Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment. METHODS: A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L. CONCLUSION: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC.

Lifting the veil off treatment effect heterogeneity.

Clinicians often suspect that a treatment effect can vary across individuals. However, they usually lack "evidence-based" guidance regarding potential heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE). Potentially actionable HTE is rarely discovered in clinical trials and is widely believed (or rationalized) by researchers to be rare. Conventional statistical methods to test for possible HTE are extremely conservative and tend to reinforce this belief. In truth, though, there is no realistic way to know whether a common, or average, effect estimated from a clinical trial is relevant for all, or even most, patients. This absence of evidence, misinterpreted as evidence of absence, may be resulting in sub-optimal treatment for many individuals. We first summarize the historical context in which current statistical methods for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were developed, focusing on the conceptual and technical limitations that shaped, and restricted, these methods. In particular, we explain how the common-effect assumption came to be virtually unchallenged. Second, we propose a simple graphical method for exploratory data analysis that can provide useful visual evidence of possible HTE. The basic approach is to display the complete distribution of outcome data rather than relying uncritically on simple summary statistics. Modern graphical methods, unavailable when statistical methods were initially formulated a century ago, now render fine-grained interrogation of the data feasible. We propose comparing observed treatment-group data to "pseudo data" engineered to mimic that which would be expected under a particular HTE model, such as the common-effect model. A clear discrepancy between the distributions of the common-effect pseudo data and the actual treatment-effect data provides prima facie evidence of HTE to motivate additional confirmatory investigation. Artificial data are used to illustrate implications of ignoring heterogeneity in practice and how the graphical method can be useful.

Incorporation of internal iliac arteries as target vessels during physician-modified fenestrated branched endovascular repair of pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm with concomitant bilateral short common iliac artery aneurysms.

This report describes an alternative endovascular approach to iliac branch devices for treatment of an abdominal aortic aneurysm with concomitant bilateral short common iliac aneurysms. The short distance between the renal arteries and internal iliac artery origins made the addition of distal iliac branch devices to the proximal fenestrated stent graft challenging. We elected to perform physician-modified fenestrated branched endovascular repair, using four fenestrations for the visceral and renal arteries and an additional two directional branches for the bilateral internal iliac arteries. The patient recovered uneventfully, and the 24-month follow-up imaging shows successful aneurysm exclusion with patent internal iliac artery branches.

Patients' views on health promotion and disease prevention services provided by healthcare workers in a South African tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND: Patients' views and experiences in healthcare institutions provide a means of assessing the quality of services patients receive from healthcare workers (HCWs). However, the views of patients on the health promotion (HP) and disease prevention (DP) services offered by HCWs and the delivery mode have not been adequately studied. AIM: This study assessed the views of patients on HP and DP services provided by various categories of HCWs. SETTING: The study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, South Africa. METHOD: An exploratory cross-sectional study was conducted among 500 patients. The questionnaire elicited responses from patients regarding the HP and DP services received from the different cadres of HCWs at three different admission phases: pre-admission phase (PAP), admission phase (ADP), and post-admission phase (POP). Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In the PAP, most patients (83.33%, n = 5; 87.85%, n = 217; and 76.14%, n = 150) seen by the rehabilitation health workers, medical doctors, and nurses respectively were empowered to manage their health. Patients attended to by nurses were 0.45 (95% CI 0.27-0.74) times less likely than those attended to by medical doctors to receive information that that will help them address the physical and environmental needs. In the ADP, patients attended to by nurses were less likely, compared to those attended to by medical doctors to be empowered to have good control over their health. In the POP, patients attended to by nurses are more likely to have their health behaviours change for better compared to those not seen by any HCW. CONCLUSION: Patients attending tertiary hospital received greater HP and DP services during the PAP and ADP of patient care. Greatest influence for behavioural change of patients on HP and DP were achieved from the medical doctors, nurses and rehabilitation service staff. Improving structural factors may prove beneficial in enhancing patients' experience from all HCW groups and phases of patient care.

Factors Associated with Non-Evidence-Based Overdose Responses among People Who Use Prescription Opioids Non-Medically in Rural Appalachia.

Background: Opioid-related overdose deaths recently accelerated. In response, overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) has been implemented widely, though access remains sparse in rural Appalachia. Despite increasing OEND, risk factors for non-evidence-based overdose responses among the training-naïve remain unknown. Methods: We enrolled 169 adults who use prescription opioids non-medically and reside in rural West Virginia (August 2014-March 2015). Participants were interviewed about witnessing overdose (lifetime and prior-year), characteristics of the most recent overdose, responses to the overdose, and OEND acceptability. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with non-evidence-based responses to overdose. Results: Among the 73 participants who witnessed an opioid-related overdose, the majority (n = 53, 73%) reported any non-evidence-based responses. Participants were significantly more likely to report a non-evidence-based response when victims were unresponsive (OR = 3.36; 95% CI = 1.07, 10.58). Common evidence-based responses included staying with the victim until help arrived (n = 66, 90%) and calling 911 (n = 63, 86%), while the most common non-evidence-based responses were hitting or slapping the victim (n = 37, 51%) and rubbing the victim with ice or placing them in a cold shower or bath (n = 14, 19%). While most (n = 60, 82%) had never heard of OEND, the majority (n = 69, 95%) were willing to train, particularly those reporting non-evidence-based responses (n = 52, 98%). Conclusions: These findings underscore the need to expand access to OEND in rural communities and indicate OEND is acceptable to training-naïve individuals who use opioids in rural Appalachia. Given the "harm reduction deserts" in the region, approaches to expand OEND should be pursued.

Plasma-Based Measurements of Tumor Heterogeneity Correlate with Clinical Outcomes in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Sequencing circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from liquid biopsies may better assess tumor heterogeneity than limited sampling of tumor tissue. Here, we explore ctDNA-based heterogeneity and its correlation with treatment outcome in STEAM, which assessed efficacy and safety of concurrent and sequential FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab (BEV) vs. FOLFOX-BEV for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. We sequenced 146 pre-induction and 89 post-induction patient plasmas with a 198-kilobase capture-based assay, and applied Mutant-Allele Tumor Heterogeneity (MATH), a traditionally tissue-based calculation of allele frequency distribution, on somatic mutations detected in plasma. Higher levels of MATH, particularly in the post-induction sample, were associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with high MATH vs. low MATH in post-induction plasma had shorter PFS (7.2 vs. 11.7 months; hazard ratio, 3.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.85−5.63; log-rank p < 0.0001). These results suggest ctDNA-based tumor heterogeneity may have potential prognostic value in metastatic cancers.

Assessment of Capecitabine and Bevacizumab With or Without Atezolizumab for the Treatment of Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cotargeting vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 may produce anticancer activity in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The clinical benefit of atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy and bevacizumab remains unclear for the treatment of mCRC. Objectives: To assess whether the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with refractory mCRC and to perform exploratory analyses among patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) disease and liver metastasis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind phase 2 randomized clinical trial enrolled 133 patients between September 25, 2017, and June 28, 2018 (median duration of follow-up for PFS, 20.9 months), with data cutoff on May 4, 2020. The study was conducted at multiple centers through the Academic and Community Cancer Research United network. Adult patients with mCRC who experienced disease progression while receiving fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody therapy (if the patient had a RAS wild-type tumor) were included. Interventions: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive capecitabine (850 or 1000 mg/m2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) on day 1 plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg; investigational group) or placebo (placebo group) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was PFS; 110 events were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 with 80% power (1-sided α = .10). Secondary end points were objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and toxic effects. Results: Of 133 randomized patients, 128 individuals (median age, 58.0 years [IQR, 51.0-65.0 years]; 77 men [60.2%]) were assessed for efficacy (82 in the investigational group and 46 in the placebo group). Overall, 15 patients (11.7%) self-identified as African American or Black, 8 (6.3%) as Asian, 1 (0.8%) as Pacific Islander, 101 (78.9%) as White, 1 (0.8%) as multiple races (Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and White), and 2 (1.6%) as unknown race or unsure of race. Microsatellite-stable disease was present in 110 patients (69 in the investigational group and 41 in the placebo group). Median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.1-6.4 months) in the investigational group and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.2 months) in the placebo group (1-sided log-rank P = .07, a statistically significant result; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.09). Among patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair, the HR for PFS was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.99). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events in the investigational vs placebo groups were hypertension (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), diarrhea (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), and hand-foot syndrome (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]). One treatment-related death occurred in the investigational group. In the investigational group, the response rate was higher among patients without liver metastasis (3 of 13 individuals [23.1%]) vs with liver metastasis (4 of 69 individuals [5.8%]). The benefit of atezolizumab for PFS and OS was greater among patients without vs with liver metastasis (primary analysis of PFS: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.27-1.47] vs 0.77 [95% CI, 0.51-1.17]; OS: HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11-1.02] vs 1.14 [95% CI, 0.72-1.81]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy provided limited (ie, not clinically meaningful) clinical benefit. Patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair tumors and those without liver metastasis benefited more from dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 pathways. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02873195.

Predictive Biomarkers of Overall Survival in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with IFNα ± Bevacizumab: Results from CALGB 90206 (Alliance).

PURPOSE: CALGB 90206 was a phase III trial of 732 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) comparing bevacizumab plus IFNα (BEV + IFN) with IFNα alone (IFN). No difference in overall survival (OS) was observed. Baseline samples were analyzed to identify predictive biomarkers for survival benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 32 biomarkers were assessed in 498 consenting patients randomly assigned into training (n = 279) and testing (n = 219) sets. The proportional hazards model was used to test for treatment arm and biomarker interactions of OS. The estimated coefficients from the training set were used to compute a risk score for each patient and to classify patients by risk in the testing set. The resulting model was assessed for predictive accuracy using the time-dependent area under the ROC curve (tAUROC). RESULTS: A statistically significant three-way interaction between IL6, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), and bevacizumab treatment was observed in the training set and confirmed in the testing set (P < 0.0001). The model based on IL6, HGF, and bevacizumab treatment was predictive of OS (P < 0.001), with the high- and low-risk groups having a median OS of 10.2 [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.0-13.8] and 34.3 (95% CI, 28.5-40.5) months, respectively. The average tAUROC for the final model of OS based on 100 randomly split testing sets was 0.78 (first, third quartiles = 0.77, 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: IL6 and HGF are potential predictive biomarkers of OS benefit from BEV + IFN in patients with mRCC. The model based on key biological and clinical factors demonstrated predictive efficacy for OS. These markers warrant further validation in future anti-VEGF and immunotherapy in mRCC trials. See related commentaries by Mishkin and Kohn, p. 2722 and George and Bertagnolli, p. 2725.

Plasma Protein Biomarkers in Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Receiving Chemotherapy With Bevacizumab or Cetuximab: Results from CALGB 80405 (Alliance).

PURPOSE: CALGB 80405 compared the combination of first-line chemotherapy with cetuximab or bevacizumab in the treatment of advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Although similar clinical outcomes were observed in the cetuximab-chemotherapy group and the bevacizumab-chemotherapy group, biomarkers could identify patients deriving more benefit from either biologic agent. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this exploratory analysis, the Angiome, a panel of 24 soluble protein biomarkers were measured in baseline plasma samples in CALGB 80405. Prognostic biomarkers were determined using univariate Cox proportional hazards models. Predictive biomarkers were identified using multivariable Cox regression models including interaction between biomarker level and treatment. RESULTS: In the total population, high plasma levels of Ang-2, CD73, HGF, ICAM-1, IL6, OPN, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VCAM-1, and VEGF-R3 were identified as prognostic of worse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PlGF was identified as predictive of lack of PFS benefit from bevacizumab [bevacizumab HR, 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-2.06; cetuximab HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.71-1.25; Pinteraction = 0.0298] in the combined FOLFIRI/FOLFOX regimens. High levels of VEGF-D were predictive of lack of PFS benefit from bevacizumab in patients receiving FOLFOX regimen only (FOLFOX/bevacizumab HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.19-2.42; FOLFOX/cetuximab HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24; Pinteraction = 0.0097). CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory, hypothesis-generating analysis, the Angiome identified multiple prognostic biomarkers and two potential predictive biomarkers for patients with mCRC enrolled in CALGB 80405. PlGF and VEGF-D predicted lack of benefit from bevacizumab in a chemo-dependent manner. See related commentaries by Mishkin and Kohn, p. 2722 and George and Bertagnolli, p. 2725.

Training, Attitudes, and Practice (TAP) among healthcare professionals in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipality, South Africa: A health promotion and disease prevention perspective.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a pivotal role in ensuring access to quality healthcare of patients. However, their role in health promotion (HP) and disease prevention (DP) has not been fully explored. This study aimed at determining how training, attitude, and practice (TAP) of HCPs influence their practice of HP and DP. METHODS: Data on TAP regarding HP and DP were collected from 495 HCPs from twenty-three hospitals in the study area using a standardized questionnaire. Bivariate, univariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted to describe how the TAP of HCPs influence their HP and DP practices. The analysis was further desegregated at the three levels of healthcare (primary, secondary and tertiary levels). RESULTS: Most of the medical doctors 36.12% (n = 173), registered nurses 28.39% (n = 136), and allied health professionals (AHPs) 11.27% (n = 54) indicated the absence of coordinated HP training for staff in their facilities. Similarly, 32.93% (n = 193) of the HCPs, indicated having participated in HP or DP training. Among those that had participated in HP and DP training, benefits of training were positive behaviour, attributions, and emotional responses. When compared at the different levels of healthcare, enhanced staff satisfaction and continuing professional development for HP were statistically significant only at the tertiary healthcare level. Multivariate analysis showed a likelihood of reduced coordinated HP training for staff among medical doctors (Coef 0.15; 95% CI 0.07-0.32) and AHPs (Coef 0.24; 95% CI 0.10-0.59) compared to nurses. Furthermore, medical doctors (Coeff: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46-0.94) were less likely to agree that HCPs should model good health behavior to render HP services as compared to nurses. CONCLUSION: Training in HP and DP empowers HCPs with the requisite knowledge and attitude necessary for effective practice. Several HCPs at different levels of care had limited knowledge of HP and DP because of inadequate training. We recommend a strategy aimed at addressing the knowledge and attitudinal gaps of HCPs to ensure effective HP and DP services to patients.

Enablers and hindrances to health promotion and disease prevention practices among healthcare workers in Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, South Africa.

Health promotion (HP) and disease prevention (DP) practices among healthcare workers (HCWs) are key to achieving universal health coverage. This study identified HP and DP enablers and hindrances and compared them at different healthcare levels in Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, South Africa. An exploratory cross-sectional study using a structured questionnaire was conducted among HCWs (n = 501) from 23 hospitals. Bivariate and multinomial regression were used to analyze the data. The highest number of participants (70.46%; n = 353) were from tertiary hospitals. Thirteen and Eight categories of enablers and hindrances respectively were identified. Of these, eleven enablers and six hindrances of HP and DP were associated with tertiary hospitals; no enabler was identified at both primary and secondary while one hindrance was associated with primary level of health care. Collaboration among disciplines and organizations (Coeff: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.28-3.66) and programme planning (Coeff: 0.375, 95% CI: 0.23-0.62) were the predictors of HP and DP among medical doctors, while staff induction training (Coeff: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.95) and performance appraisal (Coeff: 1.86, 95% CI: 1.16-2.98) were the enablers among allied health workers. On the other hand, 'facility promoting treatment more than prevention' (Coeff: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.30-3.14) and 'practice guidelines incorporating HP' (Coeff: 2.79, 95% CI: 1.66-4.70) were the predictors of HP and DP hindrances among medical doctors and allied health workers respectively. Our work indicates the need for an operational strategy designed considering enabling and hindering factors to HP and DP practices for empowering HCWs and enhancing health outcomes.

Cabozantinib and Panitumumab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Antitumor activity was observed in the study population. Dose modifications of cabozantinib improve long-term tolerability. Biomarkers are needed to identify patient populations most likely to benefit. Further study of cabozantinib with or without panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is warranted. BACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab is active in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but nearly all patients experience resistance. MET amplification is a driver of panitumumab resistance. Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) and c-MET, and may delay or reverse anti-EGFR resistance. METHODS: In this phase Ib clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of cabozantinib and panitumumab. We then treated an expansion cohort to further describe the tolerability and clinical activity of the RP2D. Eligibility included patients with KRAS WT mCRC (later amended to include only RAS WT mCRC) who had received prior treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled and treated. The MTD/RP2D was cabozantinib 60 mg p.o. daily and panitumumab 6 mg/kg I.V. every 2 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 16%. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months (90% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.1). Median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months (90% CI, 7.5-14.3). Five patients (20%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, and 18 patients (72%) required a dose reduction of cabozantinib. CONCLUSION: The combination of cabozantinib and panitumumab has activity. Dose reductions of cabozantinib improve tolerability.

Facilitators, barriers and lessons learnt from the first state-wide naloxone distribution conducted in West Virginia.

BACKGROUND: Overdose education and naloxone distribution programmes are known to reduce opioid-related deaths. A state-wide naloxone distribution effort of 8250 rescue kits was undertaken by government, community and university partners in West Virginia in 2016-2017. The purpose of this study was to discern the barriers, facilitators and lesson learnt from implementing this endeavour in a rural state with the highest opioid overdose fatality rate in the US. METHODS: Structured interviews (n=26) were conducted among both internal and external stakeholders. Those who participated were >18 years of age and were the lead representative from agencies that either received naloxone (ie, external stakeholders) or helped implement the distribution (ie, internal stakeholders). The interviews followed standardised scripts and lasted approximately 40 min. Sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed. Qualitative content analysis was performed by two researchers to determine themes surrounding facilitators or barriers to programme implementation. RESULTS: The primary facilitators reported by stakeholders included collaborative partnerships, ease of participating in the programme, being established in prevention efforts, demand for naloxone and the need for personal protection from overdose. The primary barriers identified by stakeholders included bureaucracy/policy/procedures of their organisation or agency, stigma, logistical or planning issues, problems with reporting, lack of communication post distribution and sustainability. Numerous lessons were learnt. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the implementation of the programme in 87 organisations, including law enforcement and fire departments, the impact of facilitators outweighed that of barriers. These findings may inform others planning to conduct a similar, large-scale project.

Bevacizumab (Avastin®) in cancer treatment: A review of 15 years of clinical experience and future outlook.

When the VEGF-A-targeting monoclonal antibody bevacizumab (Avastin®) entered clinical practice more than 15 years ago, it was one of the first targeted therapies and the first approved angiogenesis inhibitor. Marking the beginning for a new line of anti-cancer treatments, bevacizumab remains the most extensively characterized anti-angiogenetic treatment. Initially approved for treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in combination with chemotherapy, its indications now include metastatic breast cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, glioblastoma, renal cell carcinoma, ovarian cancer and cervical cancer. This review provides an overview of the clinical experience and lessons learned since bevacizumab's initial approval, and highlights how this knowledge has led to the investigation of novel combination therapies. In the past 15 years, our understanding of VEGF's role in the tumor microenvironment has evolved. We now know that VEGF not only plays a major role in controlling blood vessel formation, but also modulates tumor-induced immunosuppression. These immunomodulatory properties of bevacizumab have opened up new perspectives for combination therapy approaches, which are being investigated in clinical trials. Specifically, the combination of bevacizumab with cancer immunotherapy has recently been approved in non-small-cell lung cancer and clinical benefit was also demonstrated for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, despite intense investigation, reliable and validated biomarkers that would enable a more personalized use of bevacizumab remain elusive. Overall, bevacizumab is expected to remain a key agent in cancer therapy, both due to its established efficacy in approved indications and its promise as a partner in novel targeted combination treatments.

Disease Monitoring Using Post-induction Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis Following First-Line Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: We assessed plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level as a prognostic marker for progression-free survival (PFS) following first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) therapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The Sequencing Triplet With Avastin and Maintenance (STEAM) was a randomized, phase II trial investigating efficacy of bevacizumab (BEV) plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI), administered concurrently or sequentially, versus FOLFOX-BEV in first-line mCRC. Evaluation of biomarkers associated with treatment outcomes was an exploratory endpoint. Patients in the biomarker-evaluable population (BEP) had 1 tissue sample, 1 pre-induction plasma sample, and 1 post-induction plasma sample collected ≤60 days of induction from last drug date. RESULTS: Among the 280 patients enrolled in STEAM, 183 had sequenced and evaluable tumor tissue, 118 had matched pre-induction plasma, and 54 (BEP) had ctDNA-evaluable sequencing data for pre- and post-induction plasma. The most common somatic variants in tumor tissue and pre-induction plasma were TP53, APC, and KRAS. Patients with lower-than-median versus higher-than-median post-induction mean allele fraction (mAF) levels had longer median PFS (17.7 vs. 7.5 months, HR, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.63). Higher levels of post-induction mAF and post-induction mean mutant molecules per milliliter (mMMPM), and changes in ctDNA (stratified by a 10-fold or 100-fold reduction in mAF between pre- and post-induction plasma), were associated with shorter PFS. Post-induction mAF and mMMPM generally correlated with each other (ρ = 0.987, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA quantification in post-induction plasma may serve as a prognostic biomarker for mCRC post-treatment outcomes.

Predictive Blood-Based Biomarkers in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Treated with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel with or without Bevacizumab: Results from GOG-0218.

PURPOSE: GOG-0218, a double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial, compared carboplatin and paclitaxel with placebo, bevacizumab followed by placebo, or bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Results demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), but no overall survival (OS) benefit with bevacizumab. Blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Plasma samples were analyzed via multiplex ELISA technology for seven prespecified biomarkers [IL6, Ang-2, osteopontin (OPN), stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1), VEGF-D, IL6 receptor (IL6R), and GP130]. The predictive value of each biomarker with respect to PFS and OS was assessed using a protein marker by treatment interaction term within the framework of a Cox proportional hazards model. Prognostic markers were identified using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. RESULTS: Baseline samples were available from 751 patients. According to our prespecified analysis plan, IL6 was predictive of a therapeutic advantage with bevacizumab for PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.003). IL6 and OPN were found to be negative prognostic markers for both PFS and OS (P < 0.001). Patients with high median IL6 levels (dichotomized at the median) treated with bevacizumab had longer PFS (14.2 vs. 8.7 months) and OS (39.6 vs. 33.1 months) compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The inflammatory cytokine IL6 may be predictive of therapeutic benefit from bevacizumab when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Aligning with results observed in patients with renal cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapies, it appears plasma IL6 may also define those patients with EOC more or less likely to benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy.

A phase Ib study of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept followed by a phase II single-arm expansion cohort in chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. In this phase Ib/II clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD) for the combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept, and then we evaluated the efficacy of the combination in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: All patients were required to have a Karnofsky Performance Status > 70% and adequate organ function. The phase Ib dose escalation cohort included patients with advanced solid tumors who had progressed on all standard therapies. Using a standard 3 + 3 design, we identified the MTD and RPTD for the combination. Fifty patients with metastatic CRC who had progressed on or were intolerant of a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were then enrolled in a single-arm phase II expansion cohort, and were treated at the RPTD. Prior EGFR antibody therapy was required for subjects with RAS wildtype tumors. The primary endpoint for the expansion cohort was progression-free survival (PFS) at two months. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were enrolled and evaluable for toxicity (13 dose escalation; 50 expansion). The MTD and RPTD were: capecitabine 850 mg/m2, P.O. bid, days 1-14, and ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg I.V., day 1, of each 21-day cycle. In the expansion cohort, 72% of patients were progression-free at two months (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-84%). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.8-10.0), respectively. Among all patients evaluable for toxicity, the most common treatment related adverse events (all grade [%]; grade ≥ 3 [%]) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (41%; 6%), hypertension (33%; 22%), and mucositis (19%; 5%). RNA was isolated from archived tumor specimens and gene expression analyses revealed no association between angiogenic biomarkers and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept at the RPTD demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability. PFS at 2 months in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC was significantly greater than that in historical controls, indicating that this combination warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered in the www.clinicaltrials.gov system as NCT01661972 on July 31, 2012.

A phase Ib study of the combination regorafenib with PF-03446962 in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (REGAL-1 trial).

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD), as well as the safety and tolerability of PF-03446962, a monoclonal antibody targeting activin receptor like kinase 1 (ALK-1), in combination with regorafenib in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: The first stage of this study was a standard "3 + 3" open-label dose-escalation scheme. Cohorts of 3-6 subjects were started with 120 mg of regorafenib given PO daily for 3 weeks of a 4 week cycle, plus 4.5 mg/kg of PF-03446962 given IV every 2 weeks. Doses of both drugs were adjusted according to dose-limiting toxicities (DLT). Plasma was collected for multiplexed ELISA analysis of factors related to tumor growth and angiogenesis. RESULTS: Seventeen subjects were enrolled, of whom 11 were deemed evaluable. Seven subjects were enrolled at dose level 1, and four were enrolled at level - 1. Overall, three DLTs were observed during the dose-escalation phase: two in level 1 and one in level - 1. A planned dose-expansion cohort was not started due to early termination of the clinical trial. Common adverse events were infusion-related reaction, fatigue, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, abdominal pain, dehydration, nausea, back pain, anorexia, and diarrhea. One subject achieved stable disease for 5.5 months, but discontinued treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The regimen of regorafenib and PF-03446962 was associated with unacceptable toxicity and did not demonstrate notable clinical activity in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

The effects of lapatinib on cardiac repolarization: results from a placebo controlled, single sequence, crossover study in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of lapatinib on the QTc interval and ECG parameters in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: This was a multicenter, placebo-controlled study in subjects with advanced solid tumors. Subjects were administered two doses of matching placebo on day 1, 12 h apart and one dose in the morning on day 2. Two doses of lapatinib 2000 mg were administered orally on day 3, 12 h apart and one dose in the morning on day 4. Twelve-lead digital ECGs were extracted from continuous Holter recordings at pre-specified time points over the 24-h period on days 2 and 4. Venous blood samples for lapatinib concentrations were obtained immediately following the ECGs. RESULTS: A maximum mean baseline-adjusted, placebo time-matched increase in QTcF, (ddQTcF) in the evaluable, (EV) population (n = 37) of 8.8 ms (90% CI 4.1, 13.4) occurred approximately 10 h after the third lapatinib dose. These results were consistent with those in the pharmacodynamic, PD population, (n = 52) (ddQTcF = 7.9 ms; 90% CI 4.1, 11.7). No subject experienced QTcF increases from baseline of > 60 ms on lapatinib or placebo. The geometric mean lapatinib Cmax of 3902 ng/mL was observed at 3.6 h post-dose. CONCLUSIONS: These data show a relevant, treatment-related increase in QTcF after treatment with three doses of lapatinib 2000 mg. This study confirms the need for caution in patients with solid tumors treated with lapatinib, and who are concomitantly receiving drugs that are strong CYP3A inhibitors and/or prolong the QTc.

An initial genetic analysis of gemcitabine-induced high-grade neutropenia in pancreatic cancer patients in CALGB 80303 (Alliance).

OBJECTIVES: One of the standard of care regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer is gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The efficacy of gemcitabine is limited by dose-limiting hematologic toxicities especially neutropenia. Uncovering the variability of these toxicities attributed to germline DNA variation is of great importance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CALGB 80303 was a randomized study in advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine with or without bevacizumab. The study protocol included genotyping of genes of gemcitabine disposition (CDA, DCTD, SLC29A1, SLC28A1, and SLC29A2), as well as a genome-wide analysis. The clinical phenotype was time to early high-grade neutropenia event accounting for progression or death or other treatment-terminating adverse events as competing for informative events. The inference was carried out on the basis of the association between genotype and cause-specific hazard of a neutropenic event. RESULTS: The primary analyses were carried out on the basis of 294 genetically estimated European pancreatic cancer patients. For CDA rs2072671 (A>C), AC and CC patients had a lower risk of neutropenia than AA patients (P=0.01, hazard ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.89). For SLC28A1 rs3825876 (G>A), AA patients have a higher risk of neutropenia than GA and GG patients (P=0.02, hazard ratio: 1.51, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-2.16). CDA rs2072671 was associated with increased mRNA expression in whole blood in three studies (P=2.7e-14, 6.61e-62, and 9.70e-65). In the genome-wide analysis, variants in TGFB2 were among the top hits (lowest P=1.62e-06) but had no effect in luciferase assays. CONCLUSION: This is the first genetic analysis of gemcitabine-induced neutropenia using a competing risk model in a prospective randomized clinical study has proposed a potentially novel mechanism of the protective effect of the CDA rs2072671 variant. Further confirmation is needed.