. 5-FU + LV + PAN is associated with a better safety profile.

Background: The decision to resect or not the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a complex and challenging issue for oncologists, especially when an antiangiogenic-based therapy is planned., Methods: Patients enrolled in the phase III TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies that compared upfront FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab to FOLFIRI or FOLFOX + bevacizumab, respectively, were included. We assessed the association of primary tumor resection (PTR) with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of grade > 2 adverse events (AEs), and serious gastrointestinal and surgical AEs in the overall population and according to the treatment arm., Results: Of the 999 patients included, 513 (51%) underwent PTR at baseline. Longer PFS and OS were observed in resected patients compared to those with unresected primary tumors: 11.2 vs. 10.0 months ( p < 0.001) and 26.6 vs. 22.5 ( p < 0.001), respectively. In multivariate models, PTR was confirmed as an independent prognostic factor for better PFS ( p = 0.032) and OS ( p = 0.018). Patients with PTR experienced a higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea ( p = 0.055) and lower incidence of anemia ( p = 0.053), perforation ( p = 0.015), and serious gastrointestinal and surgical AEs ( p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were noted in incidence of bleeding ( p = 0.39). The benefit of FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab in terms of PFS ( p for interaction: 0.46), OS ( p for interaction: 0.80), ORR ( p for interaction: 0.36), and incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs was independent of PTR., Conclusions: PTR at baseline was independently associated with good prognosis in synchronous mCRC patients and with lower incidence of serious gastrointestinal and surgical AEs during upfront chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. The benefit and toxicity profile of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab was independent of PTR.

Objective: To investigate the clinical implications of BRAF -mutated (mut BRAF ) colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs)., Background: The clinical implications of mut BRAF status in CRLMs are largely unknown., Methods: Patients undergoing resection for mut BRAF CRLM were identified from prospectively maintained registries of the collaborating institutions. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared among patients with V600E versus non-V600E mutations, KRAS/BRAF comutation versus mut BRAF alone, microsatellite stability status (Microsatellite Stable (MSS) vs instable (MSI-high)), upfront resectable versus converted tumors, extrahepatic versus liver-limited disease, and intrahepatic recurrence treated with repeat hepatectomy versus nonoperative management., Results: A total of 240 patients harboring BRAF -mutated tumors were included. BRAF V600E mutation was associated with shorter OS (30.6 vs 144 mo, P =0.004), but not RFS compared with non-V600E mutations. KRAS/BRAF comutation did not affect outcomes. MSS tumors were associated with shorter RFS (9.1 vs 26 mo, P <0.001) but not OS (33.5 vs 41 mo, P =0.3) compared with MSI-high tumors, whereas patients with resected converted disease had slightly worse RFS (8 vs 11 mo, P =0.01) and similar OS (30 vs 40 mo, P =0.4) compared with those with upfront resectable disease. Patients with extrahepatic disease had worse OS compared with those with liver-limited disease (8.8 vs 40 mo, P <0.001). Repeat hepatectomy after intrahepatic recurrence was associated with improved OS compared with nonoperative management (41 vs 18.7 mo, P =0.004). All results continued to hold true in the multivariable OS analysis., Conclusions: Although surgery may be futile in patients with BRAF -mutated CRLM and concurrent extrahepatic disease, resection of converted disease resulted in encouraging survival in the absence of extrahepatic spread. Importantly, second hepatectomy in select patients with recurrence was associated with improved outcomes. Finally, MSI-high status identifies a better prognostic group, with regard to RFS while patients with non-V600E mutations have excellent prognosis., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Emerging data suggest that gender-related immune system composition affects both immune response and efficacy of immunotherapy in cancer patients (pts). This study aimed to investigate the sex-related prognostic role of MLR in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) pts. Methods: We analyzed a retrospective consecutive cohort of 490 mCRC patients treated from 2009 to 2018 at the Oncology Departments of Aviano and Pordenone (training set) and Udine (validation set), Italy. The prognostic impact of MLR on overall survival (OS) was evaluated with uni- and multivariable Cox regression models. The best cut-off value to predict survival was defined through ROC analyses. Results: Overall, we identified 288 males (59%) and 202 females (41%); 161 patients (33%) had a right-sided, 202 (42%) a left-sided primary, and 122 (25%) a rectal tumor. Interestingly, gender was associated with MLR (p = 0.004) and sidedness (p = 0.006). The obtained cut-off value for MLR in females and males was 0.27 and 0.49, respectively. According to univariate analysis of the training set, MLR (HR 9.07, p ≤ 0.001), MLR > 0.27 in females (HR 1.95, p = 0.003), and MLR > 0.49 in males (HR 2.65, p = 0.010) were associated with poorer OS, which was also confirmed in the validation set. In multivariate analysis, MLR > 0.27 in females (HR 2.77, p = 0.002), MLR > 0.49 in males (HR 5.39, p ≤ 0.001), BRAF mutation (HR 3.38, p ≤ 0.001), and peritoneal metastases (HR 2.50, p = 0.003) were still independently associated with worse OS. Conclusions: Males and females have a different immune response. Our study showed that high MLR, both in males and females, is an unfavorable Independent prognostic factor. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these data.

Biliary tract cancer's (BTC) treatment main stone for advanced stages is constituted by chemotherapy. Surgical centralization and physicians' confidence in the use of new technologies and molecular analysis turned out to be of interest and potentially influencing survival. After applying a random-effect model, the relationship between each clinical variable on the main outcome was investigated through multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression. The risk-standardized outcomes were calculated for each centre involved. In the unadjusted cohort the median survival was 8.6 months (95%C.I.: 7.8-9.3) with a 9-month survival rate of 48.3% (95%C.I.: 45.0-51.5). A substantial heterogeneity across hospitals was found (I 2 : 70.3%). In multilevel mixed effect logistic regression, male, being treated for gallbladder cancer, higher ECOG, increased NLR, CEA and Ca 19.9 and low value of haemoglobin showed to increase the odds for 9-month mortality. The model estimated that the residual variance observed in 9-month mortality was attributable for the 2.6% to the treating hospital. Through a multilevel mixed effect model, average risk-standardized mortality within 9 months was 50.1%. As noticeable, all hospital's risk-standardized mortality falls within 95%C.I., thus all participating centres provided similar outcomes when adjusted for patient case-mix. Heterogenicity between hospital did not affect the outcome in term of overall survival.

Background: Recent data suggest that BRAFV600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with right-sided tumours and ECOG-PS = 0 may achieve benefit from the triplet regimen differently than those with left-sided tumours and ECOG-PS > 0., Methods: The predictive impact of primary sidedness and ECOG-PS was evaluated in a large real-life dataset of 296 BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC patients treated with upfront triplet or doublet ± bevacizumab. Biological differences between right- and left-sided BRAFV600E-mutated CRCs were further investigated in an independent cohort of 1162 samples., Results: A significant interaction effect between primary sidedness and treatment intensity was reported in terms of both PFS (p = 0.010) and OS (p = 0.003), with a beneficial effect of the triplet in the right-sided group and a possible detrimental effect in the left-sided. No interaction effect was observed between ECOG-PS and chemo-backbone. In the MSS/pMMR population, a consistent trend for a side-related subgroup effect was observed when FOLFOXIRI ± bevacizumab was compared to oxaliplatin-based doublets±bevacizumab (p = 0.097 and 0.16 for PFS and OS, respectively). Among MSS/pMMR tumours, the BM1 subtype was more prevalent in the right-sided group (p = 0.0019, q = 0.0139). No significant differences were observed according to sidedness in the MSI-H/dMMR population., Conclusions: Real-life data support the use of FOLFOXIRI ± bevacizumab only in BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC patients with right-sided tumours., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have not shown clinical benefit to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) or microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours in previous studies. Both an active combination chemotherapy (FOLFOXIRI; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) and bevacizumab seem able to increase the immunogenicity of pMMR or MSS tumours. We aimed to provide preliminary evidence of benefit from the addition of the anti-PD-L1 agent atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer., Methods: AtezoTRIBE was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study of patients (aged 18-70 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status of 0-2 and aged 71-75 years with an ECOG performance status of 0) with histologically confirmed, unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer and adequate organ function, who were recruited from 22 oncology centres in Italy. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour site, and previous adjuvant therapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm randomly assigned (1:2) patients via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two groups: the control group received first-line FOLFOXIRI (intravenous 165 mg/m 2 irinotecan, 85 mg/m 2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m 2 leucovorin, and 3200 mg/m 2 fluorouracil as a 48 h infusion) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously), and the atezolizumab group received the same regimen plus atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously). Combination treatments were administered up to eight 14-day cycles followed by maintenance with fluorouracil and leucovorin plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab, according to randomisation group, until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed by the intention-to-treat principle. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The study recruitment is completed. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03721653., Findings: Between Nov 30, 2018, and Feb 26, 2020, 218 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (73 in the control group and 145 in the atezolizumab group). At the data cutoff (Aug 1, 2021), median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 17·3-23·9). Median progression-free survival was 13·1 months (80% CI 12·5-13·8) in the atezolizumab group and 11·5 months (10·0-12·6) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·69 [80% CI 0·56-0·85]; p=0·012; adjusted HR 0·70 [80% CI 0·57-0·87]; log-rank test p=0·018). The most frequent all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (59 [42%] of 142 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 26 [36%] of 72 patients in the control group), diarrhoea (21 [15%] vs nine [13%]), and febrile neutropenia (14 [10%] vs seven [10%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 39 (27%) patients in the atezolizumab group and in 19 (26%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths (due to acute myocardial infarction and bronchopulmonary haemorrhage) were reported in the atezolizumab group; none were reported in the control group., Interpretation: The addition of atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is safe and improved progression-free survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer., Funding: GONO Foundation, ARCO Foundation, F Hoffmann-La Roche, and Roche., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DR received honoraria from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD). FP received honoraria from Amgen, Merck Serono, Lilly, Sanofi, Servier, Bayer, MSD, and AstraZeneca, and research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) and AstraZeneca. AC, IB, AK, TS, JF, AP, and CM are Veracyte employees. LS received speaker and consultancy fees from MSD, AstraZeneca, Servier, Bayer, Merck, Amgen, and Pierre Fabre. SL has a consulting or an advisory role for Amgen, Merck Serono, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Daiichi-Sankyo, BMS, Servier, and MSD; has received research funding from Amgen, Merck Serono, Bayer, Roche, Lilly, AstraZeneca, and BMS; and has received speakers' fees from Roche, Lilly, BMS, Servier, Merck Serono, Pierre-Fabre, GlaxoSmithKline, and Amgen. FMo has received honoraria from Lilly and Servier. GT has a consultancy or an advisory role with BMS, AstraZeneca, MSD, Merck, and Servier. FG has received honoraria for speaker or advisory roles from Servier, Eli Lilly, Iqvia, Merck Serono, Amgen, and BMS. EM has received honoraria or consultation fees for speaker, consultancy, or advisory roles from Amgen, Bayer, Eisai, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Servier, and Incyte. JG has patents associated with the immune prognostic and predictive biomarkers, and is co-founder of HalioDx, a Veracyte company. CC has received personal fees from Roche, Amgen, Bayer, Servier, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Nordic Pharma, and Organon; has received research funding from Merck Serono, Servier, Bayer, and Amgen; and has a consulting or an advisory role with Bayer, Amgen, Servier, and Pierre Fabre. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: The aim of the present study is to evaluate a new index (PECS (PsECogSii)index) influenced by PS ECOG and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) in unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BTC patients treated with first-line chemotherapy., Methods: This multicenter, international, study was conducted on a training cohort of 130 patients and in three European and Korean validation cohorts The PECS index was calculated as ECOG × SII index (neutrophil count × platelet count/lymphocyte count). Event-time distributions were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and survival curves were compared using the log-rank test., Results: In the training cohort, the median overall survival (mOS) was 13.2 months, 8.7 months, and 3.8 months for patients with PECS-0, PECS-1, and PECS-2, respectively (PECS-0: HR = 1; PECS-1: HR 1.41; PECS-2: HR 3.23) (p < 0.0001). In the first validation cohort, the mOS was 12.8 months, 10.1 months, and 5.3 months for patients with PECS-0, PECS-1, and PECS-2, respectively (PECS-0: HR = 1; PECS-1: HR 1.29; PECS-2: HR 2.40) (p < 0.0001). In the second validation cohort, the mOS was 21.2 months, 10.2 months, and 3.0 months for patients with PECS-0, PECS-1, and PECS-2, respectively (PECS-0: HR = 1; PECS-1: HR 2.25; PECS-2: HR 9.00) (p < 0.0001). In the third validation cohort, the median OS was 15.5 months, 7.5 months, and 3.7 months for patients with PECS-0, PECS-1, and PECS-2, respectively (PECS-0: ref HR = 1; PECS-1: HR 2.14; PECS-2: HR 5.00) (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis in all cohorts confirmed the PECS index as an independent prognostic factor for OS., Conclusions: The easy assessment, low cost, and reproducibility make PECS index a promising tool to assess the prognosis of BTC patients in future clinical practice., (© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: This is a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of an immune-sensitizing strategy with temozolomide priming followed by a combination of low-dose ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) and O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT)-silenced metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)., Patients and Methods: Patients with pretreated mCRC were centrally prescreened for MSS status and MGMT silencing (ie, lack of MGMT expression by immunohistochemistry plus MGMT methylation by pyrosequencing). Eligible patients received two priming cycles of oral temozolomide 150 mg/sqm once daily, days 1-5, once every 4 weeks (first treatment part) followed, in absence of progression, by its combination with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 8 weeks and nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (second treatment part). The primary end point was the 8-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate calculated from enrollment in patients who started the second treatment part, with ≥ 4 out of 27 subjects progression-free by the 8-month time point as decision rule., Results: Among 716 prescreened patients, 204 (29%) were molecularly eligible and 135 started the first treatment part. Among these, 102 (76%) were discontinued because of death or disease progression on temozolomide priming, whereas 33 patients (24%) who achieved disease control started the second treatment part and represented the final study population. After a median follow-up of 23.1 months (interquartile range, 14.9-24.6 months), 8-month PFS rate was 36%. Median PFS and overall survival were 7.0 and 18.4 months, respectively, and overall response rate was 45%. Grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were skin rash (6%), colitis (3%), and hypophysitis (3%). No unexpected adverse events or treatment-related deaths were reported., Conclusion: The MAYA study provided proof-of-concept that a sequence of temozolomide priming followed by a combination of low-dose ipilimumab and nivolumab may induce durable clinical benefit in MSS and MGMT-silenced mCRC., Competing Interests: Federica MoranoHonoraria: ServierTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi, Servier Sara LonardiConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Merck Serono, Lilly, Servier, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSDSpeakers' Bureau: Roche, Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Servier, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, GlaxoSmithKline, AmgenResearch Funding: Amgen, Merck Serono, Bayer (Inst), Roche (Inst), Lilly (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst) Lisa SalvatoreHonoraria: Roche, Merck Serono, Servier, Bayer, Amgen, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, MSDConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Serono, Servier, Bayer, Roche, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, MSDTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi, Merck Serono, Bayer, Roche, Servier, Celgene Chiara CremoliniHonoraria: Roche, Amgen, Bayer, Servier, MSD, MerckConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, Bayer, Amgen, MSDSpeakers' Bureau: ServierResearch Funding: Merck, Bayer, Roche, Servier Patrizia RaccaHonoraria: Merck Serono, Roche, Amgen, Servier Monica NigerConsulting or Advisory Role: Incyte, Basilea Pharmaceutical, EMD Serono, MSD/AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Francesca CortiTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Advanced Accelerator Applications Alberto ZaniboniConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Servier, Bayer, Merck Serono, MerckSpeakers' Bureau: servier, Astellas Pharma (Inst) Celeste CagnazzoSpeakers' Bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis Massimo Di MaioHonoraria: Pfizer, Takeda, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Eisai, Novartis, Roche, Astellas Pharma, MSD OncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Takeda, Janssen, Eisai, Novartis, Roche, MSD Oncology, AmgenResearch Funding: Tesaro (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst) Maria Di BartolomeoHonoraria: Lilly, MSD Oncology, ServierConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, MSD OncologyResearch Funding: LillyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Sanofi Filippo De BraudHonoraria: Roche, Pfizer, BMS, Merck, MSD, Servier, Sanofi, Amgen Astellas BioPharma, IncyteConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, Incyte, EMD SERONO, Bristol Myers Squibb, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Sanofi, Novartis Italy, nms medical science, MenariniResearch Funding: Novartis (Inst), Roche (Inst), Merck Serono (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Servier (Inst), Philogen (Inst), Loxo (Inst), Tesaro (Inst), Nerviano Medical Sciences (Inst), Kymab (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb/Medarex, Merck KGaA, Ignyta, MedImmune, Exelixis, Bayer Health, Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH, Incyte, Basilea Pharmaceutical, Janssen Oncology Filippo PietrantonioHonoraria: Servier, Bayer, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Lilly, Sanofi, MSD Oncology, AmgenConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Servier, MSD Oncology, MerckResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Astrazeneca (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Different de-escalation strategies have been proposed to limit the risk of cumulative toxicity and guarantee quality of life during the treatment trajectory of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Programmed treatment interruptions, defined as drug holidays (DHs), have been implemented in clinical practice. We evaluated the association between DHs and overall survival (OS). This was a retrospective study, conducted at the University Hospital of Udine and the IRCCS CRO of Aviano. We retrieved records of 608 consecutive patients treated for mCRC from 1 January 2005 to 15 March 2017 and evaluated the impact of different de-escalation strategies (maintenance, DHs, or both) on OS through uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses. We also looked at attrition rates across treatment lines according to the chosen strategy. In our study, 19.24% of patients received maintenance therapy, 16.12% DHs, and 9.87% both, while 32.07% continued full-intensity first-line treatment up to progression or death. In uni- and multivariate analyses first-line continuous treatment and early discontinuation (treatment for less than 3 months) were associated to worse OS compared to non-continuous strategies (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.22-2.32; p = 0.002 and HR,4.89; 95% CI, 3.33-7.19; p < 0.001, respectively). Attrition rates were 22.8%, 20.61%, and 19.64% for maintenance, DHs, or both, respectively. For continuous therapy and for treatment of less than 3 months it was 21.57% and 49%. De-escalation strategies are safe and effective options. DHs after initial induction chemotherapy may be considered in clinically selected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Introduction: The consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) demonstrated prognostic value in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Similarly, a prognostic impact was suggested for the pre-consensus CRCAssigner (CRCA) classifier in early stages. The potential predictive role of these classifiers with regard to the choice of the first-line therapy has not been established. We investigated the prognostic and predictive impact of CMS and CRCA subtypes among mCRC patients treated in the TRIBE2 study., Methods: Among 679 randomized patients, 426 and 428 (63%) samples were profiled according to CMS and CRCA classifications, respectively. The prognostic and predictive impact of both CMS and CRCA subtypes was investigated with univariate and multivariate analyses for progression-free survival (PFS), PFS 2 (PFS2), and overall survival (OS)., Results: Significant associations of CMS and CRCA subtypes with PFS, PFS2, and OS were demonstrated; the CMS classifier confirmed its independent prognostic value in the multivariable model (P value for PFS/PFS2/OS = 0.01/0.07/0.08). The effect of treatment intensification was independent of CMS subtypes (P value for interaction for PFS/PFS2/OS = 0.88/0.75/0.55). A significant interaction effect between CRCA subtypes and treatment arm was demonstrated in PFS (P = 0.02), PFS2 (P = 0.01), and OS (P = 0.008). The benefit of FOLFOXIRI seemed more relevant in the stem-like (PFS, hazard ratio = 0.60; P = 0.03) and mixed subtypes (hazard ratio = 0.44; P = 0.002). These findings were confirmed in a subgroup of patients of the previous TRIBE study., Conclusions: We confirmed the independent prognostic role of CMS classification in mCRC independently of RAS/BRAF status. CRCA classification may help identifying subgroups of patients who may derive more benefit from FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab., Competing Interests: Disclosure AS received research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck KGaA, and Pierre Fabre. Patents: (i) ‘Colorectal cancer classification with differential prognosis and personalized therapeutic responses’ (patent number PCT/IB2013/060416); (ii) ‘Prognostic and treatment response predictive method’ [European (EP) patent application number: 18792565.6], and (iii) ‘Patient classification and prognostic method’ (international patent application number: PCT/EP2019/053845). CC is a consultant/advisory board member for Roche, Amgen, Bayer, Merck Serono, Servier. AF is a consultant/advisory board member for Bayer, Roche, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Merck Serono, Sanofi, Servier. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neuroendocrine differentiation has been extensively associated with worse prognosis and to mechanisms of therapy resistance in several epithelial cancers. A high prevalence of neuroendocrine differentiation was recently described in V600EBRAF- mutated (BRAFmt) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) but no data are available about its prognostic impact in this setting., Methods: We assessed synaptophysin immunohistochemical expression in a multi-institutional series of 159 BRAFmt mCRCs with matched clinical and pathological information. Tumours were dichotomized as synaptophysin high and low. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests., Results: Thirty-five tumours (22.0%) showed any level of positivity for synaptophysin, and 18 (11.3%) were characterized by positivity in at least 20% of tumour cells. Four cases resulted 100% synaptophysin positive. The histotype of synaptophysin-positive tumours (i.e. ≥20%) was not otherwise specified in 11 cases (61.1%) and mucinous adenocarcinoma in 4 cases (22.2%). Four cases were DNA mismatch repair deficient (22.2%) and 7 (38.9%) were characterized by a high number of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. At multivariate analysis, high synaptophysin expression was a negative independent prognostic factor for both PFS (HR = 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-3.33, p = 0.006) and OS (HR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.35-3.85, p = 0.001)., Conclusions: Among BRAFmt mCRCs, synaptophysin-positive tumours are characterized by worse PFS and OS. Further studies should investigate the molecular mechanisms involved in the acquisition of the neuroendocrine phenotype to identify novel-targeted treatment strategies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article. Matteo Fassan received research grant from Astellas Pharma and QED Therapeutics and is a consultant/advisory board member for Astellas Pharma, Diaceutics, Tesaro and GSK. Fotios Loupakis received lecture fees from Amgen and F. Hoffmann-La Roche and advisory fees from Bayer and Genentech. Sara Lonardi received advisory board fees from Amgen, Bayer, Eli Lilly, and Merck Serono, received research grant from Amgen and Merck Serono and is part of the speakers' bureau of Lilly and BMS. Angelo Paolo Dei Tos declares personal fees for advisory boards/speaker's bureau from PharaMar, Lilly, Roche, Bayer and Pfizer. Filippo Pietrantonio declared honoraria/speaker's bureau from Roche, Amgen, Merck-Serono, Lilly, Sanofi, Bayer and Servier and research grant from BMS. Chiara Cremolini is a consultant/advisory board member for Roche, Amgen, Bayer, Merck Serono and Servier. Massimo Di Maio received honoraria, had roles as a consultant or advisor for AstraZeneca, Bristol Myears Squibb, MSD, Takeda and Janssen and received a research grant from Tesaro. Vittorina Zagonel received honoraria and had roles as a consultant or advisor for Bristol-Myears Squibb, Bayer, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Novartis, Astellas and Servier and had roles as a consultant or advisor for Celgene and Merck. Lorenza Rimassa reports personal fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, Celgene, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roches Sanofi, AbbViem Gilead and reearch grants from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, FibroGen, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Roche. Giuseppe Aprile reports receiving personal fees and has been a consultant for Merck Serono, Amgen, Roche and Servier., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard treatment of high-risk colon cancer (CC). A shorter duration (3 months) can achieve a similar outcome [in terms of relapse-free survival (RFS)] to a longer duration. This study reports the overall survival (OS) analysis of the three or six colon adjuvant (TOSCA) phase III study. It assessed different adjuvant chemotherapy durations in patients with resected high-risk stage II and stage III CC., Material and Methods: TOSCA was an open-label, phase III, multicentre, non-inferiority trial conducted in 130 Italian centres. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1 : 1 ratio, to receive 3 months of standard doses of FOLFOX/CAPOX, or 6 months of FOLFOX/CAPOX. Patients with histologically confirmed high-risk stage II and III CC were included, with RFS being the primary end point. OS was a secondary end point., Results: From June 2007 to March 2013, 3759 patients were accrued. At a median follow-up of 7 years, the hazard ratio (HR) for RFS of the 3-month versus 6-month arms was 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.29, P for non-inferiority = 0.380, P for superiority = 0.068, crossing the non-inferiority limit of 1.20. This result did not allow us to reject the null hypothesis of the inferiority of the 3-month arm. The HR for OS of the 3-month versus 6-month arms was 1.09 (95% CI 0.93-1.26, P for superiority = 0.288). At the last follow-up analysis, the absolute OS difference between arms was <1%., Conclusions: The present analysis of the TOSCA trial does not indicate any significant difference in OS between the treatment groups. The extra benefit provided by the longer treatment should be balanced against the extra toxicity of more prolonged therapy. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT0064660., Competing Interests: Disclosure LR reports receiving consulting fees from Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bayer, Celgene, Eisai, Exelixis, Hengrui, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Roche, Sanofi; lectures fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Eisai, Gilead, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Roche, Sanofi; travel fees from Ipsen; and institutional research funding from Agios, ARMO BioSciences, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Eisai, Exelixis, FibroGen, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, MSD, Roche. All other authors declared no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: 'Drug holidays' (DH) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were introduced to preserve quality of life. We studied factors associated to a DH offer in first line. Materials & methods: We retrospectively analyzed 754 consecutive patients treated with chemotherapy for mCRC in two Italian institutions between 2005 and 2017. Associations between baseline clinical-pathological factors and DH (56 or more days of treatment interruption) were investigated. Results:  In 754 patients, previous metastasectomy, previous thermoablation and previous surgery of primary tumor were independently associated with DH. Excluding procedures or clinical trials: primary rectal cancer and resection of primary tumor were significantly associated to DH. Conclusions: DH was offered to patients with lower burden of disease, but further investigations are needed to safely guide a holiday strategy.

Background: Aging induces meaningful changes in the immune system and inflammation response with increase in monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. Aim of this study was to explore the prognostic role of MLR and LDH levels in older patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a consecutive cohort of 168 older (>70 years) patients with mCRC. The prognostic impact of MLR and LDH levels on overall survival (OS) was investigated through uni-and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Moreover, we categorized patients into three groups according to MLR and LDH levels (group 1: MLR-low and LDH-low; group 2: MLR-high or LDH-high; group 3: MLR-high and LDH-high)., Results: By univariate analysis, high LDH level (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.05-2.90) and high MLR level (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.48-3.44) were significantly associated with a worse OS. Conversely, primary tumor resection and left-sidedness were significantly associated with a longer OS. By multivariate analysis, high LDH level (HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.13-3.55) and high MLR level (HR 2.99, 95% CI 1.68-5.33) were independent prognostic factors of worse prognosis. Compared to group 1, a shorter survival was reported for patients included in group 2 (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.21-3.23 in univariate; HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.43-4.51 in multivariate) or in group 3 (HR 2.42, 95% CI 24-4.74, p = .010 in univariate; HR 5.59, 95% CI 2.15-14.54 in multivariate) CONCLUSIONS: High baseline levels of LDH, MLR or both are independent unfavorable prognostic factors in older patients treated with first-line chemotherapy for mCRC., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels are circulating biomarkers that provide information about tumor-related inflammation and immune suppression. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic role of MLR and LDH in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)., Material and Methods: This multicentric study analyzed a consecutive cohort of 528 patients with mCRC treated in 2009-2017. The whole population was randomly divided in training and validation cohort. The first was used to identify a threshold for MLR and to create the prognostic model with MLR and MLR-LDH combined (group 1: MLR-LDH low; group 2: MLR or LDH high; group 3: MLR-LDH high). The second cohort was used to validate the model., Results: At the median follow-up of 55 months, median overall survival (OS) was 22 months. By multivariate analysis, high MLR >0.49 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.37; 95% confidence interval [C.I.], 1.39-4.04), high LDH (HR, 1.73; 95% C.I., 1.03-2.90) in the first model, group 2 (HR, 2.74; 95% C.I.; 1.62-4.66), and group 3 (HR, 3.73; 95% C.I., 1.94-7.18) in the combined model, had a worse prognosis in terms of OS. These data were confirmed both in the validation set and then in the whole cohort., Conclusion: MLR and LDH are circulating cost-effective biomarkers, readily available in clinical practice, that can be useful for predicting the prognosis of patients with mCRC., Implications for Practice: High monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels could be a sign of a tumor's recruitment of suppressive and inflammatory cells worsening prognosis of different types of cancer, including colorectal cancer (CRC). Currently, no data are available for metastatic CRC regarding a cutoff definition for MLR or the prognostic impact of MLR and MLR-LDH combined. The present study showed in the training cohort and confirmed in the validation and whole cohort that MLR is a reliable and independent laboratory biomarker, which is easy to use, to predict clinical outcomes in patients with mCRC. Moreover, MLR and composite MLR-LDH could potentially result in an incremental improvement in the prognostic value of these biomarkers, being used as stratification tools for patients with mCRC., (© AlphaMed Press 2020.)

Background: In the last decade, a series of analyses failed to identify predictive biomarkers of resistance/susceptibility for anti-angiogenic drugs in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted an exploratory preplanned analysis of serum pro-angiogenic factors (SErum aNgiogenesis-cenTRAL) in 72 mCRC patients enrolled in the phase II CENTRAL (ColorEctalavastiNTRiAlLdh) trial, with the aim to identify potential predictive factors for sensitivity/resistance to first line folinic acid-fluorouracil-irinotecan regimen (FOLFIRI) plus bevacizumab., Methods: First-line FOLFIRI/bevacizumab patients were prospectively assessed for the following circulating pro-angiogenic factors, evaluated with ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay)-based technique at baseline and at every cycle: Vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), stromal derived factor-1 (SDF-1), placental derived growth factor (PlGF), fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2), monocyte chemotactic protein-3 (MCP-3), interleukin-8 (IL-8)., Results: Changes in circulating FGF-2 levels among different blood samples seemed to correlate with clinical outcome. Patients who experienced an increase in FGF-2 levels at the second cycle of chemotherapy compared to baseline, had a median Progression Free Survival (mPFS) of 12.85 vs. 7.57 months (Hazard Ratio-HR: 0.73, 95% Confidence Interval-CI: 0.43-1.27, p = 0.23). Similar results were seen when comparing FGF-2 concentrations between baseline and eight-week time point (mPFS 12.98 vs. 8.00 months, HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.46-1.33, p = 0.35)., Conclusions: Our pre-planned, prospective analysis suggests that circulating FGF-2 levels' early increase could be used as a marker to identify patients who are more likely to gain benefit from FOLFIRI/bevacizumab first-line therapy.

Background: The risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) during adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer (CRC) is unknown. We aim to evaluate if the Khorana score (KS) can predict this risk, and if it represents a prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) through a post hoc analysis of the phase III TOSCA trial of different durations (3- versus 6-months) of adjuvant chemotherapy., Methods: A logistic regression model was used to test the associations between the risk of VTE and the KS. The results are expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). To assess the effect of the KS on OS, multivariable analyses using Cox regression models were performed. The results are expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI., Results: Among 1380 CRC patients with available data, the VTE risk ( n  = 72 events: 5.2%) was similar in the two duration arms (5.5% versus 4.9%), with 0.2% of patients belonging to the high-risk KS group. Rates of VTE were similar in the low- and intermediate-risk groups (4.8% versus 6.4%). KS did not represent an independent predictive factor for VTE occurrence. Chemotherapy duration was not associated with VTE risk. In addition, KS was not prognostic for OS in multivariate analysis (HR: 0.92, 95% CI, 0.63-1.36; p  = 0.6835)., Conclusions: The use of the KS did not predict VTEs in a low-moderate thromboembolic risk population as CRC. These data did not support the use of KS to predict VTE during adjuvant chemotherapy, and suggest that other risk assessment models should be researched., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2020.)

Background: The phase III TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies randomized metastatic colorectal cancer patients to first-line FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab or a doublet (FOLFIRI or FOLFOX)/bevacizumab. The studies demonstrated a significant benefit from the triplet at the price of an increased incidence of chemotherapy-related adverse events (AEs). In both trials, males and females aged between 18 and 70 years with ECOG PS ≤2 and between 71 and 75 years with ECOG PS = 0 were eligible. We investigated the effect of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab versus doublets/bevacizumab according to age and gender., Patients and Methods: Subgroup analyses according to age (<70 versus 70-75 years) and gender were carried out for overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and AE rates., Results: Of 1187 patients, 1005 (85%) were aged <70 years and 182 (15%) 70-75 years; 693 (58%) were males and 494 (42%) females. There was no evidence of interaction between age or gender and the benefit provided by the intensification of the upfront chemotherapy in terms of ORR and PFS, or the increased risk of experiencing G3/4 AEs. Elderly patients and females experienced higher rates of overall G3/4 AEs (73% versus 60%, P < 0.01 and 69% versus 57%, P < 0.01, respectively). Notably, in the FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab subgroup, G3/4 diarrhea and febrile neutropenia occurred in 27% and 16% of elderly patients, respectively, while females reported high incidences of any grade nausea (67%) and vomiting (50%)., Conclusions: The improvements in terms of ORR and PFS of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab versus doublets/bevacizumab are independent of gender and age, with a similar relative increase in AEs among elderly patients and females. Initial dose reductions and possibly primary G-CSF prophylaxis should be recommended for patients between 70 and 75 years old treated with FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab, and a careful management of antiemetic prophylaxis should be considered among females., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: V600E BRAF mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a subtype (10%) with overall poor prognosis, but the clinical experience suggests a great heterogeneity in survival. It is still unexplored the real distribution of traditional and innovative biomarkers among V600E BRAF mutated mCRC and which is their role in the improvement of clinical prediction of survival outcomes., Methods: Data and tissue specimens from 155 V600E BRAF mutated mCRC patients treated at eight Italian Units of Oncology were collected. Specimens were analysed by means of immunohistochemistry profiling performed on tissue microarrays. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS)., Results: CDX2 loss conferred worse OS (HR = 1.72, 95%CI 1.03-2.86, p = 0.036), as well as high CK7 expression (HR = 2.17, 95%CI 1.10-4.29, p = 0.026). According to Consensus Molecular Subtypes (CMS), CMS1 patients had better OS compared to CMS2-3/CMS4 (HR = 0.37, 95%CI 0.19-0.71, p = 0.003). Samples showing less TILs had worse OS (HR = 1.72, 95%CI 1.16-2.56, p = 0.007). Progression-free survival analyses led to similar results. At multivariate analysis, CK7 and CMS subgrouping retained their significant correlation with OS., Conclusion: The present study provides new evidence on how several well-established biomarkers perform in a homogenous V600E BRAF mutated mCRC population, with important and independent information added to standard clinical prognosticators. These data could be useful to inform further translational research, for patients' stratification in clinical trials and in routine clinical practice to better estimate patients' prognosis.

Background: Despite the well-known negative prognostic value of the V600E BRAF mutation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), its outcome is quite heterogeneous, and the basis for this prognostic heterogeneity should be better defined., Methods: Two large retrospective series of V600E BRAF-mutated mCRC from 22 institutions served as an exploratory and validation set to develop a prognostic score. The model was internally and externally validated., Results: A total of 395 V600E BRAF-mutated mCRCs were included in the exploratory set. Performance status, CA19.9, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, grading and liver, lung and nodal involvement emerged as independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). Two different scoring systems were built: a 'complete' score (0-16) including all significant covariates and a 'simplified' score (0-9), based only on clinicopathological covariates, and excluding laboratory values. Adopting the complete score, proportions of patients with a low (0-4), intermediate (5-8) and high (9-16) score were 44.7%, 42.6% and 12.6%, respectively. The median OS was 29.6, 15.5 (hazard ratio [HR] for intermediate vs low risk: 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-3.22, p < .001) and 6.6 months (HR for high vs low risk: 4.72, 95% CI: 2.72-8.20, p < .001). Similar results were observed also after adjusting for the type of first-line treatment and adopting the simplified score. The simplified prognostic score derived from the exploratory set was then applied to the validation set for external confirmation., Conclusions: These scoring systems are based on easy-to-collect data and defined specific subgroups with relevant differences in their life expectancy. These tools could be useful in clinical practice, would allow better stratification of patients in clinical trials and may be adopted for proper adjustments in exploratory translational analyses., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Polymorphisms contribute to inter-individual differences and show a promising predictive role for chemotherapy-related toxicity in colon cancer (CC). TOSCA is a multicentre, randomized, non-inferiority, phase III study conducted in high-risk stage II/stage III CC patients treated with 6 vs 3 months of FOLFOX-4 or XELOX adjuvant chemotherapy. During this post-hoc analysis, 218 women and 294 men were genotyped for 17 polymorphisms: TYMS (rs34743033, rs2853542, rs11280056), MTHFR (rs1801133, rs1801131), ERCC1 (rs11615), XRCC1 (rs25487), XRCC3 (rs861539), XPD (rs1799793, rs13181), GSTP1 (rs1695), GSTT1/GSTM1 (deletion +/-), ABCC1 (rs2074087), and ABCC2 (rs3740066, rs1885301, rs4148386). The aim was to assess the interaction between these polymorphisms and sex, on safety in terms of time to grade ≥3 haematological (TTH), grade ≥3 gastrointestinal (TTG) and grade ≥2 neurological (TTN) toxicity. Interactions were detected on TTH for rs1801133 and rs1799793, on TTG for rs13181 and on TTN for rs11615. Rs1799793 GA genotype (p = 0.006) and A allele (p = 0.009) shortened TTH in men. In women, the rs11615 CC genotype worsened TTN (co-dominant model p = 0.008, recessive model p = 0.003) and rs13181 G allele improved the TTG (p = 0.039). Differences between the two sexes in genotype distribution of rs1885301 (p = 0.020) and rs4148386 (p = 0.005) were found. We highlight that polymorphisms could be sex-specific biomarkers. These results, however, need to be confirmed in additional series.

Purpose: BRAF mutations are grouped in activating RAS -independent signaling as monomers (class 1-V600E) or as dimers (class 2-codons 597/601), and RAS -dependent with impaired kinase activity (class 3-codons 594/596). Although clinical, pathologic, and molecular features of V600E BRAF -mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are well known, limited data are available from the two other classes., Experimental Design: Data from 117 patients with BRAF (92 class 1, 12 class 2, and 13 class 3)-mutated mCRC were collected. A total of 540 BRAF wt mCRCs were included as control. IHC profiling was performed to determine the consensus molecular subtypes (CMS), cytokeratin 7/20 profiles, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte infiltration, and BM1/BM2 categorization. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test., Results: Class 3 BRAF -mutated mCRC was more frequently left sided ( P = 0.0028), pN0 ( P = 0.0159), and without peritoneal metastases ( P = 0.0176) compared with class 1, whereas class 2 cases were similar to class 1. Hazard ratio for OS, as compared with BRAF wt, was 2.38 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.61-3.54] for class 1, 1.90 (95% CI, 0.85-4.26) for class 2, and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.51-1.69) for class 3 ( P < 0.0001). Class 2 and 3 tumors were all assigned to CMS2-3. A higher median CD3/CD8-positive lymphocyte infiltration was observed in BRAF -mutated class 2 ( P = 0.033) compared with class 3 cases., Conclusions: For the first time, different clinical and pathologic features and outcome data were reported according to the three BRAF mutation classes in mCRC. Specific targeted treatment strategies should be identified in the near future for such patients., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Prognostic characterization in the initial assessment of patients with advanced cancer disease is an essential step to plan the most appropriate therapeutic program. Since clinical prediction of survival (CPS) may be of limited value, some authors have tried to integrate specific prognostic factors into prognostic multidimensional scores. We carried out a prospective cohort study in two palliative care units to compare the accuracy of the Palliative Prognostic (PaP) Score, the Objective Prognostic Score (OPS), and the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI). In addition, we compared the accuracy of the CPS independently estimated by different healthcare professionals and we tested the role of laboratory results, together with clinical and social factors in predicting survival. Clinical and laboratory data of 334 advanced cancer patients were prospectively collected from the time of in-hospital admission. PaP Score was the most accurate index of survival prediction, followed by PPI; CPS estimates' accuracy was similar among physicians and nurse. All healthcare professionals tended to underestimate the real survival. Integrating CPS with multidimensional indexes may further improve the patient's management. The degree of autonomy and the number of metastatic sites were independent prognostic factors for 30-days mortality and overall survival in multivariate analysis.

Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) patients have multiple risk factors for sarcopenia and loss of skeletal muscle mass (LSMM), which may cause greater treatment toxicities, reduced response to cancer therapy, prolonged hospitalization, impaired quality of life, and worse prognosis., Methods: This is a retrospective study on advanced PC patients treated at the Department of Oncology of Udine, Italy, from January 2012 to November 2017. Among 162 patients who received chemotherapy, 94 consecutive patients with an available computed tomography (CT) scan were retrospectively analyzed. The primary objective of our study was to explore if an early LSMM ≥ 10% (measured at first radiological evaluation and compared with baseline) and/or baseline sarcopenia may impact prognosis. Baseline sarcopenia was defined according to Prado's criteria. Skeletal muscle area was measured as cross-sectional areas (cm 2 ) using CT scan data through the Picture archiving and communication system (PACS) image system., Results: In the whole cohort, 48% of patients were ≤70 years old, and 50% had metastatic disease. At baseline, 73% of patients had sarcopenia, and 16% presented a visceral fat area ≥ 44 cm 2 /m 2 . Overall, 21% experienced an early LSMM ≥ 10%. Approximately 33% of sarcopenic patients at baseline and ~35% of patients with early LSMM ≥ 10% had a body mass index > 25 kg/m 2 . Of note, 71% of patients were evaluated by a nutritionist, and 56% received a dietary supplementation (oral and/or parenteral). After a median follow-up of 30.44 months, median overall survival (OS) was 11.28 months, whereas median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.72 months. By multivariate analysis, early LSMM ≥ 10% was significantly associated with worse OS [hazard ratio (HR): 2.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-3.78; P = 0.007] and PFS (HR: 2.31; 95% CI 1.30-4.09; P = 0.004). Moreover, an exploratory analysis showed that inflammatory indexes, such as neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio variation, impact early LSMM ≥ 10% (odds ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.06-1.61, P = 0.010)., Conclusions: Early LSMM ≥ 10% has a negative prognostic role in advanced PC patients. Further prospective investigations are needed to confirm these preliminary data., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.)

Purpose: Because the role of the primary tumour location in the adjuvant setting has not been clearly established in colon cancer, we analysed the clinical outcome according to the primary tumour location from three Italian trials assessing adjuvant therapy in colon cancer., Patients and Methods: Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed globally and in each trial, according to right-sided, transverse and left-sided primary colon cancer. Analysis was planned to provide overall and stage-specific results., Results: Individual data of 5239 patients were included in this analysis. The right-sided tumours were 1540 (29%), tumours originating in the transverse were 815 (16%) and left-sided tumours were 2884 (55%). At the multivariate analysis, DFS findings from the comparison of the right-sided versus left-sided tumours (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.89-1.14) were not statistically associated with clinical outcomes in the overall population. On the contrary, OS findings, from the comparison of the right-sided versus left-sided tumours, were significantly associated with outcomes (HR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.04-1.39). In stage II patients, there was no difference in terms of DFS and OS among the three different tumour locations, whereas in stage III patients, the left-sided tumours showed an improved prognosis in terms of OS (HR: 1.36 95% CI = 1.14-1.62, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: This is the largest analysis demonstrating a prognostic effect of the tumour location on patients with colon cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the effect is limited to OS in stage III colon cancer. In stage II tumours, the primary location has a lesser impact. The transverse tumours should be prognostically considered in between the right-sided and left-sided tumours., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Based on a small retrospective study, rechallenge with cetuximab-based therapy for patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who were previously treated with the same anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-based regimen might be efficacious. Recent data suggest the role of liquid biopsy as a tool to track molecular events in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)., Objective: To prospectively assess the activity of cetuximab plus irinotecan as third-line treatment for patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC who were initially sensitive to and then resistant to first-line irinotecan- and cetuximab-based therapy., Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter phase 2 single-arm trial conducted from January 7, 2015, to June 19, 2017. Liquid biopsies for analysis of ctDNA were collected at baseline. Main eligibility criteria included RAS and BRAF wild-type status on tissue samples; prior first-line irinotecan- and cetuximab-based regimen with at least partial response, progression-free survival of at least 6 months with first-line therapy, and progression within 4 weeks after last dose of cetuximab; and prior second-line oxaliplatin- and bevacizumab-based treatment., Interventions: Biweekly cetuximab, 500 mg/m2, plus irinotecan, 180 mg/m2., Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall response rate according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Secondary end points included progression-free survival and overall survival and, as an exploratory analysis, RAS mutations in ctDNA., Results: Twenty-eight patients (9 women and 19 men; median age, 69 years [range, 45-79 years]) were enrolled. Six partial responses (4 confirmed) and 9 disease stabilizations were reported (response rate, 21%; 95% CI, 10%-40%; disease control rate, 54%; 95% CI, 36%-70%). Primary end point was met because lower limit of 95% CI of response rate was higher than 5%. RAS mutations were found in ctDNA collected at rechallenge baseline in 12 of 25 evaluable patients (48%). No RAS mutations were detected in samples from patients who achieved confirmed partial response. Patients with RAS wild-type ctDNA had significantly longer progression-free survival than those with RAS mutated ctDNA (median progression-free survival, 4.0 vs 1.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.18-0.98; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: This is the first prospective demonstration that a rechallenge strategy with cetuximab and irinotecan may be active in patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC with acquired resistance to first-line irinotecan- and cetuximab-based therapy. The evaluation of RAS mutational status on ctDNA might be helpful in selecting candidate patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02296203.

There are clinical challenges related to adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer (CRC) and novel molecular markers are needed for better risk stratification of patients. Our aim was to integrate our previously reported clinical-genetic prognostic score with new immunogenetic markers of 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) to evaluate the recurrence risk stratification before fluoropyrimidine (FL)-based adjuvant therapy. The study population included a total of 270 stage II-III CRC patients treated with adjuvant FL with (FL + OXA, n = 119) or without oxaliplatin (FL, n = 151). Patients were genotyped for a panel of 192 tagging polymorphisms in 34 immune-related genes. The IFNG -rs1861494 polymorphism was associated with worse DFS in the FL + OXA (HR = 2.14, 95%CI 1.13-4.08; P = 0.020, q -value = 0.249) and FL (HR = 1.97, 95%CI 1.00-3.86; P = 0.049) cohorts, according to a dominant model. The integration of IFNG -rs1861494 in our previous clinical genetic multiparametric score of DFS improved the patients' risk stratification (Log-rank P = 0.0026 in the pooled population). These findings could improve the discrimination of patients who would benefit from adjuvant treatment. In addition, the results may help better elucidate the interplay between the immune system and chemotherapeutics and help determine the efficacy of anti-tumor strategies.

Background: It is estimated that about half of cancer patients use at least one form of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) in their life but there is a strong reticence of patients in talking about CAM with their oncologist. Primary aim of this study was to inform patients about CAM, focusing on their supposed benefits, toxicities and interactions with conventional therapeutic agents. The study also explored patients' perception about CAM and ascertained the level of CAM use among cancer patients of an Italian academic hospital., Methods: From April 2016 to April 2017, the observational pilot trial "CAMEO-PRO" prospectively enrolled 239 cancer patients that were invited to attend a tutorial about CAM at the Department of oncology, University Hospital of Udine, Italy. Before and after the informative session, patients were asked to fill a questionnaire reporting their knowledge and opinion about CAM., Results: Overall, 163 (70%) women and 70 (30%) men were enrolled. Median age was 61 years. At study entry, 168 (72%) patients declared they had never been interested in this topic previously; 24 patients (11%) revealed the use of a type of alternative therapy and 58 (28%) revealed the use of complementary therapy. In total, 139 (55.2%) patients attended the informative session. Bowker's test of symmetry demonstrated statistically significant opinion's change after the session on 9 out of 14 explored items., Conclusions: Informative sessions seem to have a relevant impact on patients' perceptions and opinions about CAM.

Background: FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is considered a standard option in the upfront treatment of clinically selected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer irrespective of RAS and BRAF molecular status. The randomised MACBETH and VOLFI studies showed that a modified FOLFOXIRI regimen in combination with cetuximab or panitumumab, respectively, achieved high therapeutic activity in RAS and BRAF wild-type patients with an acceptable toxicity profile. Drawing from these considerations, we designed TRIPLETE study aiming at comparing two different chemotherapy backbones (mFOLFOXIRI or mFOLFOX6) in combination with panitumumab in the first-line treatment of patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer., Methods: This is a prospective, open-label, multicentre phase III trial in which initially unresectable and previously untreated RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients are randomised to receive a standard treatment with mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or an experimental regimen with modified FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan 150 mg/m 2 , oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , L-leucovorin 200 mg/m 2 , 5-fluoruracil 2400 mg/m 2 48-hour continuous infusion) plus panitumumab up to 12 cycles, followed by panitumumab plus 5-fluorouracil and L-leucovorin until disease progression. The primary endpoint is overall response rate according to RECIST 1.1 criteria., Discussion: The relative benefit of chemotherapy intensification when using an anti-EGFR-based regimen in molecularly selected patients is unknown; TRIPLETE study aims at filling this gap of knowledge. The study is sponsored by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest Cooperative Group and is currently ongoing at 42 Italian centres., Clinical Trial Information: NCT03231722., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Purpose Given the cumulative neurotoxicity associated with oxaliplatin, a shorter duration of adjuvant therapy, if equally efficacious, would be advantageous for patients and health-care systems. Methods The Three or Six Colon Adjuvant trial is an open-label, phase III, multicenter, noninferiority trial randomizing patients with high-risk stage II or stage III colon cancer to receive 3 months or 6 months of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin). Primary end-point is relapse-free survival. Results 3,759 patients were accrued from 130 Italian sites, 64% receiving FOLFOX and 36% CAPOX. Two-thirds were stage III. The median time of follow up was 62 months and 772 relapses or deaths have been observed. The hazard ratio (HR) of the 3 months versus 6 months for relapse/death was 1.14 (95% CI, 0.99 to 1.32; P [for noninferiority] = .514) and the CI crossed the noninferiority limit of 1.20. However, the absolute difference in 3-year RFS was 1.9% (95% CI, -0.7% to 4.4%). Counter-intuitively, while the RFS curves were similar for stage III (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.26) and for CAPOX treated patients (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.26), they were not for stage II and for FOLFOX treated patients, with HR of 1.41 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.89) and 1.23 (95% CI, 1.03 to 1.46), respectively, favoring the 6 months of treatment. Conclusion The Three or Six Colon Adjuvant trial failed to formally show noninferiority of 3 versus 6 months of treatment to the predefined margin of 20% relative increase. The results depended on the adjuvant regimen and risk. For CAPOX, 3 months were as good as 6 months; for FOLFOX, 6 months added extra benefit. Counter-intuitively, the low-risk patients benefitted more than the high-risk population from the 6-month duration. The choice of regimen and duration should depend on patient characteristics and be balanced against the extra toxicity of longer therapy.

Background: Few data are available regarding the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer elderly patients with anti-EGFR agents in combination with chemotherapy. FOLFOX plus panitumumab is a standard first-line option for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Slight adjustments in chemo-dosage are commonly applied in clinical practice to elderly patients, but those modified schedules have never been prospectively tested. Clinical definition of elderly (≥70 years old) patients that may deserve a more or less intensive combination therapy is still debated. Several geriatric screening tools have been developed to predict survival and risk of toxicity from treatment. Among those, the G8 screening tool has been tested in cancer patients showing the strongest prognostic value for overall survival, while the CRASH score can stratify patients according to an estimated risk of treatment-related toxicities., Methods: The PANDA study is a prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase II trial of first-line therapy with panitumumab in combination with dose-adjusted FOLFOX or with 5-fluorouracil monotherapy, in previously untreated elderly patients (≥70 years) with RAS and BRAF wild-type unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. RAS and BRAF analyses are centralized. Geriatric assessment by means of G8 and CRASH score is planned at baseline and G8 will be re-evaluated at disease progression. The primary endpoint is duration of progression-free survival in both arms. Secondary endpoints include prospective evaluation of the prognostic role of G8 score and the correlation of CRASH risk categories with toxicity., Discussion: The PANDA study aims at exploring safety and efficacy of panitumumab in combination with FOLFOX or with 5FU/LV in elderly patients affected by RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, to identify the most promising treatment strategy in this setting. Additionally, this is the first trial in which the prognostic role of the G8 score will be prospectively evaluated. Results of this study will drive further experimental developments for one or both combinations., Trial Registration: PANDA is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02904031 , July 11, 2016. PANDA is registered at EudraCT-No.: 2015-003888-10, September 3, 2015.