ALLIANCE A022104/NRG-GI010: The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial: a randomized phase II/III trial testing the efficacy of triplet versus doublet chemotherapy regarding clinical complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated cCR as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and patient groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation, improve quality of life for patients and improve survival outcomes. Methods: In this NCI-sponsored multi-group randomized, seamless phase II/III trial (1:1), up to 760 patients with LARC, T4N0, any T with node positive disease (any T, N+) or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Patients will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course chemoradiation (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 3-4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Patients will undergo assessment 8-12 (+/- 4) weeks post-TNT completion. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion will compare cCR between treatment arms. A total number of 296 evaluable patients (148 per arm) will provide statistical power of 90.5% to detect an 17% increase in cCR rate, at a one-sided alpha=0.048. The primary endpoint for the phase III portion will compare disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms. A total of 285 DFS events will provide 85% power to detect an effect size of hazard ratio 0.70 at a one-sided alpha of 0.025, requiring enrollment of 760 patients (380 per arm). Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, plasma and buffy coat in EDTA tubes, and serial rectal MRIs will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and has a current accrual of 312. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Discussion: Building off of data from modern day rectal cancer trials and patient input from national advocacy groups, we have designed the current trial studying chemotherapy intensification via a consolidation chemotherapy approach with the intent to enhance cCR and DFS rates, increase organ preservation rates, and improve quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 ; Support includes U10CA180868 (NRG) and U10CA180888 (SWOG).

Different prognostic values of KRAS exon 2 submutations and BRAF V600E mutation in microsatellite stable (MSS) and unstable (MSI) stage III colon cancer: an ACCENT/IDEA pooled analysis of seven trials.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations in stage III colon cancer (CC) remains controversial and has never been clearly analyzed in patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors due to sample size limitations. Data are also lacking for KRAS submutations and prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined clinicopathological variables and prognosis in patients with surgically resected stage III CC who participated in seven clinical trials from the ACCENT/IDEA databases. Associations between KRAS exon 2 and BRAFV600E mutations and time to recurrence (TTR), overall survival (OS), and survival after recurrence (SAR) were assessed using a Cox model. We also analyzed the prognostic value of KRAS exon 2 submutations. RESULTS: Among 8460 patients, 11.4% had MSI-H status. In the MSI-H group, BRAFV600E, KRAS exon 2 mutants, and double-wild-type statuses were detected in 40.6%, 18.1%, and 41.3%, respectively, whereas and in the microsatellite stable (MSS) group, these were detected in 7.7%, 38.6%, and 53.8%, respectively. In the MSS group, 5-year TTR rates of 61.8%, 66.3%, and 72.9% were observed among patients with BRAFV600E, KRAS exon 2 mutants, and those who were DWT, respectively [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.58 and 1.31, both P < 0.001]. In the MSI-H group, 5-year TTR rates did not differ significantly among the mutated subgroups. Similar results were found for OS. However, survival after relapse was significantly shorter in the KRAS exon 2- and BRAFV600E-mutated patients in both MSS (adjusted HR = 2.06 and 1.15; both P < 0.05) and MSI-H (adjusted HR = 1.99 and 1.81; both P < 0.05) groups. In the MSS group, KRAS exon 2 mutations were associated with TTR, but only p.G12C, p.G12D, and p.G13D were associated with poor outcomes after disease recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for both KRAS and BRAFV600E mutations in stage III patients should be considered as they can better define individual patient prognosis, and may also enable patient selection for (neo)adjuvant trials dedicated to specific molecular subtypes with poor prognosis.

Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial compared 1 year of the oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, olaparib, to matching placebo as adjuvant therapy for patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2pv) and high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, early breast cancer (EBC). The first pre-specified interim analysis (IA) previously demonstrated statistically significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). The olaparib group had fewer deaths than the placebo group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance for overall survival (OS). We now report the pre-specified second IA of OS with updates of IDFS, DDFS, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand eight hundred and thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to olaparib or placebo following (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy if indicated. Endocrine therapy was given concurrently with study medication for hormone receptor-positive cancers. Statistical significance for OS at this IA required P < 0.015. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the second IA of OS demonstrated significant improvement in the olaparib group relative to the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.68; 98.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.97; P = 0.009]. Four-year OS was 89.8% in the olaparib group and 86.4% in the placebo group (Δ 3.4%, 95% CI -0.1% to 6.8%). Four-year IDFS for the olaparib group versus placebo group was 82.7% versus 75.4% (Δ 7.3%, 95% CI 3.0% to 11.5%) and 4-year DDFS was 86.5% versus 79.1% (Δ 7.4%, 95% CI 3.6% to 11.3%), respectively. Subset analyses for OS, IDFS, and DDFS demonstrated benefit across major subgroups. No new safety signals were identified including no new cases of acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. CONCLUSION: With 3.5 years of median follow-up, OlympiA demonstrates statistically significant improvement in OS with adjuvant olaparib compared with placebo for gBRCA1/2pv-associated EBC and maintained improvements in the previously reported, statistically significant endpoints of IDFS and DDFS with no new safety signals.

Evaluation of the change of outcomes over a 10-year period in patients with stage III colon cancer: pooled analysis of 6501 patients treated with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin in the ACCENT database.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004, adjuvant 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX or FLOX) have been the standard of care for patients with resected colon cancer. Herein we examine the change of outcomes over a 10-year period in patients with stage III colon cancer who received this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data from the ACCENT database was used to compare the outcomes in older (1998-2003) and newer (2004-2009) treatment eras for patients with stage III colon cancer who received adjuvant FOLFOX or FLOX. The outcomes were compared between the two groups by the multivariate Cox proportional-hazards model adjusting for age, sex, performance score, T stage, N stage, tumor sidedness, and histological grade. RESULTS: A total of 6501 patients with stage III colon cancer who received adjuvant FOLFOX or FLOX in six randomized trials were included in the analysis. Patients enrolled in the new era group experienced statistically significant improvement in time to recurrence [3-year rate, 76.1% versus 73.0%; adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj) = 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92), P = 0.0008], disease-free survival (DFS) [3-year rate, 74.7% versus 72.3%; HRadj = 0.88 (0.79-0.98), P = 0.024], survival after recurrence (SAR) [median time, 27.0 versus 17.7 months; HRadj = 0.65 (0.57-0.74), P < 0.0001], and overall survival (OS) [5-year rate, 80.9% versus 75.7%; HRadj = 0.78 (0.69-0.88), P < 0.0001]. The improved outcomes remained in patients diagnosed at 45 years of age or older, low-risk patients (T1-3 and N1), left colon, mismatch repair proficient (pMMR), BRAF, and KRAS wild-type tumors. CONCLUSION: Improved outcomes were observed in patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in clinical trials who received adjuvant FOLFOX/FLOX therapy in 2004 or later compared with patients in the older era. Prolonged SAR calls for revalidation of 3-year DFS as the surrogate endpoint of OS in adjuvant clinical trials and reevaluation of optimal follow-up of OS to confirm the trial findings based on the DFS endpoints. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBERS: NCT00079274; NCT00096278; NCT00004931; NCT00275210; NCT00265811; NCT00112918.

Prognosis of microsatellite instability and/or mismatch repair deficiency stage III colon cancer patients after disease recurrence following adjuvant treatment: results of an ACCENT pooled analysis of seven studies.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instable/deficient mismatch repair (MSI/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancers have been reported to have a poor prognosis. Frequent co-occurrence of MSI/dMMR and BRAFV600E complicates the association. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected stage III colon cancer (CC) from seven adjuvant studies with available data for disease recurrence and MMR and BRAFV600E status were analyzed. The primary end point was survival after recurrence (SAR). Associations of markers with SAR were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, gender, performance status, T stage, N stage, primary tumor location, grade, KRAS status, and timing of recurrence. RESULTS: Among 2630 patients with cancer recurrence (1491 men [56.7%], mean age, 58.5 [19-85] years), multivariable analysis revealed that patients with MSI/dMMR tumors had significantly longer SAR than did patients with microsatellite stable/proficient MMR tumors (MSS/pMMR) (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.82; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.69-0.98; P = 0.029). This finding remained when looking at patients treated with standard oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy regimens only (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-1.00; P = 0.048). Same trends for SAR were observed when analyzing MSI/dMMR versus MSS/pMMR tumor subgroups lacking BRAFV600E (aHR, 0.84; P = 0.10) or those harboring BRAFV600E (aHR, 0.88; P = 0.43), without reaching statistical significance. Furthermore, SAR was significantly shorter in tumors with BRAFV600E versus those lacking this mutation (aHR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.73-2.46; P < 0.0001), even in the subgroup of MSI/dMMR tumors (aHR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.67-4.21; P < 0.0001). Other factors associated with a shorter SAR were as follows: older age, male gender, T4/N2, proximal primary tumor location, poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, and early recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In stage III CC patients recurring after adjuvant chemotherapy, and before the era of immunotherapy, the MSI/dMMR phenotype was associated with a better SAR compared with MSS/pMMR. BRAFV600E mutation was a poor prognostic factor for both MSI/dMMR and MSS/pMMR patients. TRIAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS: NCT00079274, NCT00265811, NCT00004931, NCT00004931, NCT00026273, NCT00096278, NCT00112918.

Survival following early-stage colon cancer: an ACCENT-based comparison of patients versus a matched international general population†.

BACKGROUND: Post-treatment survival experience of early colon cancer (CC) patients is well described in the literature, which states that cure is probable for some patients. However, comparisons of treated patients' survival versus that expected from a matched general population (MGP) are limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 32 745 patients from 25 randomized adjuvant trials conducted from 1977 to 2012 in 41 countries were pooled. Observed long-term survival of these patients was compared with expected survival matched on sex, age, country, and year, both overall and by stage (II and III), sex, treatment [surgery, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), 5-FU + oxaliplatin], age (<70 and 70+), enrollment year (pre/post 2000), and recurrence (yes/no). Comparisons were made at randomization and repeated conditional on survival to 1, 2, 3, and 5 years. CC and MGP equivalence was tested, and observed Kaplan-Meier survival rates compared with expected MGP rates 3 years out from each landmark. Analyses were also repeated in patients without recurrence. RESULTS: Within most cohorts, long-term survival of CC patients remained statistically worse than the MGP, though conditional survival generally improved over time. Among those surviving 5 years, stage II, oxaliplatin-treated, elderly, and recurrence-free patients achieved subsequent 3-year survival rates within 5% of the MGP, with recurrence-free patients achieving equivalence. CONCLUSIONS: Conditional on survival to 5 years, long-term survival of most CC patients on clinical trials remains modestly poorer than an MGP, but achieves MGP levels in some subgroups. These findings emphasize the need for access to quality care and improved treatment and follow-up strategies.

Impact of age and medical comorbidity on adjuvant treatment outcomes for stage III colon cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from four randomized, controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant oxaliplatin plus capecitabine or leucovorin/5-fluorouracil (LV/5-FU) (XELOX/FOLFOX) is the standard of care for stage III colon cancer (CC); however, there is disagreement regarding oxaliplatin benefit in patients aged >70. In most analyses, the impact of medical comorbidity (MC) has not been assessed. Efficacy and safety of adjuvant XELOX/FOLFOX versus LV/5-FU were compared with respect to age and MC using pooled data from four randomized, controlled trials, selected for access to patient-level MC data and including commonly endorsed and utilized regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual data from patients with stage III CC in NSABP C-08, XELOXA, X-ACT, and AVANT were pooled, excluding bevacizumab-treated patients. Patients were grouped by treatment, MC (low versus high), or age (<70 versus ≥70), and compared for disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression controlled for gender, T stage, and N stage. RESULTS: DFS benefits were shown for XELOX/FOLFOX versus LV/5-FU regardless of age or MC, although benefits were modestly attenuated for patients aged ≥70. Hazard ratios were 0.68 (P < 0.0001) and 0.77 (P < 0.014) for <70 and ≥70 age groups; 0.69 (P < 0.0001) and 0.59 (P < 0.0001) for Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤1 and >1 groups; and 0.70 (P < 0.0001) and 0.58 (P < 0.0001) for National Cancer Institute Combined Index ≤1 and >1 groups. OS was also significantly improved in all groups. Grade 3/4 serious AE rates were comparable across cohorts and MC scores and higher in patients aged ≥70. Oxaliplatin-relevant grade 3/4 AEs, including neuropathy, were comparable across ages and MC scores. CONCLUSIONS: Results further support consideration of XELOX or FOLFOX as standard treatment options for the adjuvant management of stage III CC in all age groups and in patients with comorbidities, consistent with those who were eligible for these clinical trials.

Innovative estimation of survival using log-normal survival modelling on ACCENT database.

BACKGROUND: The ACCENT database, with individual patient data for 20 898 patients from 18 colon cancer clinical trials, was used to support Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of 3-year disease-free survival as a surrogate for 5-year overall survival. We hypothesised substantive differences in survival estimation with log-normal modelling rather than standard Kaplan-Meier or Cox approaches. METHODS: Time to relapse, disease-free survival, and overall survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier, Cox, and log-normal approaches for male subjects aged 60-65 years, with stage III colon cancer, treated with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy regimens (with 5FU), or with surgery alone (without 5FU). RESULTS: Absolute differences between Cox and log-normal estimates with (without) 5FU varied by end point. The log-normal model had 5.8 (6.3)% higher estimated 3-year time to relapse than the Cox model; 4.8 (5.1)% higher 3-year disease-free survival; and 3.2 (2.2)% higher 5-year overall survival. Model checking indicated greater data support for the log-normal than the Cox model, with Cox and Kaplan-Meier estimates being more similar. All three model types indicate consistent evidence of treatment benefit on both 3-year disease-free survival and 5-year overall survival; patients allocated to 5FU had 5.0-6.7% higher 3-year disease-free survival and 5.3-6.8% higher 5-year overall survival. CONCLUSION: Substantive absolute differences between estimates of 3-year disease-free survival and 5-year overall survival with log-normal and Cox models were large enough to be clinically relevant, and warrant further consideration.

Two or three year disease-free survival (DFS) as a primary end-point in stage III adjuvant colon cancer trials with fluoropyrimidines with or without oxaliplatin or irinotecan: data from 12,676 patients from MOSAIC, X-ACT, PETACC-3, C-06, C-07 and C89803.

BACKGROUND: The ACCENT group previously established disease-free survival (DFS) with 2 or 3 years median follow-up to predict 5 year overall survival (5 year OS) in stage II and III colon cancer. ACCENT further proposed (1) a stronger association between DFS and OS in stage III than II, and (2) 6 or 7 years necessary to demonstrate DFS/OS surrogacy in recent trials. The relationship between end-points in trials with oral fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan is unknown. METHODS: Associations between the treatment effect hazard ratios (HRs) on 2 and 3 years DFS, and 5 and 6 years OS were examined in 6 phase III trials not included in prior analyses from 1997 to 2002. Individual data for 12,676 patients were analysed; two trials each tested oxaliplatin, irinotecan and oral treatment versus 5-FU/LV. FINDINGS: Overall association between 2/3 year DFS and 5/6 year OS HRs was modest to poor (simple R² measures: 0.58-0.76, model-based R²: 0.17-0.49). In stage III patients, the association increased (model-based R² ≥ 0.79). Observed treatment effects on 2 year DFS accurately 5/6 year OS effects overall and in stage III patients. INTERPRETATION: In recent trials of cytotoxic chemotherapy, 2 or 3 years DFS HRs are highly predictive of 5 and 6 years OS HRs in stage III but not stage II patients. In all patients the DFS/OS association is stronger for 6 year OS, thus at least 6 year follow-up is recommended to assess OS benefit. These data support DFS as the primary end-point for stage III colon cancer trials testing cytotoxic agents.

Surrogate endpoint validation: statistical elegance versus clinical relevance.

A variety of approaches have been proposed to provide formal and informal validation of proposed surrogate markers. To achieve true clinical impact, the validation must convince both the statistical and clinical communities. In this paper, we argue that the best approach is not a single method but a multi-faceted exploration, using multiple approaches, including those that directly appeal to clinicians but with less statistical foundation and those arising from statistical considerations but more difficult to interpret clinically. We illustrate our approach using data from clinical trials in both early and advanced colorectal cancer.

Adjuvant therapy for very young women with breast cancer: need for tailored treatments.

Breast cancer rarely occurs in women below the age of 35 years. Data from various sources indicate that diagnosis at such an age is associated with a dire prognosis mainly because of a more aggressive presentation. Although the effect of chemotherapy for premenopausal patients is substantial, recent evidence on 2233 patients suggested that very young women with endocrine-responsive tumors had a statistically significantly higher risk of relapse than older premenopausal patients with such tumors. In contrast, results for younger and older premenopausal patients were similar if their tumors were classified as endocrine nonresponsive. Information from studies on 7631 patients who were treated with chemotherapy alone in trials of three major U.S. cooperative groups showed a similar interaction between the effect of age and steroid hormone receptor status of the primary tumor. Better treatments for very young patients are required and may involve ovarian function suppression in addition to other endocrine agents in patients with endocrine responsive tumors and a more precise investigation of chemotherapy and its timing, duration, and intensity in those with endocrine nonresponsive tumors. Very young women with this disease are faced with personal, family, professional, and quality-of-life issues, which further complicate the phase of treatment decision making. The development of more effective therapies for younger patients requires tailored treatment investigations and cannot rely on information predominantly contributed from older premenopausal women.

HER2 and choice of adjuvant chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15.

BACKGROUND: Recent retrospective analyses have suggested that breast cancer patients whose tumors overexpress HER2 derive preferential benefit from treatment with anthracyclines such as doxorubicin. This has led some clinicians to propose that HER2 should be used as a predictive marker in choosing between anthracycline-based regimens and combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF). We evaluated this recommendation in a retrospective study of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15, in which patients received a combination of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC), CMF, or AC followed by CMF. We hypothesized that AC would be superior to CMF only in the HER2-positive patients. METHODS: Immunohistochemical detection of HER2 was performed on tumor sections from 2034 of 2295 eligible patients. We used statistical analysis to evaluate the interaction between the efficacy of the assigned treatments and HER2 overexpression. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Tumor sections from 599 patients (29%) stained positive for HER2. AC was superior to CMF in HER2-positive patients only, although differences in outcomes did not reach statistical significance. In the HER2-positive cohort, relative risks of failure (i.e., after AC treatment as compared with CMF treatment) were 0.84 for disease-free survival (DFS) (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65--1.07; P =.15), 0.82 for survival (95% CI = 0.63--1.06; P =.14), and 0.80 for recurrence-free survival (RFS) (95% CI = 0.62--1.04; P =.10). Tests for interaction between treatment and HER2 status were suggestive but not statistically significant (P =.19 for DFS, P =.11 for survival, and P =.08 for RFS). CONCLUSIONS: These results, together with overview results indicating minor overall superiority for anthracycline-based regimens relative to CMF, indicate a preference for the AC regimen in patients with HER2-positive tumors. Both AC and CMF regimens may be considered for patients with HER2-negative tumors.