Negative Hyperselection of Resistance Mutations for Panitumumab Maintenance in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (PanaMa Phase II Trial, AIO KRK 0212)

PURPOSE

We evaluated additional mutations in RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) as prognostic and predictive biomarkers for the efficacy of added panitumumab to a 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid (FU/FA) maintenance as pre-specified analysis of the randomized PanaMa trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Mutations (MUT) were identified using targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS; Illumina Cancer Hotspot Panel v2) and IHC. RAS/BRAF V600E/PIK3CA/AKT1/ALK1/ERBB2/PTEN MUT and HER2/neu overexpressions were negatively hyperselected and correlated with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since start of maintenance treatment, and objective response rates (ORR). Univariate/multivariate Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

202 of 248 patients (81.5%) of the full analysis set (FAS) had available NGS data: hyperselection WT, 162 (80.2%); MUT, 40 (19.8%). From start of maintenance therapy, hyperselection WT tumors were associated with longer median PFS as compared with hyperselection MUT mCRC (7.5 vs. 5.4 months; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.07; P = 0.11), OS (28.7 vs. 22.2 months; HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.77; P = 0.001), and higher ORR (35.8% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.26). The addition of panitumumab to maintenance was associated with significant benefit in hyperselection WT tumors for PFS (9.2 vs. 6.0 months; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93; P = 0.02) and numerically also for OS (36.9 vs. 24.9 months; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.61-1.36; P = 0.50), but not in hyperselection MUT tumors. Hyperselection status interacted with maintenance treatment arms in terms of PFS (P = 0.06) and OS (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Extended molecular profiling beyond RAS may have the potential to improve the patient selection for anti-EGFR containing maintenance regimens.

Prognostic and predictive impact of metastatic organ involvement on maintenance therapy in advanced metastatic colorectal cancer: Subgroup analysis of patients treated within the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212)

Despite molecular selection, patients (pts) with RAS wildtype mCRC represent a heterogeneous population including diversity in metastatic spread. We investigated metastatic patterns for their prognostic and predictive impact on maintenance therapy with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid ± panitumumab. The study population was stratified according to (1) number of involved metastatic sites (single vs multiple organ metastasis), liver-limited disease vs (2) liver metastasis plus one additional site, and (3) vs liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regressions were used to correlate efficacy endpoints. Single organ metastasis was observed in 133 pts (53.6%) with 102 pts (41.1%) presenting with liver-limited disease, while multiple organ metastases were reported in 114 pts (46.0). Multiple compared to single organ metastases were associated with less favorable PFS (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.93; P = .004) and OS (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.98-1.93; P = .068) of maintenance therapy. While metastatic spread involving one additional extrahepatic site was not associated with clearly impaired survival compared to liver-limited disease, pts with liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites demonstrated less favorable PFS (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.30-2.83; P < .001), and OS (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.51-3.76; P < .001) of maintenance therapy. Pmab-containing maintenance therapy appeared active in both pts with multiple (HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86; P = .006) as well as to a lesser numerical extent in pts with single organ metastasis (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.57-1.21; P = .332; Interaction P = .183). These data may support clinical decisions when EGFR-based maintenance therapy is considered.

FOLFOXIRI Plus Cetuximab or Bevacizumab as First-Line Treatment of BRAFV600E-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized Phase II FIRE-4.5 (AIO KRK0116) Study

PURPOSE

BRAFV600E mutation is associated with a poor outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This clinical trial investigated the efficacy of triplet chemotherapy (fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) combined with either cetuximab or bevacizumab in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this controlled, randomized, open-label phase II trial, 109 patients were randomly assigned, 107 of whom were included into the full analysis set (FAS). Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab in the experimental arm (n = 72) or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in the control arm (n = 35). The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST 1.1., evaluated in patients treated according to protocol (ATP population). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and feasibility were analyzed as secondary end points.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients discontinued study treatment before the first tumor assessment, thus resulting in the ATP population of 89 patients. In these patients, ORR was 51% (30/59) in the cetuximab-based experimental arm and 67% (20/30) in the bevacizumab-based control arm (odds ratio, 1.93; 80% CI, 1.06 to 3.52; P = .92 [one-sided]). In the full analysis set, median PFS was significantly inferior in the experimental arm (6.7 months v 10.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.89; P = .006). Median OS analyzed at an event rate of 64.5% showed a trend toward shorter survival in cetuximab-treated patients (12.9 months v 17.1 months; HR, 1.4; P = .20).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, FIRE-4.5 is the first prospective and randomized study investigating first-line treatment of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab does not induce a higher ORR when compared with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in first-line treatment of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Bevacizumab-based chemotherapy remains the preferable first-line treatment of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.

Key Prognostic Factors Create a Composite Risk Score to Stratify Patients into High- and Low-Treatment Benefit Groups: A Multicenter, Retrospective Data Analysis of 84 Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Regorafenib as Part of the CORRECT and CONSIGN Trials

INTRODUCTION

In further-line mCRC treatment, median progression-free survival (PFS) is rather short, and many patients do not benefit from any antitumor treatment and should therefore be treated according to best-supportive care. A risk score based on standard laboratory values using markers of tumor inflammation aims to define a patient cohort with high treatment benefit and might offer insights into tumor biology. As regorafenib has been dropped off the German market due to an unfavorable risk-benefit ratio, patient selection is key for any further-line treatment option.

METHODS

We used Cox regression analysis to determine laboratory markers that are independent prognostic factors of OS and PFS outcome. The influence of these variables was weighted using an estimator, which was calculated using Cox regression analysis. The estimators were implemented as multiplication factors, resulting in a risk score. A cut-off value for the resulting risk values was then determined via Cox regression analysis resulting in a low- and high-risk subgroup.

RESULTS

Using data of 82 patients, a risk score identifying long-term survival in patients with last-line mCRC treatment could be calculated. The following parameters were associated with significantly longer survival in multivariate analysis: NLR ≤5 (p = <0.001), AP ≤200 U/L (p = 0.001), CRP ≤3.2 mg/dL (p = <0.001). The following estimator values were used to calculate a risk score: NLR: 0.132 (p = 0.046), AP: 0.004 (p = 0.014), and CRP: 0.032 (p = 0.039). Implementing the estimators as multiplication factors yielded the following risk score: 0.132*NLR + 0.004*AP + 0.032*CRP = Risk value. Cox regression resulted in low- and high-risk subgroups with risk values below and above 1.4, respectively. In the group with a low-risk score (<1.4), patients had a median OS of 10.5 months after initiating regorafenib. Patients with a high-risk score (>1.4) survived only 3.3 months after starting therapy with regorafenib (n = 43, p < 0.001, HR = 3.76).

CONCLUSIONS

The presented composite risk score stratifies patients into two prognostic subgroups characterized by standard laboratory values. Patients with signs of systemic inflammation characterized by elevated NLR, AP, and CRP have a high composite risk score and a significant shorter overall survival. Although this score needs to be prospectively validated in larger cohorts, it may be used to stratify patients suitable for further-line treatment studies.

Impact of sex on the efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus fluorouracil and folinic acid versus fluorouracil and folinic acid alone as maintenance therapy in RAS WT metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Subgroup analysis of the PanaMa-study (AIO-KRK-0212)

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are usually conducted irrespective of sex. Sex-associated differences relating to safety and efficacy in the treatment of mCRC, however, are gaining interest.

METHODS

PanaMa investigated the efficacy of panitumumab (Pmab) plus fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) versus FU/FA alone after induction therapy with six cycles of FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. In this post hoc analysis, the study population was stratified for sex. Evaluated efficacy endpoints during maintenance treatment were progression-free survival (PFS, primary endpoint of the trial), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate during maintenance therapy. Safety endpoints were rates of any grade and grade 3/4 adverse events during maintenance therapy.

RESULTS

In total, 165 male and 83 female patients were randomized and treated. Male and female patients showed numerically better objective response rates with Pmab, without reaching statistical significance. Male patients derived a significant benefit from the addition of Pmab to maintenance treatment with regard to PFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.88; P = 0.006] that was not observed in female patients (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.53-1.35; P = 0.491). The better PFS for male patients treated with Pmab did not translate into improved OS (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.55-1.30; P = 0.452). Female patients showed numerically improved OS when treated with Pmab. There was no difference in the total of grade ≥3 adverse events during maintenance regarding sex (P = 0.791). Female patients, however, had a higher rate of any grade nausea, diarrhea and stomatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In the PanaMa trial, the addition of Pmab to maintenance treatment of RAS wild-type mCRC with FU/FA improved the outcome in terms of the primary endpoint (PFS) particularly in male patients. Female patients did not show the same benefit while experiencing higher rates of adverse events. Our results support the development of sex-specific protocols.

Health-related quality of life in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with fluorouracil and folinic acid with or without panitumumab as maintenance therapy: a prespecified secondary analysis of the PanaMa (AIO KRK 0212) trial

BACKGROUND

The PanaMa trial demonstrated significant benefit in progression-free survival with the addition of panitumumab (Pmab) to fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) as maintenance therapy following first-line induction therapy with FOLFOX/Pmab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report health-related quality of life (HRQOL) analyses from the PanaMa trial.

METHODS

HRQOL outcomes were evaluated using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) at every cycle of therapy until disease progression/death. HRQOL outcomes were mean and individual changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 from baselines (before induction therapy and before maintenance therapy) to each cycle of treatment. Comparative analyses were performed by randomisation status and treatment arm for induction- and maintenance-therapy, respectively. The trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01991873).

RESULTS

At least one HRQOL questionnaire was completed by a total of 349/377 (93%) patients who received induction therapy, and by 237/248 (96%) patients who were randomised and received maintenance therapy. During induction therapy, most HRQOL dimensions remained stable or showed improvement, while appetite loss and diarrhoea significantly deteriorated. During maintenance therapy, HRQOL dimensions remained stable, while those that deteriorated during induction therapy showed significant improvement, without significant differences between the treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance therapy improves HRQOL dimensions that initially deteriorated during induction therapy while stabilising HRQOL in other dimensions. The addition of Pmab to FU/FA as maintenance therapy in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs progression-free survival without negative impact on HRQOL.

Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal diseases in patients with haematological malignancies: 2022 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

Patients with haematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of developing invasive fungal disease (IFD) with high morbidity and attributable mortality. We reviewed data published until September 2021 to update the 2017 antifungal prophylaxis recommendations of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). The strong recommendation to administer antifungal prophylaxis in patients with HM with long-lasting neutropenia, i.e. <500 cells/μL for >7 days remains unchanged. Posaconazole remains the drug of choice for mould-active prophylaxis in these patients. Novel treatment options in HM, such as CAR-T-cell treatment or novel targeted therapies for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) were considered, however, data are insufficient to give general recommendations for routine antifungal prophylaxis in these patients. Major changes regarding specific recommendations compared to the 2017 edition are the now moderate instead of mild support for the recommendations of isavuconazole and voriconazole. Furthermore, published evidence on micafungin allows recommending it at moderate strength for its use in HM. For the first time we included recommendations for non-pharmaceutical measures regarding IFD, comprising the use of high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, smoking, measures during construction work and neutropenic diets. We reviewed the impact of antifungal prophylaxis with triazoles on drug-drug interactions with novel targeted therapies that are metabolized via cytochrome p450 where triazoles inhibit CYP3A4/5. The working group recommends reducing the dose of venetoclax when used concomitantly with strong CYP3A4 inhibiting antifungals. Furthermore, we reviewed data on the prophylactic use of novel antifungal agents. Currently there is no evidence to support their use in a prophylactic setting in clinical practice.

[Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting]

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and the subsequent vomiting (CINV) are adverse effects of cancer treatment associated with considerable burden for the patient. CINV has a significant negative impact on quality of life. The consequent loss of fluids and electrolytes can lead to impaired renal function or weight loss, which may lead to hospitalization. If CINV later results in anticipatory vomiting, this complicates both CINV prophylaxis and further chemotherapy, which can endanger the continuation of cancer treatment. The introduction of high-dose dexamethasone as well as 5‑HT3 and NK1 receptor antagonists has led to a significant improvement of CINV prophylaxis since the 1990s. Recommendations on CINV prophylaxis are in available in guidelines. Adherence to these guidelines results in better outcomes.

Consensus Molecular Subtypes as Biomarkers of Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Maintenance Therapy With or Without Panitumumab in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (PanaMa, AIO KRK 0212)

PURPOSE

Consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) were evaluated as prognostic and predictive biomarkers of patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) with or without panitumumab (Pmab) after Pmab + mFOLFOX6 induction within the randomized phase II PanaMa trial.

METHODS

CMSs were determined in the safety set (ie, patients that received induction) and full analysis set (FAS; ie, randomly assigned patients who received maintenance) and correlated with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since the start of induction or maintenance treatment and objective response rates (ORRs). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CI were calculated by univariate/multivariate Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 377 patients of the safety set, 296 (78.5%) had available CMS data: CMS1/2/3/4: 29 (9.8%)/122 (41.2%)/33 (11.2%)/112 (37.8%) and unclassifiable: 17 (5.7%). The CMSs were prognostic biomarkers in terms of PFS (P < .0001), OS (P < .0001), and ORR (P = .02) since the start of induction treatment. In FAS patients (n = 196), with CMS2/4 tumors, the addition of Pmab to FU/FA maintenance therapy was associated with longer PFS (CMS2: HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.95], P = .03; CMS4: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.38 to 1.03], P = .07) and OS (CMS2: HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52], P = .66; CMS4: HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96], P = .04). The CMS interacted significantly with treatment in terms of PFS (CMS2 v CMS1/3: P = .02; CMS4 v CMS1/3: P = .03) and OS (CMS2 v CMS1/3: P = .03; CMS4 v CMS1/3: P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The CMS had a prognostic impact on PFS, OS, and ORR in RAS wild-type mCRC. In PanaMa, Pmab + FU/FA maintenance was associated with beneficial outcomes in CMS2/4, whereas no benefit was observed in CMS1/3 tumors.

AGIHO guideline on evidence-based management of COVID-19 in cancer patients: 2022 update on vaccination, pharmacological prophylaxis and therapy in light of the omicron variants

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and the associated infectious disease COVID-19 pose a significant challenge to healthcare systems worldwide. Patients with cancer have been identified as a high-risk population for severe infections, rendering prophylaxis and treatment strategies for these patients particularly important. Rapidly evolving clinical research, resulting in the recent advent of various vaccines and therapeutic agents against COVID-19, offers new options to improve care and protection of cancer patients. However, ongoing epidemiological changes and rise of new virus variants require repeated revisions and adaptations of prophylaxis and treatment strategies to meet these new challenges. Therefore, this guideline provides an update on evidence-based recommendations with regard to vaccination, pharmacological prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 in cancer patients in light of the currently dominant omicron variants. It was developed by an expert panel of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) based on a critical review of the most recent available data.

Health-related quality of life in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with fluorouracil and folinic acid with or without panitumumab as maintenance therapy: An analysis of the Panama trial (AIO KRK0212)

51

Background: The PANAMA study demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) with the addition of panitumumab (Pmab) to fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) as maintenance therapy following first-line induction therapy with FOLFOX/Pmab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. We report health-related quality of life (HRQOL) analyses of the PANAMA study. Methods: HRQOL was assessed by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) at every cycle of therapy until disease progression. All patients who received at least one dose of induction therapy and completed at least one HRQOL assessment were included into the analysis. HRQOL outcomes were mean changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 from baseline (prior to cycle 1 of induction therapy) to each cycle of treatment (both induction and maintenance therapy). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01991873). Results: In total, 349/377 (93%) of the induction and 237/248 pts (96%) of the maintenance group completed at least one HRQOL assessment and were included in the HRQOL analysis population. There were no significant differences in any of the EORTC QLQ-C30 items between both treatment arms before induction therapy and at randomization. From baseline to cycle 6 of induction therapy there was significant improvement in mean EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QOL, functioning (except for cognitive functioning) and symptom (except for nausea and vomiting, dyspnea, appetite loss, constipation, and financial difficulties) scores in the randomized population. During maintenance therapy, no significant differences between FU/FA plus Pmab and FU/FA alone were observed. In both arms of the trial, GHS/QOL scores were maintained or trended to improve from baseline (start of induction therapy) to cycle 10 of maintenance therapy (FU/FA plus Pmab: mean difference 9.48 [95% CI 1.96-17.00]; p=0.014); FU/FA arm (mean difference 6.52 [95% CI –1.9-14.95]; p=0.128). Conclusions: Using the established EORTC QLQ-C30 assessment, the addition of Pmab to FU/FA as maintenance therapy in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer did not impair the HRQOL endpoints analyzed compared to FU/FA alone. These results, along with previously reported improvement in PFS, may support clinical decision-making concerning maintenance treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT01991873 .

Prognostic and predictive impact of metastatic organ involvement on maintenance therapy in advanced metastatic CRC: Analysis of patients treated within the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212)

127

Background: Despite molecular selection, patients with RAS wildtype mCRC represent a heterogeneous population, including different metastatic patterns and number of organs involved. We investigated metastatic patterns for their prognostic and predictive impact on maintenance therapy with (FU/FA plus Pmab or FU/FA alone) in patients treated within the PanaMa trial. Methods: The study population was stratified according to number of organs involved and also to different patterns including liver metastases alone or in combination with additional organs. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regressions were used to correlate efficacy endpoints (i.e. progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of maintenance therapy) in the aforementioned populations. Results: Of 248 patients (pts) receiving maintenance therapy, 133 pts had a one-metastatic site disease (53.6%). Of those, 102 pts had liver-only metastases. Furthermore, liver metastases plus one additional involved organ was observed in 61/248 patients (24.6%), and liver metastases plus two or more organs in 40/248 patients (16.1%). In general, one organ disease was associated with favourable PFS of maintenance therapy compared to patients with ≥2 organs involved (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52–0.88; P = 0.004). A predictive impact of disease spread in terms of pmab-containing maintenance therapy was present for the PFS of maintenance therapy in patients with ≥ 2 organ disease (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39–0.86; P = 0.006) unlike in patients with only one-organ disease (HR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.57-1.21; P = 0.332) and also specifically in patients with a 2-organ disease including the liver (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.33–0.99; P = 0.046). Conclusions: Consistent with previous reports, organ spread has prognostic impact in mCRC. The efficacy of more intensive maintenance therapy (including pmab and 5-FU/FA) is predominantly seen in patients with more than one organ involved in the metastatic spread, while less striking effects were seen in patients with only one organ disease. These data may support clinical decisions when EGFR-based maintenance therapy is considered. Clinical trial information: NCT01991873 .

Prediction of early treatment failure of second-line nal-iri/5-FU/FA in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (AIO-PAK-0216)

721

Background: Second-line Nal-Iri/5-Fluorouracil/Folinic Acid (Nal-Iri/5-FU/LV) increases overall survival of unselected patients (pts) with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after gemcitabine-based therapy. It is unknown, which pts will likely benefit or could probably profit more from alternative approaches. Methods: In this prospective trial, 156 pts with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC were included for treatment with biweekly Nal-Iri/5-FU/LV (70 mg/m², 2.4 g/m², 400 mg/m²) after failure of 1st line chemotherapy with Gemcitabine/nab-Paclitaxel, with comprehensive evaluation of prior treatment characteristics, potential predictive factors, and quality of life. Primary end point is the correlation of time to treatment failure (TTF) of 1st and 2nd line therapy. Moreover, translational research was done to measure and evaluate biomarkers in blood and tumor tissue. Here, we explore patient characteristics in two subgroups with short or long treatment duration, with the aim to evaluate potential predictive factors for further analysis. Results: 139 (90%) of the 156 pts included between 03/2018 and 07/2021 in 40 German sites received medication. End of treatment is documented for 128 pts, with 5 still on treatment as of 05/2022 Mean (±SD) treatment duration was 15.5 weeks or 7.7±7.1 cycles (median 7 weeks; 5 cycles). 37 (25%) pts received ≥ 10 cycles. The median was used to separate two subgroups of short and long treatment duration (STD, ≤ 5 cycles, n=66 (52%) vs. LTD, > 5 cycles, n=62, (48%)). Reasons for treatment discontinuation clearly differed between the two subgroups: death in 9% vs. 3%, toxicity in 9% vs. 2%, unrelated medical condition in 12% vs. 2%, and progressive disease in 46% vs. 73%, respectively. Investigator´s decision was a reason for discontinuation in 6% vs. 5%. Pts with STD had a lower performance status (ECOG 1 or 2 in 74% vs. 52%, ECOG 0 in 20% vs. 44% in STD vs. LTD group), lower albumin levels (below normal in 36% vs. 24.2%) and were more likely to suffer from liver metastases (overall 82% vs. 66%). There were no relevant differences with regard to age, sex and tumor burden (number of metastases or CA19-9 levels). Conclusions: Early treatment discontinuation was primarily associated with patient-related factors such as low performance status, low albumin levels and comorbidities, characteristics which could be used to spare patients from treatment with an unfavorable risk-to-benefit ratio. In contrast, surrogate markers for tumor burden did not correlate with treatment success. Clinical trial information: NCT03468335 .

Translational analysis and final efficacy of the AVETUX trial - Avelumab, cetuximab and FOLFOX in metastatic colorectal cancer

Introduction

In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has so far been limited to patients with microsatellite instability high tumors (MSI-H). Unfortunately, most mCRC patients suffer from non-immunogenic microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors. Therefore, new combinatorial strategies are urgently needed to enhance the immunogenicity of MSS tumors to finally increase the number of patients benefiting from ICB.

Methods

The AVETUX trial aimed to combine the PD-L1 antibody avelumab with the standard of care chemotherapy combination FOLFOX and the anti-EGFR antibody cetuximab. Furthermore, we performed a central radiological review of the pre- and on-treatment computed tomography scans to better define the individual response to treatment.

Results and Discussion

In total, 43 patients were treated of which 39 patients were confirmed as RAS/BRAF wildtype in central tissue review and finally response evaluated. A final progression-free survival (PFS) of 11.1 (range: 0.8 to 22.3 months) and a herein updated final overall survival (OS) of 32.9 months (range: 0.8 to 47.1 months) was reached. We observed a strong median depth of response of 67.5% tumor shrinkage and deepness of response correlated significantly with survival. On the other hand, early tumor shrinkage was not an indicator of better outcome at a cut-off of 20% (median values). In a next step, we correlated the individual best radiological response with potential ICB response biomarkers and found that the clonality and diversity, but not frequency of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TiLs) and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), strongly correlated with response. In summary, we report the final overall survival of the AVETUX trial and propose T cell clonality and diversity as a potential marker to predict response to chemo-immunotherapy combinations in MSS mCRC by performing a central radiological review.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier (NCT03174405).

FOLFOX plus panitumumab or FOLFOX alone as additive therapy following R0/1 resection of RAS wild-type colorectal cancer liver metastases - The PARLIM trial (AIO KRK 0314)

PURPOSE

This trial investigates the addition of panitumumab to chemotherapy with fluorouracil/folinic acid and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in a 2:1 randomised, controlled, open-label, phase II trial in RAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients with R0/1-resected liver metastases.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) two years after randomisation. The experimental arm (12 weeks of biweekly mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab followed by 12 weeks of panitumumab alone) was considered active if the two-year PFS rate was ≥65%. Based on historical data, a two-year PFS rate of 50% was estimated in the control arm (12 weeks of biweekly FOLFOX). The trial was performed with a power of 80% and an alpha of 0.05. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01384994.

RESULTS

The full analysis set consists of 70 patients (pts) in the experimental arm and 36 pts in the control arm. The primary endpoint was missed with a two-year PFS of 35.7% with FOLFOX plus panitumumab and 30.6% in the control arm. In comparative analyses, trends towards improved PFS (HR 0.83; 95%CI, 0.52-1.33; P = 0.44) and OS (HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.34-1.46; P = 0.34) were observed in favour of the panitumumab-based study arm. No new or unexpected safety signals were observed with FOLFOX plus panitumumab following liver resection.

CONCLUSION

The PARLIM trial failed to demonstrate a two-year PFS rate of 65% after resection of colorectal liver metastases. The positive trends in survival endpoints may support future trials evaluating treatment with anti-EGFR agents after resection of liver metastases.

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 age and gender on the efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus fluorouracil and folinic acid versus fluorouracil and folinic acid alone as maintenance therapy in RAS WT metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Subgroup analysis of the PANAMA-study (AIO-KRK-0212)

3567

Background: Clinical trials in mCRC are usually conducted irrespective of gender and mostly also irrespective of age. However, gender- and age-associated differences relating to safety and efficacy in the treatment of mCRC are of presently moving into the focus of interest. We investigated the effect of gender and age on efficacy and safety in the PANAMA trial. Methods: PANAMA investigated the efficacy of panitumumab (Pmab) plus fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) versus FU/FA alone after first-line induction therapy with six cycles of FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. In this post-hoc analysis, the study population was stratified for age (≤ 65 years versus > 65 years) and gender (male versus female). Evaluated efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) of maintenance therapy and objective response rate (ORR) during maintenance therapy. Safety endpoints were rates of any grade and grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs). Results: In total, 165 male and 83 female patients were randomized and treated. Male patients had a significant benefit from the addition of Pmab to maintenance treatment with regard to PFS (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.45-0.88; p = 0.006) and demonstrated a strong trend towards better ORR during maintenance therapy (Odds ratio 1.92; 95%CI 1.02-3.70, p = 0.053). In female patients, no difference regarding PFS was seen between treatment arms (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.53-1.35, p = 0.491), while a trend towards better ORR with Pmab (Odds ratio 2.50; 95% CI 0.99-6.25; p = 0.063) was observed. Gender had no significant impact on OS, nor did age categories affect survival endpoints. Adverse events grade ≥ 3 occurring during maintenance therapy were comparable between male and female patients (12.9% vs 13.5%; p = 0.791) and in different age categories (p = 0.393). Conclusions: In the Panama trial, addition of Pmab to maintenance treatment with FU/FA improved outcome in RAS wild-type mCRC. This effect is irrespective of age and is pronounced in male patients. Our results support the relevance of gender in mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT01991873. [Table: see text]

Consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) as prognostic and predictive biomarkers of panitumumab (Pmab), fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) or FU/FA maintenance therapy following Pmab-FOLFOX induction in RAS wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): PANAMA trial (AIO-KRK-0212)

3537

Background: Consensus molecular subtypes (CMS1-4) of colorectal cancer were evaluated as prognostic and predictive biomarkers in the PANAMA trial. PANAMA compared maintenance therapy with panitumumab (Pmab) and fluorouracil/folinic acid (FU/FA) vs. FU/FA alone after Pmab-FOLFOX induction therapy in RAS wildtype mCRC. Methods: Gene expression was measured after mRNA isolation in 179 of 248 patients of the full analysis set. The analysis was conducted using a customized Nanostring PanCancer Progression Panel. The original CMS classifier was re-derived for Nanostring data using a multinomial regression analysis.Median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since start of maintenance were estimated by Kaplan-Meier-method and Cox-regression, using the log rank test. Objective response rates (ORR) of maintenance therapy were compared by Chi-square-test. Results: Prevalence of CMS was: CMS1, n = 15 (8.4 %); CMS2, n = 82 (45.8 %); CMS3, n = 20 (11.2 %) and CMS4, n = 62 (34.6 %). A prognostic impact of CMS regardless of treatment was not evident for PFS (p = 0.245) and OS (p = 0.169), but for ORR (p = 0.022), with CMS1 and CMS3 being associated with unfavourable efficacy during maintenance therapy. Potential predictive effects of CMS were observed in patients with CMS2 and CMS4 tumours. In CMS2 and CMS4 tumours, ORR was significantly higher when treated with Pmab-FU/FA in maintenance therapy (CMS2: 56.5% vs 30.6%, p = 0.026; CMS4: 55.6% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.040). In patients with CMS2 mCRC, this translated into a significant effect on PFS (Hazard ratio: 0.61 (95% CI 0.38 – 0.99) p = 0.046 (Table). Conclusions: CMS have limited prognostic impact for pmab-based maintenance therapy. However, CMS2 and CMS4 are positively associated with Pmab efficacy during maintenance therapy in the PANAMA trial. Further trials are necessary to confirm these results. [Table: see text]

Predictive and prognostic value of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) on maintenance therapy with 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin plus panitumumab or 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin alone in RAS wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer: Evaluation of the phase II PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212)

3587

Background: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) may reflect response to antitumor treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The predictive value of CEA has not yet been proven for subsequent maintenance therapy. This analysis aims to evaluate the predictive and prognostic value of pre- and post-induction treatment CEA on maintenance with 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin (FU/FA) plus panitumumab (pmab) [arm A] or FU/FA alone [arm B] in RAS wildtype mCRC patients treated within the PanaMa trial. Methods: Patients with CEA measurements (pre- and post-induction therapy) were grouped as normal (both measurements ≤5 ug/l), stable (between +25% and -25%), decreasing (<-25%), and increasing (>+25%) CEA. Survival parameters (overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) from initiation of maintenance therapy) were expressed by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank testing, and Cox regression. The objective response (OR) to maintenance therapy was analyzed by chi-square testing. Results: Out of 248 patients in the in the full analysis set, 245 patients were eligible for CEA analysis. Normal CEA occurred in 58 (23.7%), stable CEA in 16 (6.5%), decreasing CEA in 161 (65.7%), and increasing CEA in 10 (4.1%) patients. In the subgroup of decreasing CEA, there was a significant difference in the prediction of OR between both treatment arms with a better positive predictive value for the pmab-containing maintenance (44.0% vs. 27.5%, p=0.032). Increasing compared to decreasing CEA was associated with unfavourable survival outcome of maintenance irrespective of treatment arm (Table). Conclusions: CEA kinetics during induction therapy appears to have a predictive value for subsequent maintenance, notably pmab-based. Besides that, CEA levels had a significant impact on survival parameters of maintenance irrespective of the addition of pmab to FU/FA. This analysis is limited by the small number of patients in the subgroup of increasing CEA. Clinical trial information: NCT01991873. [Table: see text]

Second-line therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab for older patients with oesophageal squamous cell cancer (RAMONA): a multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

The overall survival of patients with advanced and refractory oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, mostly aged 65 years and older, is poor. Treatment with PD-1 antibodies showed improved progression-free survival and overall survival. We assessed the safety and efficacy of combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy in this population.

METHODS

This multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 32 sites in Germany included patients aged 65 years and older with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma and disease progression or recurrence following first-line therapy. Patients were treated with nivolumab (240 mg fixed dose once every 2 weeks, intravenously) in the safety run-in phase and continued with nivolumab and ipilimumab (nivolumab 240 mg fixed dose once every 2 weeks and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks, intravenously). The primary endpoint was overall survival, which was compared with a historical cohort receiving standard chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03416244.

FINDINGS

Between March 2, 2018, and Aug 20, 2020, we screened 75 patients with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. We enrolled 66 patients (50 [76%] men and 16 [24%] women; median age 70·5 years [IQR 67·0-76·0]), 44 (67%) of whom received combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy and 22 (33%) received nivolumab alone. Median overall survival time at the prespecified data cutoff was 7·2 months (95% CI 5·7-12·4) and significantly higher than in a historical cohort receiving standard chemotherapy (p=0·0063). The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (12 [29%] of 42), nausea (11 [26%]), and diarrhoea (ten [24%]). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 13 (20%) of 66 patients. Treatment-related death occurred in one patient with bronchiolitis obliterans while on nivolumab and ipilimumab treatment.

INTERPRETATION

Patients aged at least 65 years, with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma might benefit from combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy in second-line treatment.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb.

Negative hyperselection for mutations associated with anti-EGFR antibody resistance in RAS wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Evaluation of the PANAMA trial (AIO-KRK-0212, maintenance therapy with 5-FU, folinic acid (FU/FA) with or without panitumumab)

3536

Background: We evaluated the prognostic and predictive impact of DNA mutations related to anti-EGFR antibody resistance in patients of the PANAMA trial, which compared Panitumumab (Pmab) and FU/FA versus FU/FA maintenance therapy after Pmab-FOLFOX induction therapy in RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC. Methods: Next generation panel sequencing was conducted on 201 of 248 tumors obtained prior to study inclusion from the full analysis set using the Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 on an Illumina MiSeq system. Hyperselection covered mutations of the following genes: KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, HER2, PTEN, AKT1, PIK3CA. Median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since start of maintenance were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression (log rank test). Objective response rates (ORR) of maintenance therapy were compared by Chi-square-test. Results: From 201 tumors, 41 (20.4 %) carried at least one mutation: KRAS: 7 (3.5%), BRAF: 23 (11.4%), PTEN: 4 (2.0%), AKT1: 2 (1.0%), PIK3CA: 12 (6.0%), with 6 tumors harboring co-occuring mutations. No mutations were found in NRAS and HER2. Negative hyperselection (wt for all genes) was associated with (numerically) favourable prognosis in terms of PFS (HR 0.79 (95% CI 0.55 – 1.12), p=0.184), OS (HR 0.61 (95% CI 0.40 – 0.95), p=0.028) and ORR (39.4% vs. 29.3%, p=0.279). The benefit of adding Pmab to FU/FA during maintenance was limited to the hyperselection wt subgroup, with significantly longer PFS (9.9 vs. 6.0 months, 0.64 (95% CI 0,46 – 0.90), p = 0.011), numerically longer OS and significantly higher ORR (49.4% vs 26.6%, p=0.009) compared to FU/FA (Table). Conclusions: Mutations related to resistance concerning anti-EGFR antibodies were detected in 41 of 201 (20.4%) of analysed tumors and associated with a worse prognosis compared to hyperselected wt tumors. Negative hyperselection may aid in the identification of patients with relevant benefit from maintenance therapy including Pmab. [Table: see text]

Netupitant-Palonosetron (NEPA) in Preventing Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: From Clinical Trials to Daily Practice

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse event associated with many anticancer therapies and can negatively impact patients' quality of life and potentially limit the effectiveness of chemotherapy. Currently, CINV can be prevented in most patients with guideline-recommended antiemetic regimens. However, clinicians do not always follow guidelines, and patients often face difficulties adhering to their prescribed treatments. Therefore, approaches to increase guideline adherence need to be implemented. NEPA is the first and only fixed combination antiemetic, composed of netupitant (oral)/fosnetupitant (intravenous) and palonosetron, which, together with dexamethasone, constitute a triple antiemetic combination recommended for the prevention of CINV for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy and for certain patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Thus, NEPA offers a convenient and straightforward antiemetic treatment that could improve adherence to guidelines. This review provides an overview of CINV, evaluates the accumulated evidence of NEPA's antiemetic activity and safety from clinical trials and real-world practice, and examines the preliminary evidence of antiemetic control with NEPA in daily clinical settings beyond those described in pivotal trials. Moreover, we review the utility of NEPA in controlling nausea and preserving patients' quality of life during chemotherapy, two major concerns in managing patients with cancer.

Quality of Life Effects of an Oral Fixed Combination of Netupitant and Palonosetron in Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Prevention: Real-World Evidence in Patients with Breast Cancer Receiving Anthracycline-Cyclophosphamide-Based Chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

In a prospective non-interventional study involving 2,173 patients, we showed that use of the oral fixed combination of netupitant 300 mg and palonosetron 0.5 mg (NEPA) for prevention of chemotherapy (Ctx)-induced nausea and vomiting has beneficial effects on the quality of life (QoL) of patients with various types of cancers receiving highly or moderately emetogenic Ctx. Here, we report on the effects on QoL, effectiveness, and tolerability of NEPA in patients with breast cancer exposed to anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC)-based Ctx.

METHODS

This is a post hoc subanalysis of a prospective non-interventional study in 1,197 patients with breast cancer receiving up to 3 cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide and NEPA. NEPA administration was per the summary of product characteristics.

RESULTS

In cycle 1 of Ctx, a large proportion of patients (84%) reported "no impact on daily life" (NIDL) due to vomiting; 53% of patients reported NIDL due to nausea. The complete response rate was 86/88/81% in the acute/delayed/overall phase in cycle 1, and NEPA was well tolerated throughout the study.

CONCLUSION

The real-world beneficial effects of NEPA prophylaxis on QoL were confirmed for patients with breast cancer receiving AC. NEPA was effective with a good safety profile in this patient population in clinical practice.

Incidence, severity, and onset of oral mucositis in 5-FU based chemotherapy for gastrointestinal cancer

77

Background: 5-fluorouracil has been used in treatment of gastrointestinal cancers for more than 40 years. Numerous toxicities of 5-FU are known. Little is known about the occurrence, natural course and causes of oral mucositis (OM) of 5-FU in GI tumors. There is little data on the additional toxicity of VEGF and EGFR antibodies together with 5-FU. We followed the occurrence, severity and localization of OM of 5-FU in consecutive patients as part of their cancer treatment. The primary aim of the study was to determine the severity, course and risk factors of OM up to the first six cycles of ctx. OM was evaluated by repeated inspections of the oral cavity and patient questionnaires. Methods: Pts who received 5-FU for the first time or who had not received ctx for at least 12 months. 64 consecutive pts were included in the observational study from March 2018 to March 2019. Out of 64 pts a total of 41 (28 m/13f) had complete documentations (inspections of the oral cavity and questionnaires) and were available for the evaluation. Results: Mean age 65 ys (range 42-83), 60% were treated for CRC, 22% esophageal/gastric cancer, and 18% other GI-cancers. 13 were non-smokers, 25 former smokers; 7 pts had daily alcohol consumption while 7 pts never consumed alcohol. 10/41 pts wore a dental prosthesis. The mean BMI was 26.5 (range 18.8-41.5). Initial very good/ good oral hygiene was given in 3/20 patients. 80% of the pts developed xerostomia after the first cycle, almost every patient needed support for symptoms due to oral problems during ctx. Of 41 pts, an OM could be documented in 38 pts. A total of 93% of the patients developed a mild course of the mucositis with grade 1-2. OM developed between the 2nd and 3rd cyle in the majority of pts. At the third cyle, only 8 pts had OM of grade 0, while 23 pts had grade 1 and 9 pts were grade 2. It was of note here that of these 9 pts with grade 2, 6 had grade 0 in the 2nd cycle. During cycle 5 and 6 only seven pts had a CTC score of 0, but no pat developed a CTC 3 or 4 OM. We could not document a connection between the occurrence of oral mucositis and the oral hygiene measures used, as no severe course of OM CTC Grad 3 or 4 could be detected. We could not find any relation to the type of 5-FU therapy (doublet, triplet +/- monoclonal antibodies). Conclusions: The incidence of oral mucositis with CTC score of 1 and 2 was 93%, but serious grade 3 and 4 mucositis rates were not observed. Xerostomia was observed in 80% after the first course of treatment. Symptomatic mucositis occurs early within 4 weeks after starting chemotherapy. Local measures appear suitable for symptom control of OM.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in second-line combination therapy for older patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer (AIO-STO-0117 trial)

303

Background: Overall survival of patients with advanced and refractory esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is poor. Most patients are 65 years or older, present with advanced and metastatic disease and suffer from extensive co-morbidity and decreased functionality. While approved therapies beyond first-line therapy have not been available for decades, just recently treatment with PD-1 antibodies has shown to improve progression-free and overall survival in this patient cohort. Thus, we assessed the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab in this vulnerable and older patient population. Methods: In this multi-center, open-label phase II trial older patients with ESCC with progression or recurrence of disease following first-line therapy were treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab. Patients had to pass a brief geriatric assessment using the G8 screening tool in combination with the Deficit Accumulation Frailty Index (DAFI). A safety run–in phase was initiated with nivolumab (240mg fixed dose Q2W). Following a safety assessment, patients then went on to receive the combination therapy of nivolumab/ipilimumab (nivolumab 240 mg fixed dose Q2W; ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q6W), in case safety was critical patients were allowed to continue with nivolumab monotherapy. The primary outcome was overall survival. Progression-free survival, quality of life and adverse events were also assessed. Results: In total 66 evaluable patients (16 female, 50 male) with ESCC were enrolled in this trial after successful geriatric assessment, median age was 70.5 years (range 55-84 years). 44 patients were treated with the combination therapy of nivolumab and ipilimumab, 22 patients with nivolumab only. The primary endpoint was met with a median OS of 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 12.4 months) (p < 0.006; versus historical control treated with standard chemotherapy). Median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 2.9 months). ORR was 18.2% (95% CI, 9.8 to 29.6), all cases were partial responses. Grade 3 or more treatment related adverse events were observed in ̃25% of patients. Conclusions: The combination therapy of nivolumab and ipilimumab demonstrates improved overall survival and sustained confirmed responses in the second line therapy of older European patients with ESCC. Geriatric assessment is feasible in the setting of a prospective immune therapy trial. Overall, the RAMONA trial confirmed efficacy and safety of combination checkpoint inhibitor therapy in G8 prescreened older patients with ESCC in Europe beyond first line therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03416244.

Panitumumab Plus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Versus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Alone as Maintenance Therapy in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized PANAMA Trial (AIO KRK 0212)

PURPOSE

The randomized PANAMA trial investigated the efficacy of panitumumab (Pmab) when added to maintenance therapy with fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Following first-line induction therapy with six cycles of FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab, responding patients (stable disease or partial or complete remission) were randomly assigned (1:1, open-label) to maintenance treatment with either FU/FA plus Pmab or FU/FA alone. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of progression-free survival (PFS, time from random assignment until progression or death) in favor of FU/FA plus Pmab with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, a power of 80%, and a significance level of 10%. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate of maintenance therapy, and toxicity. Survival end points were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test and Cox regressions. Dichotomous variables were compared by Fisher's exact test; odds ratios were indicated when appropriate. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01991873).

RESULTS

Overall, 248 patients were randomly assigned and received maintenance therapy with either FU/FA plus Pmab (125 patients) or FU/FA alone (123 patients). At data cutoff, with 218 events (of 218 needed), PFS of maintenance therapy was significantly improved with FU/FA plus Pmab (8.8 months v 5.7 months; HR, 0.72; 80% CI, 0.60 to 0.85; P = .014). Overall survival (event rate 54%) numerically favored the FU/FA plus Pmab arm (28.7 months v 25.7 months; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.18; P = .32). Objective response rates were 40.8% in patients receiving FU/FA plus Pmab versus 26.0% in patients receiving FU/FA alone (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.36; P = .02). The most frequent Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event grade ≥ 3 event during maintenance therapy was skin rash (7.2%).

CONCLUSION

In RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, maintenance therapy with FU/FA plus Pmab induced a significantly superior PFS compared with FU/FA alone. If active maintenance therapy is aspired following induction therapy with FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab, FU/FA plus Pmab appears to be the most favorable option.

PD-L1 targeting and subclonal immune escape mediated by PD-L1 mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

In patients with microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), immune checkpoint blockade is ineffective, and combinatorial approaches enhancing immunogenicity need exploration.

METHODS

We treated 43 patients with predominantly microsatellite stable RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC on a phase II trial combining chemotherapy with the epidermal growth factor receptor antibody cetuximab and the programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody avelumab. We performed next-generation gene panel sequencing for mutational typing of tumors and liquid biopsy monitoring as well as digital droplet PCR to confirm individual mutations. Translational analyses included tissue immunohistochemistry, multispectral imaging and repertoire sequencing of tumor-infiltrating T cells. Detected PD-L1 mutations were mechanistically validated in CRISPR/Cas9-generated cell models using qRT-PCR, immunoblotting, flow cytometry, complement-dependent cytotoxicity assay, antibody-dependent cytotoxicity by natural killer cell degranulation assay and LDH release assay as well as live cell imaging of T cell mediated tumor cell killing.

RESULTS

Circulating tumor DNA showed rapid clearance in the majority of patients mirroring a high rate of early tumor shrinkage. In 3 of 13 patients expressing the high-affinity Fcγ receptor 3a (FcγR3a), tumor subclones with PD-L1 mutations were selected that led to loss of tumor PD-L1 by nonsense-mediated RNA decay in PD-L1 K162fs and protein degradation in PD-L1 L88S. As a consequence, avelumab binding and antibody-dependent cytotoxicity were impaired, while T cell killing of these variant clones was increased. Interestingly, PD-L1 mutant subclones showed slow selection dynamics reversing on avelumab withdrawal and patients with such subclones had above-average treatment benefit. This suggested that the PD-L1 mutations mediated resistance to direct antitumor effects of avelumab, while at the same time loss of PD-L1 reduced biological fitness by enhanced T cell killing limiting subclonal expansion.

CONCLUSION

The addition of avelumab to standard treatment appeared feasible and safe. PD-L1 mutations mediate subclonal immune escape to avelumab in some patients with mCRC expressing high-affinity FcγR3a, which may be a subset experiencing most selective pressure. Future trials evaluating the addition of avelumab to standard treatment in MSS mCRC are warranted especially in this patient subpopulation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03174405.

Patient-reported quality of life data from patients with pre-treated metastatic colorectal cancer receiving trifluridine/tipiracil: Interim results of the TALLISUR study

3526

Background: Compared to placebo, trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) significantly improved overall and progression-free survival in patients (pts) with pre-treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the phase III RECOURSE trial. Although time to deterioration of ECOG performance status (PS) from 0/1 to ≥ 2 was significantly longer in pts treated with FTD/TPI, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was not formally assessed by direct means. Therefore, a two-arm trial with best supportive care (BSC) as appropriate comparative treatment was designed to specifically address the effect of FTD/TPI on HRQoL. Methods: In this prospective, multi-center, German, open-label, phase IV study, pts with pre-treated mCRC could choose between BSC or oral FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2 bid on days 1-5 and 8-12 of each 28-day cycle). EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires were employed to assess HRQoL. Primary endpoint was the rate of responders with stabilized ( > -10 and < 10 scores) or improved (≥ 10 scores) response (RR). Response was calculated as the mean score of the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/ QoL scale from the 2nd cycle until the end of treatment/ observation compared to the baseline score. Results: Of 194 eligible pts, 185 pts chose treatment with FTD/TPI (median 3 cycles), while 9 pts decided to receive BSC only. Questionnaires from 109 pts receiving FTD/TPI and from 6 pts with BSC were evaluable for RR. The primary endpoint (RR) was 59.6% (95% CI 49.8 – 68.9) in FTD/TPI-treated pts and 50.0% (95% CI 11.8 – 88.2) in pts receiving BSC. Analysis of the extended follow-up period, demonstrated that RR was 67.0% (95% CI 57.3 – 75.7) in FTD/TPI-treated pts. In the FTD/TPI-group, median time to deterioration of HRQoL was 121 days ( n = 61; 95% CI 87 – 151) according to EORTC QLQ-C30 and 119 days ( n = 63; 95% CI 85 – 138) according to EQ-5D-5L. Conclusions: If pts can choose between treatment and BSC in late-stage CRC, the vast majority opts for treatment. According to the present results, FTD/TPI-treatment induced prolonged stabilization of HRQoL, a highly desired attribute of therapies for pts with late-stage cancer. Clinical trial information: No 2017-000292-83.

Randomized study to investigate FOLFOXIRI plus either bevacizumab or cetuximab as first-line treatment of BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC: The phase-II FIRE-4.5 study (AIO KRK-0116)

3502

Background: FIRE-4.5 (AIO KRK-0116) compared FOLFOXIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab in BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients not treated for metastatic disease before. Methods: Within this 1:2 randomized, controlled, open-label phase-II study, patients received FOLFOXIRI every two weeks at the following schedule: irinotecan 150mg/m² (30-90min, day 1), folinic acid 400mg/m² (120min, day 1), oxaliplatin 85mg/m² (120 min, day 1), followed by 5-fluorouracil 3,000 mg/m², 48h. FOLFOXIRI was combined with either bevacizumab (arm A) at a dose of 5mg/kg body weight, every 2 weeks or cetuximab (arm B) at a loading dose of 400mg/m² and subsequent weekly doses of 250mg/m². FOLFOXIRI was applied for a maximum of 12 cycles before maintenance treatment was recommended. Primary endpoint was superiority of Arm B with respect to overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST 1.1 criterions. Secondary endpoints included PFS, OS, and tolerability. Results: From November 2016 to December 2020 108 patients were randomized in 90 German and 10 French centers (35 arm A and 73 in arm B). No new or unexpected toxicities were observed. Primary endpoint was not met with an ORR of 66.7% and 52.0% (p =0.23) in the respective arms. Median PFS was significantly longer in arm A vs arm B (8.3 months vs 5.9 months; logrank p = 0.03; HR 1.8). While OS data is still immature, median OS time are comparable at the time of analysis. Patients with left-sided primary tumors had comparable results with either bevacizumab or cetuximab, whereas those with right-sided primary tumors showed a trend towards better efficacy of the bevacizumab combination. Updated results will be presented at the annual meeting. Conclusions: FIRE-4.5 is the first prospective and randomized study investigating efficacy of FOLFOXIRI combined with targeted therapy in the first-line treatment of BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC. FOLFOXIRI plus either bevacizumab or cetuximab have comparable efficacy with differential effects according to primary tumor sidedness supporting the heterogeneity of BRAF V600E-mutant subpopulation of mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT04034459.

Maintenance therapy with 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin (5FU/LV) plus panitumumab (pmab) or 5FU/LV alone in RAS wildtype (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) - the PANAMA trial (AIO KRK 0212)

3503

Background: Planned discontinuation or stop-and-go use of oxaliplatin are established strategies in the systemic therapy of mCRC. Consequently, and irrespective of antibody use, 5FU/LV represents the standard backbone of most maintenance strategies. Unlike VEGF-targeted substances, there is limited evidence that EGFR-antibodies add efficacy to 5FU/LV maintenance in RAS wildtype ( RAS WT) mCRC patients. Methods: Following induction therapy with six cycles of 5FU/LV, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) and pmab, the trial randomized maintenance therapy with 5FU/LV plus pmab vs. 5FU/LV alone in a 1:1 fashion in patients (pts) with RAS WT mCRC. The primary endpoint was PFS (progression-free survival: time from randomization until progression or death). With 218 events needed for PFS, the trial was designed to demonstrate superiority of the 5FU/LV+ pmab arm vs. 5FU/LV alone with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, power of 80% and a significance level of 10%. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response to induction- and maintenance therapy as well as quality of life. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01991873. Results: The full analysis set consists of 248 pts (125 pts 5FU/LV + pmab and 123 pts 5FU/LV) who were randomized and received maintenance therapy. Median age was 66 vs. 65 years, male patients were 69.6% vs. 63.4%, ECOG 0 was 56.8% vs. 60.2% in the respective trial arms (5FU/LV+ pmab vs. 5FU/LV). At data cut-off, with 218 events, PFS of maintenance therapy was improved with 5FU/LV+ pmab vs. 5FU/LV alone (8.8 (80% CI 7.6-10.2) months vs. 5.7 (80% CI 5.6-6.0) months, HR 0.72 (80%CI 0.60-0.85), p = 0.014). OS (event rate 54.4%) numerically favoured the 5FU/LV+ pmab arm (28.7 (95% CI 25.4-39.1) months) as compared to 5FU/LV alone (25.7 (95% CI 22.2-28.2) months), HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.60-1.18). Conclusion: In RAS WT mCRC, maintenance therapy with 5FU/LV+ pmab appears to be superior to 5FU/LV alone and should be regarded as standard of care maintenance regimen following induction therapy with FOLFOX plus pmab. Clinical trial information: NCT01991873.

FOLFOX plus panitumumab or FOLFOX alone as additive therapy following R0/1 resection of RAS wild-type colorectal cancer liver metastases: The PARLIM trial (AIO KRK 0314)

3553

Background: This trial investigates the addition of panitumumab to chemotherapy with fluorouracil/ folinic acid and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in a 2:1 randomized, controlled, open label, phase II trial in RAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients with R0/1-resected liver metastases. Methods: The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) two years after randomisation. The experimental arm (12 wks of biweekly mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab followed by 12 wks of panitumumab alone) was considered active if the 2-year-PFS rate was ≥65%. Based on historical data, a 2-year-PFS rate of 50% was estimated in the control arm (12 wks of biweekly FOLFOX). The trial was performed with a power of 80% and an alpha of 0.05. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01384994. Results: The full analysis set consists of 70 patients (pts) in the experimental arm and 36 pts in the control arm. The 2-year-PFS rate was 34.3% with FOLFOX plus panitumumab and failed to meet the primary endpoint. The 2-year-PFS rate in the control arm was 25%. In the experimental arm, a more favourable outcome was observed with regard to PFS (HR: 0.72, 95%CI 0.45-1.17; P = 0.18) and OS (HR: 0.76 (95% CI 0.34-1.71, P = 0.51) which did, however, not reach the level of significance. Updated data including toxicity and subgroup analyses might be presented at the meeting Conclusions: The PARLIM trial clearly failed to demonstrate a PFS rate of 65% after resection of colorectal liver metastases 2 years after randomisation, potentially indicating that the generally high frequency of recurrence and the choice of primary endpoint did not correspond in this study population. However, a trend for improved PFS and OS by the addition of panitumumab to 12 wks of FOLFOX followed by 12 wks panitumumab maintenance therapy may support future trials with ant-EGFR antibodies in this specific treatment setting. Clinical trial information: NCT01384994.

Nivolumab and ipilimumab for second-line therapy in elderly patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer: Safety interim analysis of the RAMONA trial

4029

Background: Advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) is frequently diagnosed in elderly patients (pts) with additional comorbidities. Limited treatment options are available. We report the safety interim analysis of a phase II clinical trial evaluating nivolumab and ipilimumab as second-line therapy for advanced ESCC in elderly pts. Methods: RAMONA is a multicenter open-label phase II trial assessing nivolumab/ipilimumab combination therapy in elderly pts (≥65 years). The geriatric status of the pts was assessed using the G8 screening tool and the Deficit Accumulation Frailty Index (DAFI). After a run-in phase of 3 cycles nivolumab (240mg Q2W), cohort assignment was based on a safety assessment. Pts with toxicities grade ≤2 were considered eligible for escalation to nivolumab (240mg Q2W)/ipilimumab (1mg/kg Q6W) combination therapy (cohort B). Other pts remained on nivolumab monotherapy (cohort A). Primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Key secondary endpoint is time to Quality of Life deterioration defined as a loss of ≥ 10 points in the EORTC QLQ-C30 compared to baseline. Adverse events were assessed according to NCI-CTCAE version 4.03. Results: From February 2018 until February 2020, 69 pts entered the study. 61 pts were eligible for safety interim analysis. Median age of the pts was 71.9 yrs (± 5.4), median KPS score was 80% (50-100%). In 73.8% of the pts, metastases were detected at the time of study inclusion. Most pts received the IO therapy in ≥ 2nd line (91.8%). The mean G8-score at screening was 11.9 points (46 pts ≤ 14 points, 75.4%) (mean DAFI: 0.19). Based on safety assessment, 42 pts were escalated to nivolumab/ipilimumab, while 9 pts remained on nivolumab monotherapy. 10 pts were not allocated at the time of analysis. Median numbers of cumulative doses were 3.0 [1.0 - 3.0] for the run-in phase (nivolumab), 6.0 [1.0 – 48.0] for nivolumab therapy (cohort A/B) and 2.5 [1.0 – 16.0] for ipilimumab (cohort B). Median treatment duration was 144.5 days (56-781 days) in cohort A and 231 days (85-484 days) in cohort B. Frailty indices remained stable after 3 cycles of nivolumab with limited toxicity at the time of the safety assessment. Drug-related treatment emergent adverse events (AEs) were observed in 42 pts (68.9%); 29/42 in cohort A, 8/9 in cohort B, and 5/10 pts not allocated at the time of analysis. Grade ≥3 AEs were detected in 9 pts of 42 in cohort A and 4 of 9 pts in cohort B. Drug-related treatment emergent serious adverse events (SAEs) were detected in 12 pts (19.7%); 8/42 in cohort A, 2/9 pts in cohort B, and 2/10 pts not yet allocated. Conclusions: Combined nivolumab/ipilimumab is a safe and feasible second-line therapy for elderly pts with advanced ESCC. Most pts could be escalated to nivolumab/ipilimumab. Treatment duration was exceptional long for a subset of pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03416244.

Posaconazole versus voriconazole for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis: a phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Voriconazole has been recommended as primary treatment for patients with invasive aspergillosis. Intravenous and tablet formulations of posaconazole that have improved systemic absorption could be an effective alternative to voriconazole. We aimed to assess non-inferiority of posaconazole to voriconazole for the primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis.

METHODS

We did a randomised, prospective, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial comparing posaconazole (intravenous or oral posaconazole 300 mg twice on day 1, followed by 300 mg once a day for days 2-84) with voriconazole (6 mg/kg intravenous or 300 mg oral twice on day 1 followed by 4 mg/kg intravenously or 200 mg orally twice a day for days 2-84) for 12 weeks or less in the primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis. Participants were from 91 study sites in 26 countries, were aged 13 years or older, weighed at least 40 kg, and met criteria for proven, probable, or possible fungal disease. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated randomisation schedule with stratification by risk status. The primary endpoint was cumulative all-cause mortality up until day 42 in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (defined as randomly assigned participants who received ≥1 dose of study drug), with a 10% non-inferiority margin. The ITT population was also evaluated for safety. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01782131, and EudraCT, 2011-003938-14.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 25, 2013, and Sept 10, 2019, of 653 individuals assessed for eligibility, 575 ITT participants were randomly assigned and received one or more doses of study drug (n=288 [50%] posaconazole, n=287 [50%] voriconazole). Mortality up until day 42 was 15% (44 of 288) in the posaconazole group and 21% (59 of 287) in the voriconazole group (treatment difference -5·3% [95% CI -11·6 to 1·0]; p<0·0001). Mortality up until day 42 in the full-analysis-set subpopulation (ITT participants with proven or probable invasive aspergillosis) supported this conclusion: 31 (19%) of 163 participants in the posaconazole group and 32 (19%) of 171 participants in the voriconazole group (treatment difference 0·3% [95% CI -8·2 to 8·8]). The most frequently reported treatment-related adverse events (incidence >3%) were increased aspartate aminotransferase (AST) or alanine aminotransferase (ALT), nausea, hypokalaemia, and vomiting in the posaconazole group and increased ALT, AST, or alkaline phosphatase, hallucination, increased γ-glutamyltransferase peptidase, nausea, and blurred vision in the voriconazole group. The overall incidence of treatment-related adverse event rates in the ITT population was 30% for posaconazole and 40% for voriconazole (treatment difference -10·2% [95% CI -17·9 to -2·4]).

INTERPRETATION

Posaconazole was non-inferior to voriconazole for all-cause mortality up until day 42 in participants with invasive aspergillosis. Posaconazole was well tolerated, and participants had fewer treatment-related adverse events than in the voriconazole group. This study supports the use of posaconazole as a first-line treatment for the condition.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.

Central venous catheter-related infections in hematology and oncology: 2020 updated guidelines on diagnosis, management, and prevention by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

Cancer patients frequently require central venous catheters for therapy and parenteral nutrition and are at high risk of central venous catheter-related infections (CRIs). Moreover, CRIs prolong hospitalization, cause an excess in resource utilization and treatment cost, often delay anti-cancer treatment, and are associated with a significant increase in mortality in cancer patients. We therefore summoned a panel of experts by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and updated our previous guideline on CRIs in cancer patients. After conducting systematic literature searches on PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane databases, video- and meeting-based consensus discussions were held. In the presented guideline, we summarize recommendations on definition, diagnosis, management, and prevention of CRIs in cancer patients including the grading of strength of recommendations and the respective levels of evidence. This guideline supports clinicians and researchers alike in the evidence-based decision-making in the management of CRIs in cancer patients.

Patients with colorectal cancer and brain metastasis: The relevance of extracranial metastatic patterns predicting time intervals to first occurrence of intracranial metastasis and survival

The aim of the study was to investigate the predictive impact of extracranial metastatic patterns on course of disease and survival in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and brain metastasis (BM). A total of 228 patients (134 male [59%], 94 female [41%]) with histologically proven CRC and BM were classified into different groups according to extracranial metastatic patterns. Time intervals to metastatic events and survival times from initial CRC diagnosis, extracranial and intracranial metastasis were analyzed. Extracranial organs mostly affected were liver (102 of 228 [44.7%]) and lung (96 of 228 [42.1%]). Liver and lung metastases were detected in 31 patients (13.6%). Calculated over the entire course of disease, patients with lung metastasis showed longer overall survival (OS) than patients with liver metastasis or patients without lung metastasis (43.9 vs 34.6 [P = .002] vs 35.0 months [P = .002]). From the date of initial CRC diagnosis, lung metastasis occurred later in CRC history than liver metastasis (24.3 vs 7.5 months). Once lung metastasis was diagnosed, BM occurred faster than in patients with liver metastasis (15.8 vs 26.0 months; Δ 10.2 months). Accordingly, OS from the diagnosis of liver metastasis was longer than from lung metastasis (27.1 vs 19.6 months [P = .08]). Once BM was present, patients with lung metastasis lived longer than patients with liver metastasis (3.8 vs 1.1 months [P = .028]). Shortest survival times in all survival categories analyzed revealed patients with concurrent liver and lung metastasis. Patients with CRC and BM form a heterogeneous cohort where extracranial metastasis to liver or lungs predicts survival.

Prophylaxis, diagnosis and therapy of infections in patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. 2020 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

To ensure the safety of high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (HDC/ASCT), evidence-based recommendations on infectious complications after HDC/ASCT are given. This guideline not only focuses on patients with haematological malignancies but also addresses the specifics of HDC/ASCT patients with solid tumours or autoimmune disorders. In addition to HBV and HCV, HEV screening is nowadays mandatory prior to ASCT. For patients with HBs antigen and/or anti-HBc antibody positivity, HBV nucleic acid testing is strongly recommended for 6 months after HDC/ASCT or for the duration of a respective maintenance therapy. Prevention of VZV reactivation by vaccination is strongly recommended. Cotrimoxazole for the prevention of Pneumocystis jirovecii is supported. Invasive fungal diseases are less frequent after HDC/ASCT, therefore, primary systemic antifungal prophylaxis is not recommended. Data do not support a benefit of protective room ventilation e.g. HEPA filtration. Thus, AGIHO only supports this technique with marginal strength. Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis is recommended to prevent bacterial infections, although a survival advantage has not been demonstrated.

Phase 3 Study of Palonosetron IV Infusion Vs. IV Bolus for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Prophylaxis After Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy

CONTEXT

Palonosetron (PALO) is one of the two active components of NEPA, the fixed-combination antiemetic comprising netupitant (oral)/fosnetupitant (IV) and PALO. To increase the convenience of NEPA administration, especially for patients with swallowing difficulties, an IV NEPA formulation has been developed, where PALO is administered as a 30-minute infusion instead of the approved 30-second bolus.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of the PALO component used in IV NEPA.

METHODS

Noninferiority, double-blind, and randomized Phase 3 trial in chemotherapy-naive adult patients with cancer requiring highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive a single dose of PALO 0.25 mg administered IV either as a 30-minute infusion or as a 30-second bolus before highly emetogenic chemotherapy. The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of the 30-minute infusion vs. 30-second bolus in terms of complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue medication) in the acute phase. Secondary efficacy endpoints were CR in the delayed and overall phases and no emesis and no rescue medication in all phases. Safety was a secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

Overall, 440 patients received study treatment. In the infusion group, 186 (82.7%) patients reported CR in the acute phase vs. 186 (86.5%) patients in the bolus group, demonstrating the noninferiority of PALO infusion vs. bolus (P < 0.001). Secondary endpoints showed similar results between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

PALO 0.25-mg 30-minute IV infusion was noninferior to 30-second IV bolus in terms of CR rate in the acute phase. These results support the use of PALO 0.25 mg as a component of IV NEPA.

Antiemetic prophylaxis with NEPA: Final results of the German AKYPRO study

12095

Background: NEPA is a fixed combination antiemetic of the NK1-receptor-antagonist (RA) netupitant and the 5-HT3-RA palonosetron. Primary objective of this prospective non-interventional study in Germany was to assess quality of life of cancer patients (pts) undergoing moderately (MEC) or highly (HEC) emetogenic chemotherapy (CT) who received NEPA for prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting (CINV). Secondary objectives were patient reported outcomes as well as effectiveness and safety of NEPA. Here we report final data of the quality of life analysis. Methods: The study included 2.405 pts in 162 centers receiving 3 consecutive cycles of CT as one or two day MEC or HEC. Primary endpoint was impact of quality of life (QoL) due to vomiting or nausea, documented by Functional Living Index–Emesis (FLIE) questionnaires. Effectiveness was reported in patient diaries. Complete response (CR) was defined as no emesis and no rescue medication (RM). Non-significant nausea (NSN) was no or mild nausea. Adverse events (AEs) were reported on d1–21 of each cycle. Results: 2.173 patients were included in the final analysis (full analysis set; FAS). The majority of patients (n = 1976; 91%) received 1-day chemotherapy, 64% HEC, 36% MEC. Median age was 58 years and the majority (85%) was female. Cancer diagnoses: breast 66%, gastrointestinal 10%, ovarian 7% or lung 5%, other 12%. Chemotherapy: AC 57%, carboplatin 19%, cisplatin 8%, oxaliplatin 8% and other 8%. 84% of pts with HEC and 82% with MEC felt no impact on daily life due to vomiting in cycle 1 remaining constant in C2 and C3. 54% HEC patients and 59% MEC patients reported no impact on daily life due to nausea in cycle 1. CR rates ranged between 81-84% and were comparable between different HEC or MEC. NSN rates in MEC ranged from 75% (MEC) to 62% (HEC). Drug-related AEs were rare with constipation, fatigue, insomnia, and nausea as the most common (in > 1% pts). Conclusions: NEPA was highly effective in the prevention of CINV and maintenance of QoL in this real world study. Over 80% of pts reported that their daily live was not influenced by emesis while nausea was more difficult to control. Effectiveness was high and patients and physicians estimate was comparable.

Phase III APACT trial of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P + Gem) versus gemcitabine (Gem) alone for patients with resected pancreatic cancer (PC): Outcomes by geographic region

4515

Background: The APACT trial was one of the largest and most geographically diverse trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for resected PC, allowing for comparison of outcomes by geographic region. In this analysis, we report updated overall survival (OS) results for the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and examine outcomes by geographic region. Methods: Treatment-naive patients with histologically confirmed PC, macroscopic complete resection, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 < 100 U/mL were eligible. Stratification factors were resection status (R0/R1) and lymph node status (positive/negative). Treatment was initiated ≤ 12 weeks postsurgery. Patients received nab-P 125 mg/m2 + Gem 1000 mg/m2 or Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival by independent review. Secondary endpoints were OS and safety. Results: The updated OS analysis (data cutoff date, January 2020) revealed a median OS of 41.8 months with nab-P + Gem compared with 37.7 months with Gem alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68 - 0.97; nominal P = 0.047; Table). In each geographic region, the median OS with nab-P + Gem was numerically longer than with Gem alone. Conclusions: The updated OS analysis of the ITT population supports the previously reported trend favoring nab-P + Gem. The geographic regional analyses reveal numerically longer OS with nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone and variable outcomes by region; however, the differences do not support the trend observed in the ITT population, potentially due to limited sample sizes. Registration: EudraCT (2013-003398-91). Clinical trial information: NCT01964430 . [Table: see text]

Treatment of invasive fungal diseases in cancer patients-Revised 2019 Recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (DGHO)

BACKGROUND

Invasive fungal diseases remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients undergoing intensive cytotoxic therapy. The choice of the most appropriate antifungal treatment (AFT) depends on the fungal species suspected or identified, the patient's risk factors (eg length and depth of granulocytopenia) and the expected side effects.

OBJECTIVES

Since the last edition of recommendations for 'Treatment of invasive fungal infections in cancer patients' of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) in 2013, treatment strategies were gradually moving away from solely empirical therapy of presumed or possible invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) towards pre-emptive therapy of probable IFD.

METHODS

The guideline was prepared by German clinical experts for infections in cancer patients in a stepwise consensus process. MEDLINE was systematically searched for English-language publications from January 1975 up to September 2019 using the key terms such as 'invasive fungal infection' and/or 'invasive fungal disease' and at least one of the following: antifungal agents, cancer, haematological malignancy, antifungal therapy, neutropenia, granulocytopenia, mycoses, aspergillosis, candidosis and mucormycosis.

RESULTS

AFT of IFDs in cancer patients may include not only antifungal agents but also non-pharmacologic treatment. In addition, the armamentarium of antifungals for treatment of IFDs has been broadened (eg licensing of isavuconazole). Additional antifungals are currently under investigation or in clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, updated recommendations for the treatment of proven or probable IFDs are given. All recommendations including the levels of evidence are summarised in tables to give the reader rapid access to key information.

Real-world evidence of NEPA, netupitant-palonosetron, in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prevention: effects on quality of life

Aim: To determine quality of life, effectiveness and safety of oral netupitant-palonosetron (NEPA)–based antiemetic prophylaxis in the real-world setting. Materials & methods: Prospective, noninterventional study in adults receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and NEPA for three cycles. NEPA was administered per summary of product characteristics. Results: A total of 2429 patients enrolled, 2173 were evaluable. ‘No impact on daily life’ due to vomiting was reported by 84%/82% of patients in the highly emetogenic chemotherapy/moderately emetogenic chemotherapy groups in cycle 1, with rates of 54%/59% for nausea. Overall, complete response rate was 89%/87%/83% in the acute/delayed/overall phases. NEPA was well tolerated. Conclusion: NEPA had beneficial effects on the quality of life of a heterogeneous group of cancer patients and was safe and effective in the real-world setting.

Abstract P2-12-02: Quality of life data of breast cancer patients receiving a fixed combination of netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting - A real life study

Background: NEPA, an oral fixed dose combination of netupitant at 300 mg and palonosetron at 500 mg has been approved for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy (Ctx)-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cancer patients (pts) receiving highly (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). The primary objective of the prospective, non-interventional study (NIS) AkyPRO was the evaluation of quality of life (QoL) in adults receiving NEPA as primary prophylaxis for CINV associated with MEC or HEC. Secondary endpoints were efficacy and safety of NEPA. Here, we present an interim analysis in the subgroup of breast cancer (BC) pts, who represent the largest subpopulation (66%) enrolled in the AkyPRO. Since September 2015, 2427 pts have been recruited, of whom 986 suffered from BC.

Methods: This NIS has been designed to evaluate NEPA in 2,500 cancer pts receiving single day or two day MEC or HEC. QoL was recorded by FLIE questionnaires. Efficacy of NEPA as indicated by complete response (CR: no vomiting, no rescue medication), additional medication, and adverse events were recorded in patient diaries over three consecutive Ctx cycles. Patients and physicians documented overall antiemetic efficacy on a 4-point scale (very good, good, satisfactory, poor).

Results: At the cut-off date November 11, 2017, 2427 pts had been enrolled in the study. For the interim analysis, 986 BC pts were evaluated who had been completely documented in the eCRF at the cut-off date. 80% of pts received HEC, mostly (79%) anthracycline/cyclophosphamide (AC) combinations. Of the women receiving MEC, the majority were treated with carboplatin-based regimens (9%). 7% of patients received other MEC regimens. More than 84% of pts reported no impact on daily life due to vomiting in all analysed cycles. The percentage of pts with no impact on daily life due to nausea ranged from 51-56%. More than 93% of pts reported no emesis and more than 81% reported CR during the 5 days post-chemotherapy during all 3 cycles. Nausea was more difficult to control, 37% of pts documented to have suffered from nausea one or more times during the 5 days following chemotherapy. Effectiveness, evaluated by physicians’ assessment, was rated very good/good for 89 -91% of the pts in cycle 1, 2, and 3. Comparison of patients’ and physicians’ perception of antiemetic treatment effectiveness showed that patients judged the effectiveness equally well. NEPA was well tolerated. Low-grade constipation (2.2%) and insomnia (1.4%) were the most frequent treatment-related adverse events.

Conclusion: In this real-life study, NEPA was effective in the prevention of CINV in the subgroup of breast cancer pts receiving HEC or MEC. Together with its convenient administration attributes of one single dose per ctx cycle, NEPA might facilitate adherence to antiemetic guidelines and ultimately may improve CINV control.

Citation Format: Jörg Schilling, Steffi Busch, Andrea Stefek, Eberhard Müller, Jürgen Schwickerath, Falk Altmann, Martin Holländer, Meinolf Karthaus. Quality of life data of breast cancer patients receiving a fixed combination of netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting - A real life study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-12-02.

Exploratory analysis of trifluridine/tipiracil in late-stage metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Prognostic factors

24

Background: Trifluridine/Tipiracil (FTD/TPI) is effective in pts with refractory mCRC. Enrollment into in the RECOURSE trial was allowed only for pts with ECOG < 1 pts, while real world pts may have a lower ECOG. In addition, predictive markers for the efficacy of FTD/TPI at late stage are open. This exploratory analysis assessed outcome of mCRC pts (including ECOG PS ≥ 2) upon FTD/TPI treatment by prognostic factors in the real world setting. Methods: This cohort included mCRC pts who were treated with FTD/TPI from 01/2016 until 08/2019 at two large volume CRC centers in Germany. Pts were classified with good prognosis characteristics (GPC) according to Tabernero et al. (abstract 677, ASCO-GI 2019) defined by 1 or 2 metastatic sites and time since diagnosis of first metastases ≥ 18 mo. Pts of this group without liver metastases had the best prognostic characteristics. Pts with poor prognostic characteristics (PPC) were characterized by ≥ 3 metastases sites and time since diagnosis of first metastases ≤ 18 mo. Results: A total of 44 mCRC pts were included in this analysis (mean age 62.5 yrs; 22 males and 22 females). Within the GPC population (n=28; median age 67 yrs; KRAS wt n= 21; KRAS mt n= 7; ECOG 0-1 n= 23; ECOG ≥ 2n=7) 6 pts were alive up to 08/2019 and 4 were lost to FU. Four pts of the GPC were without liver metastases. Within the PPC group (n=16; median age 59 yrs; KRAS wt n= 6; KRAS mt n= 10; ECOG 0-1 n= 15; ECOG ≥ 2 n=1) 2 pts were alive and 2 were lost to FU. The mPFS and mOS of the GPC group (n=18) were 2,15 mo (range 0,62-10,13) and 4,63 mo (range 0,95-14,39), respectively. The mPFS and mOS of the PPC group (n=12) were 1,31 mo (range 0,76-9,72) and 4,72 mo (range 0,76-16,61), respectively. Pts with an ECOG ≥ 2 had a mOS of 2,76 mo (range 0,95-6,92), and a mPFS 1,67 mo (range 0,53-1,77). Conclusions: GPC and PPC group pts treated with FTD/TPI differed with respect to mPFS, but these pts had a comparable mOS in the real world setting. PFS and OS were lower when compared to the Tabernero analysis of the RECOURSE trial, which may reflect the real world setting. Inclusion of pts with an ECOG of ≥ 2 was feasible but showed poor survival data in the third line. Nevertheless, all pts with mCRC benefited from FTD/TPI treatment.

Avelumab and cetuximab in combination with FOLFOX in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC): Final results of the phase II AVETUX trial (AIO-KRK-0216)

96

Background: Single agent PD-1/L1 inhibition is efficacious in MCRC patients (pts) with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). For the vast majority of MCRC pts with MS stable (MSS) phenotype the role of immunotherapy remains undetermined. Methods: The single arm phase II AVETUX trial combined mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab with avelumab (10mg/kg day 1 from cycle 2 onwards) in RAS/BRAF wildtype (local lab) MCRC pts. Primary endpoint was 12 month progression-free survival rate. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), tolerability, overall survival and translational research evaluating tissue including PD-L1 expression (tumour/immune cells) and serial ctDNA. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat (ITT). Results: Overall 43 pts were enrolled. Median age was 61 (range 29-82), 14 pts (33%) were female and 39 (91%) left sided. 30 pts (70%) had liver mets and 17 (40%) liver mets only. 2 pts were MSI-H, one MSI-low and 40 MSS. Besides immediate and otherwise unexplained fever in 4 pts treatment was well tolerated and avelumab was not associated with unexpected adverse events to standard FOLFOX/cetuximab. Central tissue review found 4 pts to be ineligible due to low frequent KRAS or BRAF mutation (15-31%). Thus, ITT included 39 pts. The ORR was 79.5%, including 6 complete (CR) and 25 partial responses (PR). Further 5 stable diseases were noted, thus disease control rate was 92.3%; 2 pts had progression and 1 was not evaluable. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) rate (≥20% after 8 weeks) was 79.5% (1 CR, 27 PR and 3 SD with ≥20% - < 30%). In MSI-H pts 1 PR and 1 SD and in the 3 low RAS mut pts 2 PR were noted. Panel sequencing was feasible with 153 mutations detected, showing an immediate ctDNA drop within 4 weeks of treatment, mirroring the high rate of early tumor response. Notably, the 4 pts with fever had a high T cell infiltration in the tumor. Final data including the primary endpoint and translational data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: The AVETUX regimen was feasible producing a high rate of responses in MSS pts mainly occurring within the first 8 weeks. The noted ORR/ETS of 79.5% warrants further evaluation in a randomized trial. Clinical trial information: NCT03174405.

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists: review of their role for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adults

Introduction: The addition of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK₁RAs) to standard prophylaxis of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 RA (5-HT₃RA) plus dexamethasone more effectively prevents chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Areas covered: This review presents the evidence base for the use of oral and intravenous (IV) NK₁RAs, focusing on the pharmacologic and clinical properties as a class, and highlighting differences between agents. A PubMed literature search was conducted from 2000 to 2018. Expert opinion: Adherence to international antiemetic guidelines remains a clinical challenge. Strategies to simplify antiemetic regimens and facilitate their administration may improve compliance and treatment outcomes. The use of fixed-combination antiemetics offers clinical utility, in combining an NK₁RA with a 5-HT₃RA in a single oral dose. The use of long-lasting NK₁RAs and administering CINV prophylaxis closer to the time of chemotherapy may also assist with guideline and treatment compliance, diminishing the need for home-based administration, and potentially reducing resource utilization. The availability of IV and oral formulations of NK₁RAs and NK₁RA-5-HT₃RA fixed combinations offers further utility, particularly for those patients unsuited for oral administration. However, safety considerations with respect to injection site toxicity and hypersensitivity reactions of the new NK₁RA IV formulations deserve close attention.