Randomized phase III trial in elderly patients comparing LV5FU2 with or without irinotecan for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (FFCD 2001-02)

First-Line LV5FU2 with or without Aflibercept in Patients with Non-Resectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Trial (PRODIGE 25-FFCD-FOLFA)

Fluropyrimidine monotherapy is an option for some patients with inoperable metastatic colorectal cancer. Unlike bevacizumab, the addition of aflibercept, an antibody acting as an anti-angiogenic agent, has never been evaluated in this context. The aim of the study was to determine whether aflibercept could increase the efficacy of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy without increasing toxicity. This multicenter phase II non-comparative trial evaluated the addition of aflibercept to infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (LV5FU2 regimen) as first-line treatment in patients unfit to receive doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS). The clinical hypotheses expected a PFS rate at 6 months of over 40% (60% expected). A total of 117 patients, with a median age of 81 years, were included: 59 in arm A (LV5FU2-aflibercept) and 58 in arm B (LV5FU2 alone). Six-month PFS was 54.7% in both arms (90% CI 42.5-66.5 in both). Median overall survival was 21.8 months (arm A) and 25.1 months (arm B). Overall toxicity was more common in arm A: grade ≥ 3 toxicity in 82% versus 58.2%. Given the 6-month PFS, the study can be considered positive. However, the toxicity of aflibercept in this population was high, and continuation of the trial into phase III is not envisaged.

Prognostic Effect of Performance Status on Outcomes of Patients with Colorectal Cancer Receiving First-Line Chemotherapy: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Performance status (PS) is a variable derived from the assessment of a patient's functional status, originally proposed to predict drug toxicity. However, despite its characteristic of being subjective and unidimensional, it has become one of the most important prognostic variables for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In light of the considerable progressive prolongation of median overall survival (OS) of patients with mCRC, it is unclear whether PS continues to be a valid prognostic factor. This article aims to perform a meta-analysis to verify the current prognostic role of PS.

METHODS

A search on two databases of prospective trials of first-line chemotherapy in mCRC patients, published in English from 1991 to 2020, was done by predefined criteria. After the selection of phase III trials evaluating the prognostic role of PS, a meta-analysis has been performed.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials were included in the meta-analysis. They reported a reduction in the risk of death with a PS 0 compared to a PS 1 or more (HR 0.63, CI 0.54-0.72; 13 studies), which was confirmed for the comparison between PS 0 and PS 1. However, the study found significant heterogeneity (Q = 68.10; p-value < 0.001) and high-grade inconsistency (I2 = 82.38%). Therefore, to explore the reasons for the heterogeneity, a univariate meta-regression was performed, which suggested a possible moderating activity for liver metastases and timing of metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

PS is a reliable prognostic factor for patients with mCRC receiving first-line chemotherapy but is poorly evaluated in phase III trials.

Update on the management of elderly patients with colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common tumours worldwide, and 70% of CRC patients are over 65 years of age. However, the scientific evidence available for these patients is poor, as they are underrepresented in clinical trials. Therefore, a group of experts from the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours, (TTD) and the Multidisciplinary Spanish Group of Digestive Cancer (GEMCAD) have reviewed the scientific evidence available in older patients with CRC. This group of experts recommends a multidisciplinary approach and geriatric assessment (GA) before making a therapeutic decision because GA predicts the risk of toxicity and survival and helps to individualize treatment. In addition, elderly patients with localized CRC should undergo standard cancer resection, preferably laparoscopically. The indication for adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) should be considered based on the potential benefit, the risk of recurrence, the life expectancy and patient comorbidities. When the disease is metastatic, the possibility of radical treatment with surgery, radiofrequency (RF) or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) should be considered. The efficacy of palliative CT is similar to that seen in younger patients, but elderly patients are at increased risk of toxicity. Clinical trials should be conducted with the elderly population and include GAs and specific treatment plans.

Evidence-Based Care of Older Adults With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Insights From Landmark Clinical Trials

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States with more than half of the patients diagnosed being older than 65 years, and an expected further increase in older adults (OA) diagnosed with this cancer in the coming years as the population ages. Prospective data guiding the management of older patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) have been limited and treatment decisions for these patients are often guided by chronologic age, crude evaluation of performance status, and extrapolation from trials conducted in younger individuals. Recent evidence from randomized clinical trials specifically designed for OA supports treatment deintensification and dose modification to increase tolerability without compromising efficacy in older, frailer patients with mCRC. Additional studies support the incorporation of geriatric assessment (GA)-driven care to further improve the outcomes of OA with mCRC. Although the use of GA has not been validated in guiding specific treatment selection or modification for OA with mCRC, it provides a comprehensive and objective evaluation of a patient's functional status, comorbidities, risk of potential toxicities, effect on the quality of life, goals of care, and assists with personalizing therapy. With the increase in the number of OA we care for in our practices, it is time to stop extrapolating and define an evidence-based approach for this population that is based on data from prospective elderly specific clinical trials.

Real-World Treatment Sequencing in Vulnerable Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Data regarding treatment sequence for vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a real-world setting are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess treatment outcomes in second-line or later chemotherapy for vulnerable patients with mCRC in a real-world setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Vulnerable patients with mCRC who received less intensive treatment ('vulnerable') regimens, i.e. fluoropyrimidines with or without biologics (FP), reduced-dose doublet regimens with or without biologics (Doublet), and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monotherapy (Anti-EGFR), as first-line therapy between June 2015 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 210 patients from 15 hospitals were analyzed. The median age was 78 years (range 28-90), and 44 patients (21%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score of 2. In the entire population, the median time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were 7.6 and 21.4 months, respectively. Following the failure of first-line therapy in 195 patients, 74 (38%), 24 (12%), and 13 (7%) patients received vulnerable regimens, full-dose doublet regimens with or without biologics, and other regimens, respectively, whereas 84 (43%) received best supportive care (BSC). In patients receiving vulnerable regimens as second-line therapy, the median TTF and OS were 4.4 and 13.7 months, respectively, while response rate and disease control rate were 18% and 62%, respectively. In 84 patients who received BSC, the median OS was 3.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-line chemotherapy for vulnerable patients with mCRC showed clinically meaningful outcomes; however, few patients received second-line therapy, and survival among patients who received BSC was dismal.

Impact of Cardiovascular Comorbidities on the Effectiveness and Safety of Bevacizumab in Older Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular comorbidities are not contraindications of bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the impact of cardiovascular comorbidities before bevacizumab treatment on overall survival and cardiovascular safety in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A 2009-2015 cohort of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer aged ≥ 65 years administered first-line bevacizumab was extracted from the French healthcare reimbursement claims database. Baseline heart failure, hypertension, and venous/arterial thromboembolic events were identified. The 36-month overall survival rate was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the impact of cardiovascular comorbidities on the 36-month overall survival using a time-dependent, multivariable, Cox proportional hazards model. The 36-month cumulative incidence of cardiovascular events, and the impact of cardiovascular comorbidities on the likelihood of cardiovascular events were evaluated using the Fine and Gray model, with death as a competing risk.

RESULTS

We included 9222 patients (56.4% male; median age 73 years). Two-thirds (66.7%) had baseline cardiovascular comorbidities. The median 36-month overall survival was 20.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.9-21.0] and 21.8 [95% CI 21.1-22.6] months in patients with and without cardiovascular comorbidities, respectively. Age ≥ 75 years, dependency in activities of daily living, radiotherapy, and another targeted therapy were identified as death risk factors, but not cardiovascular comorbidities. At 36 months, cardiovascular events had occurred in 60.2% [95% CI 58.9-61.4] and 44.1% [95% CI 42.3-45.9] of patients with and without cardiovascular comorbidities. Baseline venous thrombosis, female, three or more cardiovascular medications, another targeted therapy, and more than six bevacizumab injections were identified as risk factors for cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, cardiovascular comorbidities before administering bevacizumab to older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer impacted the cardiovascular safety, but not overall survival. Unless they limit functional independency, older patients with cardiovascular comorbidities should be treated with bevacizumab under close monitoring.

Management of metastatic colorectal cancer in patients ≥70 years - a single center experience

BACKGROUND

Age-standardized mortality rates for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are highest among elderly patients. In current clinical guidelines, treatment recommendations for this patient population are based on a limited number of clinical trials.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this monocentric, retrospective analysis we characterized patients aged ≥70 years undergoing systemic therapy for mCRC and overall survival (OS) was investigated.

RESULTS

We included 117 unselected, consecutive mCRC patients aged ≥70 years undergoing systemic therapy for mCRC between February 2009 and July 2022. Median OS was 25.6 months (95% CI: 21.8-29.4). The median age was 78 years (range: 70-90) and 21%, 48%, 26% and 5% had an ECOG performance score of 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The median number of systemic therapy lines was 2 (range: 1-5). The choice of first-line chemotherapy backbone (doublet/triplet versus mono) did not impact OS (HR: 0.83, p=0.50) or the probability of receiving subsequent therapy (p=0.697). Metastasectomy and/or local ablative treatment in the liver, lung, peritoneum and/or other organs were applied in 26 patients (22%) with curative intent. First-line anti-EGFR-based therapy showed a trend towards longer OS compared to anti-VEGF-based therapy or chemotherapy alone in left-sided mCRC (anti-EGFR: 39.3 months versus anti-VEGF: 27.3 months versus chemotherapy alone: 13.8 months, p=0.105). In multivariable analysis, metastasectomy and/or local ablative treatment with curative intent (yes versus no, HR: 0.22, p<0.001), the ECOG performance score (2 versus 0, HR: 3.07, p=0.007; 3 versus 0, HR: 3.66, p=0.053) and the presence of liver metastases (yes versus no, HR: 1.79, p=0.049) were independently associated with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings corroborate front-line monochemotherapy in combination with targeted therapy as the treatment of choice for elderly mCRC patients with palliative treatment intent. Metastasectomy and/or local ablative treatment with curative intent are feasible and may improve OS in selected elderly mCRC patients.

Guidance for Treating the Older Adults with Colorectal Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The need for evidence-based data in the rapidly growing group of older patients is vast and more elderly-specific studies are desperately needed, for which there is clear demand from both patients and providers. Notably, many of the studies discussed in this review included unplanned subset analyses based on age and/or were not originally stratified by age; therefore, these data, particularly overall survival data, need to be interpreted with some caution as they may not be statistically valid based on the initial trial design and statistical plan. As we await data from ongoing elderly-specific trials, our recommendation for managing older patients with CRC should include geriatric screening tools (e.g., CSGA, VES-13, G8, CARG, CRASH) to help guide treatment adjustments for improved tolerability without sacrificing efficacy. For patients with a positive screen for significant geriatric concerns, a full geriatric assessment is recommended to guide treatment approach and supportive care. Prior data support the use of all approved medications for CRC in older adults who are fit; however, treatment breaks and dose attenuation with potential escalation are reasonable options for these patients. Ultimately, management decisions in the care of older adults with mCRC must be made through shared decision-making with the patient with consideration for the patient's functional status, comorbidities, goals of care, social support, as well as potential toxicities and possible effect on QoL.

The efficacy of irinotecan supplementation for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of irinotecan as the adjunctive therapy to fluorouracil and leucovorin remains controversial in patients with colorectal cancer. We conduct this meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of irinotecan supplementation for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We have searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through March 19, 2020, and included randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of irinotecan plus fluorouracil and leucovorin for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with fluorouracil and leucovorin for colorectal cancer, irinotecan supplementation could significantly improve progression-free survival rate (hazard ratio = 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58-0.90; P = .003), median progression-free survival (standard mean difference = -0.30; 95% CI = -0.44 to -0.15; P < .0001), overall survival rate (hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.66-0.90; P = .001), and objective response (risk ratio [RR] = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.49-0.66; P < .00001) and decrease progressive disease (RR = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.40-3.14; P = .0003), but revealed no obvious effect on complete response (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.33-2.29; P = .79). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events in irinotecan supplementation group was increased compared to control group (RR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.57-0.79; P < .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Irinotecan as the adjunctive therapy to fluorouracil and leucovorin can increase the survival and objective response of patients with colorectal cancer, but the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events is found to be increased after irinotecan supplementation.

Preliminary tolerance analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy in older patients after resection of stage III colon cancer from the PRODIGE 34-FFCD randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Colon adenocarcinoma mainly occurs in older patients. Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy improved disease-free survival after stage III colon cancer resection, but this improvement was not demonstrated in older patients.

METHODS

The purpose of ADAGE-PRODIGE 34, randomized open phase III trial is to compare in patients over 70 years oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine with fluoropyrimidine alone in fit patients (Group 1) and fluoropyrimidine with observation in frail patients (Group 2) after resection of stage III colon adenocarcinoma. We report a preliminary tolerance analysis on 50% of the first patients enrolled.

RESULTS

The analysis was conducted on 491 patients (378 in Group 1 and 113 in Group 2). Patients in Group 2 were older and showed more frailty criteria than those in Group 1. Cumulative grade 3-5 toxicities were more frequent in patients treated with oxaliplatin in Group 1 or with fluoropyrimidine in Group 2 than in patients treated with fluoropyrimidine in Group 1. At least one course was deferred in more than half of the patients in all groups. Early treatment cessation was more frequent in Group 2.

CONCLUSION

No safety concerns were raised for the continuation of accrual. The frailty criteria distribution suggests that the investigator's evaluation for group allocation was accurate.

First-line fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab followed by irinotecan-escalation versus initial fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan and bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer - Final survival and per-protocol analysis of the randomised XELAVIRI trial (AIO KRK 0110)

BACKGROUND

The randomised open-label phase III XELAVIRI trial failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of the sequential application of fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab followed by additional irinotecan at first progression (Arm A) versus initial combination of all agents (Arm B) for untreated metastatic colorectal cancer in the initial analysis of time-to-failure-of-strategy (TFS, 90% confidence boundary of 0.8). Here, we evaluate efficacy in the full analysis set (FAS), the per-protocol set, in addition to age-related and molecular subgroups.

METHODS

Median TFS, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Cox regression models assessed hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) (TFS: 90%; OS, PFS: 95%).

RESULTS

Of 421 patients, 390 (92.6%), 391 (92.9%) and 357 (84.8%) events for TFS, OS and PFS were observed in the FAS with a median follow-up of 54.2 months (Arm A) versus 52.9 months (Arm B). Non-inferiority of sequential treatment for TFS was missed in the FAS (HR 0.93; 90% CI, 0.79-1.10; P = 0.482) and not shown in the per-protocol set (HR 0.93; 90% CI, 0.75-1.13, P = 0.433). Formal non-inferiority for TFS was observed for patients older than 70 years (HR 1.06; 90% CI, 0.80-1.41; P = 0.670) and patients with RAS mutant tumours (HR 1.12; 90% CI, 0.87-1.43; P = 0.465). In RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours, combination treatment was significantly superior to sequential therapy in all end-points.

CONCLUSIONS

In the overall population, XELAVIRI just missed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of sequential compared to combination therapy for TFS. However, the non-inferiority of sequential treatment was observed in elderly patients and RAS mutant tumours.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration ID (clinicaltrials.gov) NCT01249638.

Study protocol of the FIRE-8 (AIO-KRK/YMO-0519) trial: a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II trial investigating the efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil plus panitumumab versus trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

Initial systemic therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is usually based on two- or three-drug chemotherapy regimens with fluoropyrimidine (5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine), oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan, combined with either anti-VEGF (bevacizumab) or, for RAS wild-type (WT) tumors, anti-EGFR antibodies (panitumumab or cetuximab). Recommendations for patients who are not eligible for intensive combination therapies are limited and include fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab or single agent anti-EGFR antibody treatment. The use of a monochemotherapy concept of trifluridine/ tipiracil in combination with monoclonal antibodies is not approved for first-line therapy, yet. Results from the phase II TASCO trial evaluating trifluridine/ tipiracil plus bevacicumab in first-line treatment of mCRC patients and from the phase I/II APOLLON trial investigating trifluridine/ tipiracil plus panitumumab in pre-treated mCRC patients suggest favourable activity and tolerability of these new therapeutic approaches.

Methods

FIRE-8 (NCT05007132) is a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II study which aims to evaluate the efficacy of first-line treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil (35 mg/m² body surface area (BSA), orally twice daily on days 1–5 and 8–12, q28 days) plus either the anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab (6 mg/kg body weight, intravenously on day 1 and 15, q28 days) [arm A] or (as control arm) the anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab (5 mg/kg body weight, intravenously on day 1 and 15, q28 days) [arm B] in RAS WT mCRC patients. The primary objective is to demonstrate an improved objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST 1.1 from 30% (control arm) to 55% with panitumumab. With a power of 80% and a two-sided significance level of 0.05, 138 evaluable patients are needed. Given an estimated drop-out rate of 10%, 153 patients will be enrolled.

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil plus panitumumab in first-line treatment of RAS WT mCRC patients. The administration of anti-EGFR antibodies rather than anti-VEGF antibodies in combination with trifluridine/tipiracil may result in an increased initial efficacy.

Trial registration

EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT) 2019-004223-20. Registered October 22, 2019, ClinicalTrials.govNCT05007132. Registered on August 12, 2021.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09892-8.

Impact of chronological age on efficacy and safety of fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab in older non-frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a combined analysis of individual data from two phase II studies of patients aged >75 years

OBJECTIVE

Many clinical trials for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer have been conducted, and fluoropyrimidine and bevacizumab are standard treatments. However, the relationship between age and the efficacy and safety of this treatment is unclear in older metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Individual data from two phase II studies on older (≥75 years), non-frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with uracil-tegafur/leucovorin or S-1 combined with bevacizumab were collected. Patient characteristics were evaluated with multiple regression analyses for survival outcomes, using the Cox proportional hazard model and linear regression analyses for the worst grade of adverse events.

RESULTS

We enrolled 102 patients with a median age of 80 years (range, 75-88 years). Of the 70 patients who died, seven (10%) died of causes unrelated to disease or treatment. The study treatment was discontinued due to adverse events in 19 patients (18.6%), with 63% aged ≥85 years. The adverse event that most commonly resulted in treatment discontinuation was grade 2 fatigue (21%). Chronological age was not associated with progression-free survival (Hazard ratio, 1.03; P = 0.40) or overall survival (Hazard ratio, 1.02; P = 0.65). Age was weakly associated with non-hematologic adverse events (regression coefficient [R], 0.27; P = 0.007), especially fatigue (R, 0.23; P = 0.02) and nausea (R, 0.19; P = 0.06), but not with hematologic (R, 0.05; P = 0.43) or bevacizumab-related (R, -0.06; P = 0.56) adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab was age-independent in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer aged ≥75 years, and attention should be paid to non-hematologic adverse events as age increases.

[Medical oncological treatment of colorectal cancer in the elderly]

Medical treatment with chemotherapy is discussed in several situations in the treatment of colon cancer. In the adjuvant setting, chemotherapy with 5FU±oxaliplatin for six months should be considered in the case of lymph node involvement. In the metastatic setting, several protocols exist. The choice of treatments should be based on the expected objectives in terms of response and survival gain, but also of tolerance and quality of life for the patient. A thorough oncogeriatric assessment helps to better define the therapeutic programme. The continuation of geriatric follow-up throughout the treatment process shows a benefit for the patient in terms of quality of life and tolerance of treatments.

Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Treatments Among Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Systemic treatments, namely, either monotherapy or combination therapy, are commonly administered to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to provide the complete efficacy and safety profiles and ranking of systemic therapies for the treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic CRC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until June 30, 2021, and also the bibliographies of relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing two or more treatments, namely, at least capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, cetuximab, oxaliplatin, or panitumumab were investigated. A network meta-analysis using the Bayesian approach was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of treatments. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated for the probability of each treatment as the most effective. The overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs) grade ≥3, and serious adverse events (SAEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred two publications with 36,147 participants were assigned to 39 different treatments. Among 11 treatments with full information on six outcomes, FOLFIRI/FOLFOX/FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab significantly improved both the ORR and DCR, compared to FOLFIRI. Although FOLFOX and FOLFIRI/FOLFOX + cetuximab significantly prolonged both OS and PFS, treatments were comparable in terms of AEs grade ≥3 and SAEs. The top highest SUCRA values were observed in the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab group for ORR (96%) and DCR (99%), FOLFIRI + bevacizumab + panitumumab group for OS (62%) and PFS (54%), and FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab group for AEs grade ≥3 (59%) and SAEs (59%) outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest an available range of systemic treatment therapies with different efficacy and safety profiles with patients. Further investigations of the side effects and mutation status are required to confirm our findings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42019127772.

Clinical efficacy of chemotherapy in colorectal cancer patients over 80 years old

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common and aggressive gastrointestinal cancer, and the prognostic impact associated with chemotherapy in super elderly (over 80 years old) patients remains poorly defined. We aimed to define the effect of chemotherapy on the prognosis of patients with CRC over 80 years old.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study including CRC patients over 80 years old was conducted. The patients were screened from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2015. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were applied as the primary and secondary outcome. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate factors associated with OS and CSS. Survival curves of OS and CSS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test.

RESULTS

In total, 14,748 CRC patients over 80 years old were included in this study. The median patient age was 85 (IQR: 82-87). All patients were divided into surgical group and non-surgical group. The OS and CSS of the surgical group were significantly better than those of the non-surgical group (P < 0.001). Chemotherapy can improve OS and CSS for patients with stage III and IV (P < 0.001) in surgical group. For the super elderly patients with CRC, chemotherapy significantly improved OS and CSS in all TNM stages in non-surgical group.

CONCLUSION

For super elderly patients with colorectal cancer, tumor treatment should not be abandoned because of their age. It is necessary to carry out clinical trials in super elderly patients.

Reduced-dose of doublet chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR antibodies in vulnerable older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Data from the REVOLT study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the toxicity patterns and effectiveness of doublet chemotherapy when administered at reduced doses of 20% (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) in combination with anti-EGFR antibodies (cetuximab or panitumumab) in old, vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study of RAS and BRAF wild-type, vulnerable patients aged ≥70 years with previously untreated mCRC. The primary endpoint was safety, and secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

One hundred and eighteen patients were collected from 14 selected Italian centres. The median age was 75 (range, 70-85). Geriatric screening by G8 tool gave a score ≤ 14 in all patients. In total, 75 and 43 patients received FOLFOX or FOLFIRI, respectively, in combination with panitumumab (53%) or cetuximab (47%). The overall incidence of grade (G) 3-4 neutropenia was 11.8%, and for skin rash 11%. The most frequent adverse events were G1-2 skin rash (49.1%), G1-2 diarrhea (21.1%) and G1-2 nausea (17.7%). The ORR was 57.3%. Stable disease was observed in 29.1% of patients, with a disease control rate of 86.4%. With a median follow-up of 18 months, the median PFS was 10.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.5-11.4), while the median OS was 18.0 months (95% CI: 16.0-19.9). No statistically significant difference was observed between the regimens in terms of ORR, PFS (p = 0.908), and OS (p = 0.832).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that with an appropriate design, including reduced doses, vulnerable older patients best tolerate chemotherapy when combined with anti-EGFR antibodies.

Capecitabine Plus Bevacizumab for Cardiac Metastasis of Sigmoid Colon Cancer: Case Report and Literature Review

BACKGROUND/AIM

Right ventricular cardiac metastasis from colorectal cancer (CRC) is rare and clinically silent. There is no standardised treatment. To date, only twelve cases have been reported in the literature. This is a case report and literature review of right ventricular cardiac metastasis from CRC.

CASE REPORT

A 75-year-old woman with a history of CRC treated with sigmoidectomy followed by liver and lung metastasectomy presented with a right ventricle tumour. Biopsy showed metastatic adenocarcinoma not suitable for resection because multiple lung metastases coexisted. The metastases were controlled for a prolonged duration by chemotherapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab. According to the review of 13 cases, the median age of metastatic CRC that involves the right ventricle is 71 years and the primary site is half the colon and rectum. Half of cases have non-cardiac metastases at cardiac metastasis diagnosis. Chemotherapy is more suitable than resection in cases with metastases other than heart because resection of the right ventricle has a high risk.

CONCLUSION

Cardiac right ventricular metastasis from CRC can be controlled by capecitabine plus bevacizumab.

Predictive factors of severe early treatment-related toxicity in patients receiving first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: Pooled analysis of 2190 patients enrolled in Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) trials

AIM

Few studies have explored the association between baseline characteristics and the occurrence of early toxicities in patients treated with first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Individual patient data of 2190 patients enrolled in 10 prospective FFCD (Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive) trials were analysed. Severe early toxicity was defined as the occurrence of grade ≥III toxicity within 3 months after initiation of chemotherapy (ET3).

RESULTS

Patients received monotherapy based on 5-FU (n = 1068), a cytotoxic doublet (n = 395) or tritherapy with a cytotoxic doublet plus anti-VEGF agent or a cytotoxic triplet (n = 727). The patients received 5-FU (100%), Irinotecan (39.6%), Oxaliplatin (13.4%), Bevacizumab (29.6%) or Aflibercept (1.8%). ET3 occurred in 244 patients (22.8%) with monotherapy, 248 patients (62.8%) with doublet and 392 patients (53.9%) with tritherapy. The most frequent ET3s were related to biological abnormalities and/or gastrointestinal, general and vascular disorders. The prognostic factors for the occurrence of an ET3 in multivariate analysis were a performance status of 2 rather than 0-1 (OR 2.57; 95% CI [1.16, 5.73]; p = 0.02), tritherapy versus monotherapy (OR 2.31; 95% CI [0.84, 6.33]; p = 0.02), alkaline phosphatase > 300 UI/l (OR 3.07; 95% CI [1.79, 5.27]; p < 0.001) and non-resected primary tumour versus resection (OR 1.59; 95% CI [1.06, 2.39]; p = 0.02). Median overall survival in patients without ET3 was significantly longer than that in patients with ET3 (HR 0.87; 95% CI [0.80-0.96]; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

ET3 is frequent whatever the treatment regimen and is associated with certain baseline characteristics. The clinical impact of ET3 on prognosis in mCRC warrants further investigation.

Personalizing First-Line Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Is There a Role for Initial Low-Intensity Therapy in 2021 and Beyond? A Perspective From Members of the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group

Palliative chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for the majority of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, with the aim of increasing length and quality of life. Although guidelines outline the available treatment options in the first line, they provide limited guidance on choice and intensity of the chemotherapy backbone. Data from the TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies confirm a survival benefit with triplet FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab, and this is a preferred option for younger patients with good performance status able to tolerate it. However, the relative benefit of a fluoropyrimidine doublet with oxaliplatin or irinotecan over single-agent fluoropyrimidine with or without a biologic is less certain; the available data demonstrate that single-agent fluoropyrimidine plus a biologic with planned sequencing of subsequent agents can produce similar overall survival outcomes with reduced toxicity. Our analysis of local real-world registry data suggests that this is an underutilized approach, particularly in younger and fitter patients. Established prognostic factors, including patient age, performance status, tumor sidedness, and biomarkers such as RAS/BRAF, are key in treatment selection; patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type disease or patients with low tumor bulk may be ideal for a less intensive regimen. Further studies are required to confirm the value of less-intensive regimens in the modern era, where the incorporation of biologic therapies has become routine and where non-chemotherapy options are emerging as viable options for molecularly defined patient subsets.

Analysis of factors affecting progression-free survival of first-line chemotherapy in older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Few studies have investigated factors influencing the efficacy of chemotherapy in older patients with cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of G8, geriatric assessment (GA), and factors measured in general clinical practice for evaluating progression-free survival (PFS) of first-line palliative chemotherapy in older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective observational study of older patients (age ≥ 70 years) with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. The modified cut-off value of G8 was determined by referring to two or more abnormal GA conditions. The usefulness of baseline GA and G8 (conventional and modified cut-off value) was assessed according to the efficacy (PFS and disease control rate) of the administered first-line palliative chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 93 patients were evaluated between March 2017 and February 2019. A modified G8 cut-off value of ≤12 had a sensitivity and specificity of 68.9% and 46.9%, respectively. PFS was significantly prolonged in the patients with G8 > 12, serum albumin ≥3.5 g/dl, and in whom grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred. There was no significant difference in the PFS between monotherapy and combination therapy. GA was not useful for predicting PFS prolongation or the occurrence of serious adverse events in first-line treatment.

CONCLUSION

Among older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer who receive first-line chemotherapy, a modified G8 cut-off value of 12 points, occurrence of grade 3 or higher adverse events, albumin levels, rather than age or performance status were predictors of PFS prolongation.

Systematic Review of Treatments for Colorectal Metastases in Elderly Patients to Guide Surveillance Cessation Following Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

Although included in surveillance programmes for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases, elderly patients are susceptible to declines in health and quality of life that may render them unsuitable for further surveillance. Deciding when to cease surveillance is challenging.

METHODS

There are no publications focused on surveillance of elderly patients for CRC metastases. A systematic review of studies reporting treatment outcomes for CRC metastases in elderly patients was performed to assess the risk-benefit balance of the key objectives of surveillance; detecting and treating CRC metastases.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight eligible studies reported outcomes for surgery and chemotherapy in the elderly. Liver resections and use of chemotherapy, including biologics, are more conservative and have poorer outcomes in the elderly compared with younger patients. Selected studies demonstrated poorer quality-of-life (QoL) following surgery and chemotherapy. Studies of ablation in elderly patients are limited.

DISCUSSION

The survival benefit of treating CRC metastases with surgery or chemotherapy decreases with advancing age and QoL may decline in the elderly. The relatively lower efficacy and detrimental QoL impact of multimodal therapy options for detected CRC metastases in the elderly questions the benefit of surveillance in some elderly patients. Care of elderly patients should thus be customized based on their preference, formal geriatric assessment, natural life-expectancy, and the perceived risk-benefit balance of treating recurrent CRC metastases. Clinicians may consider surveillance cessation in patients aged 75 years and above if geriatric assessment is unsatisfactory, patients decline surveillance, or patient fitness deteriorates catastrophically.

Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation-positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.

Chemotherapy and Targeted Agents in the Treatment of Elderly Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the main causes of cancer death in the elderly. The older patients constitute a heterogeneous group in terms of functional status, comorbidities, and aging-related conditions. Therefore, therapeutic decisions need to be individualized. Additionally, a higher toxicity risk comes from the fact that pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the drugs as well as the tissue tolerance can be altered with aging. Although the chemotherapy efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is similar for older and young patients, more toxicity is presented in the elderly. While the mono-chemotherapy provides the same benefit for young and older patients, doublets front-line chemotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) in the elderly. Furthermore, the benefit of the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in older patients has been shown in several clinical trials, while the clinical data for the benefit of anti-epidermal growth factor antibodies are scarcer. Immunocheckpoint inhibitors could be an appropriate option for patients with microsatellite instability (MSI) tumors. A prior geriatric assessment is required before deciding the type of treatment in order to offer the best therapeutic option.

Outcomes following potentially curative therapies for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Older age represents a major risk factor for developing colorectal cancer and the disease disproportionately affects patients older than 60 years of age. However, knowledge regarding the optimal management of older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains limited. The challenge of treating older patients arises in tailoring treatments to a heterogeneous cohort whilst adjusting for individuals with a wide variation of physiological reserve, a reduced tolerance to treatment side-effects and morbidity, and often different priorities as compared with younger patients. Data from the published literature supports the premise that older age alone is not an acceptable determinant of treatment options. In particular, patients aged 65-70 years with mCRC ought to be considered similarly to younger patients and patients aged 70-74 also stand to benefit from both hepatic resection and systemic therapy notwithstanding the higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Patients aged 75-79, and with sufficient physiological reserve ought to be considered for curative treatment options which are proportional to the extent of metastatic disease. Meanwhile, in patients aged ≥80 years, life-extending or life-enhancing benefit ought to be demonstrable prior to embarking upon major surgery as a curative treatment option. Older patients who meet the physiological eligibility criteria to enter clinical trials of systemic chemotherapy appear to gain similar benefit as younger patients and should not be excluded on the basis of age alone. Clinical trials that are specifically designed for older patients are feasible and could yield valuable information to guide clinical practice.

Quality of adverse event reporting in phase III randomized controlled trials of breast and colorectal cancer: A systematic review

Background

Clinical trial reports often emphasize efficacy over harms, leading to misinterpretation of the risk‐to‐benefit ratio of new therapies. Clear and sufficiently detailed reporting of methods and results is especially important in the abstracts of trial reports, as readers often base their assessment of a trial on such information. In this study, we evaluated the quality of adverse event (AE) reporting and abstract quality in phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic therapies in breast and colorectal cancer.

Methods

Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of RCTs, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from November 2005 to September 2018. Phase III RCTs evaluating systemic therapies in breast or colorectal cancer were included. Each article was independently reviewed by two investigators using a standardized data extraction form based on guidelines developed by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) group. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariable linear regression were used to analyze data. All statistical tests were two‐sided.

Results

Of 166 RCTs identified, 99.4% reported harms in the manuscript body, and 59.6% reported harms in the abstract. Reporting was restricted to severe harms in 15.6% of RCTs. Statistical comparison of AE rates went unreported in 59.0% of studies. Information regarding AEs leading to dose reductions, treatment discontinuations, or study withdrawals went unreported in 59.3%, 18.7%, and 86.8% of studies, respectively. Recently published RCTs (P = .009) and those sponsored at least partially by for‐profit companies (P = .003) had higher abstract quality scores.

Conclusions

Breast and colorectal cancer phase III RCTs inadequately report CONSORT‐compliant AE data. Improved guideline adherence and abstract reporting is required to properly weigh benefits and harms of new oncologic therapies.

Systematic Review Registration Number

CRD42019140673.

Treatment guidelines of metastatic colorectal cancer in older patients from the French Society of Geriatric Oncology (SoFOG)

BACKGROUND

Several guidelines dedicated to metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are available. Since 2013 no recent guidelines are specifically dedicated to older patients and based on a systematic review.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multidisciplinary Task Force with digestive oncologists, geriatricians and methodologists from the SoFOG was formed in 2016 to update recommendations on medical treatment of mCRC based on a systematic review of publications from 2000 to 2018. Search strategy has followed a standardized protocol from the formulation of clinical questions and definition of a search algorithm to the selection of complete articles for recommendations.

RESULTS

The four selected key questions were: For which older patients with mCRC can we considered: (1) Any chemotherapy, (2) Mono or poly-chemotherapy, (3) Anti-angiogenic therapy, (4) Other targeted therapy. Main recommendations for older patients are: (1) Omission of chemotherapy should be discussed with a geriatrician for patients with severe comorbidities, advanced dementia, uncontrolled psychiatric disorder or severe loss of autonomy. (2) If tumor response is not the main aim, a mono-chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil combined with bevacizumab is recommended as first-line. (3) For patients with symptoms related to metastases or with a planned metastasis ablation, a doublet chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab or anti-EGFR antibody in the context of a RAS wild type tumor is recommended as first-line. Preliminary data suggest that regorafenib may be used, in its registered indication, in patients under 80 with a performance status of 0 and no autonomy alterations and that trifluridine-tipiracil may be used with a tight supervising of hematological function.

Predictive factors for early progression during induction chemotherapy and chemotherapy-free interval: analysis from PRODIGE 9 trial

Background

Identifying patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who will have an early disease progression during induction chemotherapy (IC) and identifying patients who may have a chemotherapy-free interval (CFI) after IC are two major challenges.

Methods

A logistic model was used to identify factors associated with early progression during IC and with short duration of the first CFI in 488 patients enrolled in the PRODIGE 9 trial. Independent factors were defined with a threshold 0.10.

Results

In multivariate analysis, baseline leukocytes >10 × 10⁹/L (OR = 1.98 [1.02–3.8], p = 0.04), and stable or increasing CEA at 2 months (OR = 3.61 [1.68–7.75], p = 0.01) were independent factors associated with progression during IC. Male gender (OR = 1.725 [0.92–3.325], p = 0.09) and no tumour response at first evaluation (OR = 1.90 [0.96–3.76], p = 0.07) were significantly associated with a short CFI. The presence of BRAF V600E mutation was also associated with short CFI (OR = 4.59 [0.95; 22.3], p = 0.058).

Conclusion

High baseline leukocyte count and the lack of CEA decrease level at first evaluation were associated with early progression, and could be in favour of early chemotherapy intensification. Male gender, no tumour response at first evaluation and BRAF mutation are associated with a short CFI, and may be considered for maintenance chemotherapy after IC.

Clinical trial number

NCT00952029.

Quality of life assessment and reporting in colorectal cancer: A systematic review of phase III trials published between 2012 and 2018

BACKGROUND

In this study, our aim was to describe quality of life (QoL) prevalence and heterogeneity in QoL reporting in colorectal cancer phase III trials.

METHODS

We included all phase III trials evaluating anticancer drugs in colorectal cancer patients published between 2012 and 2018 by 11 major journals.

RESULTS

Out of the 67 publications identified, in 41 (61.2 %) QoL was not listed among endpoints. Out of 26 primary publications of trials including QoL among endpoints, QoL results were not reported in 10 (38.5 %). Overall, no QoL data were available in 51/67 (76.1 %) primary publications. In particular, in the metastatic setting, QoL data were not available in 12/18 (66.7 %) trials with primary endpoint overall survival, and in 20/29 (69.0 %) trials with other primary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

QoL was absent in a high proportion of recently published phase III trials in colorectal cancer, even in trials of second or further lines, where attention to QoL should be particularly high.

Magnitude of advantage in tumor response contributes to a better correlation between treatment effects on overall survival and progression-free survival: a literature-based meta-analysis of clinical trials in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Although it is suggested that the endpoints originated from the concept of tumor shrinkage dynamics, such as early tumor shrinkage and depth of response, are strongly associated with overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), they are yet to be validated as a single surrogate endpoint of OS by themselves. This study aimed to investigate the impact of advantage in tumor response on the correlation between treatment effects on progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in mCRC patients.

METHODS

Based on an electronic search, we identified randomized controlled trials of first-line therapy for mCRC. The impact of advantage in objective response rate (ORR) on the correlation between treatment effects on PFS and OS was evaluated based on Spearman correlation coefficients (r_s).

RESULTS

Forty-seven trials with a total of 24,018 patients were identified. The hazard ratio for PFS showed a relatively higher correlation with that for OS (r_s = 0.63) when the trials were limited to those that demonstrated a larger difference in ORR, compared to the case for trials that demonstrated a smaller difference (r_s = 0.32). This tendency was also observed in the subgroup analysis stratified by the types of treatment agents (targeted or non-targeted).

CONCLUSIONS

The magnitude of advantage in tumor response was suggested to contribute to a better prediction of OS benefit based on PFS in patients with mCRC. The accuracy of OS estimation in mCRC is expected to be improved by considering the degree of tumor shrinkage in conjunction with PFS.

Adjuvant Therapy for High-Risk Stage II or III Colon Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched, Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Study

Purpose: To determine the optimal adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colon adenocarcinoma, we conducted this propensity score-matched, nationwide, population-based cohort study to estimate the effects of adjuvant treatments in high-risk stage II or III colon adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods: Using propensity score matching, we minimized the confounding effects of sex, age, pathologic stage, tumor location, total chemotherapy cycles, and Charlson comorbidity index scores on adjuvant treatment outcomes in patients with high-risk stage II or III resectable colon adenocarcinoma. We selected the patients from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database and divided them into four groups: Group 1, comprising patients who received surgery alone; group 2, comprising those who received adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone; group 3, comprising those who received adjuvant oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine-leucovorin (FOLFOX); and group 4, comprising those who received adjuvant folinic acid-fluorouracil-irinotecan (FOLFIRI). Results: In both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs, as well as the 95% confidence intervals (Cis)) for mortality observed for groups 1, 2, and 4 relative to group 3 were 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82), 1.22 (1.05 to 1.43), and 2.97 (2.43 to 3.63), respectively. After a stratified subgroup analysis for high-risk stage II colon adenocarcinoma, we noted that the aHR (95% CI) for mortality for group 2 relative to group 3 was 0.52 (0.30 to 0.89). Conclusions: Adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone is the most optimal regimen for patients with high-risk stage II colon adenocarcinoma compared with the other adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Adjuvant FOLFOX can serve as an optimal regimen for patients with pathologic stage III colon adenocarcinoma, regardless of age, sex, or tumor location.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): French intergroup clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatments and follow-up (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, SFR)

INTRODUCTION

This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) published in January 2019, and available on the French Society of Gastroenterology website (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org).

METHODS

This collaborative work was realized by all French medical and surgical societies involved in the management of mCRC. Recommendations are graded in three categories (A, B and C), according to the level of evidence found in the literature, up until December 2018.

RESULTS

The management of metastatic colorectal cancer has become complex because of increasing available medical, radiological and surgical treatments alone or in combination. The therapeutic strategy should be defined before the first-line treatment, mostly depending on the presentation of the disease (resectability of the metastases, symptomatic and/or threatening disease), of the patient's condition (ECOG PS, comorbidities), and tumor biology (RAS, BRAF, MSI). The sequence of targeted therapies also seems to have an impact on the outcome (angiogenesis inhibition beyond progression). Surgical resection of metastases was the only curative intent treatment to date, joined recently by percutaneous tumor ablation tools (radiofrequency, microwave). Localized therapies such as hepatic intra-arterial infusion, radioembolization and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, also have seen their indications specified (liver-dominant disease and resectable peritoneal carcinomatosis). New treatments have been developed in heavily pretreated patients, increasing overall survival and preserving quality of life (regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil). Finally, immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated high efficacy in MSI mCRC.

CONCLUSION

French guidelines for mCRC management are put together to help offer the best personalized therapeutic strategy in daily clinical practice, as the mCRC therapeutic landscape is complexifying. These recommendations are permanently being reviewed and updated. Each individual case must be discussed within a multidisciplinary team (MDT).

Pharmacotherapeutic considerations for elderly patients with colorectal cancer

Introduction: Oncology care in the elderly presents a dilemma. The majority of cancer cases are diagnosed in the elderly yet they are underrepresented in clinical trials. In addition to limited evidence-based medicine, the elderly is a heterogeneous population filled with pharmacotherapeutic challenges and barriers. Elderly metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment decisions encompass these challenges.Areas covered: Treatment based solely on chronological age is an unacceptable practice. Physiologic factors such as function, cognition, comorbidities, polypharmacy, among others must be considered. Oncology guidelines emphasize using a geriatric assessment (GA) as opposed to traditional oncology performance status measures to best identify risks. Our review shines light on these issues as they pertain to elderly unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Expert opinion: The practical use of GA tools in oncology remain to be determined. Current barriers are the lack of a consistent tool to unify decision-making, provider education, and evidence-based use/outcomes in specific cancers. mCRC antineoplastic data surrounding GAs are scarce, and current mCRC national treatment algorithms are not stratified to encompass GA-driven therapy. Therefore, providers lack clear guidance or practicality of use. We hope mCRC trial designs will abandon age cutoffs and instead place more focus on GAs for inclusion and outcomes.

First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD)

BACKGROUND

Treatment of frail patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) is controversial. This pilot phase II trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib when administered in first-line to frail patients with advanced CRC.

METHODS

Frail patients without prior advanced colorectal cancer treatment were included in the study. Definition of frailty was defined per protocol based on dependency criteria, presence of chronic comorbid pathologies and/or geriatric features.

MAIN OBJECTIVE

to assess progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of orally administered regorafenib 160 mg/day (3 weeks followed by 1 week rest).

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were included in the study. Median age was 81 years (range 63-89). Frailty criteria: dependency was observed in 26 patients (55%), comorbidities in 27 (57%) and geriatric features in 18 (38%). PFS rate at 6 months was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30-60]. Median PFS was 5.6 months (95%CI 2.7-8.4). Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months (95%CI 7.8-24). Complete response, partial response and stable disease were observed in one, two and 21 patients respectively (objective response rate 6.4%; disease control rate 51%). Thirty-nine patients (83%) experienced grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs). The most common grade 3-4 AEs were hypertension (15 patients; 32%), asthenia (14; 30%), hypophosphatemia (6; 13%); diarrhea (4; 8%), hand-foot-skin reaction (4; 8%). There were two toxic deaths (4.2%) (grade 5 rectal bleeding and death not further specified). Dose reduction was required in 26 patients (55%) and dose-delays in 13 patients (28%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not meet the pre-specified boundary of 55% PFS rate at 6 months. Toxicity observed (83% patients experienced grade 3 and 4 AEs) preclude its current use in clinical practice on this setting. Disease control rate and overall survival results are interesting and might warrant further investigation to identify those who benefit from this approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was prospectively registered at EudraCT ( 2013-000236-94 ). Date of trial registration: April 9th, 2013.

Bevacizumab+chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in elderly patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial-PRODIGE 20 study results

Background

Metastatic colorectal cancer frequently occurs in elderly patients. Bevacizumab in combination with front line chemotherapy (CT) is a standard treatment but some concern raised about tolerance of bevacizumab for these patients. The purpose of PRODIGE 20 was to evaluate tolerance and efficacy of bevacizumab according to specific end points in this population.

Patients and methods

Patients aged 75 years and over were randomly assigned to bevacizumab + CT (BEV) versus CT. LV5FU2, FOLFOX and FOLFIRI regimen were prescribed according to investigator’s choice. The composite co-primary end point, assessed 4 months after randomization, was based on efficacy (tumor control and absence of decrease of the Spitzer QoL index) and safety (absence of severe cardiovascular toxicities and unexpected hospitalization). For each arm, the treatment will be consider as inefficient if 20% or less of the patients met the efficacy criteria and not safe if 40% or less met the safety criteria.

Results

About 102 patients were randomized (51 BEV and 51 CT), median age was 80 years (range 75–91). Primary end point was met for efficacy in 50% and 58% and for safety in 61% and 71% of patients in BEV and CT, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 9.7 months in BEV and 7.8 months in CT. Median overall survival was 21.7 months in BEV and 19.8 months in CT. The 36-month overall survival rate was 27% in BEV and 10.1% in CT. Severe toxicities grade 3/4 were mainly non-hematologic toxicities (80.4% in BEV, 63.3% in CT).

Conclusion

Bevacizumab combined with CT was safe and efficient. Both arms met the primary safety and efficacy criteria.

Treatment Modalities and Survival in Older Adults with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Real Life

OBJECTIVES

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is increasingly treated with targeted therapies, but little is known about real-life mCRC treatment in older adults. The aims were to describe the real-life first-line treatment modalities in older adult mCRC patients, to identify factors associated with treatment modalities, and to evaluate survival with regard to treatment modalities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cohort of mCRC patients aged 65 years and older at diagnosis was identified between 2009 and 2013 using French national healthcare insurance system claims data. Treatment modalities were: treatment with one or more anticancer medication vs best supportive care and, among treated patients, treatment with targeted therapy vs conventional chemotherapy alone. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with treatment by anticancer medication and by targeted therapy. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the independent effect of treatment modalities on overall survival while adjusting for baseline covariates identified with logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 503 patients were included with a median age of 78 years (54% were men). Of these, 299 (59%) were treated with anticancer medications. Among treated patients, 131 (44%) received targeted therapy. In multivariate analysis, age 75 years or older, renal failure, malnutrition, and five or more concomitant medications were associated with a lower likelihood of treatment with anticancer medications. Among treated patients, age 75 years or older, history of cancer, lymph node metastases, and a single metastatic site were associated with a lower likelihood of treatment with targeted therapy. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models found that treatment with any anticancer medication tended to be associated with a lower risk of death; treatment with targeted therapy was not significantly associated.

CONCLUSION

A more appropriate prescription of anticancer medications in the older adult will require the definition of more explicit criteria to avoid undertreatment. The real benefit of targeted therapies vs conventional chemotherapy alone needs to be confirmed in this population. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:913-919, 2019.

Reduced-dose combination chemotherapy (S-1 plus oxaliplatin) versus full-dose monotherapy (S-1) in older vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (NORDIC9): a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Older or vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer are seldom included in randomised trials. The multicentre NORDIC9 trial evaluated reduced-dose combination chemotherapy compared with full-dose monotherapy in older, vulnerable patients.

METHODS

This randomised, open-label phase 2 trial was done in 23 Nordic oncology clinics and included patients aged 70 years or older with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer who were not candidates for full-dose combination chemotherapy. Patients were block randomised (1:1) using a web-based tool to full-dose S-1 (30 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks) followed by second-line treatment at progression with irinotecan (250 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks or 180 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 every 2 weeks) or reduced-dose combination chemotherapy with S-1 (20 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1-14) and oxaliplatin (100 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks) followed by second-line treatment at progression with S-1 (20 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1-14) and irinotecan (180 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks). Use of bevacizumab (7·5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of each cycle) was optional. Treatment allocation was not masked and randomisation was stratified for institution and bevacizumab. The primary outcome was progression-free survival. Survival analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done on the treated population. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2014-000394-39, and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

From March 9, 2015, to Oct 11, 2017, 160 patients with a median age of 78 years (IQR 76-81) were randomly assigned to full-dose monotherapy (n=83) or reduced-dose combination chemotherapy (n=77). At data cutoff (Sept 1, 2018; median follow-up 23·8 months [IQR 18·8-30·9]), 81 (98%) patients in the full-dose monotherapy group and 71 (92%) patients in the reduced-dose combination group had progressed or died. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with reduced-dose combination chemotherapy (6·2 months [95% CI 5·3-8·3]) than with full-dose monotherapy (5·3 months [4·1-6·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72 [95% CI 0·52-0·99]; p=0·047). Toxicity was evaluated in 157 patients who received treatment. Significantly more patients in the full-dose monotherapy group (51 [62%] of 82 patients) experienced at least one grade 3-4 adverse event than in the reduced-dose combination group (32 [43%] of 75 patients; p=0·014). Grade 3-4 diarrhoea (12 [15%] vs two [3%]; p=0·018), fatigue (ten [12%] vs three [4%]; p=0·083), and dehydration (five [6%] vs none; p=0·060) were more frequent in the full-dose monotherapy group than in the reduced-dose combination group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in three patients during first-line treatment and three patients during second-line treatment (two in the full-dose monotherapy group vs one in the reduced-dose combination group in both cases).

INTERPRETATION

Reduced-dose combination chemotherapy with S-1 and oxaliplatin for older, vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was more effective and resulted in less toxicity than full-dose monotherapy with S-1. Reduced-dose combination chemotherapy could be a preferred treatment for this population.

FUNDING

Taiho Pharmaceuticals, Nordic Group, the Danish Cancer Society, the Swedish Cancer Society, Academy of Geriatric Research (AgeCare), and Region of Southern Denmark.

High Serum CA19-9 Concentration Predicts Poor Prognosis in Elderly Patients with Stage IV Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

The optimal treatment strategy for elderly patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial due to limited research data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate treatment results and to clarify the prognostic factors, especially poor prognosis factors, in elderly patients with stage IV CRC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 82 elderly patients (aged ≥75 years) with stage IV CRC who underwent surgical treatment at our hospital between April 2001 and March 2017. Factors that affected prognosis and the ability to undergo treatment were analyzed via multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) in the patients with high pretreatment serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) concentration (> 370 U/mL) was significantly worse than in those with lower serum CA19-9 concentration (0-370 U/mL) (8.5 vs. 19.2 months, p = 0.0059). In univariate analysis, age (≥80 years) (p = 0.014), performance status of 1-3 (p = 0.028), and high pretreatment serum CA19-9 concentration (p = 0.014) were significant prognostic factors for poor OS. By contrast, resection of the primary tumor (p = 0.024), chemotherapy (p < 0.0001), and resection of distant metastasis (p = 0.0005) were significant prognostic factors for favorable OS. Multivariate analysis showed that a high pretreatment serum CA19-9 concentration was an independent prognostic factor for poor OS (p = 0.01). Meanwhile, resection of the primary tumor (p = 0.033), chemotherapy (p < 0.0001), and resection of distant metastasis (p = 0.0008) were prognostic factors for favorable OS.

CONCLUSIONS

A high pretreatment serum CA19-9 concentration (> 370 U/mL) was a reliable predictive factor for poor prognosis, and aggressive treatments should be performed carefully in these patients. Moreover, various treatments, including surgery and chemotherapy, might improve OS in elderly patients with stage IV CRC.

Neurologic manifestations of elderly patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence of cancer is an age-related phenomenon; therefore, the interest on clinical manifestations, diagnostic approach and treatment strategies for older patients diagnosed with cancer has increased lately. Neurologic symptoms are one of the main reasons for consultation and a common cause of decreased quality of life among cancer patients.

AIMS

To identify the neurologic manifestations of patients ≥ 65 years of age diagnosed with cancer and compare them to those presented by a younger population.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of cancer patients referred to neuro-oncologic consultation at a Cancer Center. Sociodemographic, health and oncologic characteristics were obtained through clinical interviews. Clinical symptoms and final diagnoses were also recorded. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

More than 17,000 neuro-oncologic consultations in 3015 patients were given, 27% (n = 811) of them were ≥ 65 years of age. Most frequent primary neoplasms in elderly patients were: breast cancer, hematologic neoplasms, gynecological, urologic, skin and head and neck cancers. Elderly patients had an increased risk of having the following diagnoses: abnormal movements, stroke, peripheral vertigo, dementia, degenerative spine disorder, and delirium.

DISCUSSION

Elderly patients are considered a vulnerable population. The present study found that the main neoplasms associated with neurological manifestations are similar to the reported previously. We described the main symptoms that led to a neuro-oncological assessment. Moreover, we enlisted the final diagnoses made on elderly patients and compared them with others reports. To the best of our knowledge, this study provides valuable information, since there is scarce evidence in the literature about this topic.

CONCLUSION

Identifying the frequency and correlation of neurologic manifestations in older cancer patients will allow for the implementation of timely multidisciplinary care in an attempt to improve these patients' health-related quality of life.

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the Era of Personalized Medicine: A More Tailored Approach to Systemic Therapy

Colorectal cancer is the second most common malignancy diagnosed in Canada. Despite declining incidence and mortality rates in recent years, there is still a significant number of cases that are metastatic at presentation. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy was the backbone of colorectal cancer treatment, but the addition of irinotecan and oxaliplatin to form combination regimens has significantly improved overall survival. In the past decade, the development of novel biologic agents including therapies directed against vascular endothelial growth factor and epidermal growth factor receptor has further altered the landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment. However, clinical trials have demonstrated that not all patients respond to these therapies similarly and consideration must be given to individual patient- and tumor-related factors. A more tailored and biomarker driven approach to treatment selection can optimize outcomes and avoid unnecessary adverse effects. In this review article, we offer a comprehensive overview of the panel of clinical- and tumor-associated characteristics that influence treatment decisions in metastatic colorectal cancer and how this sets the foundation for a more personalized treatment strategy in oncology.

Clinical characteristics and treatment propensity in elderly patients aged over 80 years with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Elderly patients (≥ 80 years) with colorectal cancer (CRC) tend to avoid active treatment at the time of diagnosis despite of recent advances in treatment. The aim of this study was to determine treatment propensity of elderly patients aged ≥ 80 years with CRC in clinical practice and the impact of anticancer treatment on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

Medical charts of 152 elderly patients (aged ≥ 80 years) diagnosed with CRC between 1998 and 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients' clinical characteristics, treatment modalities received, and clinical outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

Their median age was 82 years (range, 80 to 98). Of 152 patients, 148 were assessable for the extent of the disease. Eighty-two of 98 patients with localized disease and 28 of 50 patients with metastatic disease had received surgery or chemotherapy or both. Surgery was performed in 79 of 98 patients with localized disease and 15 of 50 patients with metastatic disease. Chemotherapy was administered in only 24 of 50 patients with metastatic disease. Patients who received anticancer treatment according to disease extent showed significantly longer OS compared to untreated patients (localized disease, 76.2 months vs. 15.4 months, p = 0.000; metastatic disease, 9.9 months vs. 2.6 months, p = 0.001). Along with anticancer treatment, favorable performance status (PS) was associated with longer OS in multivariate analysis of clinical outcome.

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients aged ≥ 80 years with CRC tended to receive less treatment for metastatic disease. Nevertheless, anticancer treatment in patients with favorable PS was effective in prolonging OS regardless of disease extent.

Age-dependent differences in first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the DISCO study

OBJECTIVES

First-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is effective and feasible in selected older patients. We investigated age-dependent differences in treatment and outcomes in patients with mCRC in clinical practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 654 patients with mCRC referred to first-line chemotherapy in 2008-2014. Patients were divided into two age groups: 50-69 and ≥70 (older patients). Binary outcomes were analyzed by logistic regression. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression, CRC-specific and other-cause mortality with Fine and Gray proportional hazard model for the sub-distribution of a competing risk.

RESULTS

After adjusting for performance status (PS) and comorbidity, older patients were more likely to receive monotherapy (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 9.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.52-17.91), lower doses, and no additional targeted therapy (aOR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.28-2.78) than younger patients. Yet, older patients experienced more toxicity and hospitalizations (aOR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.17). Among those treated, older patients had shorter PFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.32, 95% CI 1.11-1.57), but after adjusting for PS and comorbidity, PFS was similar. No significant difference was found in CRC mortality (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.95-1.40) between age groups. Poor PS was associated with shorter OS and PFS and higher CRC mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In the DISCO study, older patients with mCRC received less aggressive first-line chemotherapy. Yet, they experienced more toxicity. Younger and older patients had similar CRC mortality. Shorter PFS and higher CRC mortality were observed in patients with poor PS.

Impact of the addition of bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, or irinotecan to fluoropyrimidin in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in elderly patients

INTRODUCTION

The clinical benefit of double-front-line therapy (including oxaliplatin or irinotecan or bevacizumab plus 5-fluorouracil (5FU) or capecitabine) compared to monotherapy (5FU or capecitabine) in elderly (> 70 years) patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) is controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The selection of the studies was carried out using PubMed with the following keywords: "metastatic colorectal cancer," "elderly," "oxaliplatin," "irinotecan," "bevacizumab," "survival." The efficacy endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were collected from the studies and pooled. By convention, an HR < 1 was a result in favor of biotherapy.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis (MA) included ten studies: three assessing irinotecan (FFCD 2001-02, CAIRO, and an already published MA by Folprecht), three assessing oxaliplatin (FOCUS2, FFCD 2000-05, and a published study by De Gramont), and four assessing bevacizumab (PRODIGE-20, AVEX, AGITG-MAX, and "AVF2192g" by Kabbinavar). Our MA included 1652 patients (62% of men). Concerning age, we chose a cut-off of 70 years or a cut-off of 75 years, corresponding to the available data for each study. The performance index (PS) was 0-1 for about 90% of patients, with the exception of FFCD 2001-02 and FOCUS2 which included 30% of patients with PS2. Overall, the addition of bevacizumab to fluoropyrimidin statistically improves both OS and PFS (HR = 0.78; CI 0.63-0.96 and HR = 0.55; CI 0.44-0.67, respectively). The addition of oxaliplatin did not statistically improve OS (= 0.99; CI 0.85-1.17) but improves PFS (HR = 0.81; CI 0.67-0.97) as well as the addition of irinotecan (HR = 1.01; CI 0.84-1.22 and HR = 0.82; CI 0.68-1.00, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In previously untreated elderly patients with MCRC, the addition of bevacizumab to fluoropyrimidin appears more effective in terms of OS or PFS than the addition of oxaliplatin or irinotecan.

Reporting of patient characteristics and stratification factors in phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient characteristics and stratification factors are important factors influencing trial outcomes. Uniform reporting on these parameters would facilitate cross-study comparisons and extrapolation of trial results to clinical practice. In 2007, standardisation on patient characteristics reporting and stratification in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) trials was proposed. We investigated the reporting of prognostic factors and implementation of this proposal in mCRC trials published from 2005 to 2016.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase (January 2005 - June 2016) for first-line phase 3 mCRC trials. Patient characteristics reporting and use of stratification factors were extracted and analysed for adherence to the proposal from 2007.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven trials (35,315 patients) were identified, reporting 48 different patient characteristics (median: 9 [range: 5-18] per study). Age, gender, performance status (PS), primary tumour site and adjuvant chemotherapy were frequently reported (87%-100%), in contrast to laboratory values, such as alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase and white blood cell count (10%-25%). We identified 29 different stratification factors (median: 3 [range: 1-9] per study). The most common strata were PS and treatment centre (>60%). A median of 8/12 (range: 4-11) of the proposed parameters was reported. Although the percentage of studies reporting each factor slightly increased over time, there was no significant correlation between publication year and adherence to the proposal from 2007.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed persistent heterogeneity in the reporting of patient characteristics and use of stratification factors in first-line mCRC trials. The proposal from 2007 has not led to increased uniformity of patient characteristics reporting and use of stratification over time. There is an urgent need to address this issue to improve the interpretation of trial results.