A prospective phase II study of pre-operative chemotherapy then short-course radiotherapy for high risk rectal cancer: COPERNICUS.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) allows earlier treatment of rectal cancer micro-metastases but is not standard of care. There are currently no biomarkers predicting long-term progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from NAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single arm phase II trial, patients with non-metastatic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined operable rectal adenocarcinoma at high risk of post-operative metastatic recurrence, received 8 weeks of oxaliplatin/fluorouracil NAC then short-course preoperative radiotherapy (SCPRT) before immediate surgery. Sixteen weeks of post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) was planned. A pelvic MRI was performed at week 9 immediately post-NAC, before SCPRT. The primary end point was feasibility assessed by completion of protocol treatment up to and including surgery. Secondary endpoints included compliance, toxicity, downstaging efficacy, and PFS. RESULTS: In total 60 patients were recruited May 2012-June 2014. In total 57 patients completed protocol treatment, meeting the primary endpoint. Compliance with NAC was much better than AC: Comparing NAC vs. AC, the median percentage dose intensity for fluoropyrimidine was 100% vs. 63% and for oxaliplatin 100% vs. 45%. Treatment-related toxicity was acceptable with no treatment-related deaths. Post-NAC MRI showed 44 tumours (73%) were T-downstaged and 22 (37%) had excellent MRI tumour regression grade (mrTRG 1-2). Median follow-up was 27 months with 2-year PFS of 86.2% (10 events). On exploratory analysis, post-NAC mrTRG predicted PFS with no event among those with excellent regression. CONCLUSION: The regimen was well tolerated with effective downstaging and encouraging PFS. mrTRG response to NAC may be a new prognostic factor for long-term PFS, but needs validation in larger studies.

Preoperative chemoradiation with capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab in rectal cancer: significance of pre-treatment and post-resection RAS mutations.

BACKGROUND: The influence of EGFR pathway mutations on cetuximab-containing rectal cancer preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is uncertain. METHODS: In a prospective phase II trial (EXCITE), patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined non-metastatic rectal adenocarinoma threatening/involving the surgical resection plane received pelvic radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab. Resection was recommended 8 weeks later. The primary endpoint was histopathologically clear (R0) resection margin. Pre-planned retrospective DNA pyrosequencing (PS) and next generation sequencing (NGS) of KRAS, NRAS, PIK3CA and BRAF was performed on the pre-treatment biopsy and resected specimen. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were recruited and 76 underwent surgery, with R0 resection in 67 (82%, 90%CI: 73-88%) (four patients with clinical complete response declined surgery). Twenty-four patients (30%) had an excellent clinical or pathological response (ECPR). Using NGS 24 (46%) of 52 matched biopsies/resections were discrepant: ten patients (19%) gained 13 new resection mutations compared to biopsy (12 KRAS, one PIK3CA) and 18 (35%) lost 22 mutations (15 KRAS, 7 PIK3CA). Tumours only ever testing RAS wild-type had significantly greater ECPR than tumours with either biopsy or resection RAS mutations (14/29 [48%] vs 10/51 [20%], P=0.008), with a trend towards increased overall survival (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05-1.03, P=0.055). CONCLUSIONS: This regimen was feasible and the primary study endpoint was met. For the first time using pre-operative rectal CRT, emergence of clinically important new resection mutations is described, likely reflecting intratumoural heterogeneity manifesting either as treatment-driven selective clonal expansion or a geographical biopsy sampling miss.

Watch-and-wait approach versus surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy for patients with rectal cancer (the OnCoRe project): a propensity-score matched cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Induction of a clinical complete response with chemoradiotherapy, followed by observation via a watch-and-wait approach, has emerged as a management option for patients with rectal cancer. We aimed to address the shortage of evidence regarding the safety of the watch-and-wait approach by comparing oncological outcomes between patients managed by watch and wait who achieved a clinical complete response and those who had surgical resection (standard care). METHODS: Oncological Outcomes after Clinical Complete Response in Patients with Rectal Cancer (OnCoRe) was a propensity-score matched cohort analysis study, that included patients of all ages diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma without distant metastases who had received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 daily fractions with concurrent fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy) at a tertiary cancer centre in Manchester, UK, between Jan 14, 2011, and April 15, 2013. Patients who had a clinical complete response were offered management with the watch-and-wait approach, and patients who did not have a complete clinical response were offered surgical resection if eligible. We also included patients with a clinical complete response managed by watch and wait between March 10, 2005, and Jan 21, 2015, across three neighbouring UK regional cancer centres, whose details were obtained through a registry. For comparative analyses, we derived one-to-one paired cohorts of watch and wait versus surgical resection using propensity-score matching (including T stage, age, and performance status). The primary endpoint was non-regrowth disease-free survival from the date that chemoradiotherapy was started, and secondary endpoints were overall survival, and colostomy-free survival. We used a conservative p value of less than 0·01 to indicate statistical significance in the comparative analyses. FINDINGS: 259 patients were included in our Manchester tertiary cancer centre cohort, 228 of whom underwent surgical resection at referring hospitals and 31 of whom had a clinical complete response, managed by watch and wait. A further 98 patients were added to the watch-and-wait group via the registry. Of the 129 patients managed by watch and wait (median follow-up 33 months [IQR 19-43]), 44 (34%) had local regrowths (3-year actuarial rate 38% [95% CI 30-48]); 36 (88%) of 41 patients with non-metastatic local regrowths were salvaged. In the matched analyses (109 patients in each treatment group), no differences in 3-year non-regrowth disease-free survival were noted between watch and wait and surgical resection (88% [95% CI 75-94] with watch and wait vs 78% [63-87] with surgical resection; time-varying p=0·043). Similarly, no difference in 3-year overall survival was noted (96% [88-98] vs 87% [77-93]; time-varying p=0·024). By contrast, patients managed by watch and wait had significantly better 3-year colostomy-free survival than did those who had surgical resection (74% [95% CI 64-82] vs 47% [37-57]; hazard ratio 0·445 [95% CI 0·31-0·63; p<0·0001), with a 26% (95% CI 13-39) absolute difference in patients who avoided permanent colostomy at 3 years between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: A substantial proportion of patients with rectal cancer managed by watch and wait avoided major surgery and averted permanent colostomy without loss of oncological safety at 3 years. These findings should inform decision making at the outset of chemoradiotherapy. FUNDING: Bowel Disease Research Foundation.

A multicenter phase II study of G17DT immunogen plus irinotecan in pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer progressing on irinotecan.

BACKGROUND: The G17DT is a novel human immunogen that raises antibodies to the growth factor gastrin 17 (G17). The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of G17DT in combination with irinotecan in patients refractory to irinotecan, and to correlate efficacy with anti-G17 immune response. METHODS: Patients received G17DT immunogen as a single intramuscular injection of 500 µg at weeks 1, 5, 9, and 26. Irinotecan was administered as an intravenous infusion of 125 mg/m(2) over 90 min starting at week 5. Each cycle of treatment consisted of irinotecan administered once weekly for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period. RESULTS: Of 161 patients who received G17DT, the best overall tumor response in the intent-to-treat population was complete response 0 (0 %), partial response 3 (3 %), stable disease 32 (32 %), and progressive disease 64 (65 %). Median survival was 217 days. About 94 (62 %) subjects evaluable for antibody titers were anti-G17 responders. Survival was significantly longer for anti-G17 responders compared with non-responders (9.0 vs. 5.6 months; P < 0.001). Toxicity was consistent with irinotecan (diarrhea, nausea, anemia, vomiting, fatigue, constipation, anorexia, and neutropenia) except for injection site reactions (pain 42 %, induration 13 %, edema 11 %, erythema 10 %, and three abscesses) attributed to G17DT in 52 % of the patients. CONCLUSION: Treatment with G17DT in combination with irinotecan results in an acceptable anti-G17 immune response, which correlated with promising survival activity in patients refractory to irinotecan-based chemotherapy.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy using concurrent capecitabine and irinotecan in magnetic resonance imaging-defined locally advanced rectal cancer: impact on long-term clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: To assess long-term clinical outcomes of preoperative chemoradiotherapy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma using concurrent irinotecan and capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred ten patients without distant metastases entered this phase II trial North West/North Wales Clinical Oncology Group (NWCOG) -2 after MRI demonstration of tumor threatening (≤ 2 mm) or involving mesorectal fascia. Pelvic radiotherapy was given to 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks with concurrent oral capecitabine at 650 mg/m(2) twice per day continuously days 1 through 35 and intravenous irinotecan at 60 mg/m(2) once weekly weeks 1 to 4. One hundred seven patients subsequently underwent surgical resection. RESULTS: Comparing prechemoradiotherapy MRI scans with histology of the resected specimen, 72 patients (67%) had their initial MRI T stage downstaged and 64 patients (80%) had their N stage downstaged. Twenty-four patients (22%) demonstrated a pathologic complete response (ypCR) and 98 patients (92%) demonstrated a negative circumferential resection margin (> 1 mm). Three-year local recurrence-free survival was 96.9%, metastasis-free survival (MFS) was 71.1%, disease-free survival was (DFS) 63.5%, and overall survival (OS) was 88.2%. By univariate analysis, lower histologic stage was significantly associated with superior MFS, DFS, and OS, whether expressed as ypT0-2 versus ypT3-4, ypN0 versus ypN1-2, or ypCR/microfoci (near-ypCR) versus other patients. By multivariate analysis both ypN stage (P = .048) and ypCR/microfoci/others (P = .013) remained significant predictors of DFS but only ypCR/microfoci/others for OS (P = .005) with no difference in outcome between ypCR compared to microfoci. CONCLUSION: This regimen demonstrates high response rates and promising long-term survival. Downstaging to ypCR/microfoci may be a useful short-term surrogate for long-term survival but needs validation in large phase III trials powered for survival outcomes.

An exploratory study of the follow-up care needs of patients treated for colorectal cancer.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore patient perceptions of their experiences of follow-up care after treatment for colorectal cancer. BACKGROUND: The optimal follow-up strategy for colorectal cancer is not known, and although patients are seen in traditional outpatient follow-up clinics, this system may not meet psycho-social and information needs. DESIGN: An exploratory qualitative study. METHOD: In-depth interviews were conducted with 27 patients who had completed treatment for colorectal cancer. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: One dominant theme emerged from the data with several sub-themes. The dominant theme was 'knowing what to expect' after bowel surgery. The subthemes related to 'living with altered bowel function', the ways patients gathered information about their condition through 'trial and error' and 'information and support from specialist nurses'. Patients who did not have a stoma were particularly vulnerable and expressed a need for more information on knowing what to expect after surgery. The role of the colorectal nurse specialist was vital in providing information and support; in particular, nurse-led clinics provided continuity of care and information that was tailored to individual need. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional hospital follow-up does not always address patients' psycho-social and information needs. Nurse-led services were commented on favourably in terms of providing information that was tailored to individual need as well as being responsive to urgent patient concerns; future innovative strategies for providing follow-up care for patients with colorectal cancer should draw on the specialist knowledge and skills of these nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurse-led clinics and/or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses may be effective models of care for this particular patient group, providing appropriate access for meeting clinical, psycho-social and information needs.

Colorectal cancer patients' attitudes towards involvement in decision making.

OBJECTIVES: To design and administer an attitude rating scale, exploring colorectal cancer patients' views of involvement in decision making. To examine the impact of socio-demographic and/or treatment-related factors on decision making. To conduct principal components analysis to determine if the scale could be simplified into a number of factors for future clinical utility. METHODS: An attitude rating scale was constructed based on previous qualitative work and administered to colorectal cancer patients using a cross-sectional survey approach. RESULTS: 375 questionnaires were returned (81.7% response). For patients it was important to be informed and involved in the decision-making process. Information was not always used to make decisions as patients placed their trust in medical expertise. Women had more positive opinions on decision making and were more likely to want to make decisions. Written information was understood to a greater degree than verbal information. The scale could be simplified to a number of factors, indicating clinical utility. CONCLUSION: Few studies have explored the attitudes of colorectal cancer patients towards involvement in decision making. This study presents new insights into how patients view the concept of participation; important when considering current policy imperatives in the UK of involving service users in all aspects of care and treatment.

Comparing hospital and telephone follow-up after treatment for breast cancer: randomised equivalence trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare traditional hospital follow-up with telephone follow-up by specialist nurses after treatment for breast cancer. DESIGN: A two centre randomised equivalence trial in which women remained in the study for a mean of 24 months. SETTING: Outpatient clinics in two NHS hospital trusts in the north west of England PARTICIPANTS: 374 women treated for breast cancer who were at low to moderate risk of recurrence. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to traditional hospital follow-up (consultation, clinical examination, and mammography as per hospital policy) or telephone follow-up by specialist nurses (consultation with structured intervention and mammography according to hospital policy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Psychological morbidity (state-trait anxiety inventory, general health questionnaire (GHQ-12)), participants' needs for information, participants' satisfaction, clinical investigations ordered, and time to detection of recurrent disease. RESULTS: The 95% confidence interval for difference in mean state-trait scores adjusted for treatment received (-3.33 to 2.07) was within the predefined equivalence region (-3.5 to 3.5). The women in the telephone group were no more anxious as a result of foregoing clinic examinations and face-to-face consultations and reported higher levels of satisfaction than those attending hospital clinics (intention to treat P<0.001). The numbers of clinical investigations ordered did not differ between groups. Recurrences were few (4.5%), with no differences between groups for time to detection (median 60.5 (range 37-131) days in hospital group v 39.0 (10-152) days in telephone group; P=0.228). CONCLUSIONS: Telephone follow-up was well received by participants, with no physical or psychological disadvantage. It is suitable for women at low to moderate risk of recurrence and those with long travelling distances or mobility problems and decreases the burden on busy hospital clinics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Cancer Research Institute 1477.

Patient participation in decision making: views of health professionals caring for people with colorectal cancer.

AIM: The aim of this study was to explore views on patient participation in decision making, as described by health professionals caring for people with colorectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Patient participation in health-care decision making is on the policy agenda at an international level. However, many aspects of cancer care and treatment are complex and it is unclear how health professionals view their role as promoters of patient participation. DESIGN: A qualitative exploratory study. METHODS: In depth interviews with 35 health professionals in clinical practice. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis, assisted by a computer software package for analysis of qualitative data (N-VIVO). RESULTS: Choices in relation to surgical treatment were viewed as limited. Although it was perceived that patients could be more involved in decisions related to adjuvant treatment, providing information on various chemotherapy regimes was challenging. It was acknowledged that patients could be involved in treatment choices but there was far less clarity concerning aspects of physical and psychological care. Age was a factor when determining which patients should be offered treatment choices. CONCLUSION: The availability and presentation of choices to patients is context specific and tailored to the preferences of individuals. If health professionals focus only on aspects of decision making related to treatment, the potential for shared partnerships with patients in relation to choices about physical and psychological care may be lost. This may be particularly pertinent for nurses and allied professions who engage with patients throughout the illness trajectory. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Policy makers should arguably appreciate that health professionals have an awareness of current thinking on patient participation, but may find policy recommendations challenging to implement in clinical practice when faced with the individual needs and preferences of patients and the complexities and uncertainties of disease management.

Exploring the decision-making preferences of people with colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To explore patient views on participation in treatment, physical care and psychological care decisions and factors that facilitate and hinder patients from making decisions. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with patients. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Three NHS Trusts in the north-west of England. Theoretical sampling including 41 patients who had been treated for colorectal cancer. RESULTS: For patients, participation in the decision-making process was about being informed and feeling involved in the consultation process, whether patients actually made decisions or not. The perceived availability of treatment choices (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy) was related to type of treatment. Factors that impacted on whether patients wanted to make decisions included a lack of information, a lack of medical knowledge and trust in medical expertise. Patients perceived that they could have a more participatory role in decisions related to physical and psychological care. CONCLUSION: This study has implications for health professionals aiming to implement policy guidelines that promote patient participation and shared partnerships. Patients in this study wanted to be well informed and involved in the consultation process but did not necessarily want to use the information they received to make decisions. The presentation of choices and preferences for participation may be context specific and it cannot be assumed that patients who do not want to make decisions about one aspect of their care and treatment do not want to make decisions about other aspects of their care and treatment.