Phase II Feasibility and Biomarker Study of Neoadjuvant Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab With Chemoradiotherapy for Resectable Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Esophageal Adenocarcinoma:TRAP Study

PURPOSE: Approximately 15% to 43% of esophageal adenocarcinomas (EACs) are human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive. Because dual-agent HER2 blockade demonstrated a survival benefit in breast cancer, we conducted a phase II feasibility study of trastuzumab and pertuzumab added to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with EAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resectable HER2-positive EAC received standard nCRT with carboplatin and paclitaxel and 41.4 Gy of radiotherapy, with 4 mg/kg of trastuzumab on day 1, 2 mg/kg per week during weeks 2 to 6, and 6 mg/kg per week during weeks 7, 10, and 13 and 840 mg of pertuzumab every 3 weeks. The primary end point was feasibility, defined as ≥ 80% completion of treatment with both trastuzumab and pertuzumab. An exploratory comparison of survival with a propensity score-matched cohort receiving standard nCRT was performed, as were exploratory pharmacokinetic and biomarker analyses. RESULTS: Of the 40 enrolled patients (78% men; median age, 63 years), 33 (83%) completed treatment with trastuzumab and pertuzumab. No unexpected safety events were observed. R0 resection was achieved in all patients undergoing surgery, with pathologic complete response in 13 patients (34%). Three-year progression-free and overall survival (OS) were 57% and 71%, respectively (median follow-up, 32.1 months). Compared with the propensity score-matched cohort, a significantly longer OS was observed with HER2 blockade (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.97). Results of pharmacokinetic analysis and activity on [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scans did not correlate with survival or pathologic response. Patients with HER2 3+ overexpression or growth factor receptor-bound protein 7 (Grb7) -positive tumors at baseline demonstrated significantly better survival (P = .007) or treatment response (P = .016), respectively. CONCLUSION: Addition of trastuzumab and pertuzumab to nCRT in patients with HER2-positive EAC is feasible and demonstrates potentially promising activity compared with historical controls. HER2 3+ overexpression and Grb7 positivity are potentially predictive for survival and treatment response, respectively

CRITICS-II: a multicentre randomised phase II trial of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in resectable gastric cancer

Background: Although radical surgery remains the cornerstone of cure in resectable gastric cancer, survival remains poor. Current evidence-based (neo)adjuvant strategies have shown to improve outcome, including perioperative chemotherapy, postoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. However, these regimens suffer from poor patient compliance, particularly in the postoperative phase of treatment. The CRITICS-II trial aims to optimize preoperative treatment by comparing three treatment regimens: (1) chemotherapy, (2) chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and (3) chemoradiotherapy. Methods: In this multicentre phase II non-comparative study, patients with clinical stage IB-IIIC (TNM 8th edition) resectable gastric adenocarcinoma are randomised between: (1) 4 cycles of docetaxel+oxaliplatin+capecitabine (DOC), (2) 2 cycles of DOC followed by chemoradiotherapy (45Gy in combination with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin) or (3) chemoradiotherapy. Primary endpoint is event-free survival, 1 year after randomisation (events are local and/or regional recurrence or progression, distant recurrence, or death from any cause). Secondary endpoints include: toxicity, surgical outcomes, percentage radical (R0) resections, pathological tumour response, disease recurrence, overall survival, and health related quality of life. Exploratory endpoints include translational studies on predictive and prognostic biomarkers. Discussion: The aim of this study is to select the most promising among three preoperative treatment arms in patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. This treatment regimen will subsequently be compared with the standard therapy in a phase III trial

Older versus younger adults with gastric cancer receiving perioperative treatment: Results from the CRITICS trial

Contains fulltext : 219605.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Venous thromboembolism during preoperative chemotherapy in the CRITICS gastric cancer trial

Background: The occurrence of a venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in patients with cancer. Gastric cancer has been associated with one of the highest risks for VTE. Chemotherapy, especially cisplatin has been associated with a high VTE risk. In this study, risk factors for VTE occurrence and their potential impact on subsequent therapeutic interventions were investigated in patients who underwent preoperative chemotherapy, in the CRITICS gastric cancer trial. Patients and methods: Patients with resectable gastric cancer were preoperatively treated with three cycles of 3-weekly epirubicin, cisplatin or oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (ECC/EOC). VTE was defined as any thrombus in the venous system, excluding superficial and/or device related VTEs. Potential risk factors were analyzed in a multivariable regression model with age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), tumor localization, Lauren classification, type of chemotherapy (ECC/EOC), (cardiovascular) comorbidity, and previous VTE as independent risk factors. The impact of VTE on completion rate of preoperative chemotherapy, surgical resection rate, postoperative complications, and start of postoperative therapy were investigated. Results: Of 781 patients, 78 (10%) of 781 patients developed a VTE during preoperative chemotherapy. On multivariable analysis, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 and previous VTE were associated with VTE occurrence (reference BMI < 25 kg/m2; OR 2.190; 95% CI 1.152-4.164; P =.017/previous VTE; OR 3.617; 95% CI 1.201-10.890; P =.022). Treatment with cisplatin was, compared to oxaliplatin, not significantly associated with VTE occurrence (OR 1.535; 95% CI 0.761-3.094; P =.231). VTE occurrence did not affect completion of preoperative chemotherapy, surgical resection rate, postoperative complications, or start of postoperative therapy. Conclusion: High BMI and previous VTE were independent risk factors for VTE occurrence during preoperative chemotherapy in patients with resectable gastric cancer. VTE occurrence in the preoperative setting did not affect receipt of further treatment

Triplet Chemotherapy with Cisplatin versus Oxaliplatin in the CRITICS Trial: Treatment Compliance, Toxicity, Outcomes and Quality of Life in Patients with Resectable Gastric Cancer

(1) Background: Perioperative chemotherapy is the current standard treatment for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Based on studies in patients with metastatic gastric cancer, oxaliplatin has replaced cisplatin in the curative setting as well. However, evidence to prefer oxaliplatin over cisplatin in the curative setting is limited. (2) Methods: We compared patientrelated and tumor-related outcomes for cisplatin versus oxaliplatin in patients with resectable gastric cancer treated with perioperative chemotherapy in the CRITICS trial. (3) Results: Preoperatively, 632 patients received cisplatin and 149 patients received oxaliplatin. Preoperative severe toxicity was encountered in 422 (67%) patients who received cisplatin versus 89 (60%) patients who received oxaliplatin (p = 0.105). Severe neuropathy was observed in 5 (1%) versus 6 (4%; p = 0.009) patients, respectively. Postoperative severe toxicity occurred in 109 (60%) versus 26 (51%) (p = 0.266) patients; severe neuropathy in 2 (1%) versus 2 (4%; p = 0.209) for patients who received cisplatin or oxaliplatin, respectively. Diarrhea impacted the quality of life more frequently in patients who received oxaliplatin compared to cisplatin. Complete or near-complete pathological response was achieved in 94 (21%) versus 16 (15%; p = 0.126) patients who received cisplatin or oxaliplatin, respectively. Overall survival was not significantly different in both groups (p = 0.300). (4) Conclusions: Both cisplatin and oxaliplatin are legitimate options as part of systemic treatment in patients with resectable gastric cancer

Triplet Chemotherapy with Cisplatin versus Oxaliplatin in the CRITICS Trial: Treatment Compliance, Toxicity, Outcomes and Quality of Life in Patients with Resectable Gastric Cancer

(1) Background: Perioperative chemotherapy is the current standard treatment for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Based on studies in patients with metastatic gastric cancer, oxaliplatin has replaced cisplatin in the curative setting as well. However, evidence to prefer oxaliplatin over cisplatin in the curative setting is limited. (2) Methods: We compared patientrelated and tumor-related outcomes for cisplatin versus oxaliplatin in patients with resectable gastric cancer treated with perioperative chemotherapy in the CRITICS trial. (3) Results: Preoperatively, 632 patients received cisplatin and 149 patients received oxaliplatin. Preoperative severe toxicity was encountered in 422 (67%) patients who received cisplatin versus 89 (60%) patients who received oxaliplatin (p = 0.105). Severe neuropathy was observed in 5 (1%) versus 6 (4%; p = 0.009) patients, respectively. Postoperative severe toxicity occurred in 109 (60%) versus 26 (51%) (p = 0.266) patients; severe neuropathy in 2 (1%) versus 2 (4%; p = 0.209) for patients who received cisplatin or oxaliplatin, respectively. Diarrhea impacted the quality of life more frequently in patients who received oxaliplatin compared to cisplatin. Complete or near-complete pathological response was achieved in 94 (21%) versus 16 (15%; p = 0.126) patients who received cisplatin or oxaliplatin, respectively. Overall survival was not significantly different in both groups (p = 0.300). (4) Conclusions: Both cisplatin and oxaliplatin are legitimate options as part of systemic treatment in patients with resectable gastric cancer

Microsatellite instability and sex differences in resectable gastric cancer – A pooled analysis of three European cohorts

Objective: Biological sex differences in cancer are increasingly acknowledged. Here, we examined these differences in clinicopathological characteristics and survival in microsatellite instability (MSI)-high and microsatellite stable (MSS) gastric cancer (GC). Design: We analysed MSI status by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and/or mismatch repair (MMR) status by immunohistochemistry in a pooled analysis of individual patient data from one retrospective cohort from Cologne, and the randomised phase III clinical trials D1/D2 and CRITICS. All patients had resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach and/or gastro-oesophageal junction. Patients were treated with either surgery only or perioperative chemo(radio)therapy. Results: MSI and/or MMR analyses on 1307 tumours resulted in 1192 (91.2%) MSS and/or MMR proficient (MMRP) [median age, 65 years; 759 males (63.7%); 619 treated with surgery only (51.9%)], and 115 (8.8%) MSI-high [median age, 69 years; 67 males (58.3%); 76 treated with surgery only (66.1%)] GC cases. Males had shorter overall survival (OS) than female MSI-high GC (5-year OS 34.7% vs. 69.7%; hazard ratio (HR) 2.68, 95%CI 1.60 to 4.49; p < 0.001). Females with MSI-high had longer OS than those with MSS/MMRP GC (HR 0.61, 95%CI 0.41 to 0.92; p = 0.02). Males with MSI-high did not have longer OS than those with MSS/MMRP GC (HR 1.26, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.69; p = 0.12). Conclusions: MSI-high GC males had a significantly worse prognosis compared to their female counterparts in three independent cohorts. In addition, the favourable prognostic value of MSI was only seen in females and not in males. These observations emphasise the need to consider sex differences in prognosis and treatment effects in oncology. Clinical trial registration: The CRITICS trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00407186; EudraCT, number 2006-004130-32; and CKTO, 2006-02

Older versus younger adults with gastric cancer receiving perioperative treatment: Results from the CRITICS trial

Aim: To evaluate treatment-related toxicity, treatment compliance, surgical complications and event-free survival (EFS) in older (≥70 years) versus younger (<70 years) adults who underwent perioperative treatment for gastric cancer. Methods: In the CRITICS trial, 788 patients with resectable gastric cancer were randomised before start of any treatment and received preoperative chemotherapy (3 cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin or oxaliplatin and capecitabine), followed by surgery, followed by either postoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (45Gy + cisplatin + capecitabine). Results: 172 (22%) patients were older adults. During preoperative chemotherapy, 131 (77%) older adults versus 380 (62%) younger adults experienced severe toxicity (p < 0.001); older adults received significantly lower relative dose intensities (RDIs) for all chemotherapeutic drugs. Equal proportions of older versus younger adults underwent curative surgery: 137 (80%) versus 499 (81%), with comparable postoperative complications and postoperative mortality. Postoperative therapy after curative surgery started in 87 (64%) older adults versus 391 (78%) younger adults (p < 0.001). Incidence of severe toxicity during postoperative chemotherapy was 22 (54%) in older adults versus 113 (59%) in younger adults (p = 0.541); older adults received significantly lower RDIs for all chemotherapeutic drugs. Severe toxicity rates for postoperative chemoradiotherapy were 22 (48%) older adults versus 89 (45%) for younger adults (p = 0.703), with comparable chemotherapy RDIs and radiotherapy dose. Two-year EFS was 53% for older adults versus 51% for younger adults. Conclusion: Perioperative treatment compliance, especially in the postoperative phase, was poorer in older adults compared with younger adults. As comparable proportions of patients underwent curative surgery, future studies should focus on neo-adjuvant treatment. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00407186. EudraCT number: 2006–00413032