Search

Background In spite of demonstrating prognostic and possibly predictive benefit in retrospective cohorts and meta-analyses of cancer populations, including colorectal cancer (CRC), prospective evaluation of the relationship between neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and treatment outcomes in previously untreated mCRC patients receiving bevacizumab-based therapy has not yet been performed. Methods An open-label, single arm, multi-centre study. Patients received first-line bevacizumab plus XELOX or mFOLFOX6 (Phase-A) and continued bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI beyond first progression (Phase-B). Analyses included the association of NLR with phase A progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A sub-study investigated the safety in patients with the primary in situ tumor. An exploratory sub-study examined relationships of circulating proteomic markers with PFS. Results Phase-A enrolled 128 patients; median age was 64 years (range: 26-84), 70 (55%) were female, 71 (56%) were PS-0 and 51 (40%) had primary in situ tumor. Fifty-three (41%) patients entered Phase-B. The median baseline (b) NLR was 3.2 (range: 1.5-20.4) with 32 (25%) patients having bNLR > 5. The PFS hazard ratio (HR) by bNLR > 5 versus <= 5 was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.9-2.2; p = 0.101). The median PFS was 9.2 months (95% CI: 7.9-10.8) for Phase-A and 6.7 months (95% CI: 3.0-8.2) for Phase-B. The HR for OS based on bNLR > 5 versus <= 5 was 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0-2.7; p = 0.052). The median OS was 25 months (95% CI: 19.2-29.7) for the full analysis set and 14.9 months for Phase-B. Baseline levels of nine proteomic markers showed a relationship with PFS. Treatment related toxicities were consistent with what has previously been published. There were 4 (3%) instances of GI perforation, of which, 3 (6%) occurred in the primary in situ tumor group. Conclusions Results from this study are aligned with the previously reported trend towards worse PFS and OS in patients with higher bNLR.Copyright © 2020 Clarke et al. Thi

Introduction: Outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer are improving, due to the tailoring of therapy enabled by better understanding of clinical behavior according to molecular subtype. Areas covered: A review of the literature and recent conference presentations was undertaken on the topic of systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This review summarizes expert discussion of the current evidence for therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on molecular subgrouping. Expert opinion: EGFR-targeted and VEGF-targeted antibodies are now routinely incorporated into treatment strategies for mCRC. EGFR-targeted antibodies are restricted to patients with extended RAS wild-type profiles, with evidence that they should be further restricted to patients with left-sided tumors. Clinically distinct treatment pathways based on tumor RAS, BRAF, HER2 and MMR status, are now clinically applicable. Evidence suggests therapy for additional subgroups will soon be defined; the most advanced being for patients with KRAS G12 C mutation and gene TRK fusion defects.Copyright © 2020, © 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Background: Patients (pts) with advanced biliary tract cancers (BTC) have a poor prognosis with first and second line chemotherapy resulting in modest survival benefits. Immunotherapy using single agent anti-PD-1 therapy has also shown low activity with an objective response rate (ORR) of less than 10%. Combined CTLA-4/PD-1 blockade using ipilimumab (ipi) and nivolumab (nivo) has demonstrated superior efficacy compared to single agent anti-PD-1 therapy in pts with advanced melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. To date, no trials in BTC pts with ipi/nivo therapy have been reported. Method(s): 39 pts with metastatic BTCs were enrolled into the CA 209-538 clinical trial for rare cancers. Patients received nivo 3mg/kg and ipi 1mg/kg q 3 weekly for 4 doses, followed by nivo 3mg/kg q 2 weekly. Treatment continued for up to 96 weeks, or until disease progression or the development of unacceptable toxicity. Response (RECIST 1.1) was assessed every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR = CR +PR + SD). Exploratory endpoints include correlation of efficacy with biomarkers including PD-L1 expression and tumour mutation burden. Result(s):39 pts with BTC were enrolled and 33 pts (85%) had received at least one prior line of systemic treatment (0-2 lines). The ORR was 24% and the CBR 45% with the median duration of response not been reached (range 2-26+months). Responses were observed in 3/14 intrahepatic, 1/10 extrahepatic, 0/2 unspecified cholangiocarcinoma and 5/13 gallbladder ca pts. None of the responding pts had a microsatellite instable tumour. 2 pts with durable partial responses were subsequently rendered surgically free of disease. Median OS and PFS were 6.1 and 3.1 months respectively. 22 (56%) pts experienced an immune -related adverse event (irAE) with grade3/4 irAEs being observed in 8 (20%) pts. Conclusion(s): Combination immunotherapy with ipi/nivo demonstrates significant clinical activity in a subset of patients with advanced microsatellite s

Importance: Biliary tract cancers represent a rare group of malignant conditions with very limited treatment options. Patients with advanced disease have a poor outcome with current therapies. Objective(s): To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with advanced biliary tract cancers. Design, Setting, and Participant(s): The CA209-538 prospective multicenter phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial included patients with advanced rare cancers including patients with biliary tract cancers. This subgroup analysis evaluated 39 patients from CA209-538 with biliary tract cancers who were enrolled from December 2017 to December 2019. Most of the patients (n = 33) had experienced disease progression after 1 or more lines of therapy and had tumor tissue available for biomarker research. Intervention(s): Patients received treatment with nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab at 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks and continued for up to 96 weeks until disease progression or the development of unacceptable toxic events. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease control rate (complete remission, partial remission, or stable disease) as assessed by RECIST 1.1. Result(s): Among the 39 patients included in this subgroup analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial (20 men, 19 women; mean [range] age, 65 [37-81] years), the objective response rate was 23% (n = 9) with a disease control rate of 44% (n = 17); all responders had received prior chemotherapy, and none had a microsatellite unstable tumor. Responses were exclusively observed in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma. The median duration of response was not reached (range, 2.5 to =23 months). The median progression-free survival was 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.2-4.6 months), and overall survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 2.7-11.9 months). Immune-related toxic events were repor

Background: Patients (pts) with rare cancers represent an unmet medical need and have an inferior overall survival compared to patients with more common malignancies. Due to their low frequency, no therapies, including immunotherapies, have systematically been investigated in this population. Ipilimumab (ipi)/Nivolumab (nivo) combination treatment has demonstrated significant clinical activity in pts with advanced melanoma and renal cell carcinoma and response rates with this regimen are higher compared to single agent anti-PD-1 therapy. This phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of ipi/nivo in rare cancer pts. Method(s): 60 pts with advanced rare upper gastrointestinal (GI), neuroendocrine (NE) and gynaecological (GY) malignancies were enrolled in 3 cohorts. Patients received nivo 3mg/kg and ipi 1mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivo 3mg/kg every 2 weeks. Treatment continued for up to 96 weeks, or until disease progression or the development of unacceptable toxicity. Response (RECIST 1.1) was assessed every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR), CR, PR and SD. Exploratory endpoints include correlation of efficacy with relevant biomarkers including PDL1 status and tumour mutation burden. Result(s): 42 pts have so far undergone restaging, 11 pts clinically progressed prior to their first restaging scan. 50 pts have received prior therapy (1-5 lines). Objective responses have been observed in a range of different malignancies. Clinical trial information: NCT02923934. Grade 3/4 immune related adverse events were detected in 3 1% of pts. The results of correlative biomarker studies will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion(s): Ipi/Nivo combination treatment has efficacy in a wide range of advanced rare malignancies. Immune related toxicity is in keeping with previously reported clinical trials using the same dosing regimen. (Table Presented) .

Background: In early-stage pancreatic cancer, there are currently no biomarkers to guide selection of therapeutic options. This prospective biomarker trial evaluated the feasibility and potential clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis to inform adjuvant therapy decision making. Material(s) and Method(s): Patients considered by the multidisciplinary team to have resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled. Pre- and post-operative samples for ctDNA analysis were collected. PCR-based-SafeSeqS assays were used to identify mutations at codon 12, 13 and 61 of KRAS in the primary pancreatic tumor and to detect ctDNA. Results of ctDNA analysis were correlated with CA19-9, recurrence-free and overall survival (OS). Patient management was per standard of care, blinded to ctDNA data. Result(s): Of 112 patients consented pre-operatively, 81 (72%) underwent resection. KRAS mutations were identified in 91% (38/42) of available tumor samples. Of available plasma samples (N = 42), KRAS mutated ctDNA was detected in 62% (23/37) pre-operative and 37% (13/35) post-operative cases. At a median follow-up of 38.4 months, ctDNA detection in the pre-operative setting was associated with inferior recurrence-free survival (RFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 4.1; P = 0.002)] and OS (HR 4.1; P = 0.015). Detectable ctDNA following curative intent resection was associated with inferior RFS (HR 5.4; P < 0.0001) and OS (HR 4.0; P = 0.003). Recurrence occurred in 13/13 (100%) patients with detectable ctDNA post-operatively, including in seven that received gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion(s): ctDNA studies in localized pancreatic cancer are challenging, with a substantial number of patients not able to undergo resection, not having sufficient tumor tissue for analysis or not completing per protocol sample collection. ctDNA analysis, pre- and/or post-surgery, is a promising prognostic marker. Studies of ctDNA guided therapy are justified, including of treatment int

Background: While adjuvant therapy provides a survival benefit for patients (pts) with early-stage pancreatic cancer there are currently no biomarkers that define pts that are more or less likely to benefit from such treatment. This prospective study investigated the use of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) as a marker of residual disease, where detection could predict recurrence. Method(s): Patients newly diagnosed with operable pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled. PCR-based-SafeSeqS assays were used to identify mutations at codons 12, 13 and 61 of KRAS in the primary tumor and to detect ctDNA in plasma samples. Patient management was as per standard of care, blinded to ctDNA data. Result(s): From January 2015 to June 2017, 42 pts with matched plasma samples, collected pre- and post-operatively, and tumor tissue available were evaluated. The median time between surgery and post-op blood collection was 6.3 (range:4-8) weeks. RAS mutations were identified in 38 (90.5%) tumor samples. ctDNA was detected in 23/37 (62.2%) pre-op and 13/35 (37.1%) post-op plasma samples. In multivariate analysis including stage, and resection margin, ctDNA status was the only statistically significant variable. Pre-op ctDNA detection was associated with worse median recurrence free survival (RFS), 10.3 months versus not reached, (Hazard Ratio (HR),3.4; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.5- 7.6; P = 0.005) and 5.4 months versus 17.1 months, (HR, 5.4; 95% CI, 4.7-37.3; P < 0.0001) post-operatively. Similarly, the presence of ctDNA was associated with worse median overall survival (OS), 13.8 months versus not reached pre-operatively, (HR,3.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 8.3; P = 0.04) and 10.6 months versus not reached (HR,4.5; 95% CI 2.4-28.6; P = 0.001) post-operatively. Notably, recurrence occurred in 13 of 13 pts with detectable post-op ctDNA, despite more than half receiving standard adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion(s): ctDNA analysis is a promising prognostic marker in early-stage pancreatic cancer

Background: The optimal duration of ACT following surgery for colon cancer remains controversial. SCOT is an international, randomised trial that compared 3 months versus 6 months of ACT in this setting. We sought the survival benefits that patients participating in SCOT judged necessary to make extra 3 months of ACT worthwhile. Method(s): SCOT participants from Australia & New Zealand completed a validated questionnaire 3 and 18 months after randomisation to elicit the minimum survival benefit each participant judged necessary to make it worthwhile having ACT for 6 months rather than 3 months. Standardised hypothetical scenarios used the following baseline survivals with 3 months of ACT: life expectancies (LE) of 5 years (5Y) and 15 years (15Y), and 5-year survival rates (5YS) of 65% and 85%. Comparisons were nonparametric, 2-sided, and considered statistically significant if p < 0.05. Result(s): Questionnaires were completed by 160 participants, 82 allocated 3 months ACT, and 78 allocated 6 months ACT. ACT was FOLFOX in 121 (75%), XELOX in 39 (25%), and the mean age was 64. Preferences varied substantially among participants, and did not differ according to the randomly allocated treatment group. The median survival benefits judged necessary to make the extra 3 months of ACT worthwhile were an extra: 3 years beyond a LE of 5Y; 3 years beyond a LE of 15Y; 15% beyond a 65% 5YS; and 5% beyond an 85% 5YS. Preferences were similar at 3 months and 18 months. Participants with symptomatic peripheral neuropathy (132, 82%) judged a median benefit of an extra 5% beyond a 65% 5YS necessary to warrant their symptoms. Conclusion(s): Participants' preferences varied substantially, and many judged much larger benefits needed to warrant having ACT for 6 months rather than 3 months than the estimates of the benefits based on the IDEA meta-analysis.

Background: Bevacizumab (BEV) with fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy is well-established for patients (pts) with mCRC. There is a need for reproducible, validated, inexpensive and accessible prognostic markers to aid in treatment selection. Pretreatment levels of systemic inflammatory markers including the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) have been shown retrospectively to be prognostic in many tumors. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the relationship between NLR and treatment outcomes in previously untreated mCRC pts receiving BEV-based therapy. Method(s): ASCENT (NCT01588990) is an openlabel, single arm, phase-IV, multi-center study. Pts received 1st-line BEV+XELOX or mFOLFOX6 in phase A (PhA) with planned continuation of BEV+FOLFIRI beyond 1st progression in phase B (PhB). Primary analysis: association of NLR with progression free survival (PFS). Secondary analyses: overall survival (OS) and safety. Sub-study: safety in pts with intact primary in situ (PIS) and resected primary tumor (RPT). Result(s): 128 pts started PhA; median age 63.5 years (range: 26-84), 70(55%) females, 51(40%) PIS, 71(56%) and 56(44%) were PS 0 and >= 1; respectively. 53(41%) pts entered PhB. The median baseline (b) NLR was 3.2 (range: 1.5- 20.4) with 32(25%) pts having a baseline level > 5. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS by NLR > 5 vs <=5 was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.9-2.2; p = 1.01). Median PFS was 9.2 months (mo; 95% CI: 7.9-10.8) for PhA and 6.7 mo (95% CI: 3.0-8.2) for PhB. HR for OS based on baseline NLR > 5 vs <=5 was 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0-2.7; p = 0.052). Based on a multivariate model, the 12-month predicted OS probability for pts with PS 0, no metastatic liver disease and <= 3 sites of other metastatic disease, was 87% in pts with bNLR <= 5 and 79% in pts with bNLR > 5. Median OS was 25 mo (95% CI: 19.2-29.7) for the full analysis set and 14.9 mo for PhB. Treatment related toxicities were numerically and qualitatively consistent with prior experience. There were 4(3%) instanc

Background: Napabucasin is a first-in-class cancer stemness inhibitor that targets STAT3, which is a poor prognostic factor in colorectal cancer. This study aimed to test napabucasin in advanced colorectal cancer. Method(s): This study was a double-blind randomised phase 3 trial done at 68 centres in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. Patients with advanced colorectal cancer with a good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (0-1) for whom all available standard therapies had failed were eligible for the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive placebo or napabucasin through a web-based system with a permuted block method, after stratification by ECOG performance status, KRAS status, previous VEGF inhibitor treatment, and time from diagnosis of metastatic disease. Napabucasin 480 mg or matching placebo was taken orally every 12 h. All patients received best supportive care. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in an intention-to-treat analysis. This is the final analysis of this trial, which is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01830621. Finding(s): Accrual began on April 15, 2013, and was stopped for futility on May 23, 2014, at which point 282 patients had undergone randomisation (138 assigned to the napabucasin group and 144 to the placebo group). Overall survival did not differ significantly between groups: median overall survival was 4.4 months (95% CI 3.7-4.9) in the napabucasin group and 4.8 months (4.0-5.3) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.46, p=0.34). The safety population included 136 patients in the napabucasin group and 144 patients in the placebo group. More patients who received napabucasin had any grade of treatment-related diarrhoea (108 [79%] of 136 patients), nausea (69 [51%]), and anorexia (52 [38%]) than did patients who received placebo (28 [19%] of 144 patients, 35 [24%], and 23 [16%], respectively). The most common severe (grade 3 or worse)

Most unresectable metastatic colon cancer remains incurable, with a median survival of less than 3 years. Molecularly targeted therapies have recently been developed; in particular, monoclonal antibodies against the epidermal growth factor receptor, which are efficacious in 40% to 60% of chemotherapy-resistant patients with wild-type KRAS. This study shows that cetuximab plus irinotecan, compared with cetuximab alone, increases the response rate and delays progression in irinotecan-resistant RAS wild-type colorectal cancer. Background(s): The Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation (ICECREAM) study assessed the efficacy of cetuximab monotherapy compared with cetuximab combined with chemotherapy for quadruple wild-type (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, or P13KCA exon 20) metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods: Patients were enrolled in an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial and randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2 cetuximab weekly, with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. Result(s): From 2012 to 2016, 48 patients were recruited. Two were ineligible, and 2 were not evaluable for response. Characteristics were balanced, except gender (male, 62% vs. 72%) and primary sidedness (left, 95% vs. 68%). For cetuximab compared with cetuximab-irinotecan, progression-free survival was 14% versus 41% (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.78; P =.008); response rate was 10% (2 partial responses) versus 38% (1 complete, 8 partial); P =.04. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were less with cetuximab monotherapy (23% vs. 50%); global and specific quality of life scores did not differ. Conclusion(s): In comparison with cetuximab alone, cetuximab plus irinotecan increases the response rate and delays progression in irinotecan-resistant RAS wild-type colorectal cancer. This echoes

Background: Pts with BRAFm mCRC have an exceedingly poor prognosis. Unlike melanoma, BRAF inhibitor monotherapy has limited activity in BRAFm mCRC. Preclinically, BRAF inhibition results in rapid feedback activation of EGFR and ongoing tumor proliferation, which can be readily overcome by combining BRAF and EGFR inhibition. EViCT examined the safety and efficacy of combining two oral agents targeting BRAF with Vemurafenib (Vem) and EGFR with Erlotinib (Erl), in BRAFm mCRC pts. Herein, we report safety and preliminary efficacy data. Method(s): EViCT had 2 parts: a Phase I dose escalation of Erl (cohort 1: 100mg qd; cohort 2: 150mg qd) together with Vem 960mg bd, to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The Phase II component involved dose expansion at MTD using a Simon 2-stage design to treat 9 pts in stage 1 and 15 pts in stage 2. Cycles were 28 days. Eligible pts had ECOG < 1, < 2 lines of systemic therapy for metastatic disease, and acceptable organ function. Staging CT scans were performed every 2 cycles, response assessed using RECIST 1.1. Primary endoint was clinical benefit rate (CR, PR and SD). A number of pharmacodynamics correlates were assessed including serial ctDNA, FDG-PET and optional tumour biopsies. Pts were treated until disease progression or toxicity requiring discontinuation. Result(s): Between Jul-2014 and Oct-2016, 30 BRAFm mCRC pts were enrolled. The Phase I Lead-in enrolled 4 pts in cohort 1 and 7 pts in cohort 2. There was 1 DLT (grade 3 hand-foot syndrome) in cohort 2. MTD/Recommended Phase 2 Dose was Erl 150mg qd and Vem 960mg bd, the full dose for each agent. The Phase II expansion enrolled 19 pts. Overall, 23 pts are evaluable for this interim analysis. Median age was 61 years, 11 (48%) pts were male. Most pts had 1(50%) or 2 (41%) lines of prior treatment. Overall response rate was 39% (95%CI = [20%, 61%]), including 5 (22%) confirmed PR, 4 (17%) unconfirmed PR, 3 (13%) stable disease and 11 (48%) progressive disease. Conclusion(s

Background:This randomised phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of panitumumab added to docetaxel-based chemotherapy in advanced oesophagogastric cancer. Method(s):Patients with metastatic or locally recurrent cancer of the oesophagus, oesophagogastric junction or stomach received docetaxel and a fluoropyrimidine with or without panitumumab for 8 cycles or until progression. The primary end point was response rate (RECIST1.1). We planned to enrol 100 patients, with 50% expected response rate for combination therapy. Result(s):A total of 77 patients were enrolled. A safety alert from the REAL3 trial prompted a review of data that found no evidence of adverse outcomes associated with panitumumab but questionable efficacy, and new enrolment was ceased. Enrolled patients were treated according to protocol. Response rates were 49% (95% CI 34-64%) in the chemotherapy arm and 58% (95% CI 42-72%) in the combination arm. Common grade 3 and 4 toxicities included infection, anorexia, vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue. At 23.7 months of median follow-up, median progression-free survival was 6.9 months vs 6.0 months and median overall survival was 11.7 months vs 10.0 months in the chemotherapy arm and the combination arm, respectively. Conclusion(s):Adding panitumumab to docetaxel-based chemotherapy for advanced oesophagogastric cancer did not improve efficacy and increased toxicities.Copyright © 2016 Cancer Research UK.

Background: The INTEGRATE study evaluated activity of regorafinib (REG) v placebo (PBO) in 147 eligible patients with refractory AOGC. REG was highly effective in prolonging progression free survival (PFS). Differences between regions (i.e. Australia New Zealand/Canada (ANZ/CAN) vs Korea) were found in the magnitude of effect, but REG was effective across all regions and subgroups. We report on an exploratory analysis of VEGF biomarkers to identify predictive/prognostic markers. Method(s): Protein biomarkers IL8, VEGF-A,-B,-C-D, soluble(s)VEGFR-1,-2-3 were analysed in plasma at baseline (BL) by multiplex immunoassays (Bio-Plex,BioRad) or ELISA (Abnova). Spearman statistics were used to quantify correlations between markers. Wilcoxon Rank-Sum tests were used to compare markers across regions. The prognostic and predictive value of markers was determined using cox proportional hazards analysis of PFS. Result(s): There were moderate-to-strong correlations between BL levels of IL8 and VEGF-C (rho: = 0.68), IL8 and VEGF-D (rho: = 0.66), VEGF-A and VEGF-C (rho = 0.68), VEGF-A and sVEGFR-1 (rho = 0.54); and a modest negative correlation between VEGF-D and sVEGRF-1(rho = -0.33). The regions differed according to BL levels of: VEGF-A (higher in ANZ/CAN; p = 0.0015), VEGF-B (higher in Korea; p = 0.0003), VEGF-D (higher in Korea; p <.0001), and sVEGFR-1 (higher in ANZ/CAN; p <.0001). Adjusting for treatment group, there were statistically significant negative associations between PFS and BL IL8 (p = 0.047), VEGF-A (p = 0.037) and sVEGFR-1 (p = 0.045). There was no convincing statistical evidence that any BL plasma biomarker modified the effect of REG. The effect of region on effectiveness of REG was maintained when evaluated in conjunction with BL biomarkers individually and in combination. Conclusion(s): Highplasma IL8, VEGF-A and sVEGFR-1 may be adverse prognostic factors. A predictive VEGF blood based biomarker remains elusive. A broader biomarker study including markers be

Purpose We evaluated the activity of regorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods We conducted an international (Australia and New Zealand, South Korea, and Canada) randomized phase II trial in which patients were randomly assigned at a two-To-one ratio and stratified by lines of prior chemotherapy for advanced disease (one v two) and region. Eligible patients received best supportive care plus regorafenib 160 mg or matching placebo orally on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle until disease progression or prohibitive adverse events occurred. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Final analysis included data to December 31, 2014. Results A total of 152 patients were randomly assigned from November 7, 2012, to February 25, 2014, yielding 147 evaluable patients (regorafenib, n = 97; placebo, n = 50). Baseline characteristics were balanced. Median PFS significantly differed between groups (regorafenib, 2.6 months; 95% CI, 1.8 to 3.1 and placebo, 0.9 months; 95% CI, 0.9 to 0.9; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.59; P <.001). The effect was greater in South Korea than in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada combined (HR, 0.12 v 0.61; interaction P < .001) but consistent across age, neutrophil-To-lymphocyte ratio, primary site, lines of chemotherapy, peritoneal metastasis presence, number of metastatic sites, and plasma vascular endothelial growth factor A. A survival trend in favor of regorafenib was seen (median, 5.8 months; 95% CI, 4.4 to 6.8 v 4.5 months; 95% CI, 3.4 to 5.2; HR, 0.74; P = .147). Twenty-nine patients assigned to placebo received open-label regorafenib after disease progression. Regorafenib toxicity was similar to that previously reported. Conclusion In this phase II trial, regorafenib was effective in prolonging PFS in refractory advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. Regional differences were found, but regorafenib was effective in both regional groups. A phase III trial is pl

Introduction: REG is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor warranting evaluation in AOGC following failure of 1st- or 2nd-line chemotherapy (CT) where few options exist. Method(s): International (Australia & New Zealand (ANZ), Korea, Canada (NCIC CTG)) phase II RCT with 2:1 randomisation to 160mg REG or matched placebo (PBO) on days (D) 1-21 each 28 D cycle until disease progression (PD) or prohibitive adverse events. Primary endpoint: progression free survival (PFS). Final analysis used data to 31 Dec 14. Result(s): 152 patients ( pts) enrolled (Nov 12 to Feb 14) yielding 147 pts evaluable for analysis (97 REG and 50 PBO). M:F (118:29); primary site: OGJ (56), stomach (85); lines of prior CT: 1 (62), 2 (85); ECOG PS 0 (62): 1 (85). Median (med.) treatment wks: 8 (REG) v 4 (PBO). Med. REG dose intensity: 150mg (130mg Korea and 160mg ANZ/ Can). 27 PBO pts received REG following PD. REG Med. PFS 11.1 wks (95% CI: 7.7- 13.3) v PBO 3.9 wks (3.7 - 4.0), HR 0.40, p < 0.0001. Med. REG OS 25 wks (95% CI: 18.9-29.6) v PBO 19.4 wks (95% CI: 14.9-22.7), HR 0.74, p = 0.11. Pre-specified analyses found REG effect greater in Korea than ANZ/Can (HR 0.12 v 0.61, p = 0.0009) but consistent across age, NLR, primary site, lines of CT, peritoneal metastases (mets) presence, number of met. sites, and VEGF-A (Table). Results comparable for ITT population (n = 152). REG was well tolerated, with expected spectrum of toxicities. Conclusion(s): REG was highly effective in prolonging PFS across a broad range of pts, with a non-significant positive OS trend. Regional differences were found in the magnitude of effect but REG was effective in all regions and subgroups. A phase III trial is merited. (Table Presented).

Contains fulltext : 154417pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We analysed the protein expression levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) ligands and receptors to determine their prognostic and predictive effects. METHODS: We graded expression of VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D, VEGF-R1, and VEGF-R2 to assess whether overexpression predicted bevacizumab resistance in samples from 268 of 471 patients randomised to capecitabine (C), capecitabine and bevacizumab (CB), or CB and mitomycin (CBM) in the MAX trial and extended the analysis to the CAIRO-2 population. RESULTS: Patients with low expression of VEGF-D (0, 1thorn) benefited from bevacizumab treatment (PFS hazard ratio (HR) (C vs CBthornCBM), 0.21; 95% CI, 0.08-0.55; overall survival (OS) HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.13-0.90). Patients with higher VEGF-D expression received less benefit (VEGF-D 2thorn PFS HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-1.00; OS HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52-1.30; VEGF-D 3thorn PFS HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50-1.17; OS HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.79-2.09) (P interaction o0.05). In CAIRO-2, there was no difference in PFS or OS according to VEGF-D expression. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive value of VEGF-D expression for bevacizumab may depend on the chemotherapy backbone used. Further evaluation is required before clinical utilisation.

Background: REG is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor warranting evaluation in AOGC following failure of 1st or 2nd line chemotherapy (CT) where few options exist. Method(s):International (Australia & New Zealand (ANZ), Korea, Canada (NCIC CTG)) phase II RCT with 2:1 randomization to 160 mg REG or matched Placebo (PBO) on days (D) 1-21 each 28 D cycle until disease progression (PD) or prohibitive adverse events. Primary endpoint: progression free survival (PFS). Final analysis used data to December 31, 2014. Result(s):152 patients (pts) enrolled (November 2012 to February 2014) yielding 147 pts evaluable for analysis (97 REG and 50 PBO). M:F (118:29); primary site: OGJ (56), stomach (85); lines of prior CT: 1 (62), 2 (85); ECOG PS 0 (62): 1 (85). Median (med.) treatment wks: 8 (REG) v 4 (PBO). Med. REG dose intensity: 150 mg (130 mg Korea and 160mg ANZ/Can). 27 PBO pts received REG following PD. REG Med. PFS 11.1 wks (95% CI: 7.7 - 13.3) v PBO 3.9 wks (3.7 - 4.0), HR 0.40, p < 0.0001. Med. REG OS 25 wks (95% CI: 18.9-29.6) v PBO 19.4 wks (95% CI: 14.9 - 22.7), HR 0.74, p = 0.11. Pre-specified analyses found REG effect greater in Korea than ANZ/Can (HR 0.12 v 0.61, p = 0.0009) but consistent across age, NLR, primary site, lines of CT, peritoneal metastases (mets) presence, number of met. sites, and VEGF-A (Table). Results comparable for ITT population (n = 152). REG was well tolerated, with expected spectrum of toxicities. Conclusion(s): REG was highly effective in prolonging PFS across a broad range of pts, with a non-significant positive OS trend. Regional differences were found in the magnitude of effect but REG was effective in all regions and subgroups. A phase III trial is merited.

Background: This phase 2 study evaluated trebananib (AMG 386), an investigational peptide-Fc fusion protein that neutralises the interaction between angiopoietins-1/2 and the Tie2 receptor, plus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Method(s): Patients had adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum with progression within 6 months of receiving only one prior fluoropyrimidine/oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease. All patients received FOLFIRI and were randomised 2: 1 to also receive intravenous trebananib 10 mg kg-1 once weekly (QW) (Arm A) or placebo QW (Arm B). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Result(s): One hundred and forty-four patients were randomised (Arms A/B, n=95/49). Median PFS in Arms A and B was 3.5 and 5.2 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.23; 95% CI, 0.81-1.86; P=0.33) and median overall survival (OS) was 11.9 and 8.8 months, respectively (HR 0.90; 95% CI; 0.53-1.54; P=0.70). Objective response rate (ORR) was 14% and 0% in Arms A and B, respectively. Incidence of grade >=3 adverse events was similar between treatment arms (Arm A, 61%; Arm B, 65%) and included pulmonary embolism (1%/4%), deep vein thrombosis (5%/2%), and hypertension (1%/0%). Conclusion(s): Administration of trebananib plus FOLFIRI did not prolong PFS compared with placebo plus FOLFIRI. Toxicities were manageable and consistent with those known for FOLFIRI and trebananib. © 2013 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Background:Cetuximab can reverse chemotherapy resistance in colorectal cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination of docetaxel and cetuximab as a second-line treatment in docetaxel-refractory oesophagogastric cancer. Method(s):Patients received docetaxel 30 mg m-2 on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks and cetuximab 400 mg m-2 on day 1, then 250 mg m-2 weekly. Biomarker mutation analysis was performed. Result(s):A total of 38 patients were enrolled. Response rates were PR 6% (95% CI 2-19%), s.d. 43% (95% CI 28-59%). Main grade 3/4 toxicities were febrile neutropenia, anorexia, nausea, diarrhoea, stomatitis, and acneiform rash. Median progression-free and overall survival were 2.1 and 5.4 months, respectively. A landmark analysis showed a trend to improved survival times with increased grade of acneiform rash. No KRAS, BRAF or PIK3CA mutations were observed. Conclusion(s):Cetuximab and docetaxel achieve modest responses rates, but maintain comparable survival times to other salvage regimens with low rates of toxicity. © 2013 Cancer Research UK.

Background: This randomized phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of P, a fully human mAb against the epidermal growth factor receptor combined with T-based chemotherapy in advanced OG cancer. Method(s): Eligible pts had histologically confirmed metastatic OG cancer (adeno-carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma) were 18 years of age, PS 0-2, with adequate renal, haematologic and liver function with measurable disease. All pts provided informed consent. Selection was not based on kras determination. Pts received T 30mg/m2 d1,8, C 60mg/m2 d1 and F; investigator choice of 5FU infusion 160mg/m2/d or capecitabine 500mg/m2bd continuous +/-P 9 mg/kg d1 q3w. Treatment was administered for 8 cycles or until PD. The primary endpoint was response rate according to RECIST (1.1) assessed q6w. Planned enrolment target was 100 pts. Stratification variables included histology, PS and choice of F. Result(s): From April 2010 to November 2011, 77 pts were enrolled from 15 institutions. A safety alert from the REAL3 study (also involving P in OG cancer) prompted an unplanned review of data from ATTAX3 by the IDMC. The IDMC found no evidence of adverse outcomes associated with P, but as it did not appear that P would significantly improve efficacy, they recommended cessation of the study to new enrolment. Previously enrolled pts were treated and followed according to protocol. Median follow up is 24m. Treatment arms were well balanced; median age 59, 64y, male 77%, 87%, PS0-1 95%,90%, adenocarcinoma 90%,90%, capecitabine 67%, 66% for TCF/TCF-P, respectively. Common grade 3/4 toxicities include infection 18%,24%, febrile neutropenia 10%, 5%, anorexia 10%, 24%, nausea 18%,30%, stomatitis 3%,5%, diarrhoea 15%,24% , acneiform rash 0%, 8%, fatigue 18%, 30%, hypomagnesemia 10%, 16% for TCF/TCF-P. Efficacy outcomes are summarized in Table. Conclusion(s): The addition of P to T-based chemotherapy in advanced OG cancer did not improve efficacy and was associated with an increase in som

Background: Advanced Oesophago-Gastric Carcinoma (AOGC) has a poor prognosis, and there is no established standard treatment following failure of first or second line chemotherapy (CT). Regorafenib (BAY 73-4506)(REG) is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor which targets kinases involved in angiogenesis (VEGFR1-3, TIE-2), tumor microenvironment (PDGFR-beta, FGFR), and oncogenesis (RAF, RET and KIT), and has shown activity in other solid tumours. Following promising results in colon cancer and GIST, this study will determine if regorafenib has sufficient activity and safety to warrant further evaluation in a phase III trial as a second or third line therapy for AOGC. Method(s): International (Australia & New Zealand (ANZ); Canada (NCIC CTG), Korea) randomised phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 2:1 (REG:placebo) randomisation and stratification by: (1) Lines of prior chemotherapy for advanced disease (1 vs. 2). (2) Geographic region. Eligible patients with histological confirmation of OGC, with measurable metastatic or locally advanced disease that is refractory to, or relapsed following, first or second line CT, will receive best supportive care plus 160mg REG or matching placebo orally on days 1-21 of each 28 day treatment cycle until disease progression or prohibitive adverse events. Primary endpoint is progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints: PFS by baseline VEGF, response rate, overall survival, safety, quality of life and exploratory plasma angiogenesis and tissue growth factor biomarkers. 150 patients will be randomized in a 2:1 (REG:PBO) ratio. This will provide 90% power to detect a PFS rate at 2 months in the REG arm 66% versus < 50%. If 16 of 33 (evaluable) REG participants have progressed by 2 months, then the study will be reassessed or stopped. Result(s): As of January 2013, 19 of 29 planned ANZ sites are open, with 10 patients enrolled. Regulatory approval has been received for 16 sites in Canada and 7 sites in Korea. 4 Korean s

Background: Bevacizumab is an antiangiogenic mAb with efficacy against several cancers, but it is associated with risk of arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Further data are needed to determine the safety of bevacizumab. Patients and Methods: We recorded grade 3, 4, or 5 ATE events and other data (including age, baseline cardiovascular risk factors, history of ATE, and aspirin use) from 471 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in the MAX (Mitomycin, Avastin, Xeloda) trial of capecitabine monotherapy versus capecitabine with bevacizumab with or without mitomycin C. Result(s): Bevacizumab-treated patients had 12 grade 3, 4, or 5 ATEs (3.8% incidence). ATEs occurred in 2.1% of patients >65 years, 5% of those with a history of ATE, and 5% of those with cardiac risk factors. Age, history of ATE, or vascular risk factors did not increase risk. Aspirin users had a higher incidence than nonusers (8.9% versus 2.7%) but had higher rates of vascular risk factors. Conclusion(s): Bevacizumab was associated with a modestly higher risk of ATE, but safety was not significantly worse in older patients or patients with a history of ATE or vascular risk factors. The effect of aspirin in preventing ATE in patients receiving bevacizumab could not be determined from this study. © The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to conduct a randomised phase II study in second-line metastatic colorectal cancer with the purpose of confirming preliminary clinical data indicating that the formulation of irinotecan with the drug carrier, hyaluronan (HA) reduced toxicity of the drug. Method(s): Irinotecan-naive patients were randomized to receive either irinotecan (350 mg/m2) or HA-Irinotecan (HA 1,000 mg/m2 and irinotecan at 350 mg/m2) every 3 weeks for a maximum of eight cycles. Result(s): Seventy-six patients (41 HA-Irinotecan and 35 irinotecan-alone) were enrolled. There was no significant difference in any individual, or overall, grade 3 or 4 toxicity. There was a trend for increased diarrhea in the HA-Irinotecan-treated patients (20 versus 9%; P = 21), potentially explained by a disproportionate number of baseline toxicity-associated risk factors in this treatment group. The median number of cycles completed was six for HA-Irinotecan patients and two for irinotecan-alone patients (P = 0.005). When compared to the control arm, HA-Irinotecan patients had a significantly longer median progression-free survival of 5.2 versus 2.4 months (P = 0.017) and time to treatment failure (4 vs. 1.8 months; P = 0.007). Median overall survival was 10.1 months for HA-Irinotecan compared to 8.0 months for irinotecan patients (P = 0.196). Conclusion(s): Further studies are required to define the safety of the formulation of irinotecan with HA. While this study was not adequately powered to demonstrate survival differences, these phase II data indicated HA-Irinotecan to be a promising therapy demonstrating improved efficacy compared to irinotecan-alone. © 2010 Springer-Verlag.

Background: The CO.17 trial demonstrated that the addition of cetuximab monotherapy (C) to best supportive care (BSC) improves OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with ACRC. We compared tumour measurement as a continuous variable and visualized by waterfall plot vs. categorized as response based on RECIST as potential early predictors of OS benefit. Method(s): Of the 572 randomized, 216 pts on C and 142 on BSC had tumor assessment at baseline and 8 weeks and are included in this analysis. Response at 8 weeks was assessed using standard RECIST criteria and categorised as partial response, stable disease or progressive disease. Continuous tumour size measurement was also assessed using waterfall plot, The absolute difference in logarithm transformed sum of the longest tumor diameters (LSLD) between 8 weeks and baseline were calculated for the entire group and the KRAS wild-type (WT) and mutant (MUT) subgroups and correlated with OS in a multivariate analysis including difference in LSLD, RECIST response and other prognostic factors as covariates. Result(s): The increase of tumor size (cm) from baseline of pts treated by C was significantly smaller than those that received BSC (mean difference in LSLD 0.02 vs. 0.23; p < 0.0001), and this remained significant after adjusting for baseline prognostic factors (p<0.0001). In a multivariate analysis of pts treated by C, difference in LSLD was significantly associated with OS (HR 14.84, per ln(cm) of increase, 95% CI 4.31 to 51.08; p<0.0001), whilst RECIST defined response was not. Results were similar for WT pts: HR 14.30 per ln(cm) of increase in LSLD, 95% CI 1.32 to 96.5; p=0.03. For MUT pts, neither change in LSLD nor RECIST response was associated with OS. Conclusion(s): Change of tumor size at 8 weeks following commencement of C using a waterfall plot analysis was a better predictor of OS than standard RECIST categories. This may be a better early signal of treatment efficacy for molecular targeted

Background:Docetaxel administered 3-weekly with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil leads to better survival than does standard therapy in patients with oesophagogastric cancer, but leads to high rates of haematological toxicity. Weekly docetaxel is associated with less haematological toxicity. This randomised phase II study tested weekly docetaxel-based combination chemotherapy regimens, with the aim of maintaining their activity while reducing toxicity. Method(s):Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic oesophageal or gastric carcinoma were randomised to receive weekly docetaxel (30 mg m 2) on days 1 and 8, cisplatin (60 mg m 2) on day 1, and 5-fluorouracil (200 mg m 2 per day) continuously, every 3 weeks (weekly TCF, wTCF); or docetaxel (30 mg m 2) on days 1 and 8 and capecitabine (1600 mg m 2 per day) on days 1-14, every 3 weeks (weekly TX, wTX). Result(s):A total of 106 patients were enrolled (wTCF, n50; wTX, n56). Response rates, the primary end point, were 47% with wTCF and 26% with wTX. Rates of febrile neutropenia were low in each arm. Median progression-free and overall survival times were 5.9 and 11.2 months for wTCF and 4.6 and 10.1 months for wTX, respectively. Conclusion(s):Weekly TCF and TX have encouraging activity and less haematological toxicity than TCF administered 3-weekly. Weekly docetaxel-based combination regimens warrant further evaluation in this disease. © 2010 Cancer Research UK.

Background: AMG 386, a first-in-class investigational peptide-Fc fusion protein (peptibody), blocks angiogenesis via inhibiting the interaction between angiopoietins-1 and -2 and the Tie2 receptor. We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of AMG 386 or placebo plus CX in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Method(s): Pts with confirmed metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach, gastroesophageal junction or distal esophagus were randomized 1:1:1 to receive CX (cisplatin, 80 mg/m2 IV Q3W; capecitabine, 1,000 mg/m2 orally BID for 14 days Q3W) plus AMG 386 10 mg/kg (Arm A), 3 mg/kg (Arm B), or placebo (Arm C) IV QW. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR; in pts with measurable disease), adverse events (AEs), and pharmacokinetics (PK). Result(s): 171 pts were randomized (Arm A/B/C, n = 56/59/56). Efficacy results are summarized in the table. The incidence of grade >= 3 AEs in Arms A/B/C was 80/84/75%. Serious AEs occurred in 73/60/47% and serious AEs grade >= 3 in 66/60/43% of pts. AEs in Arms A/B/C included abdominal pain (30/40/17%; grade >= 3, 18/3/4%), peripheral edema (13/29/6%; grade >= 3, 0/2/0%), venous thromboembolic events (20/22/19%; grade >= 3, 20/19/17%), and pulmonary embolism (9/3/15%; grade >= 3, 9/2/13%). Median AMG 386 Cmax andCmin values at steady state after CX coadministration were dose-proportional. Coadministration with CX did not markedly affect AMG 386 exposure. Conclusion(s): In this study, AMG 386 plus CX did not significantly improve PFS or ORR over placebo plus CX in this patient population. The toxicity of the combination of AMG 386 plus CX, compared with placebo, was greater but manageable. No unexpected AEs occurred.

Purpose: To determine whether adding bevacizumab, with or without mitomycin, to capecitabine monotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in an open-label, three-arm randomized trial. Patients and Methods: Overall, 471 patients in Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom with previously untreated, unresectable mCRC were randomly assigned to the following: capecitabine; capecitabine plus bevacizumab (CB); or capecitabine, bevacizumab, and mitomycin (CBM). We compared CB with capecitabine and CBM with capecitabine for progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), toxicity, response rate (RR), and quality of life (QOL). Result(s): Median PFS was 5.7 months for capecitabine, 8.5 months for CB, and 8.4 months for CBM (capecitabine v CB: hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.79; P < .001; C v CBM: HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.75; P < .001). After a median follow-up of 31 months, median OS was 18.9 months for capecitabine and was 16.4 months for CBM; these data were not significantly different. Toxicity rates were acceptable, and all treatment regimens well tolerated. Bevacizumab toxicities were similar to those in previous studies. Measures of overall QOL were similar in all groups. Conclusion(s): Adding bevacizumab to capecitabine, with or without mitomycin, significantly improves PFS without major additional toxicity or impairment of QOL. Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.