Garth D. Nelson

Benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer: A meta-analysis

CONTEXT Despite potentially curative resection of stomach cancer, 50% to 90% of patients die of disease relapse. Numerous randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have compared surgery alone with adjuvant chemotherapy, but definitive evidence is lacking. OBJECTIVES To perform an individual patient-level meta-analysis of all RCTs to quantify the potential benefit of chemotherapy after complete resection over surgery alone in terms of overall survival and disease-free survival, and to further study the role of regimens, including monochemotherapy; combined chemotherapy with fluorouracil derivatives, mitomycin C, and other therapies but no anthracyclines; combined chemotherapy with fluorouracil derivatives, mitomycin C, and anthracyclines; and other treatments. DATA SOURCES Data from all RCTs comparing adjuvant chemotherapy with surgery alone in patients with resectable gastric cancer. We searched MEDLINE (up to 2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the National Institutes of Health trial registry, and published proceedings from major oncologic and gastrointestinal cancer meetings. STUDY SELECTION All RCTs closed to patient recruitment before 2004 were eligible. Trials testing radiotherapy; neoadjuvant, perioperative, or intraperitoneal chemotherapy; or immunotherapy were excluded. Thirty-one eligible trials (6390 patients) were identified. DATA EXTRACTION As of 2010, individual patient data were available from 17 trials (3838 patients representing 60% of the targeted data) with a median follow-up exceeding 7 years. RESULTS There were 1000 deaths among 1924 patients assigned to chemotherapy groups and 1067 deaths among 1857 patients assigned to surgery-only groups. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a statistically significant benefit in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.90; P < .001) and disease-free survival (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75-0.90; P < .001). There was no significant heterogeneity for overall survival across RCTs (P = .52) or the 4 regimen groups (P = .13). Five-year overall survival increased from 49.6% to 55.3% with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION Among the RCTs included, postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy based on fluorouracil regimens was associated with reduced risk of death in gastric cancer compared with surgery alone.

Treatment of Colorectal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis With Systemic Chemotherapy: A Pooled Analysis of North Central Cancer Treatment Group Phase III Trials N9741 and N9841

PURPOSE Symptoms and complications of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) differ by metastatic sites. There is a paucity of prospective survival data for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis colorectal cancer (pcCRC). We characterized outcomes of patients with pcCRC enrolled onto two prospective randomized trials of chemotherapy and contrasted that with other manifestations of mCRC (non-pcCRC). METHODS A total of 2,095 patients enrolled onto two prospective randomized trials were evaluated for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the adjusted associations. RESULTS The characteristics of the pcCRC group (n = 364) were similar to those of the non-pcCRC patients in median age (63 v 61 years, P = .23), sex (57% males v 61%, P = .23), and performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 94% v 96%, P = .06), but differed in frequency of liver (63% v 82%, P < .001) and lung metastases (27% v 34%, P = .01). Median OS (12.7 v 17.6 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.5; P < .001) and PFS (5.8 v 7.2 months, HR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.3; P = .001) were shorter for pcCRC versus non-pcCRC. The unfavorable prognostic influence of pcCRC remained after adjusting for age, PS, liver metastases, and other factors (OS: HR = 1.3, P < .001; PFS: HR = 1.1, P = .02). Infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin was superior to irinotecan, leucovorin, and fluorouracil as a first-line treatment among pcCRC (HR for OS = 0.62, P = .005) and non-pcCRC patients (HR = 0.66, P < .001). CONCLUSION pcCRC is associated with a significantly shorter OS and PFS as compared with other manifestations of mCRC. Future trials for mCRC should consider stratifying on the basis of pcCRC status.

Lenalidomide Combined With R-CHOP Overcomes Negative Prognostic Impact of Non–Germinal Center B-Cell Phenotype in Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Phase II Study

PURPOSE Lenalidomide has significant single-agent activity in relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We demonstrated that lenalidomide can be safely combined with R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone); this new combination is known as R2CHOP. The goal of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy of this combination in newly diagnosed DLBCL. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients were adults with newly diagnosed untreated stages II to IV CD20(+) DLBCL. Patients received lenalidomide 25 mg orally per day on days 1 through 10 with standard-dose R-CHOP every 21 days for six cycles. All patients received pegfilgrastim on day 2 of each cycle and aspirin prophylaxis throughout. DLBCL molecular subtype was determined by tumor immunohistochemistry and classified as germinal center B-cell (GCB) versus non-GCB in the R2CHOP patients and 87 control patients with DLBCL from the Lymphoma Database who were treated with conventional R-CHOP. RESULTS In all, 64 patients with DLBCL were enrolled, and 60 were evaluable for response. The overall response rate was 98% (59 of 60) with 80% (48 of 60) achieving complete response. Event-free survival and overall survival (OS) rates at 24 months were 59% (95% CI, 48% to 74%) and 78% (95% CI, 68% to 90%), respectively. In R-CHOP patients, 24-month progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were 28% versus 64% (P < .001) and 46% versus 78% (P < .001) in non-GCB DLBCL versus GCB DLBCL, respectively. In contrast, there was no difference in 24-month PFS or OS for R2CHOP patients on the basis of non-GCB and GCB subtype (60% v 59% [P = .83] and 83% v 75% [P = .61] at 2 years, respectively). CONCLUSION R2CHOP shows promising efficacy in DLBCL. The addition of lenalidomide appears to mitigate a negative impact of non-GCB phenotype on patient outcome.

Prognostic Impact of Deficient DNA Mismatch Repair in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer From a Randomized Trial of FOLFOX-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy

PURPOSE The association of deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) with prognosis in patients with colon cancer treated with adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy remains unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS Resected, stage III colon carcinomas from patients (N = 2,686) randomly assigned to FOLFOX ± cetuximab (North Central Cancer Treatment Group N0147 trial) were analyzed for mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression and mutations in BRAF(V600E) (exon 15) and KRAS (codons 12 and 13). Association of biomarkers with disease-free survival (DFS) was determined using Cox models. A validation cohort (Cancer and Leukemia Group B 88903 trial) was used. RESULTS dMMR was detected in 314 (12%) of 2,580 tumors, of which 49.3% and 10.6% had BRAF(V600E) or KRAS mutations, respectively. MMR status was not prognostic overall (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.07; P = .14), yet significant interactions were found between MMR and primary tumor site (P(interaction) = .009) and lymph node category (N1 v N2; P(interaction) = .014). Favorable DFS was observed for dMMR versus proficient MMR proximal tumors (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.94; P = .018) but not dMMR distal tumors (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.99 to 2.95; P = .056), adjusting for mutations and covariates. Any survival benefit of dMMR was lost in N2 tumors. Mutations in BRAF(V600E) (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.70; P = .009) or KRAS (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.21 to 1.70; P < .001) were independently associated with worse DFS. The observed MMR by tumor site interaction was validated in an independent cohort of stage III colon cancers (P(interaction) = .037). CONCLUSION The prognostic impact of MMR depended on tumor site, and this interaction was validated in an independent cohort. Among dMMR cancers, proximal tumors had favorable outcome, whereas distal or N2 tumors had poor outcome. BRAF or KRAS mutations were independently associated with adverse outcome.

KRAS Codon 12 and 13 Mutations in Relation to Disease-Free Survival in BRAF–Wild-Type Stage III Colon Cancers from an Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial (N0147 Alliance)

Purpose: We examined the prognostic impact of specific KRAS mutations in patients with stage III colon adenocarcinoma receiving adjuvant FOLFOX alone or combined with cetuximab in a phase III trial (N0147). Analysis was restricted to BRAF–wild-type tumors, because BRAF mutation was associated with poor prognosis, and BRAF and KRAS mutations are mutually exclusive. Experimental Design: The seven most common KRAS mutations in codon 12 and codon 13 were examined in 2,478 BRAF–wild-type tumors. Because KRAS mutations in codon 12 (n = 779) or 13 (n = 220) were not predictive of adjuvant cetuximab benefit, study arms were pooled for analysis. Disease-free survival (DFS) was evaluated by HRs using Cox models. Results: KRAS mutations in codon 12 (multivariate HR, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.28–1.80; P < 0.0001) or codon 13 (multivariate HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.04–1.77; P = 0.0248) were significantly associated with shorter DFS compared with patients with wild-type KRAS/BRAF tumors, independent of covariates. KRAS codon 12 mutations were independently associated with proficient mismatch repair (P < 0.0001), proximal tumor site (P < 0.0001), low grade, age, and sex, whereas codon 13 mutations were associated with proximal site (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: KRAS mutations in either codon 12 or 13 are associated with inferior survival in patients with resected stage III colon cancer. These data highlight the importance of accurate molecular characterization and the significant role of KRAS mutations in both codons in the progression of this malignancy in the adjuvant setting. Clin Cancer Res; 20(11); 3033–43. ©2014 AACR.

Prognostic factors differ by tumor stage for small cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of North Central Cancer Treatment Group trials.

An analysis of 14 small cell lung cancer (SCLC) trials was performed to improve the current understanding of potential prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS) in groups of patients with limited‐stage disease SCLC (LD‐SCLC) and extensive‐stage disease SCLC (ED‐SCLC) separately.

Patient and Tumor Characteristics and BRAF and KRAS Mutations in Colon Cancer, NCCTG/Alliance N0147

BACKGROUND KRAS and BRAF (V600E) mutations are important predictive and prognostic markers, respectively, in colon cancer, but little is known about patient and clinical factors associated with them. METHODS Two thousand three hundred twenty-six of 3397 patients in the N0147 phase III adjuvant trial for stage III colon cancer completed a patient questionnaire. Primary tumors were assessed for KRAS and BRAF (V600E) mutations and defective mismatch repair (dMMR) status. Logistic regression models and categorical data analysis were used to identify associations of patient and tumor characteristics with mutation status. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS KRAS (35%) and BRAF (V600E) (14%) mutations were nearly mutually exclusive. KRAS mutations were more likely to be present in patients without a family history of colon cancer and never smokers. Tumors with KRAS mutations were less likely to have dMMR (odds ratio [OR] = 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.15 to 0.31; P < .001) and high-grade histology (OR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.92; P < .001) but were more often right-sided. Among KRAS-mutated tumors, those with a Gly13Asp mutation tended to have dMMR and high-grade histology. Tumors with BRAF (V600E) mutations were more likely to be seen in patients who were aged 70 years or older (OR = 3.33; 95% CI = 2.50 to 4.42; P < .001) and current or former smokers (OR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.26 to 2.14; P < .001) but less likely in non-whites and men. Tumors with BRAF (V600E) mutations were more likely to be right-sided and to have four or more positive lymph nodes, high-grade histology, and dMMR. CONCLUSIONS Specific patient and tumor characteristics are associated with KRAS and BRAF (V600E) mutations.

Associations Between Cigarette Smoking Status and Colon Cancer Prognosis Among Participants in North Central Cancer Treatment Group Phase III Trial N0147

PURPOSE By using data from North Central Cancer Treatment Group Phase III Trial N0147, a randomized adjuvant trial of patients with stage III colon cancer, we assessed the relationship between smoking and cancer outcomes, disease-free survival (DFS), and time to recurrence (TTR), accounting for heterogeneity by patient and tumor characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS Before random assignment to infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or FOLFOX plus cetuximab, 1,968 participants completed a questionnaire on smoking history and other risk factors. Cox models assessed the association between smoking history and the primary trial outcome of DFS (ie, time to recurrence or death), as well as TTR, adjusting for other clinical and patient factors. The median follow-up was 3.5 years among patients who did not experience events. RESULTS Compared with never-smokers, ever smokers experienced significantly shorter DFS (3-year DFS proportion: 70% v 74%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.42). This association persisted after multivariate adjustment (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.49). There was significant interaction in this association by BRAF mutation status (P = .03): smoking was associated with shorter DFS in patients with BRAF wild-type (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.66) but not BRAF mutated (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.29) colon cancer. Smoking was more strongly associated with poorer DFS in those with KRAS mutated versus KRAS wild-type colon cancer (HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.12 to 2.00] v HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.85 to 1.39]), although interaction by KRAS mutation status was not statistically significant (P = .07). Associations were comparable in analyses of TTR. CONCLUSION Overall, smoking was significantly associated with shorter DFS and TTR in patients with colon cancer. These adverse relationships were most evident in patients with BRAF wild-type or KRAS mutated colon cancer.

A Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Carboplatin with or without Cediranib as First-Line Therapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study N0528

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine and carboplatin with (arm A) or without (arm B) daily oral cediranib as first-line therapy for advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. Methods: A lead-in phase to determine the tolerability of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, and carboplatin on day 1 at area under curve 5 administered every 21 days with cediranib 45 mg once daily was followed by a 2 (A):1 (B) randomized phase II study. The primary end point was confirmed overall response rate (ORR) with 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6) rate in arm A as secondary end point. Polymorphisms in genes encoding cediranib targets and transport were correlated with treatment outcome. Results: On the basis of the safety assessment, cediranib 30 mg daily was used in the phase II portion. A total of 58 and 29 evaluable patients were accrued to arms A and B. Patients in A experienced more grade 3+ nonhematologic adverse events, 71% versus 45% (p = 0.01). The ORR was 19% (A) versus 20% (B) (p = 1.0). PFS6 in A was 48% (95% confidence interval: 35%–62%), thus meeting the protocol-specified threshold of at least 40%. The median overall survival was 12.0 versus 9.9 months (p = 0.10). FGFR1 rs7012413, FGFR2 rs2912791, and VEGFR3 rs11748431 polymorphisms were significantly associated with decreased overall survival (hazard ratio 2.78–5.01, p = 0.0002–0.0095). Conclusions: The trial did not meet its primary end point of ORR but met its secondary end point of PFS6. The combination with cediranib 30 mg daily resulted in increased toxicity. Pharmacogenetic analysis revealed an association of FGFR and VEGFR variants with survival.

Comparison of FOLFIRI With or Without Cetuximab in Patients With Resected Stage III Colon Cancer; NCCTG (Alliance) Intergroup Trial N0147

BACKGROUND Two arms with FOLFIRI, with or without cetuximab, were initially included in the randomized phase III intergroup clinical trial NCCTG (North Central Cancer Treatment Group) N0147. When other contemporary trials demonstrated no benefit to using irinotecan as adjuvant therapy, the FOLFIRI-containing arms were discontinued. We report the clinical outcomes for patients randomized to FOLFIRI with or without cetuximab. PATIENTS AND METHODS After resection, patients were randomized to 12 biweekly cycles of FOLFIRI, with or without cetuximab. KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog) mutation status was retrospectively determined in a central lab. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS One hundred and six patients received FOLFIRI and 40 received FOLFIRI plus cetuximab. Median follow-up was 5.95 years (range, 0.1-7.0 years). The addition of cetuximab showed a trend toward improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.26-1.1; P = .09) and OS (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.17-1.16; P = .10) in the overall group, regardless of KRAS status, and in patients with wild type KRAS. Grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic adverse effects were significantly increased in the cetuximab versus FOLFIRI-alone arm (68% vs. 46%; P = .02). Adjuvant FOLFIRI resulted in a 3-year DFS less than that expected for FOLFOX. CONCLUSION In this small randomized subset of patients with resected stage III colon cancer, the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward improved DFS and OS. Nevertheless, considering the limitations of this analysis, FOLFOX without the addition of a biologic agent remains the standard of care for adjuvant therapy in resected stage III colon cancer.