Al B. Benson

Bevacizumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results From the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E3200

PURPOSE Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States. Antiangiogenic therapy with bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy improves survival in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. This study was conducted to determine the effect of bevacizumab (at 10 mg/kg) on survival duration for oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eight hundred twenty-nine metastatic colorectal cancer patients previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) with bevacizumab; FOLFOX4 without bevacizumab; or bevacizumab alone. The primary end point was overall survival, with additional determinations of progression-free survival, response, and toxicity. RESULTS The median duration of survival for the group treated with FOLFOX4 and bevacizumab was 12.9 months compared with 10.8 months for the group treated with FOLFOX4 alone (corresponding hazard ratio for death = 0.75; P = .0011), and 10.2 months for those treated with bevacizumab alone. The median progression-free survival for the group treated with FOLFOX4 in combination with bevacizumab was 7.3 months, compared with 4.7 months for the group treated with FOLFOX4 alone (corresponding hazard ratio for progression = 0.61; P < .0001), and 2.7 months for those treated with bevacizumab alone. The corresponding overall response rates were 22.7%, 8.6%, and 3.3%, respectively (P < .0001 for FOLFOX4 with bevacizumab v FOLFOX4 comparison). Bevacizumab was associated with hypertension, bleeding, and vomiting. CONCLUSION The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin improves survival duration for patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Recommendations for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To develop a guideline for the use of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in early stage breast cancer. METHODS An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Expert Panel conducted a systematic review of the literature available through February 2004 on the use of SNB in early-stage breast cancer. The panel developed a guideline for clinicians and patients regarding the appropriate use of a sentinel lymph node identification and sampling procedure from hereon referred to as SNB. The guideline was reviewed by selected experts in the field and the ASCO Health Services Committee and was approved by the ASCO Board of Directors. RESULTS The literature review identified one published prospective randomized controlled trial in which SNB was compared with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), four limited meta-analyses, and 69 published single-institution and multicenter trials in which the test performance of SNB was evaluated with respect to the results of ALND (completion axillary dissection). There are currently no data on the effect of SLN biopsy on long-term survival of patients with breast cancer. However, a review of the available evidence demonstrates that, when performed by experienced clinicians, SNB appears to be a safe and acceptably accurate method for identifying early-stage breast cancer without involvement of the axillary lymph nodes. CONCLUSION SNB is an appropriate initial alternative to routine staging ALND for patients with early-stage breast cancer with clinically negative axillary nodes. Completion ALND remains standard treatment for patients with axillary metastases identified on SNB. Appropriately identified patients with negative results of SNB, when done under the direction of an experienced surgeon, need not have completion ALND. Isolated cancer cells detected by pathologic examination of the SLN with use of specialized techniques are currently of unknown clinical significance. Although such specialized techniques are often used, they are not a required part of SLN evaluation for breast cancer at this time. Data suggest that SNB is associated with less morbidity than ALND, but the comparative effects of these two approaches on tumor recurrence or patient survival are unknown.

Clinical practice guidelines in oncology

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast represents a heterogeneous group of neoplastic lesions in the breast ducts. The goal for management of DCIS is to prevent the development of invasive breast cancer. This manuscript focuses on the NCCN Guidelines Panel recommendations for the workup, primary treatment, risk reduction strategies, and surveillance specific to DCIS.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Recommendations on Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer

PURPOSE To address whether all medically fit patients with curatively resected stage II colon cancer should be offered adjuvant chemotherapy as part of routine clinical practice, to identify patients with poor prognosis characteristics, and to describe strategies for oncologists to use to discuss adjuvant chemotherapy in practice. METHODS An American Society of Clinical Oncology Panel, in collaboration with the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guideline Initiative, reviewed pertinent information from the literature through May 2003. RESULTS A literature-based meta-analysis found no evidence of a statistically significant survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II patients. Recommendations The routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for medically fit patients with stage II colon cancer is not recommended. However, there are populations of patients with stage II disease that could be considered for adjuvant therapy, including patients with inadequately sampled nodes, T4 lesions, perforation, or poorly differentiated histology. CONCLUSION Direct evidence from randomized controlled trials does not support the routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage II colon cancer. Patients and oncologists who accept the relative benefit in stage III disease as adequate indirect evidence of benefit for stage II disease are justified in considering the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, particularly for those patients with high-risk stage II disease. The ultimate clinical decision should be based on discussions with the patient about the nature of the evidence supporting treatment, the anticipated morbidity of treatment, the presence of high-risk prognostic features on individual prognosis, and patient preferences. Patients with stage II disease should be encouraged to participate in randomized trials.

Molecular predictors of survival after adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer

BACKGROUND Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival among patients with stage III colon cancer, but no reliable molecular predictors of outcome have been identified. METHODS We evaluated loss of chromosomal material (also called loss of heterozygosity or allelic loss) from chromosomes 18q, 17p, and 8p; cellular levels of p53 and p21(WAF1/CIP1) proteins; and microsatellite instability as molecular markers. We analyzed tumor tissue from 460 patients with stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer who had been treated with various combinations of adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and levamisole to determine the ability of these markers to predict survival. RESULTS Loss of heterozygosity at 18q was present in 155 of 319 cancers (49 percent). High levels of microsatellite instability were found in 62 of 298 tumors (21 percent), and 38 of these 62 tumors (61 percent) had a mutation of the gene for the type II receptor for transforming growth factor beta1 (TGF-beta1). Among patients with microsatellite-stable stage III cancer, five-year overall survival after fluorouracil-based chemotherapy was 74 percent in those whose cancer retained 18q alleles and 50 percent in those with loss of 18q alleles (relative risk of death with loss at 18q, 2.75; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.34 to 5.65; P=0.006). The five-year survival rate among patients whose cancer had high levels of microsatellite instability was 74 percent in the presence of a mutated gene for the type II receptor for TGF-beta1 and 46 percent if the tumor did not have this mutation (relative risk of death, 2.90; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.14 to 7.35; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Retention of 18q alleles in microsatellite-stable cancers and mutation of the gene for the type II receptor for TGF-beta1 in cancers with high levels of microsatellite instability point to a favorable outcome after adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil-based regimens for stage III colon cancer.

Phase III Study of Gemcitabine in Combination With Fluorouracil Versus Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Carcinoma: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial E2297

PURPOSE Gemcitabine is generally considered to constitute first-line therapy for pancreatic cancer. To determine whether the addition of fluorouracil (5-FU) improves on the results from single-agent gemcitabine, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) compared gemcitabine plus bolus 5-FU with gemcitabine alone for patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS This trial involved patients with biopsy-proven, advanced carcinoma of the pancreas not amenable to surgical resection. Patients were randomized to receive either gemcitabine alone (1,000 mg/m(2)/wk) weekly for 3 weeks of every 4 or to receive gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)/wk) followed by 5-FU (600 mg/m(2)/wk) weekly on the same schedule. The primary end point of the trial was survival, with secondary end points of time to progression and response rate. RESULTS Of 327 patients enrolled over 18 months, 322 were eligible. Overall, the median survival was 5.4 months for gemcitabine alone and 6.7 months for gemcitabine plus 5-FU (P =.09). Progression-free survival for gemcitabine alone was 2.2 months, compared with 3.4 months for gemcitabine plus 5-FU (P =.022). Objective responses were uncommon and were observed in only 5.6% of patients treated with gemcitabine and 6.9% of patients treated with gemcitabine plus 5-FU. Most toxicities were hematologic or gastrointestinal; no significant differences were noted between the two treatment arms. CONCLUSION 5-FU, administered in conjunction with gemcitabine, did not improve the median survival of patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma compared with single-agent gemcitabine. Further studies with other combinations of gemcitabine and 5-FU are not compelling, and clinical trial resources should address other combinations and novel agents.

Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Yttrium-90 Microspheres: A Comprehensive Report of Long-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has limited treatment options; long-term outcomes following intra-arterial radiation are unknown. We assessed clinical outcomes of patients treated with intra-arterial yttrium-90 microspheres (Y90). METHODS Patients with HCC (n = 291) were treated with Y90 as part of a single-center, prospective, longitudinal cohort study. Toxicities were recorded using the Common Terminology Criteria version 3.0. Response rate and time to progression (TTP) were determined using World Health Organization (WHO) and European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) guidelines. Survival by stage was assessed. Univariate/multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS A total of 526 treatments were administered (mean, 1.8; range, 1-5). Toxicities included fatigue (57%), pain (23%), and nausea/vomiting (20%); 19% exhibited grade 3/4 bilirubin toxicity. The 30-day mortality rate was 3%. Response rates were 42% and 57% based on WHO and EASL criteria, respectively. The overall TTP was 7.9 months (95% confidence interval, 6-10.3). Survival times differed between patients with Child-Pugh A and B disease (A, 17.2 months; B, 7.7 months; P = .002). Patients with Child-Pugh B disease who had portal vein thrombosis (PVT) survived 5.6 months (95% confidence interval, 4.5-6.7). Baseline age; sex; performance status; presence of portal hypertension; tumor distribution; levels of bilirubin, albumin, and alpha-fetoprotein; and WHO/EASL response rate predicted survival. CONCLUSIONS Patients with Child-Pugh A disease, with or without PVT, benefited most from treatment. Patients with Child-Pugh B disease who had PVT had poor outcomes. TTP and overall survival varied by patient stage at baseline. These data can be used to design future Y90 trials and to describe Y90 as a potential treatment option for patients with HCC.

Fluorouracil vs Gemcitabine Chemotherapy Before and After Fluorouracil-Based Chemoradiation Following Resection of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT Among patients with locally advanced metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, gemcitabine has been shown to improve outcomes compared with fluorouracil. OBJECTIVE To determine if the addition of gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil chemoradiation (chemotherapy plus radiation) improves survival for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized controlled phase 3 trial of patients with complete gross total resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and no prior radiation or chemotherapy enrolled between July 1998 and July 2002 with follow-up through August 18, 2006, at 164 US and Canadian institutions. INTERVENTION Chemotherapy with either fluorouracil (continuous infusion of 250 mg/m2 per day; n = 230) or gemcitabine (30-minute infusion of 1000 mg/m2 once per week; n = 221) for 3 weeks prior to chemoradiation therapy and for 12 weeks after chemoradiation therapy. Chemoradiation with a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (250 mg/m2 per day) was the same for all patients (50.4 Gy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Survival for all patients and survival for patients with pancreatic head tumors were the primary end points. Secondary end points included toxicity. RESULTS A total of 451 patients were randomized, eligible, and analyzable. Patients with pancreatic head tumors (n = 388) had a median survival of 20.5 months and a 3-year survival of 31% in the gemcitabine group vs a median survival of 16.9 months and a 3-year survival of 22% in the fluorouracil group (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.03]; P = .09). The treatment effect was strengthened on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.00]; P = .05). Grade 4 hematologic toxicity was 1% in the fluorouracil group and 14% in the gemcitabine group (P < .001) without a difference in febrile neutropenia or infection. There were no differences in the ability to complete chemotherapy or radiation therapy (>85%). CONCLUSIONS The addition of gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemoradiation was associated with a survival benefit for patients with resected pancreatic cancer, although this improvement was not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003216.

Fluorouracil, Mitomycin, and Radiotherapy vs Fluorouracil, Cisplatin, and Radiotherapy for Carcinoma of the Anal Canal: A Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT Chemoradiation as definitive therapy is the preferred primary therapy for patients with anal canal carcinoma; however, the 5-year disease-free survival rate from concurrent fluorouracil/mitomycin and radiation is only approximately 65%. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of cisplatin-based (experimental) therapy vs mitomycin-based (standard) therapy in treatment of anal canal carcinoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS US Gastrointestinal Intergroup trial RTOG 98-11, a multicenter, phase 3, randomized controlled trial comparing treatment with fluorouracil plus mitomycin and radiotherapy vs treatment with fluorouracil plus cisplatin and radiotherapy in 682 patients with anal canal carcinoma enrolled between October 31, 1998, and June 27, 2005. Stratifications included sex, clinical nodal status, and tumor diameter. INTERVENTION Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 intervention groups: (1) the mitomycin-based group (n = 341), who received fluorouracil (1000 mg/m2 on days 1-4 and 29-32) plus mitomycin (10 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29) and radiotherapy (45-59 Gy) or (2) the cisplatin-based group (n = 341), who received fluorouracil (1000 mg/m2 on days 1-4, 29-32, 57-60, and 85-88) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m2 on days 1, 29, 57, and 85) and radiotherapy (45-59 Gy; start day = day 57). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was 5-year disease-free survival; secondary end points were overall survival and time to relapse. RESULTS A total of 644 patients were assessable. The median follow-up for all patients was 2.51 years. Median age was 55 years, 69% were women, 27% had a tumor diameter greater than 5 cm, and 26% had clinically positive nodes. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53%-67%) in the mitomycin-based group and 54% (95% CI, 46%-60%) in the cisplatin-based group (P = .17). The 5-year overall survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 67%-81%) in the mitomycin-based group and 70% (95% CI, 63%-76%) in the cisplatin-based group (P = .10). The 5-year local-regional recurrence and distant metastasis rates were 25% (95% CI, 20%-30%) and 15% (95% CI, 10%-20%), respectively, for mitomycin-based treatment and 33% (95% CI, 27%-40%) and 19% (95% CI, 14%-24%), respectively, for cisplatin-based treatment. The cumulative rate of colostomy was significantly better for mitomycin-based than cisplatin-based treatment (10% vs 19%; P = .02). Severe hematologic toxicity was worse with mitomycin-based treatment (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS In this population of patients with anal canal carcinoma, cisplatin-based therapy failed to improve disease-free-survival compared with mitomycin-based therapy, but cisplatin-based therapy resulted in a significantly worse colostomy rate. These findings do not support the use of cisplatin in place of mitomycin in combination with fluorouracil and radiotherapy in the treatment of anal canal carcinoma. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003596.

Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: 2005 Update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology Practice Guideline

PURPOSE To update the 2000 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on colorectal cancer surveillance. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on results from three independently reported meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that compared low-intensity and high-intensity programs of colorectal cancer surveillance, and on recent analyses of data from major clinical trials in colon and rectal cancer, the Panel recommends annual computed tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen for 3 years after primary therapy for patients who are at higher risk of recurrence and who could be candidates for curative-intent surgery; pelvic CT scan for rectal cancer surveillance, especially for patients with several poor prognostic factors, including those who have not been treated with radiation; colonoscopy at 3 years after operative treatment, and, if results are normal, every 5 years thereafter; flexible proctosigmoidoscopy [corrected] every 6 months for 5 years for rectal cancer patients who have not been treated with pelvic radiation; history and physical examination every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years, every 6 months during years 4 and 5, and subsequently at the discretion of the physician; and carcinoembryonic antigen every 3 months postoperatively for at least 3 years after diagnosis, if the patient is a candidate for surgery or systemic therapy. Chest x-rays, CBCs, and liver function tests are not recommended, and molecular or cellular markers should not influence the surveillance strategy based on available evidence.