Phase II clinical study of modified FOLFOX7 (intermittent oxaliplatin administration) plus bevacizumab in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer-CRAFT study

An Analysis of Tolerance and Early Survival Outcomes with Perioperative Modified FLOT in Gastric Cancers

Anant RamaswamyPurpose  Perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) is a current standard of care for locoregionally advanced gastric adenocarcinomas. There is limited real world data with regard to the tolerance and efficacy of this regimen. Materials and Methods  This is a retrospective analysis of gastric cancer patients who were offered neoadjuvant perioperative modified FLOT regimen between December 2016 and October 2018, at the Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai. Chemotherapy-related side-effects are reported along with overall survival (OS), as calculated by Kaplan-Meier method. Results  Three hundred and forty-three consecutive patients were started on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with mFLOT of which 298 patients (87%) completed the planned treatment. A total of 294 patients (86%) underwent curative resection of gastric cancer. Common grade 3 and grade 4 toxicities during NACT were diarrhea in 42 patients (12%) and febrile neutropenia in 27 patients (8%). Toxic death was seen in nine (2.6%) patients. A total of 264 patients (77%) completed planned adjuvant chemotherapy. Common grade 3 and grade 4 toxicities during adjuvant therapy were diarrhea in 42 patients (12%) and febrile neutropenia in 16 patients (6%). With a median follow-up of 19 months, the estimated 2-year median OS was 69.4%. Conclusion  Administration of modified FLOT regimen in locoregionally advanced gastric cancers is feasible in clinical practice with high completion rates, though requiring dose modifications due to the incidence of clinically relevant grade 3 to 5 toxicities. Early outcomes with the regimen are on par with survivals from the FLOT-AIO study.

Multicenter phase II clinical study of the efficiency and safety of capecitabine plus intermittent oxaliplatin with bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (VOICE trial)

PURPOSE

The aim of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with five-cycle CAPOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) plus bevacizumab, followed by five-cycle maintenance therapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab and reintroduction of CAPOX plus bevacizumab for five cycles, with a preplanned intermittent oxaliplatin strategy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Patients with untreated mCRC were administered CAPOX (130 mg/m² oxaliplatin on day 1, 2000 mg/m²/day capecitabine on days 1-14, every 21 days) + bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for five cycles, maintenance treatment without oxaliplatin for five cycles, and CAPOX + bevacizumab reintroduction for five cycles or upon tumor progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were the time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival, response rate (RR), and safety.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the evaluation of efficacy and safety. Median PFS was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.6-19.5), and median TTF was 12.3 months (95% CI, 10.3-14.3). The objective RRs were 51.1% (24/47) during induction therapy, 58.3% (21/36) during maintenance therapy, and 63.6% (14/22) during reintroduction therapy. The frequency of patients with neutropenia, diarrhea, peripheral sensory neuropathy, venous thromboembolism, or grade ≥ 3 allergic reactions was 2.1%.

CONCLUSION

CAPOX plus bevacizumab therapy with a preplanned intermittent oxaliplatin strategy consisting of brief five-cycle induction therapy, five-cycle maintenance therapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab, and five-cycle reintroduction therapy consisting of CAPOX plus bevacizumab is safe and effective for mCRC patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN ID: 000,005,732, date of registration: June 7, 2011.  https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000006695.

The efficacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with FOLFOX regimen in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is necessary to systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BEV) combined with 5-fluorouracil + leucovorin + oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed et al databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the BEV combined with the FOLFOX regimen in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer up to January 20, 2021. The Cochrane Collaborations' risk of bias tool was used for the quality assessment of included RCTs. Revman5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs with a total of 3178 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were included, meta-analysis results showed that the objective response rate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.15, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 2.25-4.40, P < .001) and cancer control rate (OR = 2.73, 95% CI: 1.91-3.90, P < .001) of BEV + FOLFOX were higher than that of FOLFOX group. And the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reactions (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.07-1.55, P = .008) in the BEV + FOLFOX group was higher than that of the FOLFOX group, there were no significant differences in the incidence of leukopenia (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.72-1.50, P = .83), hypertension (OR = 3.92, 95% CI: 0.81-18.88, P = .09) and neurotoxicity (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.8-1.27, P = .98) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

BEV combined with the FOLFOX regimen is more effective than the FOLFOX regimen alone in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, but it may also increase the risk of gastrointestinal adverse reactions.

Optimal Maintenance Strategy for First-Line Oxaliplatin-Containing Therapy with or without Bevacizumab in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Maintenance therapy after oxaliplatin withdrawal is useful in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study aimed to investigate the timing of discontinuation or reintroduction of oxaliplatin and the optimal maintenance therapy regimen for survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed and conference abstracts were searched to select phase II and III trials of first-line oxaliplatin-containing therapy with or without bevacizumab using maintenance therapy for mCRC. Correlations of median overall survival (OS) with induction therapy regimens, induction therapy duration, maintenance therapy regimens (fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab [FP+Bev], FP/Bev alone, and no treatment), and oxaliplatin reintroduction were investigated using correlation and weighted multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-two treatment arms were analyzed, including 2,581 patients. The maintenance therapy regimen FP+Bev showed the strongest correlation with a prolonged OS (Spearman's partial correlation coefficient=0.42), and the other three variables correlated weakly with the OS. The maintenance therapy regimen significantly interacted with the induction chemotherapy duration (p=0.019). The predicted OS for FP+Bev crossed the lines of FP/Bev alone at 18 weeks of induction therapy, and of no treatment at 23 weeks. The corresponding OS at 12 and 27 weeks of induction therapies were 28.6 and 24.2 months for FP+Bev, 25.9 and 28.8 months for FP/Bev alone, and 20.5 and 27.5 months for no treatment.

CONCLUSION

The optimal maintenance therapy regimen for the OS is a continuous induction therapy as long as possible followed by FP/Bev alone and switching to FP+Bev within approximately 4 months if induction therapy is discontinued.

Oxaliplatin retreatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: Systematic review and future research opportunities

BACKGROUND

Oxaliplatin represents a main component of cytotoxic treatment regimens in colorectal cancer (CRC). Given its efficacy, oxaliplatin is frequently re-administered in the context of the continuum of care in metastatic CRC (mCRC). However, efficacy and tolerability of this therapeutic strategy has not been comprehensively assessed.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature on September 19th 2020, according to PRISMA criteria 2009. The research was performed on PubMed, ASCO Meeting Library, ESMO library and ClinicalTrials.gov for citations or ongoing trials.

RESULTS

64 records were retrieved and 13 included in the systematic review: 8 full-text articles, 4 abstracts and 1 ongoing clinical trial. According to readministration timing, studies were classified as rechallenge/reintroduction (n = 8) or stop & go/intermittent therapeutic strategies (n = 4). The studies presented wide heterogeneity in terms of efficacy (Response Rate 6-31%; Disease Control Rate 39-79%; median Progression-Free Survival 3.1-7 months). Those patients who received retreatment after prior adjuvant oxaliplatin or exploiting a stop-&-go strategy appeared to achieve better outcomes. However, no formal comparisons on treatment outcomes were feasible. The most frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events were hematologic toxicities (5-27%), peripheral neuropathy (5-14%) and hypersensitivity reactions (5-20%).

CONCLUSIONS

Retreatment with oxaliplatin for mCRC is practiced based on scarce and heterogeneous data indicating efficacy and manageable toxicity. The best strategy to exploit this approach remains to be defined, and the most promising research avenue to improve therapeutic index of oxaliplatin is represented by selection of responder patients whose tumors harbor molecular defects in the DNA damage repair pathway.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Correlation of Progression-Free Survival-2 and Overall Survival in Solid Tumors

Background: Using progression-free survival (PFS)2, time from randomization to 2nd disease progression or death, is proposed as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) in oncology clinical trials. We used published data from solid tumor trials to assess whether PFS2 and OS are correlated.

Methods: A literature search identified studies that reported PFS, PFS2, and OS. Two reviewers screened for eligibility, and documented PFS2, PFS or time from 1st to 2nd disease progression or death and OS. Correlation between PFS2 and OS was assessed using: (1) Kendall's Tau + Pearson's correlation coefficient in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); (2) Meta-analysis with the random effects model to compute the pooled correlation of PFS2 and OS.

Results: Overall, 133 studies met search criteria, 15 (28 arms) had complete PFS2 and OS data in ovarian, gastric, colorectal, prostate, lung, renal and breast cancers. A positive correlation for PFS2 and OS was found for all 15 studies (Kendall's Tau = 0.7 [95% CIs 0.54, 0.78]); 10 RCTs (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.86); and meta-analysis from 7 trials (pooled Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.84 [p = 0.0001; 95% CIs 0.71, 0.96]).

Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis PFS2 strongly correlates with OS supporting the use of PFS2 to measure long-term clinical benefit when OS cannot be assessed.

FOLFOXIRI vs FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRINOX regimen is the first-line reference chemotherapy (L1) in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC). FOLFOXIRI, a schedule with a lower dose of irinotecan and no bolus 5-fluorouracil, has demonstrated efficacy and feasibility in colorectal cancer.

AIM

To investigate the potential clinical value of FOLFOXIRI in patients with aPDAC in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

Analyses were derived from all consecutive aPDAC patients treated in L1 between January 2011 and December 2017 in two French institutions, with either FOLFOXIRI (n = 165) or FOLFIRINOX (n = 124) regimens. FOLFOXIRI consisted of irinotecan (165 mg/m²), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²), leucovorin (200 mg/m²) and 5-fluorouracil (3200 mg/m² as a 48-h continuous infusion) every 2 wk. Ninety-six pairs of patients were selected through propensity score matching, and clinical outcomes of the two treatment regimens were compared.

RESULTS

Median overall survival was 11.1 mo in the FOLFOXIRI and 11.6 mo in the FOLFIRINOX cohorts, respectively. After propensity score matching, survival rates remained similar between the two regimens in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.22; P = 0.219) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.27; P = 0.120). The objective response rate was 37.1% in the FOLFOXIRI group vs 47.8% in the FOLFIRINOX group (P = 0.187). Grade 3/4 toxicities occurred in 28.7% of patients in the FOLFOXIRI cohort vs 19.5% in the FOLFIRINOX cohort (P = 0.079). FOLFOXIRI was associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 digestive adverse events. Hematopoietic growth factors were used after each chemotherapy cycle and the low hematological toxicity rates were below 5% with both regimens.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOXIRI is feasible in L1 in patients with aPDAC but does not confer any therapeutic benefit as compared with FOLFIRINOX. The low hematological toxicity rates strengthened the relevance of primary prophylaxis with hematopoietic growth factors.

Pan-Asian adapted ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KACO, MOS, SSO and TOS

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) consensus guidelines for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was published in 2016, identifying both a more strategic approach to the administration of the available systemic therapy choices, and a greater emphasis on the use of ablative techniques, including surgery. At the 2016 ESMO Asia Meeting, in December 2016, it was decided by both ESMO and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting, endorsed by both ESMO and JSMO, immediately after the JSMO 2017 Annual Meeting. The aim was to adapt the ESMO consensus guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences relating to the toxicity as well as other aspects of certain systemic treatments in patients of Asian ethnicity. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with mCRC identified by the Presidents of the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology), Korea (Korean Association for Clinical Oncology), Malaysia (Malaysian Oncological Society), Singapore (Singapore Society of Oncology) and Taiwan (Taiwan Oncology Society). The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.

Retrospective comparison of the efficacy and the toxicity of standard and modified FOLFIRINOX regimens in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRINOX stands a major breakthrough in the management of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA). Nonetheless, significant side-effects have been reported using standard FOLFIRINOX. We aimed to compare survival outcomes, response rates and toxicity of patients treated with standard or modified FOLFIRINOX in MPA.

METHODS

We included patients aged ≥18 years old, with pathologically confirmed MPA, treated with FOLFIRINOX in the first-line setting. Patients submitted to at least one cycle of full-dose FOLFIRINOX were grouped in the standard FOLFIRINOX group.

RESULTS

Patients treated with standard FOLFIRINOX were younger and had less comorbidity. We observed no differences in overall survival or in progression-free survival between the two treatment arms. The only variable independently associated with OS was log10[neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)]. Modified FOLFIRINOX was associated with a lower dose reduction rate, but a slightly increased incidence of severe toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Modified FOLFIRINOX presents the same activity against MPA as standard FOLFIRINOX. We found no significant differences in toxicity, possibly due to patient selection and a higher dose reduction rate in the standard FOLFIRINOX arm. NLR stood as an important prognostic marker and further research is needed to comprehend its biological meaning in pancreatic cancer.

The efficacy and safety of CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy followed by capecitabine plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a multi-center, single-arm, phase II study (CCOG-0902)

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CapeOX plus bevacizumab with a planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy in Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Methods

Patients with untreated mCRC were treated with 4 cycles of CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy, followed by capecitabine plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy. Reintroduction of oxaliplatin was scheduled after 8 cycles of maintenance therapy or upon tumor progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate to each treatment, reintroduction rate of oxaliplatin, frequency of peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN), and safety.

Results

The 52 patients who received the protocol treatment were included in the evaluation of efficacy and safety. Median PFS and OS were 12.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0–14.8) and 30.6 months (95% CI, 27.6–33.5), respectively. The objective response rates were 55.8% for the initial CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy, 17.8% for capecitabine plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy, and 31.0% for reintroduced CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy. The frequency of PSN was 63.5%, including 3.8% of patients with grade 3 PSN. No patients required treatment discontinuation because of PSN during the induction or maintenance therapy.

Conclusions

CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy with a planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy is a feasible first-line treatment for Japanese patients with mCRC.

Trial registration

This trial is registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network in 15 March 2010 (UMIN000006478).