First-line concomitant EGFR-TKI + chemotherapy versus EGFR-TKI alone for advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC: a meta-analysis of randomized phase III trials.

INTRODUCTION: A tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) is indicated as a first-line treatment for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring an epidermal growth-factor - receptor (EGFR) mutation. Chemotherapy (ChT) given in combination with an EGFR-TKI in this setting is of interest. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of phase III randomized trials comparing EGFR-TKI + ChT vs. EGFR-TKI alone as first-line therapy for advanced NSCLC harboring an activating EGFR mutation. RESULTS: Three studies evaluated gefitinib + ChT (NEJ009, GAP-Brain, and Noronha et al.) and another evaluated osimertinib + ChT (FLAURA-2). Those four eligible studies included 1413 patients with non-squamous NSCLCs, 826 (58%) with an exon-19 deletion (ex19del) and 541 (38%) with EGFRL858R. The EGFR-TKI + ChT combination was significantly associated with prolonged PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.59]; p < 0.0001) and OS (HR: 0.69 [0.52-0.93]; p = 0.01). PFS was particularly improved for patients with brain metastases (HR: 0.41[0.33-0.51]; p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with untreated, advanced, EGFR-mutated NSCLCs, the EGFR-TKI + ChT combination, compared to EGFR-TKI alone, was associated with significantly prolonged PFS and OS. However, further studies are needed to identify which patients will benefit the most from the combination. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024508055.

Complete pathological response after chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors in deficient MMR metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of a retrospective multicenter study.

About 5% of the patients with metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) present microsatellite instability (MSI)/deficient mismatch repair system (dMMR). While metastasectomy is known to improve overall and progression-free survival in mCRC, specific results in selected patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC are lacking. Our study aimed to describe metastasectomy results, characterize histological response and evaluate pathological complete response (pCR) rate in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC. We retrospectively reviewed data from all consecutive patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC who underwent surgical metastasectomy between January 2010 and June 2021 in 17 French centers. Primary outcome was to assess the pCR rate defined by tumor regression grade (TRG) 0. Secondary endpoints included relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), and explored TRG as predictive factor for RFS and OS. Among the 88 patients operated, 109 metastasectomies were performed in 81 patients after neoadjuvant treatment [chemotherapy ± targeted therapy (CTT): 69, 85.2%; immunotherapy (ICI): 12, 14.8%], and pCR was achieved in 13 (16.1%) patients. Among the latter, pCR rate were 10.2% in the patients having received CTT (N = 7) and 50.0% in the patients treated with ICI (N = 6). Radiological response did not predict TRG. With a median follow-up of 57.9 (IQR 34.2-81.6) months, median RFS was 20.2 (15.4-not reached) months, median OS was not reached. Major pathological responses (TRG0 + TRG1) were significantly associated with longer RFS (HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.55; P = .006). The pCR rate of 16.1% achieved with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC is consistent with previously reported rates in pMMR/MSS mCRC. Immunotherapy showed better pCR rate than chemotherapy ± targeted therapy. Further prospective trials are needed to validate immunotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in resectable/potentially resectable dMMR/MSI mCRC and identify predictive factors for pCR.

The Identification of Large Rearrangements Involving Intron 2 of the CDH1 Gene in BRCA1/2 Negative and Breast Cancer Susceptibility.

E-cadherin, a CDH1 gene product, is a calcium-dependent cell-cell adhesion molecule playing a critical role in the establishment of epithelial architecture, maintenance of cell polarity, and differentiation. Germline pathogenic variants in the CDH1 gene are associated with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC), and large rearrangements in the CDH1 gene are now being reported as well. Because CDH1 pathogenic variants could be associated with breast cancer (BC) susceptibility, CDH1 rearrangements could also impact it. The aim of our study is to identify rearrangements in the CDH1 gene in 148 BC cases with no BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants. To do so, a zoom-in CGH array, covering the exonic, intronic, and flanking regions of the CDH1 gene, was used to screen our cohort. Intron 2 of the CDH1 gene was specifically targeted because it is largely reported to include several regulatory regions. As results, we detected one large rearrangement causing a premature stop in exon 3 of the CDH1 gene in a proband with a bilateral lobular breast carcinoma and a gastric carcinoma (GC). Two large rearrangements in the intron 2, a deletion and a duplication, were also reported only with BC cases without any familial history of GC. No germline rearrangements in the CDH1 coding region were detected in those families without GC and with a broad range of BC susceptibility. This study confirms the diversity of large rearrangements in the CDH1 gene. The rearrangements identified in intron 2 highlight the putative role of this intron in CDH1 regulation and alternative transcripts. Recurrent duplication copy number variations (CNV) are found in this region, and the deletion encompasses an alternative CDH1 transcript. Screening for large rearrangements in the CDH1 gene could be important for genetic testing of BC.

Is There a Benefit of Oxaliplatin in Combination with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer? An Updated Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant fluoropyrimidine (5FU or capecitabine)-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has been considered the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Whether addition of oxaliplatin (OXP) will further improve clinical outcomes is still unclear. METHODS: To identify clinical trials combining oxaliplatin in preoperative CRT or perioperative chemotherapy for LARC published until March 2021, we searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library. We also searched for relevant ASCO conference abstracts. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Data were extracted from every study to perform a meta-analysis using Review Manager (version 5.3). RESULTS: A total of seven randomized clinical trials (ACCORD-12, CARO-AIO-04, FOWARC, JIAO, NSABP, PETACC-6, and STAR-01) with 5782 stage II or III rectal cancer patients were analyzed, including 2727 patients with OXP + 5FU regimen and 3055 patients with 5FU alone. Compared with the 5FU alone group, the OXP + 5FU regimen improved DFS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.81-0.99, p = 0.03) and pathologic complete response (pCR) (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.37, p = 0.002). Patients treated with the OXP + 5FU regimen had significantly less metastatic progression (OR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94; p = 0.007). Considering adverse events (AEs), there was more grade 3-4 diarrhea with OXP + 5FU (OR = 2.41, 95% CI: 1.74-3.32, p < 0.00001). However, there were no significant differences grade 3-4 hematologic AEs (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.87-1.57, p = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis with long-term results from the randomized studies showed a benefit of the addition of OXP + 5FU regiment in terms of DFS, metastatic progression, and pCR rate that did not translate to improved OS.

First-line immune-checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Platin-based chemotherapy (CT) has long been the first-line standard-of-care for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Adding immune-checkpoint inhibitor(s) to CT (ICI+CT) in this setting is an option of interest, although its benefit is apparently modest. METHODS: This meta-analysis was conducted on randomized trials comparing first-line ICI+CT versus CT alone for ES-SCLC. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), response at 12 months and adverse events (AEs). Subgroup analyses were computed according to the immunotherapy used, performance status (PS), age, platinum salt, liver metastases and brain metastases at diagnosis. RESULTS: The literature search identified one randomized phase II (ECOG-ACRIN-5161) and four phase III trials (CASPIAN, IMPOWER-133, KEYNOTE-604 and Reck et al. 2016) that included 2775 patients (66% males, 95% smokers, median age: 64 years, PS = 0 or 1). ICI+CT was significantly associated (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) with prolonged OS [0.82 (0.75-0.89); p < 0.00001] and PFS [0.81 (0.75-0.87); p < 0.00001], with OS benefits for anti-PD-L1 [0.73 (0.63-0.85); p < 0.0001] or anti-PD-1 [0.76 (0.63-0.93); p < 0.006] but not for anti-CTLA-4 [0.90 (0.80-1.01), p = 0.07]. ORRs for ICI+CT or CT alone were comparable [odds ratio 1.12 (0.97-1.00); p = 0.12], but responses at 12 months favored ICI+CT [4.16 (2.81-6.17), p < 0.00001]. Serious grade-3/4 AEs were more frequent with ICI+CT [odds ratio 1.18 (1.02-1.37); p = 0.03]. Compared with CT, no ICI+CT benefit was found for ES-SCLC with brain metastases at diagnosis [HR 1.14 (0.87-1.50); p = 0.34]. CONCLUSIONS: First-line ICI+CT appears to be superior to CT alone for ES-SCLC except for patients with brain metastases at diagnosis.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Patients Aged ≥ 75 Years with Advanced Cancer in First- and Second-Line Settings: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of aging on the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains controversial, and little is known on the subject in adults aged ≥ 75 years. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this comprehensive meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of ICIs in patients aged ≥ 75 years. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials concerning ICIs (as monotherapy or in combination) versus standard therapy in patients with advanced solid tumors between January 2010 and January 2020. We compared overall survival between older (aged ≥ 75 years) and younger (< 75 years) patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were collected and pooled. The secondary endpoint focused on the impact of the use of ICIs in first- and second-line settings. RESULTS: In total, 15 phase III studies evaluating anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) (nivolumab or pembrolizumab), anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) (atezolizumab or avelumab), or anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (anti-CTLA-4) (ipilimumab) therapies were included. Enrolled patients had non-small-cell lung cancer, renal cell carcinoma, melanoma, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, or gastric cancer. Eight studies assessed treatment in the first-line setting and seven in the second-line setting. The median age was 64 years, with 906 patients aged ≥ 75 years (552 in first line, 354 in second line) and 8741 were aged < 75 years (4992 in first line, 3749 in second line). In the first-line setting, HRs for death were 0.78 (95% CI 0.61-0.99) in patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 0.84 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) in those aged < 75 years. In the second-line setting, HRs for death were 1.02 (95% CI 0.77-1.36) in patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 0.68 (95% CI 0.61-0.75) in those aged < 75 years, with a statistically significant difference observed between subgroups (p = 0.009 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: ICIs appear to be effective in patients aged ≥ 75 years. However, the survival benefit is mainly observed in first-line treatment and remains unclear in the second-line setting.

First-line angiogenesis inhibitor plus erlotinib versus erlotinib alone for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harboring an EGFR mutation.

PURPOSE: Erlotinib is indicated as first-line treatment for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring an epidermal growth-factor-receptor (EGFR) mutation. Addition of a vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor (anti-VEGF) in combination with the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor erlotinib in this setting is controversial. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing anti-VEGF plus erlotinib vs erlotinib alone as first-line therapy for advanced NSCLC harboring an EGFR mutation. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and median duration of response (DOR). A fixed-effect model was used. RESULTS: Four studies evaluated bevacizumab + erlotinib (ARTEMIS, NEJ026, J025667, Stinchcombe et al.), and another evaluated ramucirumab + erlotinib (RELAY). These five eligible studies included 1230 non-squamous NSCLC patients, 654 (53.2%) with exon 19 deletion (ex19del) and 568 (46.8%) with EGFRL858R. Patients were predominantly women (63%), Asians (85%) and non-smokers (60%); the median age was 64 years. The combination (anti-VEGF + erlotinib) was significantly associated with prolonged PFS (hazards ratio [HR] 0.59 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.69]; p < 0.00001). The combination achieved significantly longer median DOR (p < 0.005). Based on interim analyses, OS (HR 0.90 [0.68-1.19]; p = 0.45) and ORR (odds ratio 1.19 [95% CI 0.91-1.55]; p = 0.21 were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with untreated, advanced, EGFR-mutation-harboring NSCLCs, the anti-VEGF + erlotinib combination, compared to erlotinib alone, was associated with significantly prolonged PFS but mature data for OS are needed to confirm the benefit of this strategy.

Single-arm phase II trial to evaluate efficacy and tolerance of regorafenib monotherapy in patients over 70 with previously treated metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma FFCD 1404 - REGOLD.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib significantly increases overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated but gives toxicities. OBJECTIVES: to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib at it's approved dose in the older population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter single-arm phase II enrolled patients ≥70 years old after the failure of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy, anti-VEGF, and anti-EGFR treatment. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) 2 months after initiation of regorafenib (160 mg/day, 3 weeks on/1 week off). RESULTS: Forty-three patients were enrolled, with a median age of 77 years. The 2 months DCR was 31.4% in the 35 evaluable patients. For the 42 patients that received at least one dose of regorafenib, median progression-free survival and OS were 2.2 and 7.5 months. The median time to autonomy degradation and quality of life degradation was 3.1 and 3.2 months, respectively. A grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events was observed in 35/42 patients, notably: fatigue (45.2%), hand-foot skin reaction (19.0%), hypertension (21.4%), and diarrhea (7.1%). There is a trend to achieve DCR in patients ≤80 years and a trend to discontinue the study due to toxicity in patients with ECOG ≥1, over 80 years and with impaired baseline autonomy. CONCLUSION: Treatment with regorafenib in pretreated patients ≥70 years is feasible and demonstrate similar efficacy that was observed in previous studies in young patients. Fatigue is the most frequent severe adverse event. However, caution should be taken for older patients with ECOG ≥1, over 80 years, and with impaired baseline autonomy.

Withholding the Introduction of Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: Impact on Outcomes in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Tumors: A Multicenter AGEO Study (the WAIT or ACT Study).

BACKGROUND: Patients with RAS wild-type (WT) nonresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may receive either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) combined with first-line, 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Without the RAS status information, the oncologist can either start chemotherapy with bevacizumab or wait for the introduction of the anti-EGFR. Our objective was to compare both strategies in a routine practice setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, propensity score-weighted study included patients with a RAS WT nonresectable mCRC, treated between 2013 and 2016 by a 5-FU-based chemotherapy, with either delayed anti-EGFR or immediate anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Primary criterion was overall survival (OS). Secondary criteria were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: A total of 262 patients (129 in the anti-VEGF group and 133 in the anti-EGFR group) were included. Patients receiving an anti-VEGF were more often men (68% vs. 56%), with more metastatic sites (>2 sites: 15% vs. 9%). The median delay to obtain the RAS status was 19 days (interquartile range: 13-26). Median OS was not significantly different in the two groups (29 vs. 30.5 months, p = .299), even after weighting on the propensity score (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.08, p = .2024). The delayed introduction of anti-EGFR was associated with better median PFS (13.8 vs. 11.0 months, p = .0244), even after weighting on the propensity score (HR = 0.74, 95% CI, 0.61-0.90, p = .0024). ORR was significantly higher in the anti-EGFR group (66.7% vs. 45.6%, p = .0007). CONCLUSION: Delayed introduction of anti-EGFR had no deleterious effect on OS, PFS, and ORR, compared with doublet chemotherapy with anti-VEGF. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: For RAS/RAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, patients may receive 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus either bevacizumab or an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In daily practice, the time to obtain the RAS status might be long enough to consider two options: to start the chemotherapy with bevacizumab, or to start without a targeted therapy and to add the anti-EGFR at reception of the RAS status. This study found no deleterious effect of the delayed introduction of an anti-EGFR on survival, compared with the introduction of an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor from cycle 1. It is possible to wait one or two cycles to introduce the anti-EGFR while waiting for RAS status.

Prognosis and chemosensitivity of deficient MMR phenotype in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: An AGEO retrospective multicenter study.

Mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) and/or microsatellite instability-high (MSI) colorectal cancers (CRC) represent about 5% of metastatic CRC (mCRC). Prognosis and chemosensitivity of dMMR/MSI mCRC remain unclear. This multicenter study included consecutive patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC from 2007 to 2017. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) in a population receiving first-line chemotherapy. Associations between chemotherapy regimen and survival were evaluated using a Cox regression model and inverse of probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology in order to limit potential biases. Overall, 342 patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC were included. Median PFS and overall survival (OS) on first-line chemotherapy were 6.0 and 26.3 months, respectively. For second-line chemotherapy, median PFS and OS were 4.4 and 21.6 months. Longer PFS (8.1 vs. 5.4 months, p = 0.0405) and OS (35.1 vs. 24.4 months, p = 0.0747) were observed for irinotecan-based chemotherapy compared to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. The association was no longer statistically significant using IPTW methodology. In multivariable analysis, anti-VEGF as compared to anti-EGFR was associated with a trend to longer OS (HR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.00-3.19, p = 0.0518), whatever the backbone chemotherapy used. Our study shows that dMMR/MSI mCRC patients experienced short PFS with first-line chemotherapy with or without targeted therapy. OS was not different according to the chemotherapy regimen used, but a trend to better OS was observed with anti-VEGF. Our study provides some historical results concerning chemotherapy in dMMR/MSI mCRC in light of the recent nonrandomized trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

First-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone for negative or < 1% PD-L1-expressing metastatic non-small-cell lung cancers.

AIMS: Single-agent anti-PD-1/PD-L1 clinical efficacy against < 1% PD-L1-expressing non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) is controversial. METHODS: This meta-analysis examined randomized-trial data comparing first-line PD-1/PD-L1-inhibitor + chemotherapy (CT) vs CT alone for advanced < 1% PD-L1 NSCLCs. Outcome measures included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: IMpower (atezolizumab + CT), Keynote (pembrolizumab + CT) and CheckMate (nivolumab + CT) trials included 2037 NSCLCs (1246 PD-L1-negative; 791 < 1% PD-L1 expression). Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 + CT was significantly associated (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) with prolonged OS (0.75 [0.63-0.89]; p = 0.0008) and PFS (0.72 [0.65-0.80]; p < 0.0001), and higher ORR (odds ratio 2.06 [1.50-2.83]; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: First-line anti-PD-1/PD-L1 + CT combination appears superior to CT alone for advanced, < 1% PD-L1-expressing NSCLCs for OS, PFS and ORR.

Management of skin toxicities during panitumumab treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is associated with skin adverse events not previously reported with conventional chemotherapy. Prophylactic actions are recommended, but routine clinical management of these toxicities and their impact on quality of life remain unknown. AIM: To assess the dermatological toxicities reported after panitumumab initiation, their impact on the quality of life and the clinical practices for their management. METHODS: Patients included in this prospective multicenter observational study were over 18 years of age and began treatment with panitumumab for wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer. The incidence of dermatological toxicities, clinical practices for their management and impact on quality of life were recorded during a 6-mo follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 229 patients (males, 57.6%; mean age, 66.2 years) were included. At day 15, 59.3% of patients had dermatological toxicity; the rate peaked at month 2 (74.7%) and decreased at month 6 (46.5%). The most frequent dermatological toxicities were rash/acneiform rash, xerosis and skin cracks. At least one preventive treatment was administered to 65.9% of patients (oral antibiotics, 84.1%; emollients, 75.5%; both, 62.9%). The rates of patients who received at least one curative treatment peaked at month 2 (63.4%) and decreased at month 6 (44.8%). The impact of the dermatological toxicities on quality of life was limited as assessed with Dermatology Life Quality Index scores and inconvenience visual analogic scale score. The rates of topical corticosteroids administration and visits to specialists were low. CONCLUSION: The rates of the different skin toxicities peaked at various times and were improved at the end of follow-up. Nevertheless, their clinical management could be optimized with a better adherence to current recommendations. The impact of skin toxicities on patient's quality of life appeared to be limited.

Continuation of Bevacizumab vs Cetuximab Plus Chemotherapy After First Progression in KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The UNICANCER PRODIGE18 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Second-line treatment with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab or cetuximab is a valid option for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objective: To evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 4 months with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab vs cetuximab for patients with progression of metastatic colorectal cancer after bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial was conducted from December 14, 2010, to May 5, 2015. The main eligibility criterion was disease progression after bevacizumab plus fluorouracil with irinotecan or oxaliplatin in patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. All analyses were performed on the modified intent-to-treat population. Interventions: Patients were randomized to arm A (FOLFIRI [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with irinotecan] or modified FOLFOX6 [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with oxaliplatin] plus bevacizumab) or arm B (FOLFIRI or modified FOLFOX6 plus cetuximab); the second-line chemotherapy regimen was chosen according to first-line treatment (crossover). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 4-month PFS rate. Secondary end points included safety, objective response rate, overall survival, and PFS. Results: A total of 132 patients (47 women and 85 men; median age, 63.0 years [range, 33.0-84.0 years]; 74 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 54 patients with a performance status of 1, and 4 patients with unknown performance status) were included at 25 sites. The 4-month PFS rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 68.0%-88.3%) in arm A and 66.7% (95% CI, 53.6%-76.8%) in arm B. The median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.7-8.2 months) in arm A and 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.2-6.5 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-1.02; P = .06), and the median overall survival was 15.8 months (95% CI, 9.5-22.3 months) in arm A and 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.0-16.2 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.04; P = .08). A central analysis of KRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), NRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), and BRAF (V600) was performed for 95 tumor samples. Eighty-one patients had wild-type KRAS and wild-type NRAS tumors. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of the PRODIGE18 (Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie DIGEstive) study showed a nonsignificant difference but favored continuation of bevacizumab with chemotherapy crossover for patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer that progressed with first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01442649 and clinicaltrialsregister.eu identifier: EUDRACT 2009-012942-22.

Chronological Age and Risk of Chemotherapy Nonfeasibility: A Real-Life Cohort Study of 153 Stage II or III Colorectal Cancer Patients Given Adjuvant-modified FOLFOX6.

OBJECTIVES: To assess nonfeasibility of adjuvant-modified FOLFOX6 chemotherapy in patients with stage II or III colorectal cancer. METHODS: Consecutive patients managed between 2009 and 2013 in 2 teaching hospitals in the Paris urban area were included in the CORSAGE (COlorectal canceR, AGe, and chemotherapy fEasability study) cohort study. Nonfeasibility was defined by the frequencies of empirical first-cycle dose reduction (>15%), early discontinuation (<12 cycles), and low relative dose intensity (RDI) (<0.85). Risk factors for chemotherapy nonfeasibility were identified using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 153 patients, 56.2% were male (median age, 65.6 y; 35.3%≥70 y; 7.3% with performance status [PS]≥2). For 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), 20.9% of patients had first-cycle dose reduction and 28.1% early discontinuation; RDI was 0.91 (25th to 75th percentiles, 0.68 to 0.99). Factors independently associated with first-cycle 5-FU dose reduction were aged 65 to 69 years versus those younger than 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-19.9) but not age 70 years and older, PS≥2 (aOR, 6.02; 95% CI, 1.15-31.4), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (aOR1-point increase, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.05-1.82), or larger number of medications (aOR 1-medication increase, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.00-1.42). Oxaliplatin dose reduction occurred in 52.3% of patients and early discontinuation in 62.7%; the latter was more common in the 70 years and older group (92.6% vs. 74.6% in the <65-y group; P=0.01); RDI was 0.7 (95% CI, 0.55-0.88). CONCLUSIONS: In the real-world setting, compared with their younger and older counterparts, patients aged 65 to 69 years given modified FOLFOX6 for stage II or III colorectal cancer had higher frequencies of 5-FU nonfeasibility defined based on first-cycle dose reduction, early discontinuation, and RDI; and these differences were independent from PS, comorbidities, and number of medications.

Perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX in resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma in real life practice: An AGEO multicenter retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Perioperative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin, with or without epirubicin, improves overall survival in resectable gastroesophageal junction and gastric adenocarcinoma. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of perioperative chemotherapy with a FOLFOX-based regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled patients with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, who had at least 3 cycles of a pre-operative FOLFOX-based regimen. The primary end point was the feasibility of the peri-operative chemotherapy. RESULTS: We enrolled 109 patients from 2007 to 2012 in 12 centres. Their median age was 66, 67% were men and 73% had gastric tumours. The median number of chemotherapy courses was 6 with a median of 4 pre-operative cycles and 2 post-operative cycles. Twenty-three patients received at least 8 cycles of chemotherapy. In univariate analysis, the Karnofsky index at inclusion was the only factor associated with 8 cycles of chemotherapy. An R0 resection was achieved in 100 patients (95.2%). CONCLUSION: The FOLFOX-based perioperative regimen achieves favourable results in real life practice. The optimal number of chemotherapy cycle remains to be determined. FOLFOX regimen may be used as an alternative treatment option to a cisplatin-based regimen in resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. A prospective randomized trial is needed to confirm these results.

Efficacy of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colon Cancer With Microsatellite Instability: A Large Multicenter AGEO Study.

BACKGROUND: Deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) colon cancer (CC) is reportedly resistant to 5-fluorouracil (5FU) adjuvant chemotherapy while preliminary data suggest chemosensitivity to oxaliplatin. We assessed the efficacy of fluoropyrimidine with and without oxaliplatin in a large cohort of dMMR CC patients. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included all consecutive patients who underwent curative surgical resection for stage II or III dMMR CC between 2000 and 2011. Prognostic factors were analyzed using Cox models, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 433 dMMR CC patients were included (56.8% stage II, 43.2% stage III). Mean follow-up was 47.0 months. The patients received surgery alone (n = 263) or surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of fluoropyrimidine with (n = 119) or without (n = 51) oxaliplatin. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 16.7% of stage II and 69.0% of stage III CC patients. As compared with surgery alone, adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy improved disease-free survival (DFS) in multivariable analysis (HR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.65, P < .001), contrary to adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone (HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.49, P = .38). In the subgroup analysis, the DFS benefit of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was statistically significant in multivariable analysis only in stage III (HR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.87, P = .02). CONCLUSION: This study supports the use of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin in stage III dMMR CC.

Doublet chemotherapy vs. single-agent therapy with 5FU in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of first-line doublet chemotherapy (including oxaliplatin or irinotecan) compared to single-drug therapy (5FU) in elderly patients (>70 or >75 years old) with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) is controversial. Therefore, we undertook a meta-analysis of all published phase III studies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a PubMed search using keywords metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, survival. We also screened Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) proceedings. Few studies have been published corresponding to our inclusion criteria. The efficacy outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Toxicity was also examined when available. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were collected from the studies and pooled. By convention, HRs <1 corresponded to a better outcome for doublets. p values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. A fixed-effect model was used. We used Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software (Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA). RESULTS: This meta-analysis (MA) included five original studies (Mitry and Venderbosch for CAIRO both assessing irinotecan, De Gramont and Seymour for FOCUS2 and Ducreux assessing oxaliplatin) and an already published MA (Folprecht) of four trials comparing FOLFIRI with 5FU (Saltz, Douillard, Köhne and Seymour). Our MA included 1225 patients (70 % men). For age, we chose a cut-off of 70 years for oxaliplatin and a cut-off of 75 years for irinotecan. The performance status (PS) score was 0-1 in about 90 % of patients except for the studies by Mitry and Seymour FOCUS2 which both included 30 % of PS2 patients. Overall, doublet chemotherapy, compared to 5FU alone, did not improve OS (HR = 1.00; CI: 0.89-1.13) but significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.82; CI: 0.72-0.93). When assessed separately, FOLFIRI and FOLFOX both significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.83; 0.68-1.00 and HR = 0.81; 0.68-0.97, respectively). The main grade 3-4 toxicities for FOLFIRI were diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting and neutropenia, which occurred significantly more often than with 5FU alone. CONCLUSION: Addition of oxaliplatin or irinotecan to 5FU in metastatic CRC significantly improved PFS in elderly patients more than 70 years old but was associated with an increased risk of toxicity as shown for irinotecan.

Similar survival rates with first-line gefitinib, gemcitabine, or docetaxel in a randomized phase II trial in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a poor performance status (IFCT-0301).

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of age in a randomized phase II trial that compared three first-line drugs in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a poor performance status (PS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC with a PS of 2 or 3 were enrolled into a multicenter randomized trial: arm A, gefitinib; arm B, gemcitabine; and arm C, docetaxel. We performed subgroup analyses according to age. RESULTS: Between December 2004 and June 2007, 127 patients were enrolled. Analyses were performed between the two subgroups aged <70years (younger, n=56) and ≥70years (older, n=71). Patients mainly had adenocarcinoma (46% young vs. 51%: elderly), of which 62% vs. 75% had a PS of 2, respectively. Significantly more elderly patients were women and non-smokers, and there was a non-significant trend towards more PS-2 among the elderly. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.4months (95% CI: 1.1-1.9) for younger compared to 2.3months (95% CI: 2.1-2.9) for elderly patients. Overall survival (OS) was 2.0months (95% CI: 1.5-2.4) and 3.7months (95% CI: 2.4-4.8), respectively. Toxicity did not differ between younger and older patients. NSCLC was better controlled in elderly patients after three cycles of monotherapy compared to younger patients (p=0.034). When adjusted for stratification criteria, age was the main prognostic factor for PFS. Adjusted HRs for PFS was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.38-0.85) for the elderly compared to patients aged <70years (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients had a decreased risk of progression/death compared to younger patients. Single-agent chemotherapy can be considered for patients aged ≥70years with a PS of 2.

Impact of physical activity on cancer-specific and overall survival of patients with colorectal cancer.

Background. Physical activity (PA) reduces incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC). Its influence on cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS) is controversial. Methods. We performed a literature-based meta-analysis (MA) of observational studies, using keywords "colorectal cancer, physical activity, and survival" in PubMed and EMBASE. No dedicated MA was found in the Cochrane Library. References were cross-checked. Pre- and postdiagnosis PA levels were assessed by MET. Usually, "high" PA was higher than 17 MET hour/week. Hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and CSS were calculated, with their 95% confidence interval. We used more conservative adjusted HRs, since variables of adjustment were similar between studies. When higher PA was associated with improved survival, HRs for detrimental events were set to <1. We used EasyMA software and fixed effect model whenever possible. Results. Seven studies (8056 participants) were included, representing 3762 men and 4256 women, 5210 colon and 1745 rectum cancers. Mean age was 67 years. HR CSS for postdiagnosis PA (higher PA versus lower) was 0.61 (0.44-0.86). The corresponding HR OS was 0.62 (0.54-0.71). HR CSS for prediagnosis PA was 0.75 (0.62-0.91). The corresponding HR OS was 0.74 (0.62-0.89). Conclusion. Higher PA predicted a better CSS. Sustained PA should be advised for CRC. OS also improved (reduced cardiovascular risk).