Health-related Quality of Life in the Phase III LUME-Colon 1 Study: Comparison and Interpretation of Results From EORTC QLQ-C30 Analyses

INTRODUCTION: We used European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) data from the LUME-Colon 1 study to illustrate different methods of statistical analysis for health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and compared the results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive nintedanib 200 mg twice daily plus best supportive care (n = 386) or matched placebo plus best supportive care (n = 382). Five methods (mean treatment difference averaged over time, using a mixed-effects growth curve model; mixed-effects models for repeated measurements (MMRM); time-to-deterioration (TTD); status change; and responder analysis) were used to analyze EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL and scores from functional scales. RESULTS: Overall, GHS/QoL and physical functioning deteriorated over time. Mean treatment difference slightly favored nintedanib over placebo for physical functioning (adjusted mean, 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-4.34) and social functioning (adjusted mean, 2.62; 95% CI, 0.66-4.47). GHS/QoL was numerically better with nintedanib versus placebo (adjusted mean, 1.61; 95% CI, -0.004 to 3.27). MMRM analysis had similar results, with better physical functioning in the nintedanib group at all timepoints. There was no significant delay in GHS/QoL deterioration (10%) and physical functioning (16%) with nintedanib versus placebo (TTD analysis). Status change analysis showed a higher proportion of patients with markedly improved GHS/QoL and physical functioning in the nintedanib versus placebo groups. Responder analysis showed a similar, less pronounced pattern. CONCLUSION: Analyses of EORTC QLQ-C30 data showed that HRQoL was not impaired by treatment with nintedanib versus placebo. Analysis and interpretation of HRQoL endpoints should consider symptom type and severity and course of disease. ispartof: CLINICAL COLORECTAL CANCER vol:18 issue:4 pages:269-+ ispartof: location:United States status: publishe

Efficacy of trifluridine and tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo, with supportive care, in a randomized, controlled trial of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from Spain : results of a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 RECOURSE trial

TAS-102 is a combination of the thymidine-based nucleoside analog trifluridine and the thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor tipiracil. Efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory or intolerant to standard therapies were evaluated in the phase 3 RECOURSE trial. Results of RECOURSE demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with TAS-102 versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 and 0.48 for OS and PFS, respectively; both P < 0.001]. The current analysis evaluates efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup. Primary and key secondary endpoints were evaluated in a post hoc analysis of the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, using univariate and multivariate analyses. Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics. The RECOURSE Spanish subgroup included 112 patients (mean age 61 years, 62 % male). Median OS was 6.8 months in the TAS-102 group (n = 80) versus 4.6 months in the placebo group (n = 32) [HR = 0.47; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.78; P = 0.0032). Median PFS was 2.0 months in the TAS-102 group and 1.7 months in the placebo group (HR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.30-0.74; P = 0.001). Eighty (100 %) TAS-102 versus 31 (96.9 %) placebo patients had adverse events (AEs). The most common drug-related ≥Grade 3 AE was neutropenia (40 % TAS-102 versus 0 % placebo). There was 1 (1.3 %) case of febrile neutropenia in the TAS-102 group versus none in the placebo group. In the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, TAS-102 was associated with significantly improved OS and PFS versus placebo, consistent with the overall RECOURSE population. No new safety signals were identified. NCT0160795

A randomised phase 2 study comparing different dose approaches of induction treatment of regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer patients (REARRANGE trial)

Altres ajuts: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.Purpose: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the safety of two regorafenib dose-escalation approaches in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Patients and methods: Patients with mCRC and progression during or within 3 months following their last standard chemotherapy regimen were randomised to receive the approved dose of regorafenib of 160 mg QD (arm A) or 120 mg QD (arm B) administered as 3 weeks of treatment followed by 1 week off, or 160 mg QD 1 week on/1 week off (arm C). The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with G3/G4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in each arm. Results: There were 299 patients randomly assigned to arm A (n = 101), arm B (n = 99), or arm C (n = 99); 297 initiated treatments (arm A n = 100, arm B n = 98, arm C n = 99: population for safety analyses). G3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 60%, 55%, and 54% of patients in arms A, B, and C, respectively. The most common G3/4 AEs were hypertension (19, 12, and 20 patients), fatigue (20, 14, and 15 patients), hypokalemia (11, 7, and 10 patients), and hand-foot skin reaction (8, 7, and 3 patients). Median overall survival was 7.4 (IQR 4.0-13.7) months in arm A, 8.6 (IQR 3.8-13.4) in arm B, and 7.1 (IQR 4.4-12.4) in arm C. Conclusions: The alternative regorafenib dosing schedules were feasible and safe in patients with mCRC who had been previously treated with standard therapy. There was a higher numerical improvement on the most clinically relevant AEs in the intermittent dosing arm, particularly during the relevant first two cycles. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02835924

Analysis of mutant allele fractions in driver genes in colorectal cancer - biological and clinical insights

Sequencing of tumors is now routine and guides personalized cancer therapy. Mutant allele fractions (s, or the 'mutation dose') of a driver gene may reveal the genomic structure of tumors and influence response to targeted therapies. We performed a comprehensive analysis of s of driver alterations in unpaired primary and metastatic colorectal cancer () at our institution from 2010 to 2015 and studied their potential clinical relevance. Of 763 samples, 622 had detailed annotation on overall survival in the metastatic setting (met) and 89 received targeted agents matched to ( inhibitors), ( inhibitors), or 3 mutations (3K pathway inhibitors). s of each variant were normalized for tumor purity in the sample (adjs). We found lower adjs for 600E and 3 than for , , and non-V600 variants. 53 and 600E adjs were higher in metastases as compared to primary tumors, and high adjs were found in metastases of patients with wild-type primary tumors previously exposed to antibodies. Patients with - or 600E -mutated tumors, irrespective of adjs, had worse met. There was no significant association between adjs and time to progression on targeted therapies matched to , , or 3 mutations, potentially related to the limited antitumor activity of the employed drugs (overall response rate of 4.5%). In conclusion, the lower 600E and 3 adjs in subsets of primary tumors indicate subclonality of these driver genes. Differences in adjs between metastases and primary tumors suggest that approved therapies may result in selection of 600E - and -resistant clones and an increase in genomic heterogeneity with acquired 53 alterations. Despite significant differences in prognosis according to mutations in driver oncogenes, adjs levels did not impact on survival and did not help predict benefit with matched targeted agents in the metastatic setting

Global cancer control : responding to the growing burden, rising costs and inequalities in access

The cancer burden is rising globally, exerting significant strain on populations and health systems at all income levels. In May 2017, world governments made a commitment to further invest in cancer control as a public health priority, passing the World Health Assembly Resolution 70.12 on cancer prevention and control within an integrated approach. In this manuscript, the 2016 European Society for Medical Oncology Leadership Generation Programme participants propose a strategic framework that is in line with the 2017 WHO Cancer Resolution and consistent with the principle of universal health coverage, which ensures access to optimal cancer care for all people because health is a basic human right. The time for action is now to reduce barriers and provide the highest possible quality cancer care to everyone regardless of circumstance, precondition or geographic location. The national actions and the policy recommendations in this paper set forth the vision of its authors for the future of global cancer control at the national level, where the WHO Cancer Resolution must be implemented if we are to reduce the cancer burden, avoid unnecessary suffering and save as many lives as possible

Efficacy of trifluridine and tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo, with supportive care, in a randomized, controlled trial of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from Spain : results of a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 RECOURSE trial

TAS-102 is a combination of the thymidine-based nucleoside analog trifluridine and the thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor tipiracil. Efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory or intolerant to standard therapies were evaluated in the phase 3 RECOURSE trial. Results of RECOURSE demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with TAS-102 versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 and 0.48 for OS and PFS, respectively; both P < 0.001]. The current analysis evaluates efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup. Primary and key secondary endpoints were evaluated in a post hoc analysis of the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, using univariate and multivariate analyses. Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics. The RECOURSE Spanish subgroup included 112 patients (mean age 61 years, 62 % male). Median OS was 6.8 months in the TAS-102 group (n = 80) versus 4.6 months in the placebo group (n = 32) [HR = 0.47; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.78; P = 0.0032). Median PFS was 2.0 months in the TAS-102 group and 1.7 months in the placebo group (HR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.30-0.74; P = 0.001). Eighty (100 %) TAS-102 versus 31 (96.9 %) placebo patients had adverse events (AEs). The most common drug-related ≥Grade 3 AE was neutropenia (40 % TAS-102 versus 0 % placebo). There was 1 (1.3 %) case of febrile neutropenia in the TAS-102 group versus none in the placebo group. In the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, TAS-102 was associated with significantly improved OS and PFS versus placebo, consistent with the overall RECOURSE population. No new safety signals were identified. NCT0160795

Early Clinical Experience with Trifluridine/Tipiracil for Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The ROS Study

Trifluridine/tipiracil is currently approved for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to available therapies. However, there is no consensus on factors that predict treatment outcomes in daily practice. We assessed the early clinical experience with trifluridine/tipiracil in Spain and potential survival markers. This was a retrospective cohort study of mCRC patients who participated in the trifluridine/tipiracil early clinical experience programme in Spain. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Associations between OS and patient characteristics were assessed using multivariate Cox regression analyses. A total of 379 patients were included in the study. Trifluridine/tipiracil was administered for a median of 3.0 cycles and discontinued mainly due to disease progression (79.2%). The median OS was 7.9 months, with a 12-month OS rate of 30.5%. Cox analyses revealed that the following variables independently enhanced OS: ≤2 metastatic sites, no liver metastasis, alkaline phosphatase < 300 IU, trifluridine/tipiracil dose reductions, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio < 5. Grade ≥ 3 toxicities were reported in 141 (37.2%) patients, including mainly afebrile neutropaenia (23.2%), anaemia (12.1%), and thrombocytopaenia (5.3%). This study supports the real-life efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil for refractory mCRC and identifies tumour burden, liver metastasis, alkaline phosphatase, dose reductions, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio as survival markers.This work was supported by the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD) through a grant provided by Laboratorios Servier S.L. (grant reference number: not applicable)Ye

Impact of circulating tumor DNA mutant allele fraction on prognosis in RAS

Despite major advances in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the survival rate remains very poor. This study aims at exploring the prognostic value of RAS -mutant allele fraction (MAF) in plasma in mCRC. Forty-seven plasma samples from 37 RAS -mutated patients with nonresectable metastases were tested for RAS in circulating tumor DNA using BEAMing before first- and/or second-line treatment. RAS MAF was correlated with several clinical parameters (number of metastatic sites, hepatic volume, carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9 levels, primary site location, and treatment line) and clinical outcome [progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)]. An independent cohort of 32 patients from the CAPRI-GOIM trial was assessed for clinical outcome based on plasma baseline MAF. RAS MAF analysis at baseline revealed a significant correlation with longer OS [Hazard ratios (HR) = 3.514; P = 0.00066]. Patients with lower MAF also showed a tendency to longer PFS, although not statistically significant. Multivariate analysis showed RAS MAFs as an independent prognostic factor in both OS (HR = 2.73; P = 0.006) and first-line PFS (HR = 3.74; P = 0.049). Tumor response to treatment in patients with higher MAF was progression disease (P = 0.007). Patients with low MAFs at baseline in the CAPRI-GOIM group also showed better OS [HR = 3.84; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.5-9.6; P = 0.004] and better PFS (HR = 2.5; 95% CI: 1.07-5.62; P = 0.033). This minimally invasive test may help in adding an independent factor to better estimate outcomes before initiating treatment. Further prospective studies using MAF as a stratification factor could further validate its utility in clinical practice