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.

Evaluation of Intratumoral Response Heterogeneity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Its Impact on Patient Overall Survival: Findings from 10,551 Patients in the ARCAD Database.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. RESULTS: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

Evaluating sex as a predictive marker for response to bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal carcinoma: Pooled analysis of 3,369 patients in the ARCAD database.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest a possible sex-specific response to bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC), showing a benefit in males, while the effect in females is less significant. METHODS: Data from 3369 patients with mCRC enrolled on four first-line randomised trials testing chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (2000-2007) were pooled. Association between sex and progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) was evaluated by stratified Cox regression model, adjusted for potential confounders. Predictive value was evaluated by interaction effect between sex and treatment. In a pre-planned secondary analysis, analyses were stratified using an age cut point of 60 years to evaluate the possible role of menopausal-related effects. RESULTS: Bevacizumab was associated with an improved median OS in males and females, with a 2.3- and 0.6-months benefit, respectively. Stratified by age, bevacizumab resulted in improved OS in males at both age categories. In females at or above the age of 60 (n = 731), bevacizumab resulted in improved OS. However, in females below the age of 60 (n = 634), OS benefit did not reach statistical significance (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirmed the OS benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in mCRC in both sexes. Among females, the benefit was less than 1 month. For females under the age of 60, there was no survival benefit. These findings could be used to relieve financial toxicity or be redistributed within healthcare systems for other health-related purposes.

Phase I Study Evaluating Glesatinib (MGCD265), An Inhibitor of MET and AXL, in Patients with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer and Other Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Heightened signaling by mesenchymal epithelial transition factor (MET) is implicated in tumorigenesis. Glesatinib is an investigational, oral inhibitor of MET and AXL. OBJECTIVE: This phase I study determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and safety profile of glesatinib in patients with advanced or unresectable solid tumors. Antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics (PK) were secondary objectives. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four formulations of glesatinib glycolate salt (capsule, unmicronized, micronized, and micronized version 2 [V2] tablets) and two free-base formulations (free-base suspension [FBS] capsule and spray-dried dispersion [SDD] tablet), developed to enhance drug exposure and optimize manufacturing processes, were evaluated in patients with genetically unselected advanced/unresectable solid tumors. MTD, based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed during the first 21-day treatment cycle, was further evaluated in dose-expansion cohorts comprising patients with overexpression of MET and/or AXL, MET/AXL amplification, MET-activating mutations, or MET/AXL rearrangements for confirmation as the RP2D. RESULTS: Glesatinib was evaluated across 27 dose-escalation cohorts (n = 108). Due to suboptimal exposure with glesatinib glycolate salt formulations in the initial cohorts, investigations subsequently focused on the FBS capsule and SDD tablet; for these formulations, MTD was identified as 1050 mg twice daily and 750 mg twice daily, respectively. An additional 71 patients received glesatinib in the FBS and SDD dose-expansion cohorts. At MTDs, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (FBS, 83.3%; SDD, 75.0%), nausea (57.1%, 30.6%), vomiting (45.2%, 25.0%), increased alanine aminotransferase (45.2%, 30.6%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (47.6%, 27.8%). Exploratory pharmacodynamic analyses indicated target engagement and inhibition of MET by glesatinib. Antitumor activity was observed with glesatinib FBS 1050 mg twice daily and SDD 750 mg twice daily in tumors harboring MET/AXL alteration or aberrant protein expression, particularly in patients with non--small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In patients with NSCLC, the objective response rate was 25.9% in those with MET/AXL mutation or amplification and 30.0% in a subset with MET-activating mutations. All six partial responses occurred in patients with tumors carrying MET exon 14 deletion mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of single-agent glesatinib was acceptable. SDD 750 mg twice daily was selected as the preferred glesatinib formulation and dose based on clinical activity, safety, and PK data. Observations from this study led to initiation of a phase II study of glesatinib in patients with NSCLC stratified by type of MET alteration (NCT02544633). CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00697632; June 2008.

Trajectories of body weight change and survival among patients with mCRC treated with systemic therapy: Pooled analysis from the ARCAD database.

BACKGROUND: Higher body mass index is associated with a higher incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) but also with improved survival in metastatic CRC (mCRC). Whether weight change after mCRC diagnosis is associated with survival remains largely unknown. METHODS: We analysed individual patient data for previously untreated patients enrolled in five phase 3 randomised trials conducted between 1998 and 2006. Weight measurements were prospectively collected at baseline and up to 59.4 months after diagnosis. We used stratified multivariable Cox models to assess the prognostic associations of weight loss with overall and progression-free survival, adjusting for other factors. The primary end-point was a difference in overall survival (OS) between populations with weight loss and stable or increasing weight. FINDINGS: Data were available for 3504 patients. The median weight change at 3 months was -0.54% (IQR -3.9 … +1.5%). We identified a linear trend of increasing risk of death associated with progressive weight loss. Unstratified median OS was 20.5, 18.0, and 11.9 months (p < 0.001) for stable weight or gain, <5% weight loss, and ≥5% weight loss at 3 months, respectively. Weight loss was associated with a higher risk of death (<5% loss: aHR 1.18 [1.06-1.30], p < 0.002; ≥5% loss: aHR 1.87 [1.67-2.1], p < 0.001) as compared to stable or increasing weight at 3 months post-baseline (reference), while adjusting for age, sex, performance, and a number of metastatic sites. INTERPRETATION: Patients losing weight during systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer have significantly shorter OS. The degree of weight loss is proportional to the observed increased risk of death and remains evident among underweight, normal weight, and obese individuals. On-treatment weight change could be used as an intermediate end-point. FUNDING: The creation and management of the database containing the individual patient data from the original randomised trials is supported by the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive Foundation.

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.

Impact of geography on prognostic outcomes of 21,509 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer enrolled in clinical trials: an ARCAD database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking international cancer survival differences is necessary to evaluate and improve healthcare systems. Our aim was to assess the potential regional differences in outcomes among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) participating in international randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Countries were grouped into 11 regions according to the World Health Organization and the EUROCARE model. Meta-analyses based on individual patient data were used to synthesize data across studies and regions and to conduct comparisons for outcomes in a two-stage random-effects model after adjusting for age, sex, performance status, and time period. We used mCRC patients enrolled in the first-line RCTs from the ARCAD database, which provided enrolling country information. There were 21,509 patients in 27 RCTs included across the 11 regions. RESULTS: Main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Compared with other regions, patients from the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland were proportionaly over-represented, older, with higher performance status, more frequently male, and more commonly not treated with biological therapies. Cohorts from central Europe and the United States (USA) had significantly longer OS compared with those from UK and Ireland (p = 0.0034 and p < 0.001, respectively), with median difference of 3-4 months. The survival deficits in the UK and Ireland cohorts were, at most, 15% at 1 year. No evidence of a regional disparity was observed for PFS. Among those treated without biological therapies, patients from the UK and Ireland had shorter OS than central Europe patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Significant international disparities in the OS of cohorts of mCRC patients enrolled in RCTs were found. Survival of mCRC patients included in RCTs was consistently lower in the UK and Ireland regions than in central Europe, southern Europe, and the USA, potentially attributed to greater overall population representation, delayed diagnosis, and reduced availability of therapies.

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.

Adverse event load, onset, and maximum grade: A novel method of reporting adverse events in cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Current adverse event reporting practices do not document longitudinal characteristics of adverse effects, and alternative methods are not easily interpretable and have not been employed by clinical trials. Introducing time parameters in the evaluation of safety that are comprehensive yet easily interpretable could allow for a better understanding of treatment quality. In this study, we developed and applied a novel adverse event reporting method based on longitudinal adverse event changes to aid describing, summarizing, and presenting adverse event profile. We termed it the "Adverse Event Load, Onset, and Maximum Grade" method. METHODS: We developed two adverse event summary metrics to complement the traditional maximum grade report. Onset time indicates the time period in which the maximum grade for a specific adverse event occurred and was defined as "early" (i.e. maximum grade happened for the first time before 6 weeks) or "late" (i.e. after the 6th week). Adverse event load indicates the overall severity of a specific adverse event over the entire treatment. Higher adverse event load indicates a worse overall experience. These metrics can be calculated for adverse events with different maximum grades, in treatments with planned changes (e.g. dosage changes), using data sets with different number of adverse event data points between treatments (e.g. treatments with longer cycle lengths may have less adverse event data points) and on data sets with different adverse event data availability (e.g. cycle basis and patient-outcome reports). We tested the utility of this method using individual patient data from two major backbone therapies ("Irinotecan" and "Oxaliplatin") from the N9741 trial available in the Fondation ARCAD database (fondationarcad.org). We investigated profiles of diarrhea, neutropenia/leukopenia, and nausea/vomiting. RESULTS: Our method provided additional information compared to traditional adverse event reports. For example, for nausea/vomiting, while patients in Irinotecan had a higher risk of experiencing maximum grade 3-4 (15.6% vs 7.6%, respectively; p < 0.001), patients in both groups experienced similar severity over time (adverse effect load = 0.102 and 0.096, respectively; p = 0.26), suggesting that patients in Oxaliplatin experienced a lower-grade but more persistent nausea/vomiting. For neutropenia/leukopenia, more patients in Irinotecan experienced their maximum grade for the first time early in the treatment compared to patients in Oxaliplatin (67.9% vs 41.7%; p < 0.001), regardless of maximum grade. Longitudinal information can help compare treatments or guide clinicians on choosing appropriate interventions for low-grade but persistent adverse event or early adverse event onset. CONCLUSION: We developed an adverse event reporting method that provides clinically relevant information about treatment toxicity by incorporating two longitudinal adverse event metrics to the traditional maximum grade approach. Future research should establish clinical benchmarks for metrics included in this adverse event reporting method.

Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of FOLFOXIRI Plus Bevacizumab Versus Doublets Plus Bevacizumab as Initial Therapy of Unresectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: A proper estimation of the magnitude of the overall survival (OS) benefit from infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) plus bevacizumab versus doublets + bevacizumab is lacking because all trials that have investigated this regimen had primary end points other than OS. To test OS with higher power and to explore the interaction of treatment effect with main patient and disease characteristics, we performed an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IPD from 5 eligible trials were collected: CHARTA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01321957), OLIVIA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00778102), STEAM (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01765582), TRIBE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00719797), and TRIBE2 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02339116). The primary end point was OS. Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), R0 resection rate, grade 3/4 adverse events, and subgroup analyses according to clinical and molecular characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 1,697 patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab (n = 846) or doublets + bevacizumab (n = 851). Most (78%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, and the median age was 61 years. After a median follow-up of 39.9 months, patients assigned to FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab had significantly longer OS than those assigned to doublets + bevacizumab (median, 28.9 v 24.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.91; P < .001), with no significant heterogeneity among trials (P = .39; I2 = 2%). No significant interaction effect between treatment arm and investigated characteristics was demonstrated. Patients assigned to FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab had longer PFS (median, 12.2 v 9.9 months; HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.82; P < .001), higher ORR (64.5% v 53.6%; P < .001), higher R0 resection rate (16.4% v 11.8%; P = .007), and higher rates of grade 3/4 neutropenia (45.8% v 21.5%; P < .001), febrile neutropenia (6.3% v 3.7%; P = .019), and diarrhea (17.8% v 8.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab significantly and meaningfully improves survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer compared with doublets + bevacizumab and provides advantage in PFS, ORR, and R0 resection rate at the price of a moderate increase in toxicity. No increased benefit is observed among patients with BRAF-mutant tumors.

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.

The McCAVE Trial: Vanucizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 Versus Bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 in Patients with Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma (mCRC).

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab, a VEGF-A inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy, has proven to increase progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in multiple lines of therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The angiogenic factor angiopoetin-2 (Ang-2) is associated with poor prognosis in many cancers, including mCRC. Preclinical models demonstrate improved activity when inhibiting both VEGF-A and Ang-2, suggesting that the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 blocker vanucizumab (RO5520985 or RG-7221) may improve clinical outcomes. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus modified (m)FOLFOX-6 (folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin) versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6 for first-line mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients received mFOLFOX-6 and were randomized 1:1 to also receive vanucizumab 2,000 mg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every other week. Oxaliplatin was given for eight cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized (vanucizumab, n = 94; bevacizumab, n = 95). The number of PFS events was comparable (vanucizumab, n = 39; bevacizumab, n = 43). The hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.58; p = .98) in a stratified analysis based on number of metastatic sites and region. Objective response rate was 52.1% and 57.9% in the vanucizumab and bevacizumab arm, respectively. Baseline plasma Ang-2 levels were prognostic in both arms but not predictive for treatment effects on PFS of vanucizumab. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥3 was similar between treatment arms (83.9% vs. 82.1%); gastrointestinal perforations (10.8% vs. 8.4%) exceeded previously reported rates in this setting. Hypertension and peripheral edema were more frequent in the vanucizumab arm. CONCLUSION: Vanucizumab/mFOLFOX-6 did not improve PFS and was associated with increased rates of antiangiogenic toxicity compared with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6. Our results suggest that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in first-line mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This randomized phase II study demonstrates that additional angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) inhibition does not result in superior benefit over anti-VEGF-A blockade alone when each added to standard chemotherapy. Moreover, the performed pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that vanucizumab was bioavailable and affected its intended target, thereby strongly suggesting that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in the clinical setting of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer. As a result, the further clinical development of the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 inhibitor vanucizumab was discontinued.

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.

Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size-Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS). Objective: To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pooled analysis of 20 randomized clinical trials within the Aide et Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database, which contains academic and industry-sponsored trials, was conducted. Three sets of comparisons were performed: chemotherapy alone, antiangiogenic agents, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surrogacy of time to nadir and depth of nadir was assessed at the trial level based on joint modeling of relative tumor-size change vs baseline and OS. Treatment effects on time to nadir and on depth of nadir were defined in terms of between-arm differences in time to nadir and in depth of nadir, and both were assessed in linear regressions for their correlation with treatment effects (hazard ratios) on OS within each set. The strengths of association were quantified using sample-size-weighted coefficients of determination (R2), with values closer to 1.00 indicating stronger association. At the patient level, the correlation was assessed between modeled relative tumor-size change and OS. Results: For 14 chemotherapy comparisons in 4289 patients, the R2 value was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.96) for the association between treatment effects on time to nadir and OS and 0.08 (95% CI, 0-0.37) for depth of nadir and OS. For 11 antiangiogenic agent comparisons (4854 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.25 (95% CI, 0-0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0-0.35). For 8 anti-epidermal growth factor receptor comparisons (2684 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.24 (95% CI, 0-0.83) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0-0.78). Conclusions and Relevance: In contrast with early reports favoring depth of response as a surrogate, these results suggest that neither time to nadir nor depth of nadir is an acceptable surrogate for OS in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.