Adherence to consensus-based diagnosis and treatment guidelines in adult soft-tissue sarcoma patients: a French prospective population-based study

BACKGROUND

Soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare tumors with varied histological presentations. Management and treatment are thus complex, but crucial for patient outcomes. We assess adherence to adult STS management guidelines across two French regions (10% of the French population). We also report standardized incidence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

STS patients diagnosed from 1 November 2006 to 31 December 2007 were identified from pathology reports, medical hospital records, and cancer registries. Guideline adherence was assessed by 23 criteria (validated by Delphi consensus method), and age and sex-standardized incidence rates estimated. Associations between patient, treatment, and institutional factors and adherence with three major composite criteria relating to diagnostic imaging and biopsy as well as multidisciplinary team (MDT) case-review are reported.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-four patients were included (57.7% male, mean age 60.8 years). Practices were relatively compliant overall, with over 70% adherence for 10 criteria. Three criteria with perfect Delphi consensus had low adherence: receiving histological diagnosis before surgery, adequacy of histological diagnosis (adherence around 50% for both), and MDT discussion before surgery (adherence <30%). Treatment outside of specialized centers was associated with lower adherence for all three composite criteria, and specific tumor sites and/or features were associated with lower adherence for diagnostic imaging, methods, and MDT meetings. STS standardized incidence rates were 4.09 (European population) and 3.33 (World) /100 000 inhabitants.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial STS diagnosis and treatment across all stages (imaging, biopsy, and MDT meetings) need improving, particularly outside specialized centers. Educational interventions to increase surgeon's sarcoma awareness and knowledge and to raise patients' awareness of the importance of seeking expert care are necessary.

Immunogenic death of colon cancer cells treated with oxaliplatin

Both the pre-apoptotic exposure of calreticulin (CRT) and the post-apoptotic release of high-mobility group box 1 protein (HMGB1) are required for immunogenic cell death elicited by anthracyclins. Here, we show that both oxaliplatin (OXP) and cisplatin (CDDP) were equally efficient in triggering HMGB1 release. However, OXP, but not CDDP, stimulates pre-apoptotic CRT exposure in a series of murine and human colon cancer cell lines. Subcutaneous injection of OXP-treated colorectal cancer (CRC), CT26, cells induced an anticancer immune response that was reduced by short interfering RNA-mediated depletion of CRT or HMGB1. In contrast, CDDP-treated CT26 cells failed to induce anticancer immunity, unless recombinant CRT protein was absorbed into the cells. CT26 tumors implanted in immunocompetent mice responded to OXP treatment in vivo, and this therapeutic response was lost when CRT exposure by CT26 cells was inhibited or when CT26 cells were implanted in immunodeficient mice. The knockout of toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), the receptor for HMGB1, also resulted in a deficient immune response against OXP-treated CT26 cells. In patients with advanced (stage IV, Duke D) CRC, who received an OXP-based chemotherapeutic regimen, the loss-of-function allele of TLR4 (Asp299Gly in linkage disequilibrium with Thr399Ile, reducing its affinity for HMGB1) was as prevalent as in the general population. However, patients carrying the TLR4 loss-of-function allele exhibited reduced progression-free and overall survival, as compared with patients carrying the normal TLR4 allele. In conclusion, OXP induces immunogenic death of CRC cells, and this effect determines its therapeutic efficacy in CRC patients.

MSH2 and adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

CRA7502

Background: Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy improves survival among patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The human MutS homolog 2 (MSH2) protein is required to repair cisplatin-DNA lesions. Methods: We used immunohistochemistry to determine MSH2 expression in specimens from patients who had been enrolled in the International Adjuvant Lung Trial. The long-term (median follow-up 7.5 years) overall survival benefit was evaluated in a Cox model adjusted on clinical and pathological variables. Results: Among 673 evaluable tumors, 257 (38%) were MSH2 positive and 416 (62%) were MSH2 negative. The long-term survival benefit of chemotherapy was likely different according to MSH2 expression (test for interaction, P=0.06): chemotherapy compared with observation prolonged survival in the MSH2 negative group (adjusted hazard ratio for death, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.59 to 0.97; P=0.03), but not in the MSH2 positive group (adjusted hazard ratio for death, 1.12; 95%CI, 0.81 to 1.55; P=0.48). In the control arm, the adjusted hazard ratio for death associated with MSH2 positivity compared to MSH2 negativity was 0.66 (95%CI, 0.49 to 0.90; P=0.01). Among 658 patients with available excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1) data, the benefit of chemotherapy decreased with the number of positive markers among MSH2 and ERCC1 (P=0.01). Chemotherapy compared with observation prolonged survival in the combined MSH2 negative/ERCC1 negative subgroup (adjusted hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95%CI, 0.47 to 0.91; P=0.01). Conclusions: MSH2 appears to predict a long-term benefit from adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and may be combined with ERCC1.

[Table: see text]

A multicenter, randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) alone or in combination with biweekly cetuximab in the first-line treatment of advanced biliary cancer: Interim analysis of the BINGO trial

4520

Background: There is no standard regimen for palliative chemotherapy of advanced biliary cancers. The GEMOX regimen is an option (BJC 2008). EGFR over-expression has been observed in advanced biliary cancers suggesting that the combination with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies may be appropriate. Methods: Patients with advanced biliary cancer, WHO performance status 0–1, and without prior palliative chemotherapy were eligible for this international, open-label, two-stage, randomized phase II trial. Patients received GEMOX (gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2 [10 mg/m2/min] at day [D]1; oxaliplatin, 100 mg/m2 at D2) alone (arm A) or with cetuximab (500 mg/m2 at D1 or 2, arm B), every 2 weeks. Randomization was stratified according to tumor stage and location, center, and prior treatments. The primary endpoint was 4-month crude progression-free survival (PFS) rate (H0 hypothesis, < 40%; H1, ≥ 60%; planned sample size, 50 patients per arm). Secondary endpoints were response rate, PFS, overall survival, toxicity, early response assessment by PET, and blood/tumor EGFR signalling pathway member analyses. A data safety monitoring board-approved interim analysis was performed at the end of the first stage (18 patients per arm, minimal follow- up 4 months). Results: From October 2007 to October 2008, we enrolled 101 patients (median age, 62 yrs; male, 60%; metastatic, 86%; non-gallbladder, 76%). Among the 36 patients at the time of the interim analysis, the median number of treatment cycles was 6 and 8 in arms A and B, respectively. 76% (arm A) and 67% (arm B) had NCI-CTC grade 3–4 toxicity, mainly cytopenia (41%/39%), peripheral neuropathy (modified Levi's scale grade 2–3: 29%/33%), fatigue (6%/22%), gastrointestinal toxicity (12%/17%), and rash/hypersensitivity (0%/17%). The 4-month PFS rate was 44% (95% CI, 20–70) and 61% (95% CI, 36–83) in arms A and B, respectively. Conclusions: The GEMOX-cetuximab regimen seems well tolerated in patients with advanced biliary cancer. Adding cetuximab to GEMOX showed promising activity and therefore the trial was continued. Updated results on the whole population for primary and secondary endpoints will be available at the meeting.

[Table: see text]

Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BEV)-based combination regimens in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Randomized phase II study of BEV + FOLFIRI versus BEV + XELIRI (FNCLCC ACCORD 13/0503 study)

4086

Background: The combination of BEV and chemotherapy is highly effective in patients with mCRC and improves response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival compared with chemotherapy alone. This randomized non-comparative phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of BEV in combination with either XELIRI or FOLFIRI as first-line therapy for mCRC. Methods: Patients were eligible for inclusion in this study if they had histologically proven measurable mCRC, were aged 18–75 years, and had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0–2. Patients were treated with 8 cycles of XELIRI (irinotecan 200 mg/m2 on Day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 bid on Days 1–14) + BEV 7.5 mg/kg on Day 1, every 3 weeks or 12 cycles of FOLFIRI (irinotecan 200 mg/m2 on Day 1 + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m2 + folinic acid 400 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 via 46-h infusion) + BEV 5 mg/kg on day 1, every 2 weeks. BEV was continued to disease progression. Patients aged ≥65 years received a lower daily dose of capecitabine (800 mg/m2 bid). The primary endpoint was crude progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months. Results: In total, 145 patients were entered in the study between March 2006 and January 2008; 72 patients received BEV + XELIRI and 73 patients received BEV + FOLFIRI (male 64%/48%; median age 61/61 years; 35/36% aged >65 years). Preliminary results from the first 6 months of follow-up are reported here. A total of 491/783 cycles was administered, 63%/67% receiving at least the initially planned number of cycles (8 cycles for BEV + XELIRI and 12 for BEV + FOLFIRI). Main results are given in the table . Conclusions: This randomized non-comparative study has shown that BEV + XELIRI and BEV + FOLFIRI are similarly effective treatments for patients with mCRC, with manageable toxicity profiles. Results with updated follow-up will be presented at the Meeting.

[Table: see text]

[Table: see text]

MSH2 and adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

CRA7502

The full, final text of this abstract will be available in Part II of the 2009 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings, distributed onsite at the Meeting on May 30, 2009, and as a supplement to the June 20, 2009, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[Table: see text]

Circulating endothelial cell (CEC) monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) treated with first-line bevacizumab (BEV)-based combination regimens: Results of the randomized phase II FNCLCC-ACCORD 13/0503 trial

4071

Background: There is no validated biomarker to predict the efficacy of BEV, an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody. Rare cell subpopulations such as CEC are good candidates. Methods: Pts with mCRC, aged 18–75 yrs, ECOG performance status (PS) 0–2, and no prior palliative chemotherapy were randomized to either BEV (5 mg/kg) + FOLFIRI every 2 weeks (arm A, 12 cycles) or BEV (7,5 mg/kg) + XELIRI every 3 weeks (arm B, 8 cycles). BEV was continued until disease progression [PD]. The primary endpoint was crude 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. In consenting pts, CEC (CD45-CD31+CD146+7- amino-actinomycin- cells) were measured at baseline (Day [D]1, before treatment), D8, and at the end of cycle 1 (D15 or 22) in 1-mL whole blood by four-color flow cytometry according to a method we established previously (J Immunol Methods 2008). Results were correlated to pts’ characteristics and primary endpoint (Wilcoxon's, Fisher's, and trend tests). Results: From 03/06 to 01/08, we enrolled 145 pts (male, 56%; median age, 61 yrs; PS 0–1, 91%; number of metastatic sites [1/2/>2], 45/48/8%). Pts with at least one CEC measurement (n=99; arm A, 51; arm B, 48) did not differ from the 46 other pts regarding sex, age, PS, and number of metastatic sites. Baseline CEC levels (n=97; median, 16/mL) were higher in PS 1–2 pts (n=42) than in PS 0 pts (n=55) (17 vs. 12/mL, p=0.02) (age, sex, number of metastatic sites: NS) and in pts with PD (n=17) than in pts with non- PD (n=80) at 6 months (30 vs. 15/mL, p=0.004). CEC levels were higher at the end of cycle 1 in the PD group (n=17) than in the non-PD group (n=74) (34 vs. 14/mL, p=0.01). The 6-month PFS rate varied from 0% to 32% in the 4 groups defined by baseline and end-of-cycle- 1 CEC values (cutoff: baseline median) (trend test, p=0.006) ( table ). Conclusions: Baseline and end-of-cycle-1 CEC levels may predict tumor control in patients with mCRC starting first-line BEV + chemotherapy.

[Table: see text]

[Table: see text]