Daniel Dietrich

Prognostic Role of KRAS and BRAF in Stage II and III Resected Colon Cancer: Results of the Translational Study on the PETACC-3, EORTC 40993, SAKK 60-00 Trial

PURPOSE Mutations within the KRAS proto-oncogene have predictive value but are of uncertain prognostic value in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. We took advantage of PETACC-3, an adjuvant trial with 3,278 patients with stage II to III colon cancer, to evaluate the prognostic value of KRAS and BRAF tumor mutation status in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue blocks (n = 1,564) were prospectively collected and DNA was extracted from tissue sections from 1,404 cases. Planned analysis of KRAS exon 2 and BRAF exon 15 mutations was performed by allele-specific real-time polymerase chain reaction. Survival analyses were based on univariate and multivariate proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS KRAS and BRAF tumor mutation rates were 37.0% and 7.9%, respectively, and were not significantly different according to tumor stage. In a multivariate analysis containing stage, tumor site, nodal status, sex, age, grade, and microsatellite instability (MSI) status, KRAS mutation was associated with grade (P = .0016), while BRAF mutation was significantly associated with female sex (P = .017), and highly significantly associated with right-sided tumors, older age, high grade, and MSI-high tumors (all P < 10(-4)). In univariate and multivariate analysis, KRAS mutations did not have a major prognostic value regarding relapse-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS). BRAF mutation was not prognostic for RFS, but was for OS, particularly in patients with MSI-low (MSI-L) and stable (MSI-S) tumors (hazard ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.4; P = .0003). CONCLUSION In stage II-III colon cancer, the KRAS mutation status does not have major prognostic value. BRAF is prognostic for OS in MS-L/S tumors.

Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group

PURPOSE This phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (GemCap) versus single-agent Gem in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral capecitabine 650 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m2 by 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m2 by 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks). Patients were stratified according to center, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), presence of pain, and disease extent. RESULTS A total of 319 patients were enrolled between June 2001 and June 2004. Median overall survival (OS) time, the primary end point, was 8.4 and 7.2 months in the GemCap and Gem arms, respectively (P = .234). Post hoc analysis in patients with good KPS (score of 90 to 100) showed a significant prolongation of median OS time in the GemCap arm compared with the Gem arm (10.1 v 7.4 months, respectively; P = .014). The overall frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was similar in each arm. Neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse event in both arms. CONCLUSION GemCap failed to improve OS at a statistically significant level compared with standard Gem treatment. The safety of GemCap and Gem was similar. In the subgroup of patients with good performance status, median OS was improved significantly. GemCap is a practical regimen that may be considered as an alternative to single-agent Gem for the treatment of advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with a good performance status.

Phase II Study of Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin in First- and Second-Line Treatment of Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE To determine the efficacy and tolerability of combining oxaliplatin with capecitabine in the treatment of advanced nonpretreated and pretreated colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-three nonpretreated patients and 26 patients who had experienced one fluoropyrimidine-containing regimen for advanced colorectal cancer were treated with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) bid on days 1 to 14 every 3 weeks. Patients with good performance status (World Health Organization grade 0 to 1) were accrued onto two nonrandomized parallel arms of a phase II study. RESULTS The objective response rate was 49% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33% to 65%) for nonpretreated and 15% (95% CI, 4% to 35%) for pretreated patients. The main toxicity of this combination was diarrhea, which occurred at grade 3 or 4 in 35% of the nonpretreated and 50% of the pretreated patients. Grade 3 or 4 sensory neuropathy, including laryngopharyngeal dysesthesia, occurred in 16% of patients on both cohorts. Capecitabine dose reductions were necessary in 26% of the nonpretreated and 45% of the pretreated patients in the second treatment cycle. The median overall survival was 17.1 months and 11.5 months, respectively. CONCLUSION Combining capecitabine and oxaliplatin yields promising activity in advanced colorectal cancer. The main toxicity is diarrhea, which is manageable with appropriate dose reductions. On the basis of our toxicity experience, we recommend use of capecitabine in combination with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) at an initial dose of 1,250 mg/m(2) bid in nonpretreated patients and at a dose of 1,000 mg/m(2) bid in pretreated patients.

CA 19-9 tumour-marker response to chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer enrolled in a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Several studies in patients undergoing chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic carcinoma have linked a decrease in the concentration of the tumour marker carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 to lengthened survival. The aim of this study was to test the hypotheses that an early decrease in baseline serum CA 19-9 concentration (on day 42, after two cycles of chemotherapy) by at least 50% is associated with lengthened survival, and that a decrease in CA 19-9 concentration of at least 50% from the baseline concentration to the lowest value measured at any time during treatment (nadir) is of prognostic significance, enabling its use as a surrogate endpoint for survival. METHODS CA 19-9 serum concentration was measured at baseline and every 3 weeks thereafter in patients with histologically proven advanced pancreatic carcinoma enrolled in a randomised trial of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus capecitabine. Patients were excluded if baseline serum CA 19-9 concentration was below the upper limit of normal (ULN) in the laboratory or if this measurement was missing. Comparisons of survival between patients with and without a CA 19-9 response were corrected for the guarantee-time bias by the landmark method. The trial on which this study is based is registered on the clinical trials site of the US National Cancer Institute website http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00030732. FINDINGS 247 of 319 randomised patients were assessable for analysis of baseline serum CA 19-9 concentration, and, of these, 175 patients were assessable for tumour-marker response to treatment. Median overall survival for patients with a baseline CA 19-9 concentration equal to or above the median value (ie, 59xULN) was 5.8 months (95% CI 5.1-7.0), which was significantly shorter than that for patients with baseline concentrations below the median value (10.3 months [95% CI 8.6-12.8], p<0.0001). An early decrease in CA 19-9 concentration of at least 50% after two cycles of chemotherapy was not associated with a longer overall survival compared with patients who did not have a decrease of at least 50% (median 10.1 months [9.2-12.7] vs 8.6 months [6.9-11.2], p=0.53; hazard ratio for death 1.11 [0.81-1.52]). Furthermore, a decrease in CA 19-9 concentration of at least 50% reached at the CA 19-9 nadir concentration was not associated with a longer overall survival compared with those patients who did not have a decrease of at least 50% (median 7.8 months [6.5.10.1] vs 6.7 months [5.5-9.8], p=0.74; 0.95 [0.69-1.31]) after adjusting for the guarantee-time bias. INTERPRETATION Pretreatment serum CA 19-9 concentration is an independent prognostic factor for survival, but a decrease in concentration during chemotherapy is not significantly associated with lengthened survival compared with those who did not have a corresponding decrease. Our data suggest that CA 19-9 response during chemotherapy is not a valid surrogate endpoint for survival in clinical trials.

Adding cetuximab to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK

BACKGROUND To determine the activity and tolerability of adding cetuximab to the oxaliplatin and capecitabine (XELOX) combination in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS In a multicenter two-arm phase II trial, patients were randomized to receive oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks alone or in combination with standard dose cetuximab. Treatment was limited to a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS Seventy-four patients with good performance status entered the trial. Objective partial response rates after external review and radiological confirmation were 14% and 41% in the XELOX and in the XELOX + Cetuximab arm, respectively. Stable disease has been observed in 62% and 35% of the patients, with 76% disease control in both arms. Cetuximab led to skin rash in 65% of the patients. The median overall survival was 16.5 months for arm A and 20.5 months for arm B. The median time to progression was 5.8 months for arm A and 7.2 months for arm B. CONCLUSION Differences in response rates between the treatment arms indicate that cetuximab may improve outcome with XELOX. The correct place of the cetuximab, oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combinations in first-line treatment of MCC has to be assessed in phase III trials.

Cetuximab in Combination With Chemoradiotherapy Before Surgery in Patients With Resectable, Locally Advanced Esophageal Carcinoma : a Prospective, Multicenter Phase IB/II Trial (SAKK 75/06)

PURPOSE This multicenter phase IB/II trial investigated cetuximab added to preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with resectable, locally advanced esophageal cancer received two 3-week cycles of induction chemoimmunotherapy (cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1, docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) day 1, cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) days 1, 8,15 [400 mg/m(2) loading dose]) followed by chemoimmunoradiation therapy (CIRT) and surgery. CIRT consisted of 45 Gy radiotherapy (RT) plus concurrent cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) and cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) weekly for 5 weeks in cohort 1. If fewer than three of seven patients experienced limiting toxicity (LT), the next seven patients also received docetaxel (20 mg/m(2) weekly × 5). If fewer than three patients experienced LTs, 13 additional patients were treated at this dose. RESULTS In total, 28 patients (median age, 64 years) with predominantly node-positive (82%) esophageal adenocarcinoma (15 patients) or squamous cell carcinoma (13 patients) were enrolled and 24 (86%) completed the entire trimodal therapy. During CIRT, no LT occurred, rash was not exacerbated within the RT field, and the main grade 3 toxicities were esophagitis (seven patients), anorexia (three), fatigue (three), and thrombosis (two). Surgery (R0 resection) was performed in 25 patients. Anastomotic leakage occurred in three patients: two recovered spontaneously and one successfully underwent re-operation. There were no deaths at 30 days and no treatment-related mortality after 12 months. Nineteen patients (68%) showed complete or near complete pathologic regression. CONCLUSION Adding cetuximab to preoperative chemoradiotherapy is feasible without increasing postoperative mortality. Phase III investigation has begun based on the high histopathologic response and R0 resection rate.

Influence of Preoperative Functional Status on Outcome After Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND International registries with large, heterogeneous patient populations provide excellent research opportunities for studying factors that influence treatment outcomes after total hip arthroplasty. In the present study, we used a European multinational database to investigate whether there is an association between three functional variables (preoperative pain, mobility, and motion) and functional outcome. METHODS We performed a retrospective cohort study on preoperative and follow-up clinical data that were prospectively entered into the International Documentation and Evaluation System European hip registry between 1967 and 2002. The inclusion criteria for this study were an age of more than twenty years, an underlying diagnosis of osteoarthritis, and a Charnley class-A functional designation at the time of surgery. A total of 12,925 patients (13,766 total hip arthroplasties) who met these criteria were entered into the analysis. Three functional variables (pain, mobility, and motion) that were assessed preoperatively were evaluated postoperatively at various follow-up examinations for a maximum of ten years. RESULTS Six thousand four hundred and one patients could walk longer than ten minutes preoperatively; of these, 57.1% had a walking capacity of more than sixty minutes at the time of the most recent follow-up. In comparison, 6896 patients had a preoperative walking capacity of less than ten minutes and only 38.9% of these patients could walk more than sixty minutes at the time of the most recent follow-up. The difference was significant (p < 0.01). Similarly, 10,375 patients had a preoperative hip flexion range of >70 degrees ; of these, 74.7% had a flexion range of >90 degrees at the time of the most recent follow-up. In comparison, 2793 patients had a preoperative hip flexion range of <70 degrees and only 62.6% of these patients had a flexion range of >90 degrees at the time of the most recent follow-up. The difference was also significant (p < 0.01). Lasting, complete, or almost complete pain relief was achieved by >80% of the patients following total hip arthroplasty regardless of their preoperative categorization of pain. CONCLUSIONS Patients with poor preoperative walking capacity and hip flexion are less likely to achieve an optimal outcome with regard to walking and motion. In contrast, there is no correlation between the preoperative pain level and pain alleviation, which is generally good and long-lasting after total hip arthroplasty.

Clinical benefit and quality of life in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine versus gemcitabine alone: a randomized multicenter phase III clinical trial--SAKK 44/00-CECOG/PAN.1.3.001.

PURPOSE To compare clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (Cap) versus single-agent Gem for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral Cap 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks or until progression. CBR criteria and QOL indicators were assessed over this period. CBR was defined as improvement from baseline for >or= 4 consecutive weeks in pain (pain intensity or analgesic consumption) and Karnofsky performance status, stability in one but improvement in the other, or stability in pain and performance status but improvement in weight. RESULTS Of 319 patients, 19% treated with GemCap and 20% treated with Gem experienced a CBR, with a median duration of 9.5 and 6.5 weeks, respectively (P < .02); 54% of patients treated with GemCap and 60% treated with Gem had no CBR (remaining patients were not assessable). There was no treatment difference in QOL (n = 311). QOL indicators were improving under chemotherapy (P < .05). These changes differed by the time to failure, with a worsening 1 to 2 months before treatment failure (all P < .05). CONCLUSION There is no indication of a difference in CBR or QOL between GemCap and Gem. Regardless of their initial condition, some patients experience an improvement in QOL on chemotherapy, followed by a worsening before treatment failure.

Immediate Versus Deferred Hormonal Treatment for Patients With Prostate Cancer Who Are Not Suitable for Curative Local Treatment: Results of the Randomized Trial SAKK 08/88

PURPOSE To determine if immediate hormonal therapy is advantageous compared with deferred treatment in newly diagnosed asymptomatic prostate cancer patients who, for any reason, were not candidates for curative local treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between February 1988 and February 1992, 197 patients with a median age of 76 years (range, 56 to 86 years) were randomly assigned to receive either immediate or deferred orchiectomy on symptomatic progression. The two groups did not differ significantly in clinical or laboratory parameters; 67% had T3-4 tumors and 20% had lymph node metastases. Patient accrual was stopped prematurely because of a similar competing trial. Therefore, observation time was prolonged to achieve the desired number of events and statistical power. RESULTS Deferred orchiectomy was necessary in 58% of the patients. Median time to disease progression was 2.8 years less than for patients with immediate orchiectomy. However, overall pain-free time from random assignment to symptomatic progression after immediate or deferred orchiectomy, and performance status, were identical in both groups. Cancer-specific survival tended to be longer in the immediate group (P = .09) but there was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (P = .96). The median hemoglobin value decreased significantly after immediate orchiectomy (P < .001). CONCLUSION For elderly, asymptomatic patients not undergoing curative local treatment, we were unable to show any major advantage of immediate compared with deferred hormonal treatment regarding quality of life or overall survival in our limited number of patients. Disabling complications were prevented in the deferred-treatment arm by careful follow-up; 42% of these patients never required any tumor-specific treatment.

Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III non-inferiority trial (SAKK 41/06)

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is a standard option for first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. We assessed whether no continuation is non-inferior to continuation of bevacizumab after completing first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS In an open-label, phase III multicentre trial, patients with mCRC without disease progression after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were randomly assigned to continuing bevacizumab at a standard dose or no treatment. CT scans were done every 6 weeks until disease progression. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A non-inferiority limit for hazard ratio (HR) of 0.727 was chosen to detect a difference in TTP of 6 weeks or less, with a one-sided significance level of 10% and a statistical power of 85%. RESULTS The intention-to-treat population comprised 262 patients: median follow-up was 36.7 months. The median TTP was 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1-5.4] months for bevacizumab continuation versus 2.9 (95% CI 2.8-3.8) months for no continuation; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.58-0.96). Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated. The median overall survival was 25.4 months for bevacizumab continuation versus 23.8 months (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.63-1.1; P = 0.2) for no continuation. Severe adverse events were uncommon in the bevacizumab continuation arm. Costs for bevacizumab continuation were estimated to be ∼30,000 USD per patient. CONCLUSIONS Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated for treatment holidays versus continuing bevacizumab monotheray, after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Based on no impact on overall survival and increased treatment costs, bevacizumab as a single agent is of no meaningful therapeutic value. More efficient treatment approaches are needed to maintain control of stabilized disease following induction therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00544700.