Peri-operative chemotherapy for the treatment of resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The role of peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with resected stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains to be defined. This study was aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with resected stage IV CRC by performing a meta-analysis of relevant trials.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a literature search to identify trials comparing patients with stage IV CRC receiving peri-operative chemotherapy and surgery with patients undergoing surgery alone. The hazard ratio (HR) was estimated to assess any survival advantage of peri-operative chemotherapy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eight trials conducted on a total of 1174 patients were identified by a literature search. In these trials, HR estimates suggested that peri-operative chemotherapy yielded no survival advantage over surgery alone (HR, 0.94; 95%CI, 0.8-1.10; <it>p </it>= 0.43). In a subset analysis on intra-arterial chemotherapy alone, no survival benefit was evident (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.84-1.21; <it>p </it>= 0.96; I²= 30%), whereas in the trials involving systemic chemotherapy, the difference between the groups approached statistical significance (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53-1.04; <it>p </it>= 0.08; I²= 0%). Both peri-operative treatment groups had a significant recurrence-free survival benefit (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.95; <it>P </it>= 0.01 for hepatic arterial infusion; and HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.91; <it>p </it>= 0.003 for systemic therapy). The toxicities of chemotherapy were acceptable in most trials.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This is the first meta-analysis demonstrating the importance of peri-operative chemotherapy in the treatment of resected stage IV CRC. Although the results must be carefully interpreted because of some limitations, critical issues were identified that must be resolved by future studies.</p

Adjuvante Therapie des Kolonkarzinoms

Adjuvant Therapy in Colon Cancer The goal of improving adjuvant treatment can be reached in two ways: firstly, by developing more effective drugs and protocols and, secondly, by selecting suitable patients on the basis of clinical and molecular factors. In UICC (Union internationale contre le cancer) stage II, microsatellite instability (MSI) is a strong prognostic factor. Whether it can also be used as a predictive marker is currently a matter of controversy because the available data are contradictory. The question whether or not the MSI status should be checked before treatment decisions are made in stage II patients can therefore not be clearly answered at present. For adjuvant treatment in stage III, with capecitabine/oxaliplatin (XELOX) there is now a new protocol available that is based on the orally administered prodrug capecitabine. With regard to the question of how much older patients in this stage may also benefit from a combination chemotherapy, new - and contradictory - data have emerged recently: firstly, preliminary results of two new studies have given rise to safety concerns and, secondly, an analysis by the `ACCENT Collaborative Group' indicated lower efficacy of the `newer' adjuvant protocols in older people. These findings, however, have now been called into question as a result of a new subgroup analysis from the XELOXA study. The expert group therefore recommended that the decision whether to treat patients older than 70 years with an ( oral) fluoropyrimidine alone or in combination with oxaliplatin should be based on clinical parameters such as biological age and comorbidities

Производственно-финансовый анализ компании "CALIFORNIA RESOURSES CORPORATION"

В статье проведен анализ производственно-экономической деятельности компании "CALIFORNIA RESOURSES CORPORATION"

Methylated free-circulating HPP1 DNA is an early response marker in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Detection of methylated free-circulating DNA (mfcDNA) for hyperplastic polyposis 1 (HPP1) in blood is correlated with a poor prognosis for patients with metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC). Here, we analyzed the plasma levels of HPP1 mfcDNA in mCRC patients treated with a combination therapy containing a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab to test whether HPP1 mfcDNA is a suitable prognostic and response biomarker. From 467 patients of the prospective clinical study AIO-KRK-0207, mfcDNA was isolated from plasma samples at different time points and bisulfite-treated mfcDNA was quantified using methylation specific PCR. About 337 of 467 patients had detectable levels for HPP1 mfcDNA before start of treatment. The detection was significantly correlated with poorer overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.86; 95%CI 1.37-2.53). About 2-3 weeks after the first administration of combination chemotherapy, HPP1 mfcDNA was reduced to non-detectable levels in 167 of 337 patients. These patients showed a better OS compared with patients with continued detection of HPP1 mfcDNA (HR HPP1(sample 1: pos/ sample 2: neg) vs. HPP1(neg/neg) = 1.41; 95%CI 1.00-2.01, HPP1(neg,pos/pos) vs. HPP1(neg/neg) = 2.60; 95%CI 1.86-3.64). Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that HPP1 mfcDNA discriminates well between patients who do (not) respond to therapy according to the radiological staging after 12 or 24 weeks (AUC = 0.77 or 0.71, respectively). Detection of HPP1 mfcDNA can be used as a prognostic marker and an early marker for response (as early as 3-4 weeks after start of treatment compared with radiological staging after 12 or 24 weeks) to identify patients who will likely benefit from a combination chemotherapy with bevacizumab.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Health-related quality of life in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving maintenance olaparib

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) often have a detriment in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In the randomized, double-blind, Phase III POLO trial progression-free survival was significantly longer with maintenance olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, than placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm) and mPC whose disease had not progressed during first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The prespecified HRQoL evaluation is reported here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive maintenance olaparib (300 mg bid; tablets) or placebo. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item module at baseline, every 4 weeks until disease progression, at discontinuation, and 30 days after last dose. Scores ranged from 0 to 100; a ≥ 10-point change or difference between arms was considered clinically meaningful. Adjusted mean change from baseline was analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures. Time to sustained clinically meaningful deterioration (TSCMD) was analysed using a log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 154 randomized patients, 89 of 92 olaparib-arm and 58 of 62 placebo-arm patients were included in HRQoL analyses. The adjusted mean change in Global Health Status (GHS) score from baseline was less than 10 points in both arms and there was no significant between-group difference (-2.47; 95% CI - 7.27, 2.33; P=0.31). Analysis of physical functioning scores showed a significant between-group difference (-4.45 points; 95% CI - 8.75, -0.16; P=0.04). There was no difference in TSCMD for olaparib versus placebo for GHS (P=0.25; HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.41, 1.27) or physical functioning (P=0.32; HR 1.38; 95%CI 0.73, 2.63). CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL was preserved with maintenance olaparib treatment with no clinically meaningful difference compared with placebo. These results support the observed efficacy benefit of maintenance olaparib in patients with a gBRCAm and mPC. CLINCALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT02184195

Identification of serum angiopoietin-2 as a biomarker for clinical outcome of colorectal cancer patients treated with bevacizumab-containing therapy

BACKGROUND: The combination of chemotherapy with the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody bevacizumab is a standard of care in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). However, biomarkers predicting outcome of bevacizumab-containing treatment are lacking. As angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) is a key regulator of vascular remodelling in concert with VEGF, we investigated its role as a biomarker in metastatic CRC. METHODS: Serum Ang-2 levels were measured in 33 healthy volunteers and 90 patients with CRC. Of these, 34 had metastatic disease and received bevacizumab-containing therapy. To determine the tissue of origin of Ang-2, quantitative real-time PCR was performed on microdissected cryosections of human CRC and in a murine xenograft model of CRC using species-specific amplification. RESULTS: Ang-2 originated from the stromal compartment of CRC tissues. Serum Ang-2 levels were significantly elevated in patients with metastatic CRC compared with healthy controls. Amongst patients receiving bevacizumab-containing treatment, low pre-therapeutic serum Ang-2 levels were associated with a significant better response rate (82 vs 31%; P<0.01), a prolonged median progression-free survival (14.1 vs 8.5 months; P<0.01) and a reduction of 91% in the hazard of death (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Serum Ang-2 is a candidate biomarker for outcome of patients with metastatic CRC treated with bevacizumab-containing therapy, and it should be further validated to customise combined chemotherapeutic and anti-angiogenic treatment. British Journal of Cancer (2010) 103, 1407-1414. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605925 www.bjcancer.com Published online 5 October 2010 (C) 2010 Cancer Research U

Dynamics in treatment response and disease progression of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with focus on BRAF status and primary tumor location: analysis of untreated RAS-wild-type mCRC patients receiving FOLFOXIRI either with or without panitumumab in the VOLFI trial (AIO KRK0109)

Purpose: In mCRC, disease dynamics may play a critical role in the understanding of long-term outcome. We evaluated depth of response (DpR), time to DpR, and post-DpR survival as relevant endpoints. Methods: We analyzed DpR by central review of computer tomography images (change from baseline to smallest tumor diameter), early tumor shrinkage (≥ 20% reduction in tumor diameter at first reassessment), time to DpR (study randomization to DpR-image), post-DpR progression-free survival (pPFS = DpR-image to tumor progression or death), and post-DpR overall survival (pOS = DpR-image to death) with special focus on BRAF status in 66 patients and primary tumor site in 86 patients treated within the VOLFI-trial, respectively. Results: BRAF wild-type (BRAF-WT) compared to BRAF mutant (BRAF-MT) patients had greater DpR (− 57.6% vs. − 40.8%, p = 0.013) with a comparable time to DpR [4.0 (95% CI 3.1–4.4) vs. 3.9 (95% CI 2.5–5.5) months; p = 0.8852]. pPFS was 6.5 (95% CI 4.9–8.0) versus 2.6 (95% CI 1.2–4.0) months in favor of BRAF-WT patients (HR 0.24 (95% CI 0.11–0.53); p < 0.001). This transferred into a significant difference in pOS [33.6 (95% CI 26.0–41.3) vs. 5.4 (95% CI 5.0–5.9) months; HR 0.27 (95% CI 0.13–0.55); p < 0.001]. Similar observations were made for patients stratified for primary tumor site. Conclusions: BRAF-MT patients derive a less profound treatment response compared to BRAF-WT patients. The difference in outcome according to BRAF status is evident after achievement of DpR with BRAF-MT patients hardly deriving any further disease control beyond DpR. Our observations hint towards an aggressive tumor evolution in BRAF-MT tumors, which may already be molecularly detectable at the time of DpR