Julia Quidde

Maintenance strategies after first-line oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AIO 0207): a randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND The definition of a best maintenance strategy following combination chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated whether no continuation of therapy or bevacizumab alone are non-inferior to fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, following induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab. METHODS In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial, we included patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function, no pre-existing neuropathy greater than grade 1, and measurable disease, from 55 hospitals and 51 private practices in Germany. After 24 weeks of induction therapy with either fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin, both with bevacizumab, patients without disease progression were randomly assigned centrally by fax (1:1:1) to standard maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, bevacizumab alone, or no treatment. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. Stratification criteria were response status, termination of oxaliplatin, previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin, and ECOG performance status. At first progression, re-induction with all drugs of the induction treatment was a planned part of the protocol. Time to failure of strategy was the primary endpoint, defined as time from randomisation to second progression after maintenance (and if applicable re-induction), death, or initiation of further treatment including a new drug. Time to failure of strategy was equivalent to time to first progression for patients who did not receive re-induction (for any reason). The boundary for assessment of non-inferiority was upper limit of the one-sided 98·8% CI 1·43. Analyses were done by intention to treat. The study has completed recruitment, but follow-up of participants is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00973609. FINDINGS Between Sept 17, 2009, and Feb 21, 2013, 837 patients were enrolled and 472 randomised; 158 were randomly assigned to receive fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, 156 to receive bevacizumab monotherapy, and 158 to receive no treatment. Median follow-up from randomisation is 17·0 months (IQR 9·5-25·4). Median time to failure of strategy was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·1-8·5) for the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 6·1 months (5·3-7·4) for the bevacizumab alone group, and 6·4 months (4·8-7·6) for the no treatment group. Bevacizumab alone was non-inferior to standard fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·85-1·37]; p=0·53; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·42), whereas no treatment was not (HR 1·26 [0·99-1·60]; p=0·056; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·65). The protocol-defined re-induction after first progression was rarely done (30 [19%] patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 67 [43%] in the bevacizumab monotherapy group, and 73 [46%] in the no treatment group. The most common grade 3 adverse event was sensory neuropathy (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 22 [14%] of 156 patients in the bevacizumab alone group, and 12 [8%] of 158 patients in the no treatment group). INTERPRETATION Although non-inferiority for bevacizumab alone was demonstrated for the primary endpoint, maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab may be the preferable option for patients following an induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab, as it allows the planned discontinuation of the initial combination without compromising time with controlled disease. Only a few patients were exposed to re-induction treatment, thus deeming the primary endpoint time to failure of strategy non-informative and clinically irrelevant. Progression-free survival and overall survival should be considered primary endpoints in future trials exploring maintenance strategies.

A novel microfluidic platform for size and deformability based separation and the subsequent molecular characterization of viable circulating tumor cells

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were introduced as biomarkers more than 10 years ago, but capture of viable CTCs at high purity from peripheral blood of cancer patients is still a major technical challenge. Here, we report a novel microfluidic platform designed for marker independent capture of CTCs. The Parsortix™ cell separation system provides size and deformability‐based enrichment with automated staining for cell identification, and subsequent recovery (harvesting) of cells from the device. Using the Parsortix™ system, average cell capture inside the device ranged between 42% and 70%. Subsequent harvest of cells from the device ranged between 54% and 69% of cells captured. Most importantly, 99% of the isolated tumor cells were viable after processing in spiking experiments as well as after harvesting from patient samples and still functional for downstream molecular analysis as demonstrated by mRNA characterization and array‐based comparative genomic hybridization. Analyzing clinical blood samples from metastatic (n = 20) and nonmetastatic (n = 6) cancer patients in parallel with CellSearch® system, we found that there was no statistically significant difference between the quantitative behavior of the two systems in this set of twenty six paired separations. In conclusion, the epitope independent Parsortix™ system enables the isolation of viable CTCs at a very high purity. Using this system, viable tumor cells are easily accessible and ready for molecular and functional analysis. The systems ability for enumeration and molecular characterization of EpCAM‐negative CTCs will help to broaden research into the mechanisms of cancer as well as facilitating the use of CTCs as “liquid biopsies.”

Improved Detection of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer by the Combination of the CellSearch® System and the AdnaTest®

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the major causes of cancer-related death and reliable blood-based prognostic biomarkers are urgently needed. The enumeration and molecular characterization of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) has gained increasing interest in clinical practice. CTC detection by CellSearch® has already been correlated to an unfavorable outcome in metastatic CRC. However, the CTC detection rate in mCRC disease is low compared to other tumor entities. Thus, the use of alternative (or supplementary) assays might help to itemize the prognostic use of CTCs as blood-based biomarkers. In this study, blood samples from 47 mCRC patients were screened for CTCs using the FDA-cleared CellSearch® technology and / or the AdnaTest®. 38 samples could be processed in parallel. We demonstrate that a combined analysis of CellSearch® and the AdnaTest® leads to an improved detection of CTCs in our mCRC patient cohort (positivity rate CellSearch® 33%, AdnaTest® 30%, combined 50%). While CTCs detected with the CellSearch® system were significantly associated with progression-free survival (p = 0.046), a significant correlation regarding overall survival could be only seen when both assays were combined (p = 0.013). These findings could help to establish improved tools to detect CTCs as on-treatment biomarkers for clinical routine in future studies.

Quality of life assessment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving maintenance therapy after first-line induction treatment: a preplanned analysis of the phase III AIO KRK 0207 trial.

BACKGROUND First-line maintenance strategies are a current matter of debate in the management of mCRC. Their impact on patients health-related quality of life (HRQOL) has not yet been evaluated. The objective of this study was to assess whether differences in HRQOL during any active maintenance treatment compared with no maintenance treatment exist. PATIENT AND METHODS Eight hundred and thirty-seven patients were enrolled in the AIO KRK 0207 trial. Four hundred and seventy-two underwent randomization (after 24 weeks of induction treatment) into one of the maintenance arms: FP plus Bev (arm A), Bev alone (arm B), or no active treatment (arm C). HRQOL were assessed every 6 weeks during induction and maintenance treatment independent from treatment stop, delay, or modification, and also continued after progression, using the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29. The mean value of the global quality of life dimension (GHS/QoL) of the EORTC QLQ-C30, calculated as the average of all available time points after randomization was considered as pre-specified main endpoint. Additionally, EORTC QLQ-C30 response scores were analyzed. RESULTS For HRQOL analysis, 413 patients were eligible (arm A: 136; arm B: 142, arm C: 135). Compliance rate with the HRQOL questionnaires was 95% at time of randomization and remained high during maintenance (98%, 99%, 97% and 97% at week 6, 12, 18 and 24). No significant differences between treatment arms in the mean GHS/QoL scores were observed at any time point. Also, rates of GHS/QoL score deterioration were similar (20.5%; 17.2% and 20.7% of patients), whereas a score improvement occurred in 36.1%; 43.8% and 42.1% (arms A, B and C). CONCLUSION Continuation of an active maintenance treatment with FP/Bev after induction treatment was neither associated with a detrimental effect on GHS/QoL scores when compared with both, less active treatment with Bev alone or no active treatment. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER NCT00973609 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

T-cell diversification reflects antigen selection in the blood of patients on immune checkpoint inhibition and may be exploited as liquid biopsy biomarker.

Cancer immunotherapy with antibodies targeting immune checkpoints, such as programmed cell death protein 1 (PD‐1), shows encouraging results, but reliable biomarkers predicting response to this costly and potentially toxic treatment approach are still lacking. To explore an immune signature predictive for response, we performed liquid biopsy immunoprofiling in 18 cancer patients undergoing PD‐1 inhibition before and shortly after initiation of treatment by multicolor flow cytometry and next‐generation T‐ and B‐cell immunosequencing (TCRß/IGH). Findings were correlated with clinical outcomes. We found almost complete saturation of surface PD‐1 on all T‐cell subsets after the first dose of the antibody. Both T‐ and B‐cell compartments quantitatively expanded during treatment. These expansions were mainly driven by an increase in the activated T‐cell compartments, as well as of naïve B‐ and plasma cells. Deep immunosequencing revealed a clear diversification pattern of the clonal T‐cell space indicative of antigenic selection in 47% of patients, while the remaining patients showed stable repertoires. 43% of the patients with a diversification pattern showed disease control in response to the PD‐1 inhibitor. No disease stabilizations were observed without clonal T‐cell space diversification. Our data show for the first time a clear impact of PD‐1 targeting not only on circulating T‐cells, but also on B‐lineage cells, shedding light on the complexity of the anti‐tumor immune response. Liquid biopsy T‐cell next‐generation immunosequencing should be prospectively evaluated as part of a composite response prediction biomarker panel in the context of clinical studies.

Integrating patient reported measures as predictive parameters into decisionmaking about palliative chemotherapy: a pilot study

BackgroundSystemic treatment has proven to improve physical symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. Relationship between quality of life (QoL) or symptom burden (SYB) and treatment efficacy (tumour response and survival) is poorly described. Therefore, we evaluated the predictive value of pretreatment QoL and SYB on treatment outcomes.MethodsEligible patients had metastatic gastrointestinal cancers and were about to receive 1st/2nd line palliative chemotherapy. 47 patients were consecutively enrolled. QoL and SYB were assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 and MSKCC MSAS questionnaires before treatment and after first response evaluation after 8–12 weeks. Logistic regression analysis of QoL and SYB for prediction of objective treatment efficacy was performed. Patients were categorized according to response rate (RR) based on RECIST1.1 and progression free survival (PFS). PFS was categorized by a ratio (individual PFS/expected PFS) in above median (ratio ≥ 1) or below median PFS (ratio < 1). QoL and SYB were analysed for RR groups (partial response, stable or progressive disease) and PFS ratio (PFSR).ResultsObjective response to chemotherapy and increase in PFS were associated with better pretreatment QoL and less SYB. Patients with future objective treatment efficacy (PFSR ≥ 1) evidenced clinically relevant better role/emotional/cognitive/social functioning and less fatigue and appetite loss at baseline in comparison to PFSR < 1 (>10 points difference). Lowest scores in all functioning scales at treatment start were seen in patients with future PFSR < 1. Global health status (EORTC), PSYCH subscale and global distress index (MSAS) predicted PFSR, even if adjusted for gender, age, cancer type, ECOG and line of treatment (p < 0.05). Interestingly, improved QoL and SYB (subjective benefit) were noted even in patients with worse pretreatment status and no objective tumour response.ConclusionFuture non-responders seem to show distinct QoL patterns before chemotherapy. This may facilitate early detection of patients deriving less or even no benefit from treatment regarding prolongation of survival. Even in patients with primarily progressive disease QoL and SYB may improve during treatment. Integration of QoL and SYB assessment into decision-making about palliative chemotherapy seem to be an important approach to improve patient outcome and should be further evaluated.

Baseline and On-Treatment Markers Determining Prognosis of First-Line Chemotherapy in Combination with Bevacizumab in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Background: In metastatic colorectal cancer, no upfront or on-treatment markers are available to determine the prognosis or efficacy for chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab. Patients and Methods: The current analysis was performed to evaluate the prognostic value of disease and patient characteristics (age, number of metastatic sites, stage of primary tumor, performance status, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)) and on-treatment changes of CEA (response after 8-12 weeks of treatment and specific patterns of CEA kinetics) in patients from an observational cohort study of chemotherapy with bevacizumab. Results: Baseline factors were available from 1,438 patients. Patients with baseline CEA levels > 20 ng/ml, more than 1 metastatic site, and age > 75 years showed significantly lower progression-free (PFS) and overall survival in multivariate analysis. A CEA response of > 30% during treatment was associated with increased PFS. In addition, the pattern of CEA kinetics predicts survival and response to treatment. Conclusion: In summary, baseline CEA, number of metastatic sites, and age are strong independent prognostic factors for survival. By monitoring CEA, clear patterns with distinct prognostic value can be determined. CEA kinetics and/or response after 8-12 weeks might be a useful and simple tool to stratify the post-induction treatment approach based on individual prognosis in the future.

Randomized controlled trial of S-1 maintenance therapy in metastatic esophagogastric cancer – the multinational MATEO study

BackgroundThe optimal duration of firstline chemotherapy in metastatic esophagogastric cancer is unknown. In most clinical trials therapy was given until tumour progression or limiting toxicity. Maintenance concepts aiming to prolong the duration of response and maintain quality of life have been established in other tumour types but not in esophagogastric cancer. S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine with proven efficacy in metastatic esophagogastric cancer.MethodsThe Maintenance Teysuno® (S-1) in esophagogastric cancer (MATEO) trial is a multinational, randomized phase II study that explores the role of S-1 maintenance therapy in Her-2 negative, advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. After a 12-week firstline platinum-fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy patients without tumour progression are randomized in a 2:1 allocation to receive S-1 alone or continue with the same regimen as during the primary period. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include safety and toxicity, progression-free survival and quality of life.Correlative biomarker analyses focus on the identification of a subgroup of patients with a prolonged benefit from S-1 based maintenance therapy.DiscussionMATEO will be the first trial to define the role of a S-1 based maintenance therapy in patients having received a platinum-based firstline chemotherapy.Trial registrationNCT02128243 (date of registration: 29–04-2014).

Treatment of Metastatic Spindle Epithelial Tumor with Thymus-Like Differentiation (SETTLE) - Long-Term Disease Control by Multimodal Therapy

Background: Spindle epithelial tumor with thymus-like differentiation (SETTLE) is a very rare tumor that occurs mainly in pediatric patients and young adults. Only few of these patients develops metastatic disease; therefore, clinical data regarding treatment and outcome of metastatic SETTLE are extremely limited. Several chemotherapy agents have been used in SETTLE but due to the limited number of patients no evidence-based therapy exists. Case Report: We present a case of metastatic SETTLE presenting with high tumor burden and paraneoplastic hypercalcemia. Prolonged disease control with several lines of platinum-based chemotherapy, anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy and additional radiotherapy was achieved. Conclusion: Multi-agent chemotherapy is an active treatment in metastatic SETTLE and can induce sustained tumor control.

Konsensusempfehlungen deutscher Experten - Management der Therapie mit Idelalisib

Idelalisib, die erste Substanz in der Wirkklasse der Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase delta (PI3Kδ)-Inhibitoren, ist in Deutschland für die Therapie von Patienten mit chronischer lymphatischer Leukämie (CLL) und follikulärem Lymphom (FL) zugelassen. Im Rahmen eines Expertenmeetings wurden Empfehlungen für das Therapiemanagement erarbeitet, um das Nutzen-Risiko-Profil von Idelalisib weiter zu diskutieren. In klinischen Studien [2] hat Idelalisib in den zugelassenen Indikationen eine hohe Wirksamkeit gezeigt. Doch wie jede effektive Behandlung kann auch die Idelalisib-Therapie mit Nebenwirkungen assoziiert sein, deren Management im klinischen Alltag beherrscht werden muss. Als wichtige potenzielle Nebenwirkungen wurden in diesem Zusammenhang insbesondere Kolitiden, Infektionen unter anderem mit dem Cytomegalievirus (CMV) und Pneumocystis jirovecii-Pneumonien (PJP) sowie nichtinfektiöse Pneumonitiden definiert.