Laura Cisar

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.

Irinotecan Plus Gemcitabine Results in No Survival Advantage Compared With Gemcitabine Monotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Despite Increased Tumor Response Rate

PURPOSE This phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study compared the overall survival associated with irinotecan plus gemcitabine (IRINOGEM) versus gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM) in patients with chemotherapy-naive, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS IRINOGEM patients received starting doses of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 given weekly for 2 weeks every 3-week cycle. GEM patients received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 of 8 weeks (induction) and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. The primary end point of the trial was survival. Secondary end points included tumor response, time to tumor progression (TTP), changes in CA 19-9, and safety. RESULTS In each arm, 180 randomly assigned patients comprised the intent-to-treat population evaluated for efficacy; 173 IRINOGEM and 169 GEM patients were treated. Median survival times were 6.3 months for IRINOGEM (95% CI, 4.7 to 7.5 months) and 6.6 months for GEM (95% CI, 5.2 to 7.8 months; log-rank P =.789). Tumor response rates were 16.1% (95% CI, 11.1% to 22.3%) for IRINOGEM and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.9% to 8.6%) for GEM (chi2 P <.001). Median TTP was 3.5 months for IRINOGEM versus 3.0 months for GEM (log-rank P =.352). However, subset analyses in patients with locally advanced disease suggested a TTP advantage with IRINOGEM versus GEM (median, 7.7 v 3.9 months). CA 19-9 progression was positively correlated with tumor progression. The incidence of grade 3 diarrhea was higher in the IRINOGEM group but grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities and quality-of-life outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION IRINOGEM safely improved the tumor response rate compared with GEM but did not alter overall survival.

Randomized phase III trial comparing biweekly infusional fluorouracil/leucovorin alone or with irinotecan in the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer: PETACC-3.

PURPOSE The primary objective of this randomized, multicenter, phase III trial was to investigate whether the addition of irinotecan to the de Gramont infusional fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV) adjuvant regimen (LV5FU2) would improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with stage III colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS After curatively intentioned surgery, patients with stage II and III colon cancer were randomly allocated surgery to receive LV5FU2 (LV 200 mg/m(2) as a 2-hour infusion, followed by FU; as a 400 mg/m(2) bolus and then a 600 mg/m(2) continuous infusion over 22 hours, days 1 and 2, every 2 weeks for 12 cycles: de Gramont regimen) with or without irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) as a 30- to 90-minute infusion, day 1, every 2 weeks). In total, 260 (7.9%) of 3,278 patients received an alternative high-dose infusional FU/LV regimen (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internische Onkologie regimen) with or without irinotecan. Results The principal efficacy analysis was based on 2,094 treated patients with stage III disease, randomly allocated in the LV5FU2 strata. After a median follow-up of 66.3 months, the 5-year DFS rate was 56.7% with irinotecan/LV5FU2 and 54.3% with LV5FU2 alone (primary end point: log-rank P = .106). Combining irinotecan with LV5FU2 did not significantly improve overall survival in this patient group compared with LV5FU2 alone (5-year rate 73.6% v 71.3%, respectively; log-rank P = .094). The addition of irinotecan to LV5FU2 was associated with an increased incidence of grade 3 to 4 GI events and neutropenia. CONCLUSION Irinotecan added to LV5FU2 as adjuvant therapy did not confer a statistically significant improvement in DFS or overall survival in patients with stage III colon cancer compared with LV5FU2 alone.

Integrated Analysis of Molecular and Clinical Prognostic Factors in Stage II/III Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND The prognostic potential of individual clinical and molecular parameters in stage II/III colon cancer has been investigated, but a thorough multivariable assessment of their relative impact is missing. METHODS Tumors from patients (N = 1404) in the PETACC3 adjuvant chemotherapy trial were examined for BRAF and KRAS mutations, microsatellite instability (MSI), chromosome 18q loss of heterozygosity (18qLOH), and SMAD4 expression. Their importance in predicting relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analyses, Cox regression models, and recursive partitioning trees. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS MSI-high status and SMAD4 focal loss of expression were identified as independent prognostic factors with better RFS (hazard ratio [HR] of recurrence = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.81, P = .003) and OS (HR of death = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.70, P = .001) for MSI-high status and worse RFS (HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.81, P < .001) and OS (HR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.23 to 2.01, P < .001) for SMAD4 loss. 18qLOH did not have any prognostic value in RFS or OS. Recursive partitioning identified refinements of TNM into new clinically interesting prognostic subgroups. Notably, T3N1 tumors with MSI-high status and retained SMAD4 expression had outcomes similar to stage II disease. CONCLUSIONS Concomitant assessment of molecular and clinical markers in multivariable analysis is essential to confirm or refute their independent prognostic value. Including molecular markers with independent prognostic value might allow more accurate prediction of prognosis than TNM staging alone.

Disease-Related Outcomes With Long-Term Follow-Up: An Updated Analysis of the Intergroup Exemestane Study

PURPOSE Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES), an investigator-led study in 4,724 postmenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer has demonstrated clinically important benefits from switching adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen to exemestane. Now, with longer follow-up, a large number of non-breast cancer-related events have been reported. Exploratory analyses describe breast cancer-free survival (BCFS) and explore incidence and patterns of the different competing events. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients who were disease-free after 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen were randomly assigned to continue tamoxifen or switch to exemestane to complete 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. At this planned analysis, the median follow-up was 91 months. Principal analysis focuses on 4,052 patients with estrogen receptor (ER) -positive and 547 with ER-unknown tumors. RESULTS In all, 930 BCFS events have been reported (exemestane, 423; tamoxifen, 507), giving an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.92; P = .001) in favor of exemestane in the ER-positive/ER unknown group. Analysis partitioned at 2.5 years after random assignment showed that the on-treatment benefit of switching to exemestane (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.75; P < .001) was not lost post-treatment, but that there was no additional gain once treatment had ceased (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.10; P = .60). Improvement in overall survival was demonstrated, with 352 deaths in the exemestane group versus 405 deaths in the tamoxifen group (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = .04). Of these, 222 were reported as intercurrent deaths (exemestane, 107; tamoxifen, 115). CONCLUSION The protective effect of switching to exemestane compared with continuing on tamoxifen on risk of relapse or death was maintained for at least 5 years post-treatment and was associated with a continuing beneficial impact on overall survival.

Phase II Trial of Irinotecan in Children With Relapsed or Refractory Rhabdomyosarcoma: A Joint Study of the French Society of Pediatric Oncology and the United Kingdom Children's Cancer Study Group

PURPOSE This phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of irinotecan administered intravenously once every 3 weeks in pediatric patients with recurrent or refractory rhabdomyosarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 35 patients younger than age 20 years, with refractory or relapsed rhabdomyosarcoma for which standard treatments have failed, received irinotecan at 600 mg/m2 administered as a 60-minute infusion every 3 weeks. Concomitant treatments included atropine for cholinergic symptoms, loperamide for diarrhea at the first liquid stool, and preventive antiemetic treatment. Tumor response was assessed every two cycles until progression according to WHO criteria. RESULTS The best overall response rate to irinotecan was 11.4% (95% CI, 3.2 to 26.7%; 2.9% complete responses, 8.5% partial responses) from all patients recruited. The median times to progression and survival were 1.4 and 5.8 months, respectively. A total of 112 cycles were administered, with a median number of two cycles per patient (range, 1 to 16). The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (46%), abdominal pain or cramping (17%), cholinergic syndrome (14%), nausea/vomiting (11%), anemia (11%), thrombocytopenia (9%), and diarrhea (6%). CONCLUSION In heavily pretreated children with a high tumor burden who have been treated with multiagent chemotherapy, irinotecan administered intravenously as a single agent, at 600 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, showed an interesting objective response rate and a good tolerance profile in rhabdomyosarcoma.

A phase II study of irinotecan in children with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma : A European cooperation of the Société Francaise d'Oncologie Pediatrique (SFOP) and the United Kingdom Children Cancer Study Group (UKCCSG)

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan in paediatric recurrent or refractory neuroblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty seven patients aged between 6 months and < or = 20 years, with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma, received irinotecan at 600 mg/m(2) administered as a 60-min infusion, every 3 weeks. Tumour response was evaluated by conventional radiological and mIBG scans every two cycles. RESULTS No objective response was observed during the study. Stable disease was observed in 13% of evaluable patients. Median times to progression and survival were 1.4 months (range, 1.2-1.5 months) and 8.8 months (range, 6.7-11.3 months), respectively. One forty two cycles were administered, with a median of two cycles per patient (range, 1-17 cycles). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (65% of patients), anaemia (43%), thrombocytopenia (38%), vomiting (14%), abdominal pain or cramping (8%), and nausea (5%). CONCLUSION Irinotecan administered intravenously as a single agent every 3 weeks induced no objective response in relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma.

Phase I Clinical and Pharmacologic Trial of Intravenous Estramustine Phosphate

PURPOSE To determine the dose-limiting toxicities, maximum-tolerated dose, and pharmacokinetics of intravenous estramustine phosphate (IV EMP). PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 31 patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer received IV EMP as a 30- to 90-minute infusion weekly (n = 28) or for 3 consecutive days followed by a single weekly dose (n = 3). IV EMP dose was escalated from 500 to 3,000 mg/m(2). Pharmacokinetics of EMP and the metabolites estramustine (EaM), estromustine (EoM), estradiol, and estrone were assessed after weeks 1 and 4 of treatment. RESULTS The initial IV EMP infusion caused perineal discomfort that was ameliorated by lengthening the infusion time. Other common toxicities were grade 1 to 2 hepatotoxicity, nausea or vomiting, and fatigue or malaise. Lower-extremity thrombosis occurred in one patient, and two others developed upper-extremity thrombosis associated with venous infusion catheters. Dose-limiting fatigue and hypotension occurred at 3,000 mg/m(2), and cumulative fatigue developed after multiple cycles at 2,500 mg/m(2). Mean EMP clearance, estimated steady-state volume of distribution, and elimination half-life were 3.7 L/h, 10.6 L, and 3.7 hours, respectively. Variability of EMP clearance was 21%, and variation in area under the curve per dose for the metabolites was 28% to 36%. Elimination half-lives of EoM and EaM were 110 hours and 64 hours, and peak plasma concentrations of these active metabolites exceeded 10 micromol/L after IV EMP doses greater-than-or-equal 2,000 mg/m(2). CONCLUSION High-dose IV EMP can be administered safely as a weekly short infusion to patients with HRPC. High peak concentrations of active metabolites after IV EMP may provide an advantage over oral EMP in antimicrotubule drug combinations.

Phase II study of irinotecan in combination with temozolomide (TEMIRI) in children with recurrent or refractory medulloblastoma: a joint ITCC and SIOPE brain tumor study.

BACKGROUND This multicenter phase II study investigated temozolomide + irinotecan (TEMIRI) treatment in children with relapsed or refractory medulloblastoma. METHODS Patients received temozolomide 100-125 mg/m(2)/day (days 1-5) and irinotecan 10 mg/m(2)/day (days 1-5 and 8-12) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was tumor response within the first 4 cycles confirmed ≥4 weeks and assessed by an external response review committee (ERRC). In a 2-stage Optimum Simon design, ≥6 responses in the first 15 evaluable patients were required within the first 4 cycles for continued enrollment; a total of 19 responses from the first 46 evaluable patients was considered successful. RESULTS Sixty-six patients were treated. Seven responses were recorded during stage 1 and 15 in the first 46 ERRC evaluated patients (2 complete responses and 13 partial responses). The objective response rate during the first 4 cycles was 32.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.5%-48.0%). Median duration of response was 27.0 weeks (7.7-44.1 wk). In 63 patients evaluated by local investigators, the objective response rate was 33.3% (95% CI, 22.0%-46.3%), and 68.3% (95% CI, 55.3%-79.4%) experienced clinical benefit. Median survival was 16.7 months (95% CI, 13.3-19.8). The most common grade 3 treatment-related nonhematologic adverse event was diarrhea (7.6%). Grade 3/4 treatment-related hematologic adverse events included neutropenia (16.7%), thrombocytopenia (12.1%), anemia (9.1%), and lymphopenia (9%). CONCLUSIONS The planned study primary endpoint was not met. However, its tolerability makes TEMIRI a suitable candidate chemotherapy backbone for molecularly targeted agents in future trials in this setting.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Costs for Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma Initiating Treatment with Sunitinib and Pazopanib

BACKGROUND Sunitinib and pazopanib are among the most prescribed targeted therapies for the systemic management of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but published cost comparisons between the 2 agents are few and limited by methodological and population differences. Also, sunitinib is administered on a 4-week on/2-week off cycle, and pazopanib is taken continuously. Thus, appropriate use and cost comparisons between the 2 drugs require methodological approaches to account for these differences. One way to accomplish this is to substitute expected for observed days supply. Recognizing the effects of nonrepresentative days supply values is important for assessing real-world treatment patterns and costs. OBJECTIVES To (a) characterize demographic and clinical characteristics among patients with RCC newly initiating sunitinib or pazopanib, using a large administrative claims dataset; (b) characterize treatment patterns, persistence, and costs for each treatment group; and (c) assess the effect on treatment patterns and costs for sunitinib by substituting 42 days for prescriptions with 28- or 30-day supplies to account for sunitinibs 4-week on/2-week off dosing schedule. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study using health care claims data from the Truven MarketScan Research Databases, which include enrollment information and medical and pharmacy claims. Baseline patient demographic and clinical characteristics and treatment patterns (continuation, discontinuation, switching, or interruption; days supply; and persistence) were compared. Health care costs were calculated as mean daily index medication costs and as total, medical, and medication (all-cause and RCC-related) costs over the 12 months post-index period. Inclusion criteria were continuous health plan enrollment between 6 months pre-index and 12 months post-index; no RCC medications 6 months pre-index; ≥ 2 RCC diagnoses within ±180 days of index; and age ≥ 20 years. For demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and costs, means (± standard deviations) for continuous data and relative frequencies for categorical data were reported. Chi-square tests or Student t-tests were used to evaluate differences other than costs. A generalized linear model with gamma distribution and log link was used for evaluating costs, controlling for patient demographic and pre-index clinical characteristics, persistence days, and index medication. All statistical tests were 2-tailed with significance set at P < 0.05 for all comparisons except for interactions with significance set at P < 0.10. The effects of substituting 42 days supply for sunitinib prescription records with 28 or 30 days supply were determined. RESULTS In total, 609 (15.1% of the sunitinib overall sample) sunitinib patients and 183 (8.3% of the pazopanib overall sample) pazopanib patients were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar for each treatment cohort. The persistence periods and number of prescriptions filled were also similar. Without substitution, significant differences were observed between treatment groups in patterns of index medication use (overall P = 0.0409), with fewer patients taking sunitinib continuing treatment than patients taking pazopanib. However, with substitution, treatment patterns differed significantly (overall P = 0.0026), but with more sunitinib patients than pazopanib patients continuing treatment. Without substitution, unadjusted daily mean index medication costs were significantly different for sunitinib (