Detailed analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who developed cardiotoxicity on another fluoropyrimidine and switched to S-1 treatment (subgroup analysis of the CardioSwitch-study)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The CardioSwitch-study demonstrated that patients with solid tumors who develop cardiotoxicity on capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) treatment can be safely switched to S-1, an alternative fluoropyrimidine (FP). In light of the European Medicines Agency approval of S-1 in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), this analysis provides more detailed safety and efficacy information, and data regarding metastasectomy and/or local ablative therapy (LAT), on the mCRC patients from the original study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 12 European centers. The primary endpoint was recurrence of cardiotoxicity after switch. For this analysis, safety data are reported for 78 mCRC patients from the CardioSwitch cohort (N = 200). Detailed efficacy and outcomes data were available for 66 mCRC patients.

RESULTS

Data for the safety of S-1 in mCRC patients were similar to the original CardioSwitch cohort and that expected for FP-based treatment, with no new concerns. Recurrent cardiotoxicity (all grade 1) with S-1-based treatment occurred in 4/78 (5%) mCRC patients; all were able to complete FP treatment. Median progression-free survival from initiation of S-1-based treatment was 9.0 months and median overall survival 26.7 months. Metastasectomy and/or LAT was performed in 33/66 (50%) patients, and S-1 was successfully used in recommended neoadjuvant/conversion or adjuvant-like combination regimens and schedules as for standard FPs.

INTERPRETATION

S-1 is a safe and effective FP alternative when mCRC patients are forced to discontinue 5-FU or capecitabine due to cardiotoxicity and can be safely used in the standard recommended regimens, settings, and schedules.

Harnessing the Potential of Real-World Evidence in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

OPINION STATEMENT

Treatment guidelines for colorectal cancer (CRC) are primarily based on the results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), the gold standard methodology to evaluate safety and efficacy of oncological treatments. However, generalizability of trial results is often limited due to stringent eligibility criteria, underrepresentation of specific populations, and more heterogeneity in clinical practice. This may result in an efficacy-effectiveness gap and uncertainty regarding meaningful benefit versus treatment harm. Meanwhile, conduct of traditional RCTs has become increasingly challenging due to identification of a growing number of (small) molecular subtypes. These challenges-combined with the digitalization of health records-have led to growing interest in use of real-world data (RWD) to complement evidence from RCTs. RWD is used to evaluate epidemiological trends, quality of care, treatment effectiveness, long-term (rare) safety, and quality of life (QoL) measures. In addition, RWD is increasingly considered in decision-making by clinicians, regulators, and payers. In this narrative review, we elaborate on these applications in CRC, and provide illustrative examples. As long as the quality of RWD is safeguarded, ongoing developments, such as common data models, federated learning, and predictive modelling, will further unfold its potential. First, whenever possible, we recommend conducting pragmatic trials, such as registry-based RCTs, to optimize generalizability and answer clinical questions that are not addressed in registrational trials. Second, we argue that marketing approval should be conditional for patients who would have been ineligible for the registrational trial, awaiting planned (non) randomized evaluation of outcomes in the real world. Third, high-quality effectiveness results should be incorporated in treatment guidelines to aid in patient counseling. We believe that a coordinated effort from all stakeholders is essential to improve the quality of RWD, create a learning healthcare system with optimal use of trials and real-world evidence (RWE), and ultimately ensure personalized care for every CRC patient.

Organoids as a biomarker for personalized treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: drug screen optimization and correlation with patient response

BACKGROUND

The inability to predict treatment response of colorectal cancer patients results in unnecessary toxicity, decreased efficacy and survival. Response testing on patient-derived organoids (PDOs) is a promising biomarker for treatment efficacy. The aim of this study is to optimize PDO drug screening methods for correlation with patient response and explore the potential to predict responses to standard chemotherapies.

METHODS

We optimized drug screen methods on 5-11 PDOs per condition of the complete set of 23 PDOs from patients treated for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PDOs were exposed to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. We compared medium with and without N-acetylcysteine (NAC), different readouts and different combination treatment set-ups to capture the strongest association with patient response. We expanded the screens using the optimized methods for all PDOs. Organoid sensitivity was correlated to the patient's response, determined by % change in the size of target lesions. We assessed organoid sensitivity in relation to prior exposure to chemotherapy, mutational status and sidedness.

RESULTS

Drug screen optimization involved excluding N-acetylcysteine from the medium and biphasic curve fitting for 5-FU & oxaliplatin combination screens. CellTiter-Glo measurements were comparable with CyQUANT and did not affect the correlation with patient response. Furthermore, the correlation improved with application of growth rate metrics, when 5-FU & oxaliplatin was screened in a ratio, and 5-FU & SN-38 using a fixed dose of SN-38. Area under the curve was the most robust drug response curve metric. After optimization, organoid and patient response showed a correlation coefficient of 0.58 for 5-FU (n = 6, 95% CI -0.44,0.95), 0.61 for irinotecan- (n = 10, 95% CI -0.03,0.90) and 0.60 for oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 11, 95% CI -0.01,0.88). Median progression-free survival of patients with resistant PDOs to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was significantly shorter than sensitive PDOs (3.3 vs 10.9 months, p = 0.007). Increased resistance to 5-FU in patients with prior exposure to 5-FU/capecitabine was adequately reflected in PDOs (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study emphasizes the critical impact of the screening methods for determining correlation between PDO drug screens and mCRC patient outcomes. Our 5-step optimization strategy provides a basis for future research on the clinical utility of PDO screens.

Topical Diclofenac for Prevention of Capecitabine-Associated Hand-Foot Syndrome: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting side effect of capecitabine. Celecoxib prevents HFS by inhibiting cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) that is upregulated because of the underlying associated inflammation. However, systemic side effects of celecoxib have limited routine prescription. Topical diclofenac inhibits COX-2 locally with minimal risk of systemic adverse events. Therefore, we conducted this study to assess the efficacy of topical diclofenac in the prevention of capecitabine-induced HFS.

METHODS

In this single-site phase III randomized double-blind trial, we enrolled patients with breast or GI cancer who were planned to receive capecitabine-based treatment. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive topical diclofenac or placebo gel for 12 weeks or until the development of HFS, whichever occurred earlier. The primary end point was the incidence of grade 2 or 3 HFS (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5), which was compared between the two groups using simple logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total, 264 patients were randomly assigned to receive topical diclofenac gel (n = 131) or placebo (n = 133). Grade 2 or 3 HFS was observed in 3.8% of participants in the diclofenac group compared with 15.0% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 11.2%; 95% CI, 4.3 to 18.1; P = .003). Grade 1-3 HFS was lower in the diclofenac group than in the placebo group (6.1% v 18.1%; absolute risk difference, 11.9%; 95% CI, 4.1 to 19.6). Capecitabine dose reductions because of HFS were less frequent in the diclofenac group (3.8%) than in the placebo group (13.5%; absolute risk difference, 9.7%; 95% CI, 3.0 to 16.4).

CONCLUSION

Topical diclofenac prevented HFS in patients receiving capecitabine. This trial supports the use of topical diclofenac to prevent capecitabine-associated HFS.

Predictive factors for the development of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: a retrospective observational cohort study

Background

Capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common condition that significantly affects patients' quality of life. The exact underlying mechanisms are currently not clearly understood. Therefore, the study of predictive factors for HFS is of critical importance.

Materials and methods

This prognostic factor research used a retrospective observational cohort as the study design. Data collected from the medical records of 205 patients treated with capecitabine between January 2019 and June 2022 were subjected to univariable and multivariable regression analysis to determine the predictive factors for the development of grade 2 and grade 3 HFS.

Results

The incidence of grade 2 and grade 3 HFS was 26.8%. The independent predictive factors, such as age over 60 years (OR 4.80, 95% CI: 2.16-10.68, P<0.001), capecitabine dose greater than 3000 mg/day (OR 2.47, 95% CI: 1.09-5.59, P=0.030), and the number of cycles five or more in the total capecitabine regimen (OR 2.94, 95% CI: 1.29-6.71, P=0.01), were significantly associated with the development of grade 2 and grade 3 HFS.

Conclusions

Independent predictive factors for the development of grade 2 and grade 3 HFS in patients treated with capecitabine include age over 60, capecitabine dose greater than 3000 mg/day, and patients who plan to undergo five or more cycles in the total capecitabine regimen. This knowledge can be valuable for guiding clinical monitoring and follow-up of patients.

Precision medicine in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: comprehensive review of past, present, and future prospect

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is an aggressive malignancy with high propensity for lymphatic spread and distant metastasis. It is prominent as an endemic malignancy in Southern China and Southeast Asia regions. Studies on NPC pathogenesis mechanism in the past decades such as through Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) infection and oncogenic molecular aberrations have explored several potential targets for therapy and diagnosis. The EBV infection introduces oncoviral proteins that consequently hyperactivate many promitotic pathways and block cell-death inducers. EBV infection is so prevalent in NPC patients such that EBV serological tests were used to diagnose and screen NPC patients. On the other hand, as the downstream effectors of oncogenic mechanisms, the promitotic pathways can potentially be exploited therapeutically. With the apparent heterogeneity and distinct molecular aberrations of NPC tumor, the focus has turned into a more personalized treatment in NPC. Herein in this comprehensive review, we depict the current status of screening, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention in NPC. Subsequently, based on the limitations on those aspects, we look at their potential improvements in moving towards the path of precision medicine. The importance of recent advances on the key molecular aberration involved in pathogenesis of NPC for precision medicine progression has also been reported in the present review. Besides, the challenge and future outlook of NPC management will also be highlighted.

DNA damage-mediated cellular senescence promotes hand-foot syndrome that can be relieved by thymidine prodrug

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a widely recognized dose-limiting cutaneous toxicity effect of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy agents that impairs clinical benefits and treatment outcomes. Even though the cause and pathophysiology of HFS are relatively widely reported, how the toxicity of fluoropyrimidine translates into persistent inflammation has not been studied. Additionally, prevention and treatment strategies for HFS based on its mechanistic occurrence and development are scarce. In our study, we demonstrated that cGAS-STING signaling pathway-mediated cellular senescence played a critical role in the inflammatory reaction and provided a therapeutic solution for HFS. Mechanistically, DNA damage, as the primary cytotoxic cause, in keratinocytes induces cell cycle arrest, activates the cGAS-STING signaling pathway, and subsequently mediates cellular senescence, ultimately fueling a robust secondary inflammatory response that results in HFS. More importantly, the thymidine prodrug thymidine diacetate was proven to be effective in preventing HFS by compensating for thymidylate deficiency to facilitate the replication and repair of DNA and thus causing the escape from cellular senescence. These data highlight the importance of DNA damage-mediated cellular senescence in the etiology of HFS and provide a potential therapeutic anchor point for fluoropyrimidine-induced HFS.

Fluoropyrimidine-induced hand-foot syndrome and cardiotoxicity: recommendations for the use of the oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 in metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Fluoropyrimidines (FPs) are an essential part of the majority of systemic regimens in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). The use of the oral FP S-1 has been approved by the European Medicines Agency as monotherapy or in combination with oxaliplatin or irinotecan, with or without bevacizumab, for the treatment of patients with metastatic CRC in whom it is not possible to continue treatment with another FP due to hand-foot syndrome (HFS) or cardiovascular toxicity (CVT). Subsequently, this indication has been included in the 2022 ESMO guidelines for metastatic CRC. Recommendations for use in daily practice are not available.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Based on peer-reviewed published data on the use of S-1 in Western patients with metastatic CRC who switched from infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine to S-1 for reasons of HFS or CVT, recommendations for its use were formulated by an international group of medical oncologists with expertise in the treatment of metastatic CRC and a cardio-oncologist.

RESULTS

In patients who experience pain and/or functional impairment due to HFS during treatment with capecitabine or infusional 5-FU, a switch to S-1 is recommended without prior dose reduction of capecitabine/5-FU. S-1 should preferably be initiated at full dose when HFS has decreased to grade ≤1. In patients with cardiac complaints, in whom an association with capecitabine or infusional 5-FU treatment cannot be excluded, capecitabine/5-FU should be discontinued and a switch to S-1 is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations should guide clinicians in daily practice in the treatment of patients with metastatic CRC with FP-containing regimens.

Prevalence of hand-foot syndrome following chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the prevalence of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched, from their inception to September 20, 2022, to identify studies on the prevalence of HFS in patients with colorectal cancer receiving chemotherapy. Comprehensive retrieval of literature was performed using the literature tracing method. We calculated the prevalence of HFS in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy based on meta-analyses. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analyses were performed to determine the sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies were included, involving 4773 cases. Meta-analysis of the random effects model showed that the total prevalence of HFS in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy was 49.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.332, 0.651). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the most frequent grades of HFS were grades 1 and 2, accounting for 40.1% (95% CI: 0.285, 0.523) of cases; this rate was markedly higher than that of grades 3 and 4 (5.8%; 95% CI: 0.020, 0.112). The meta-regression results illustrated that the type of research, country of the study population, type of drug, and year of publication were not sources of heterogeneity in this setting (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The present findings showed that the prevalence of HFS in patients with colorectal cancer receiving chemotherapy was high. Healthcare professionals should provide knowledge to such patients regarding the prevention and management of HFS.

Capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A pharmacogenetic study beyond DPYD

AIM OF THE STUDY

Occurrence of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) during capecitabine treatment often results in treatment interruptions (26 %) or treatment discontinuation (17 %), and can severely decrease quality of life. In this study, we investigated whether single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in capecitabine metabolism - other than DPYD - are associated with an increased risk for capecitabine-induced HFS.

METHODS

Patients treated with capecitabine according to standard of care were enrolled after providing written informed consent for genotyping purposes. Prospectively collected blood samples were used to extract genomic DNA, which was subsequently genotyped for SNPs in CES1, CES2 and CDA. SNPs and clinical baseline factors that were univariably associated with HFS with P ≤ 0.10, were tested in a multivariable model using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 446 patients eligible for analysis, 146 (32.7 %) developed HFS, of whom 77 patients (17.3 %) experienced HFS ≥ grade 2. In the multivariable model, CES1 1165-33 C>A (rs2244613, minor allele frequency 19 %) and CDA 266 + 242 A>G (rs10916825, minor allele frequency 35 %) variant allele carriers were at higher risk of HFS ≥ grade 2 (OR 1.888; 95 %CI 1.075-3.315; P = 0.027 and OR 1.865; 95 %CI 1.087-3.200; P = 0.024, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We showed that CES1 1165-33 C>A and CDA 266 + 242 A>G are significantly associated with HFS grade 2 and grade 3 in patients treated with capecitabine. Prospective studies should assess whether this increased risk can be mitigated in carriers of these SNPs, when pre-emptive genotyping is being followed by dose adjustment or by alternative treatment by a fluoropyrimidine that is not substrate to CES1, such as S1.

Systematic review and non-inferiority meta-analysis of randomised phase II/III trials on S-1-based therapy versus 5-fluorouracil- or capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine that is increasingly used in Western countries for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a non-inferiority meta-analysis on the efficacy of S-1-based therapy versus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)- or capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of patients with mCRC.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Opengrey were searched for randomised clinical trials until May 2021. Data were extracted for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events. Pooled effect estimates, stratified by treatment line, with corresponding 99% confidence intervals (CI) were presented. For PFS, a pre-defined non-inferiority margin (ΔNI) of 1.25 was selected.

RESULTS

Ten studies (n = 2117) were included, of which six studies reported PFS and OS data and 10 studies reported ORR data. S-1-based therapy was shown to be non-inferior to 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in terms of PFS (HRtotal 0.95, 99% CI 0.83-1.08) with its CI upper limit well below ΔNI, and at least as efficacious in terms of OS (HRtotal 0.93, 99% CI 0.81-1.07), and ORR (RRtotal 1.06, 99% CI 0.90-1.24).

CONCLUSIONS

S-1-based therapy is non-inferior to 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of mCRC regarding PFS and at least as efficacious as 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in terms of ORR and OS. These data support the use of S-1 in mCRC patients who are intolerant to 5-FU/capecitabine-based treatment.

First-line trifluridine/tipiracil + bevacizumab in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: final survival analysis in the TASCO1 study

Background

Therapeutic options are limited in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. The use of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab (TT-B) in this setting was evaluated in the TASCO1 trial; here, we present the final overall survival (OS) results.

Methods

TASCO1 was an open-label, non-comparative phase II trial. Patients (n = 153) were randomised 1:1 to TT-B (trifluridine/tipiracil 35 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1–5 and 8–12, and bevacizumab intravenously 5 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle) or capecitabine plus bevacizumab (C-B; capecitabine, 1250 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1–14 and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day cycle). Final OS was analysed when all patients had either died or withdrawn from the study. Adjusted multivariate regression was used to investigate the effects of pre-specified variables on OS.

Results

At 1 September 2020, median OS was 22.3 months (95% CI: 18.0–23.7) with TT-B and 17.7 months (95% CI: 12.6–19.8) with C-B (adjusted HR 0.78; 95% CI: 0.55–1.10). No variables negatively affected OS with TT-B. Safety results were consistent with prior findings.

Conclusions

TT-B is a promising therapeutic regimen in mCRC patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

Clinical trial information

NCT02743221 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Severe ileum bleeding following adjuvant capecitabine chemotherapy for locally advanced colon cancer: a case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Capecitabine is a prodrug that is enzymatically converted to its active form, fluorouracil (also called 5-fluorouracil), which is commonly used as adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer patients. Severe gastrointestinal bleeding induced by capecitabine is rare. Here, we are presenting the first case report of surgery specimen assisted diagnosis of this uncommon condition.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 63-year-old Chinese male with a history of colon adenocarcinoma and right hemicolectomy presented with severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding 2 days after finishing capecitabine administration during the first cycle of XELOX adjuvant chemotherapy. Because of the negative findings of active bleeding points by digital subtraction angiography (DSA) or colonoscopy, emergency laparotomy and partial enterectomy were performed. The bloody diarrhea had resolved after surgery and a terminal ileitis was diagnosed after pathological examination of the surgical specimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Terminal ileitis induced by capecitabine is likely to be underreported. It should be considered more often as a cause of severe gastrointestinal bleeding during or after treatment with capecitabine agents. Emergency surgery may achieve satisfactory outcomes if endoscopic hemostasis is ineffective.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THIS CASE

1. Gastrointestinal bleeding following capecitabine treatment in colorectal cancer patients might be life-threatening. 2. Terminal ileitis induced by capecitabine should always be considered in the differential diagnosis of severe gastrointestinal bleeding. 3. Awareness of the risk factors such as deficiency of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, advanced age, or right colectomy may aid in reducing capecitabine-related morbidity. 4. When severe bleeding occurs, emergency surgery may achieve satisfactory outcomes if medical and endoscopic interventions are ineffective.

Neoadjuvant Modified Short-Course Radiotherapy Followed by Delayed Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Simple Summary

Both short- and long-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NA-RT) followed by surgery have been adopted as standard treatments for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We hypothesized that a modified short-course radiotherapy (mSC-RT) using an accelerated hyperfractionated regimen, with a dose of 2.5 Gy twice daily up to a total dose of 25 Gy in 10 fractions, can provide a favorable therapeutic ratio in comparison with the conventional regimens. Ninety-seven consecutive LARC patients undergoing mSC-RT followed by delayed surgery were analyzed in this retrospective study. Additionally, potential prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) were also assessed. The results showed that mSC-RT followed by delayed surgery achieved equivalent anti-tumor efficacy and acute toxicity that were comparable with long- and short-course NA-RT, respectively. A neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥ 1.83 was independently associated with poor OS in LARC patients receiving mSC-RT. Thus, mSC-RT can be a promising alternative to both standard long- and short-course NA-RT regimens.

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes and predictive factors of neoadjuvant modified short-course radiotherapy (mSC-RT) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Data from 97 patients undergoing mSC-RT followed by radical surgery for LARC were retrospectively analyzed. A 2.5 Gy dose twice daily up to a total dose of 25 Gy in 10 fractions was administered through mSC-RT, and this was delivered with oral chemotherapy in 95 (97.9%) patients. Radical surgery was performed 6 (range, 3–13) weeks after mSC-RT. The median follow-up among surviving patients was 43 (8–86) months. All patients completed neoadjuvant radiotherapy with no acute toxicity grade ≥ 3. Three- and five-year local control rates were 96.3% and 96.3%, respectively. Three- and five-year overall survival (OS) rates were 92.7% and 79.8%, respectively. Univariate analyses revealed that poor OS was associated with no concurrent administration of capecitabine, C-reactive-protein-to-albumin ratio ≥ 0.053, carcinoembryonic antigen ≥ 3.4 ng/mL, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥ 1.83 (P = 0.045, 0.001, 0.041, and 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analyses indicated that NLR ≥ 1.83 was independently associated with poor OS (p = 0.018). mSC-RT followed by delayed surgery for LARC was deemed feasible and resulted in good clinical outcomes, whereas poor OS was associated with high NLR.

Selection of Oral Therapeutics in China for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Intravenous administration of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has been the backbone of treatment in colorectal cancer (CRC) for decades. The availability of oral capecitabine has improved the tolerability and simplified combination schedules. In addition to capecitabine, several other oral drugs have proven efficacy, particularly in palliative treatment lines. Clinical guidelines describe several available third-line treatment options for metastatic CRC (mCRC), but few insights are provided to guide the selection and sequence. In this review, we describe the available evidence and most recent data concerning oral drugs with proven efficacy in CRC, including antiangiogenetic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR TKIs), inhibitors blocking EGFR/Raf/MEK/ERK signaling pathway and modified fluoropyrimidine, and share recommendations and insights on selecting third-line oral therapies for mCRC in China. In general, third-line treatment options for mCRC are mainly regorafenib, fruquintinib, and chemo/targeted therapy reintroduction, while FTD/TPI was rarely used in China probably due to poor accessibility. Fruquintinib is preferred in patients with poor performance status (PS), elder age, and severe organ dysfunction, compared to regorafenib. New drugs of clinical trials were more recommended for the patients with BRAF mutant tumor, and those with good previous treatment efficacy tended to be recommended for chemo/targeted therapy reintroduction. The management of mCRC is evolving, and it must be emphasized that the consideration and recommendations presented here reflect current treatment practices in China and thus might change according to new clinical data as well as the availability of new oral drugs.

S-1 and Capecitabine for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Colorectal cancers common tumors that develop in the large intestines. The incidence of colorectal cancer is second only to gastric and esophageal cancers. Both S-1 and capecitabine are the third-generation fluorouracil-based chemotherapeutic drugs. We hope to summarize the therapeutic effects of tecotae and capecitabine in patients with colorectal cancer through this Meta-analysis. We performed a meta-analysis of the findings in the current literature. We performed a systematic review of outcomes associated with S-1 and capecitabine used to treat advanced colorectal cancer based on findings from both English and Chinese publications listed in PubMed, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, EBSCO, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. End-points included ORR, DCR, OS, and PFS; adverse events (grades 1–2 and 3–4) were also evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. A total of 12 studies were eventually included, involving a total of 3,375 patients. Of this group, 1,683 and 1,692 patients underwent treatment with S-1 or capecitabine, respectively. There were no greatly differences with respect to ORR, DCR, or OS; however, PFS was bettered in the group of S-1 compared to those treated with capecitabine. The incidence of leukopenia, diarrhea and anorexia were all higher among those in S-1 group compared to the capecitabine group, but a higher incidence of hand-foot syndrome was linked with use of capecitabine. Use of S-1 for the treatment of colorectal cancer may result in superior outcomes when compared to use of capecitabine.

Metastatic colorectal cancer: Advances in the folate-fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy backbone

Notwithstanding recent treatment advances in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), chemotherapy with a combination of a fluoropyrimidine and a folate agent, often 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin, remains the backbone of treatment regimens for the majority of patients with mCRC. This is despite a recent focus on molecular-targeted treatments and patient stratification according to mutational status or expression levels of specific genes. Intracellular folate concentration was discovered to be pivotal in the cytotoxic efficacy of 5-FU, paving the way to the current standard combination therapy approach. Subsequent discovery that systemic chemotherapy agents, such as irinotecan and oxaliplatin, can further increase the efficacy of 5-FU-based treatments led to the development of several combination chemotherapy regimens, including FOLFOX, FOLFIRI and FOLFOXIRI. Subsequent efforts to optimise 5-FU-based treatments have focused on 5-FU analogues, initially capecitabine and the combination drug tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1) and then TAS-102, which has recently been evaluated in phase 3 clinical trials for refractory colorectal cancer. Further approaches taken to improve the efficacy of 5-FU chemotherapy regimens have focused on optimising the route and dosing schedules and regulating folate metabolism. Pharmacokinetic variability caused by the requirement for metabolic conversion of leucovorin has been central to recent research, and the development of agents such as arfolitixorin which bypass the need for metabolic conversion remains promising for future therapeutic candidates. In this review, we summarise the evidence leading to the current treatment regimens employing 5-FU and leucovorin, focusing on recent approaches taken to optimise and refine treatments to improve clinical outcomes in patients with mCRC.

Oral drugs in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common forms of cancer, with an estimated 1.36 million new cases and almost 700,000 deaths annually. Approximately 21% of patients with CRC have metastatic disease at diagnosis. The objective of this article is to review the literature on the efficacy and safety of oral drugs available for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Several such drugs have been developed, and fluoropyrimidines are the backbone of chemotherapy in this indication. They exert their antitumour activity by disrupting the synthesis and function of DNA and RNA. Oral fluoropyrimidines include prodrugs capecitabine, tegafur, eniluracil/5-fluorouracil, tegafur/uracil, tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil and trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI). Oral drugs offer several advantages over injectable formulations, including convenience, flexibility, avoidance of injection-related adverse events (AEs) and, in some circumstances, lower costs. However, oral drugs may not be suitable for patients with gastrointestinal obstruction or malabsorption, they may result in reduced treatment adherence and should not be co-administered with drugs that interfere with absorption or hepatic metabolism. Oral fluoropyrimidines such as capecitabine, as monotherapy or in combination with oxaliplatin, irinotecan or bevacizumab, are as effective as intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in first-line treatment of mCRC. Other oral fluoropyrimidines, such as FTD/TPI, are effective in patients with mCRC who are refractory, intolerant or ineligible for 5-FU. In addition, oral fluoropyrimidines are used in adjuvant treatment of mCRC. Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor used in patients in whom several previous lines of therapy have failed. Frequent AEs associated with oral drugs used in the treatment of CRC include hand-foot syndrome and gastrointestinal and haematological toxicities.

A Phase II Study Demonstrates No Feasibility of Adjuvant Treatment with Six Cycles of S-1 and Oxaliplatin in Resectable Esophageal Adenocarcinoma, with ERCC1 as Biomarker for Response to SOX

Simple Summary

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery is currently standard of care in esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, prognosis remains dismal. The aim of our study was to assess the feasibility of administering six cycles of adjuvant S-1 and oxaliplatin following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and esophagectomy. Although six cycles of adjuvant S-1 and oxaliplatin were not feasible in pretreated patients, mainly due to toxicity, efficacy results were promising compared to a propensity-score matched cohort. Exploratory biomarker analyses demonstrated potential benefit for patients with Excision repair cross-complementation group 1 (ERCC1) negative tumor expression. A proteomics biomarker model provided valuable information for prediction of survival and pharmacokinetics of 5-FU showed a correlation with treatment-related toxicity. Although it remains unclear if additional chemotherapy should be provided in the adjuvant setting, subgroups such as patients with ERCC1 negativity, could potentially benefit from this treatment option based on our exploratory biomarker research.

Abstract

We assessed the feasibility of adjuvant S-1 and oxaliplatin following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and esophagectomy. Patients treated with nCRT (paclitaxel, carboplatin) and esophagectomy received six 21-day cycles with oxaliplatin (130 mg/m²) on day 1 and S-1 (25 mg/m² twice daily) on days 1–14. The primary endpoint was feasibility, defined as ≥50% completing treatment. We performed exploratory propensity-score matching to compare survival, ERCC1 and Thymidylate Synthase (TS) immunohistochemistry analyses, proteomics biomarker discovery and 5-FU pharmacokinetic analyses. Forty patients were enrolled and 48% completed all adjuvant cycles. Median dose intensity was 98% for S-1 and 62% for oxaliplatin. The main reason for early discontinuation was toxicity (67%). The median recurrence-free and overall survival were 28.3 months and 40.8 months, respectively (median follow-up 29.1 months). Survival was not significantly prolonged compared to a matched cohort (p = 0.09). Patients with ERCC1 negative tumor expression had significantly better survival compared to ERCC1 positivity (p = 0.01). Our protein signature model was predictive of survival [p = 0.04; Area under the curve (AUC) 0.80]. Moreover, 5-FU pharmacokinetics significantly correlated with treatment-related toxicity. To conclude, six cycles adjuvant S-1 and oxaliplatin were not feasible in pretreated esophageal adenocarcinoma. Although the question remains whether additional treatment with chemotherapy should be provided in the adjuvant setting, subgroups such as patients with ERCC1 negativity could potentially benefit from adjuvant SOX based on our exploratory biomarker research.

The JPJDF has Synergistic Effect with Fluoropyrimidine in the Maintenance Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Background:

Maintenance chemotherapeutic regimen with low toxicity is needed for metastatic colorectal cancer. A recent patent has been issued on the spleen-strengthening and detoxification prescription (JPJDF), a traditional Chinese herbal medicinal formula with anti-angiogenesis effect. The clinical effect of JPJDF on the maintenance treatment of advanced colorectal cancer has not been evaluated.

Objective:

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of JPJDF in combination with fluoropyrimidine compared to fluoropyrimidine alone as maintenance therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Methods:

We applied a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, single center clinical study design. A total of 137 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were recruited. Patients received either Fluoropyrimidine (Flu-treated group, n = 68), or Fluoropyrimidine plus JPJDF (Flu-F-treated group, n = 69) as maintenance treatment after 6-cycle of FOLFOX4 or FOLFORI induction treatment. The primary endpoints were Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were safety, Performance Status (PS) score and other symptoms.

Results:

The endpoint of disease progression was observed in 91.7% of patients. The PFS was 5.0 months and 3.0 months in the Flu-F-treated and Flu-treated groups, respectively. The OS was 15.0 months and 9.0 months in the Flu-F-treated and Flu-treated groups, respectively. Some common symptoms, such as hypodynamia, anepithymia, dizziness and tinnitus and shortness of breath, were improved in the Flu-F-treated group. There was no significant difference in the common adverse reactions between the two groups.

Conclusion:

JPJDF and fluoropyrimidine have synergistic effect in the maintenance treatment of mCRC.

Multicentre, phase II study of gemcitabine and S-1 in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: TG1308 study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) remains the standard, frontline therapy for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABTC). The JCOG1113 study suggested that gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) had noninferior median overall survival and comparable incidence of significant neutropenia as compared to GC treatments. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of a modified GS regimen.

METHODS

The eligible patients with chemonaive, measurable ABTC received 800 mg/m2 of gemcitabine on day 1 and 80 mg/m2 /day of S-1 (80/100/120 mg for patients with body surface <1.25/ ≥1.25 and <1.5/ ≥1.5 m2 respectively). The primary endpoint was the 12-week disease control rate (12-week DCR: objective response and stable disease ≥ 12 weeks). Per the p0 = 40% and p1 = 60% (α/β = 0.05/0.2) assumption, Simon's optimal two-stage design indicated 12-week DCR in ≥ 24 of 46 evaluable patients for significant activity. Tumour responses were assessed every 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were enrolled and most of them had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (64.7%), metastatic disease (84.3%) and disease-related symptoms (82.4%). On intention-to-treat analysis, 11 (21.6%) patients showed partial response, whereas 21 (41.2%) showed stable disease ≥ 12 weeks. The progression-free and overall survival were 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.5-7.0), and 12.7 months (95% CI: 6.1-15.6) respectively. The study met its primary endpoint with a 12-week DCR of 69.6% in 46 evaluable patients. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse eventsoccurred in < 6% of patients of all individual items. The mean dose intensities of S-1 and gemcitabine were 87.1% and 92.5% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Modified GS showed moderate efficacy with a favourable safety profile in ABTC patients, thus mandating further assessment. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02425137.

A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy or combination therapy as first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety profile of S-1-based versus non-S-1-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in mCRC.

METHODS

Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and Ovid databases and the Cochrane library from database set up in May 2018. The RCTs of S-1-based monotherapy or combination therapy as first-line treatment were selected. The impact of S-1-based chemotherapy on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by pooling data via RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of 10 RCTs showed that S-1-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, P = 0.006). In subgroup analysis, there was a statistically significant increase in PFS when S-1-based chemotherapy was compared with 5-FU-based (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.00, P = 0.04) or capecitabine-based chemotherapy (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99, P = 0.04). The meta-analysis of OS (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.05, P = 0.36), overall response rate (ORR) (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84-1.17, P = 0.90), and disease control rate (DCR) (HR 1.61, 95% CI 0.87-3.00, P = 0.13) showed no statistical significance between S-1-based and non-S-1-based chemotherapy. The statistically significant differences in the meta-analysis indicated less incidence of graded 3-4 leucopenia (OR = 0.30, 95% CI 0.13-0.71, P = 0.006) and hand-foot syndrome (HFS) (OR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58, P = 0.001) in the S-1-based chemotherapy, and there was no statistically significant difference for other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

S-1-based chemotherapy in mono or combined therapy was an attractive alternative to standard first-line regimen for patients of mCRC.

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.

Practice variation on hospital level in the systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in The Netherlands: a population-based study

Introduction: Population-based data on the implementation of guidelines for cancer patients in daily practice are scarce, while practice variation may influence patient outcomes. Therefore, we evaluated treatment patterns and associated variables in the systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the Netherlands.Material and methods: We selected a random sample of adult mCRC patients diagnosed from 2008 to 2015 from the National Cancer Registry in 20 (4 academic, 8 teaching and 8 regional) Dutch hospitals. We examined the influence of patient, demographic and tumour characteristics on the odds of being treated with systemic therapy according to the current guideline and assessed its association with survival.Results: Our study population consisted of 2222 mCRC patients of whom 1307 patients received systemic therapy for mCRC. Practice variation was most obvious in the use of bevacizumab and anti-EGFR therapy in patients with (K)RAS wild-type tumours. Administration rates did not differ between hospital types but fluctuated between individual hospitals for bevacizumab (8-92%; p < .0001) and anti-EGFR therapy (10-75%; p = .05). Bevacizumab administration was inversely correlated to higher age (OR:0.2; 95%CI: 0.1-0.3) comorbidity (OR:0.6; 95%CI: 0.5-0.8) and the presence of metachronous metastases (OR:0.5; 95%CI: 0.3-0.7), but patient characteristics did not differ between hospitals with low or high bevacizumab administration rates. The hazard ratios for exposure to bevacizumab and anti-EGFR therapy were 0.8 (95%CI: 0.7-0.9) and 0.6 (95%CI: 0.5-0.8), respectively.Discussion: We identified significant inter-hospital variation in targeted therapy administration for mCRC patients, which may affect outcome. Age and comorbidity were inversely correlated with non-administration of bevacizumab but did not explain inter-hospital practice variation. Our data suggest that practice variation is based on individual strategy of hospitals rather than guideline recommendations or patient-driven decisions. Individual hospital strategies are an additional factor that may explain the observed differences between real-life data and results obtained from clinical trials.

SNPs in the COX-2/PGES/EP signaling pathway are associated with risk of severe capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome

PURPOSE

Capecitabine is a widely used 5-fluorouracil oral prodrug. Hand-foot syndrome (HFS), one of the most common adverse events of capecitabine, impacts patients' quality of life seriously. The pathogenesis of HFS remains unclear but was usually considered as a type of inflammation conducted by cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). The COX-2/PGES/EP signaling pathway plays an important role in the inflammatory reaction. We hypothesized that the single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in this pathway may be associated with the risk of HFS induced by capecitabine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using DNA from blood samples of 225 patients, we genotyped 19 SNPs in 6 core genes (COX-2, PGES, EP1, EP2, EP3, and EP4). Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 was used to grade hand-foot syndrome. We used logistic regression analysis to evaluate the correlations between genotype variants and occurrence of HFS. The cumulative incidence of HFS was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 225 participants, 58.6% (132/225) patients developed into HFS, including 41.3% (93/225) grade 1 HFS, 10.2% (23/225) grade 2 HFS and 7.1% (16/225) grade 3 HFS. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed the AG/GG genotype of rs3810255 to be associated with a significantly higher risk of grade 2/3 HFS, while the AG/AA genotype of rs17131450 to be associated with a significantly lower risk of grade 2/3 HFS (OR = 3.646, P = 0.011; and OR = 0.266, P = 0.036; respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that rs3810255 AG/GG genotypes and rs17131450 GG genotypes to be associated with high risk of capecitabine-induced HFS.

Management of cytotoxic chemotherapy-induced hand-foot syndrome

Improvements in systemic cancer treatments have resulted in more patients surviving for prolonged periods of time on treatment. This has made treatment-related toxicity and quality of life concerns increasingly relevant. Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common skin reaction to systemic therapy that should be anticipated with chemotherapeutic treatments such as pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, docetaxel, and fluoropyrimidines. In this review we discuss current knowledge of the diagnosis, incidence, pathogenesis, and management of hand-foot syndrome (HFS). Although HFS is not life threatening, it can cause significant discomfort and impairment of function, especially in elderly patients, and may seriously impact quality of life. The incidence of HFS is dependent on the chemotherapeutic drug used, the treatment schedule, and the median duration of treatment. Effective measures for prevention and treatment of HFS include systemic and topical treatments, dose reductions, and switching to other drugs in the same class that are associated with lower rates of HFS. These approaches allow patients to continue cancer treatment while reducing negative impacts on quality of life. Awareness and early recognition are important to ensure timely treatment and avoidance of dose reductions or treatment discontinuation. We provide useful recommendations to guide the management of HFS in clinical practice.

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.

The underreporting of phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data of older patients with cancer: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Inspired by the American Society of Clinical Oncology's recommendations to strengthen the evidence base for older adults with cancer, the purpose of this systematic review is to identify the reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events specific to older adults with cancer in Phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trials. This review also investigates the frequency with which these data points were reported in the literature to identify gaps in reporting and opportunities to expand the knowledge base on clinical outcomes for older adults with cancer.

METHODS

Chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data published from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 was reviewed. Manuscripts (n = 929) were identified based on keyword searches of EMBASE and PubMed. After removal of duplicates (n = 116) and articles that did not meet this study's inclusion criteria (n = 654), 159 articles were identified for review.

RESULTS

Reviewed papers were published in 36 different scientific journals and included twenty-five different cancer types. Of the 159 articles, 117 (73.6%) reported age-specific medians and 75 (47.2%) included stratifications of data by age. Treatment efficacy was reported in 96.2% of the articles with 39.9% reporting effectiveness of treatment by age. Reporting of adverse events was included in 84.9% of the articles with only 8.9% reporting these events stratified by age.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest inadequate reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events as well as basic descriptive statistics about the age distribution of study subjects. Conscious efforts are needed to address these deficiencies at every level of planning and conducting clinical trials as wells as reporting outcomes stratified by age. Ultimately, standardized reporting could lead to improved treatment decisions and outcomes for older adults with cancer.

S-1 in Patients with Advanced Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma: Results from the Safety Compliance Observatory on Oral fluoroPyrimidines (SCOOP) Study

Background and Objectives

S-1-based regimens have been shown to be as effective as other fluoropyrimidine-based regimens with a better safety profile in patients with advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. However, real-world data on S-1 in European patients with advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma are lacking. The Safety Compliance Observatory on Oral fluoroPyrimidines (SCOOP) study evaluated safety and relative dose intensities for patients treated with S-1-based regimens for advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma as part of daily practice.

Methods

Overall, data for 125 patients with advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma were collected at 21 centers in five countries in Europe. Demographics, treatment, and adverse-event data were recorded over a planned treatment of six cycles.

Results

Most patients (87%) received combination treatment of S-1 plus a platinum compound. Adverse events related to S-1 treatment were mostly grade 1 or 2 while reported grade 3–4 serious adverse events related to S-1 occurred in 12 patients and were most often grade 3 neutropenia (n = 4, 3.2%) or diarrhea (n = 5, 4%). The most common adverse events of any grade that were attributable to S-1 treatment included neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. No patients experienced mucositis, dehydration, or febrile neutropenia, whereas 2% (3/125) of patients experienced hand-foot syndrome.

Conclusion

The overall relative dose intensity was 70%. In a real-world setting, patients with advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma tolerated S-1 treatment well with high compliance rates. The SCOOP study provides valuable information on S-1 relative dose intensity that can be used for treatment decision making.

Combination gemcitabine plus S-1 versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin for advanced/recurrent biliary tract cancer: the FUGA-BT (JCOG1113) randomized phase III clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) is the standard treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC); however, it causes nausea, vomiting, and anorexia, and requires hydration. Gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) reportedly has equal to, or better, efficacy and an acceptable toxicity profile. We aimed to confirm the non-inferiority of GS to GC for patients with advanced/recurrent BTC in terms of overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We undertook a phase III randomized trial in 33 institutions in Japan. Eligibility criteria included chemotherapy-naïve patients with recurrent or unresectable BTC, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 0 - 1, and adequate organ function. The calculated sample size was 350 with a one-sided α of 5%, a power of 80%, and non-inferiority margin hazard ratio (HR) of 1.155. The primary end point was OS, while the secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), adverse events (AEs), and clinically significant AEs defined as grade ≥2 fatigue, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, oral mucositis, or diarrhea.

RESULTS

Between May 2013 and March 2016, 354 patients were enrolled. GS was found to be non-inferior to GC [median OS: 13.4 months with GC and 15.1 months with GS, HR, 0.945; 90% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-1.15; P = 0.046 for non-inferiority]. The median PFS was 5.8 months with GC and 6.8 months with GS (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.70-1.07). The RR was 32.4% with GC and 29.8% with GS. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated. Clinically significant AEs were observed in 35.1% of patients in the GC arm and 29.9% in the GS arm.

CONCLUSIONS

GS, which does not require hydration, should be considered a new, convenient standard of care option for patients with advanced/recurrent BTC.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

This trial has been registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm), number UMIN000010667.

Evaluating the recent developments in palliative chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased. CRC is the third most common cancer and the fourth most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Korea. Palliative chemotherapy can be used to shrink tumors and ease symptoms caused by the cancer when cure is not possible. It is important to identify chemotherapeutic agents that can be used to effectively treat metastatic CRC (mCRC) and thus improve the survival and quality of life of patients with mCRC. This review aimed to evaluate the recent developments in palliative chemotherapy for mCRC and the biological or targeted agents used based on genetic alterations.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of S-1 and capecitabine in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of S-1 and capecitabine in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC).

METHODS

Eligible prospective clinical trials were searched and available data were extracted. Odds ratio and hazard ratio of available outcomes including objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were pooled for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies including 828 patients were included. The results of pooled analysis showed no statistical difference in short-term efficacy including ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-1.19; P = .48) or DCR (95% CI: 0.65-1.29; P = .61), or long-term efficacy including PFS (95% CI: 0.75-1.08; P = .26) or OS (95% CI: 0.78-1.13; P = .50). Symptoms of diarrhea at any grade were more prevalent (95% CI: 1.21-2.29; P = .002) in patients treated with S-1, while hand-foot syndrome (HFS) at any grade (95% CI: 0.24-0.48; P < .0001) or high grade (95% CI: 0.09-0.48; P < .0001) was more frequent in capecitabine group. AEs including leucopenia, neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, vomiting, oral mucositis, stomatitis, elevated alanine transaminase, or peripheral neuropathy showed no statistical difference between S-1 and capecitabine group (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis reveals that S-1 has comparable efficacy, lower risk of HFS and higher incidence of diarrhea compared to capecitabine for treatment in patients with mCRC.

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.

Capecitabine-Associated Terminal Ileitis

Capecitabine is an oral fluoropyrimidine used as adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer. Diarrhea is a well-known side effect of capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil agents. We present a case with terminal ileitis as a rare adverse event of capecitabine treatment. Capecitabine-induced terminal ileitis is likely to be underreported. It should be considered more often as a cause of severe and atypical complaints of diarrhea during treatment with capecitabine or other 5-fluorouracil agents.

Evaluation of Guideline Adherence in Colorectal Cancer Treatment in The Netherlands: A Survey Among Medical Oncologists by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines are generated to preserve high-quality evidence-based care. Data on the implementation of guidelines into clinical practice are scarce, despite that guideline adherence prevents over- and undertreatment and correlates with survival. Therefore, we investigated guideline adherence for the systemic treatment in high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer and metastatic colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all Dutch hospitals (n = 88) 1 medical oncologist involved in colorectal cancer care was approached to participate. An online survey was conducted regarding the local standard of care for adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer and first-line treatment regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer. Frequency tables were provided for categorical variables and compared for differences in guideline adherence according to hospital type (academic/teaching/regional).

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 70% (62 of 88). Reported guideline adherence was at least 60% of all presented settings. For high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer, treatment strategies agreed with national guidelines in 66% and 84% of hospitals, and overtreatment patterns were identified in 28% and 13%, respectively. Targeted therapy was not routinely administered as first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (range from 63% to 71% in different settings). No differences in guideline adherence were observed among different hospital types.

CONCLUSION

Guideline adherence as reported by medical oncologists in The Netherlands is suboptimal. Possible explanations include unawareness or disagreement with the guidelines, or local financial restrictions. Our results recommend additional support of guideline implementation and monitoring in clinical practice, and investigating underlying causes in case of nonadherence.

Randomized study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 followed by irinotecan) and reduced dose combination therapy (S-1/oxaliplatin followed by S-1/irinotecan) as initial therapy for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: NORDIC 9

Background

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a disease of older age, but there is a relative lack of knowledge about effects of chemotherapy in older patients as they are under-represented in clinical trials. Little data can guide whether the strategy in older mCRC patients should be a sequential full-dose monotherapy chemotherapy approach or a dose-reduced combination chemotherapy approach. The oral 5FU prodrug S-1 seems to have less side effects than capecitabine and should be an optimal drug for older patients, but few data are available. Improved geriatric assessments are needed to select which older patients should receive therapy.

Methods

The NORDIC 9 trial is a Nordic multicenter randomized phase II study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 30 mg/m² twice daily days 1–14 every 3 weeks, followed by second line irinotecan 250–350 mg/m² iv day 1 every 3 weeks or 180–250 mg/m² iv day 1 every 2 weeks) with reduced dose combination therapy (S-1 20 mg/m² days 1–14 + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² iv day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by second line S-1 20 mg/m² days 1–14 + irinotecan 180 mg/m² day 1 every 3 week) for older patients (≥70 years) with mCRC who are not candidates for full-dose standard combination therapy. Additional bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) is optional in first-line. Blood samples and tumor tissue will be collected to investigate predictive markers. Geriatric screening tools (G-8, VES-13, Timed-Up-and-Go and Handgrip strength), Charlson Comorbidty Index and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) will be evaluated as predictors of efficacy and toxicity. The target sample size is 150 patients.

The primary endpoint is progression-free survival and secondary endpoints are time-to-failure of strategy, overall survival, response rate, toxicity, and correlations between biomarkers, pre-treatment characteristics and geriatric assessments.

Discussion

The study will add knowledge on how to treat older mCRC patients who are not candidates for standard combination therapy. Furthermore it may provide understanding of efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in older cancer patients and thus offer a better chance for tailored treatment strategies in these patients.

Trial registration

EU Clinical Trial Register, EudraCT no. 2014–000394-39. Registered 05 May 2014.

Capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil and S-1 based regimens for previously untreated advanced oesophagogastric cancer: A network meta-analysis

As evidence is inconsistent and based on either isolated Asian or Western studies, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine efficacy and safety of 5-FU (5-fluorouracil), capecitabine and S-1-based first-line treatment of advanced esophagogastric cancer in Asian and Western patients. Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL and conferences ASCO and ESMO were searched up to January 2016 for randomized-controlled-trials comparing 5-FU, capecitabine or S-1-based regimens with equal chemotherapy backbones. Direct and indirect data for overall survival (OS) and progression-free-survival (PFS) were combined on the Hazard Ratio (HR)-scale using random-effects NMA and calculated as combined HRs and 95%credible intervals (95%CrI). Grade 1-2 and grade 3-4 adverse events were compared with pair-wise meta-analysis. Fifteen studies were identified including capecitabine (n = 945), 5-FU (n = 2,132) or S-1 (n = 1,636). No differences were found in respectively OS and PFS for capecitabine-based versus 5-FU-based regimens (HR = 0.89, 95%CrI = 0.76-1.04 and HR = 0.98, 95%CrI = 0.75-1.32), S-1-based versus 5-FU-based regimens (HR = 0.92, 95%CrI = 0.82-1.04 and HR = 0.88, 95%CrI = 0.70-1.11) and S-1-based versus capecitabine-based regimens (HR = 1.03, 95%CrI = 0.87-1.22 and HR = 0.89, 95%CrI = 0.65-1.20). Effects were similar in Asian and Western subgroups. Toxicity profiles were different but a lower frequency of relevant adverse events was observed with S-1 In conclusion, as efficacy was similar, choosing fluoropyrimidines should be based on their individual toxicity profiles.