Olivier Bouché

FOLFIRINOX versus Gemcitabine for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as compared with gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS We randomly assigned 342 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 (on a scale of 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater severity of illness) to receive FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg per square meter of body-surface area; irinotecan, 180 mg per square meter; leucovorin, 400 mg per square meter; and fluorouracil, 400 mg per square meter given as a bolus followed by 2400 mg per square meter given as a 46-hour continuous infusion, every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter weekly for 7 of 8 weeks and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. Six months of chemotherapy were recommended in both groups in patients who had a response. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the FOLFIRINOX group as compared with 6.8 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.73; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 6.4 months in the FOLFIRINOX group and 3.3 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.59; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 31.6% in the FOLFIRINOX group versus 9.4% in the gemcitabine group (P<0.001). More adverse events were noted in the FOLFIRINOX group; 5.4% of patients in this group had febrile neutropenia. At 6 months, 31% of the patients in the FOLFIRINOX group had a definitive degradation of the quality of life versus 66% in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.70; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS As compared with gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX was associated with a survival advantage and had increased toxicity. FOLFIRINOX is an option for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and good performance status. (Funded by the French government and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00112658.).

KRAS Mutations As an Independent Prognostic Factor in Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer Treated With Cetuximab

PURPOSE Cetuximab is efficient in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). We previously showed that KRAS mutations were associated with resistance to cetuximab in 30 CRC patients. The aim of this study was to validate, in an independent larger series of 89 patients, the prognostic value of KRAS mutations on response to cetuximab and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eighty-nine metastatic CRC patients treated with cetuximab after treatment failure with irinotecan-based chemotherapy were analyzed for KRAS mutation by allelic discrimination on tumor DNA. The association between KRAS mutations and tumor response, skin toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed. RESULTS A KRAS mutation was present in 27% of the patients and was associated with resistance to cetuximab (0% v 40% of responders among the 24 mutated and 65 nonmutated patients, respectively; P < .001) and a poorer survival (median PFS: 10.1 v 31.4 weeks in patients without mutation; P = .0001; median OS: 10.1 v 14.3 months in patients without mutation; P = .026). When we pooled these 89 patients with patients from our previous study, the multivariate analysis showed that KRAS status was an independent prognostic factor associated with OS and PFS, whereas skin toxicity was only associated with OS. In a combined analysis, median OS times of patients with two, one, or no favorable prognostic factors (severe skin toxicity and no KRAS mutation) was of 15.6, 10.7, and 5.6 months, respectively. CONCLUSION These results confirm the high prognostic value of KRAS mutations on response to cetuximab and survival in metastatic CRC patients treated with cetuximab.

Preoperative Radiotherapy With or Without Concurrent Fluorouracil and Leucovorin in T3-4 Rectal Cancers: Results of FFCD 9203

PURPOSE In 1992, preoperative radiotherapy was considered in France as the standard treatment for T3-4 rectal cancers. The present randomized trial compares preoperative radiotherapy with chemoradiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were eligible if they presented a resectable T3-4, Nx, M0 rectal adenocarcinoma accessible to digital rectal examination. Preoperative radiotherapy with 45 Gy in 25 fractions during 5 weeks was delivered. Concurrent chemotherapy with fluorouracil 350 mg/m2/d during 5 days, together with leucovorin, was administered during the first and fifth week in the experimental arm. Surgery was planned 3 to 10 weeks after the end of radiotherapy. All patients should receive adjuvant chemotherapy with the same fluorouracil/leucovorin regimen. The primary end point of the trial was overall survival. RESULTS A total of 733 patients were eligible. Grade 3 or 4 acute toxicity was more frequent with chemoradiotherapy (14.6% v 2.7%; P < .05). There was no difference in sphincter preservation. Complete sterilization of the operative specimen was more frequent with chemoradiotherapy (11.4% v 3.6%; P < .05). The 5-year incidence of local recurrence was lower with chemoradiotherapy (8.1% v 16.5%; P < .05). Overall 5-year survival in the two groups did not differ. CONCLUSION Preoperative chemoradiotherapy despite a moderate increase in acute toxicity and no impact on overall survival significantly improves local control and is recommended for T3-4, N0-2, M0 adenocarcinoma of the middle and distal rectum.

Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND No treatment options are available for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer that progresses after all approved standard therapies, but many patients maintain a good performance status and could be candidates for further therapy. An international phase 3 trial was done to assess the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in these patients. METHODS We did this trial at 114 centres in 16 countries. Patients with documented metastatic colorectal cancer and progression during or within 3 months after the last standard therapy were randomised (in a 2:1 ratio; by computer-generated randomisation list and interactive voice response system; preallocated block design (block size six); stratified by previous treatment with VEGF-targeting drugs, time from diagnosis of metastatic disease, and geographical region) to receive best supportive care plus oral regorafenib 160 mg or placebo once daily, for the first 3 weeks of each 4 week cycle. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The study sponsor, participants, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01103323. FINDINGS Between April 30, 2010, and March 22, 2011, 1052 patients were screened, 760 patients were randomised to receive regorafenib (n=505) or placebo (n=255), and 753 patients initiated treatment (regorafenib n=500; placebo n=253; population for safety analyses). The primary endpoint of overall survival was met at a preplanned interim analysis; data cutoff was on July 21, 2011. Median overall survival was 6·4 months in the regorafenib group versus 5·0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·77; 95% CI 0·64-0·94; one-sided p=0·0052). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 465 (93%) patients assigned regorafenib and in 154 (61%) of those assigned placebo. The most common adverse events of grade three or higher related to regorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction (83 patients, 17%), fatigue (48, 10%), diarrhoea (36, 7%), hypertension (36, 7%), and rash or desquamation (29, 6%). INTERPRETATION Regorafenib is the first small-molecule multikinase inhibitor with survival benefits in metastatic colorectal cancer which has progressed after all standard therapies. The present study provides evidence for a continuing role of targeted treatment after disease progression, with regorafenib offering a potential new line of therapy in this treatment-refractory population. FUNDING Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

Randomized trial comparing monthly low-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus with bimonthly high-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus plus continuous infusion for advanced colorectal cancer: a French intergroup study.

PURPOSE This multicenter study compared the therapeutic ratio of a monthly schedule of low-dose leucovorin (LV) and fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus with a bimonthly schedule of high-dose LV and 5-FU bolus plus continuous infusion in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Of the 448 patients randomly assigned to treatment, 433 were assessable. Treatment A was a monthly regimen of intravenous (IV) LV 20 mg/m2 plus bolus 5-FU 425 mg/m2 for 5 days every 4 weeks. Treatment B was a bimonthly regimen of IV LV 200 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion followed by bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m2 and 22-hour infusion 5-FU 600 mg/m2 for 2 consecutive days every 2 weeks. Therapy was continued until disease progression. Second-line chemotherapy, which included 5-FU continuous infusion, was allowed in both arms. RESULTS The response rates in 348 patients with measurable lesions were 14.4% (monthly regimen) and 32.6% (bimonthly regimen) (P = .0004). The median progression-free survival times were 22 weeks (monthly regimen) and 27.6 weeks (bimonthly regimen) (P = .0012). The median survival times were 56.8 weeks (monthly regimen) and 62 weeks (bimonthly regimen) (P = .067). Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 23.9% of patients in the monthly arm compared with 11.1% of those in the bimonthly arm (P = .0004). Patients in arm A more frequently experienced severe granulocytopenia (7.3% v 1.9%), diarrhea (7.3% v 2.9%), and mucositis (7.3% v 1.9%) than patients in arm B. CONCLUSION The bimonthly regimen was more effective and less toxic than the monthly regimen and definitely increased the therapeutic ratio. However, there was no evidence of increased survival.

Perioperative Chemotherapy Compared With Surgery Alone for Resectable Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: An FNCLCC and FFCD Multicenter Phase III Trial

PURPOSE After curative resection, the prognosis of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is poor. This phase III trial was designed to evaluate the benefit in overall survival (OS) of perioperative fluorouracil plus cisplatin in resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Overall, 224 patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus, gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), or stomach were randomly assigned to either perioperative chemotherapy and surgery (CS group; n = 113) or surgery alone (S group; n = 111). Chemotherapy consisted of two or three preoperative cycles of intravenous cisplatin (100 mg/m(2)) on day 1, and a continuous intravenous infusion of fluorouracil (800 mg/m(2)/d) for 5 consecutive days (days 1 to 5) every 28 days and three or four postoperative cycles of the same regimen. The primary end point was OS. RESULTS Compared with the S group, the CS group had a better OS (5-year rate 38% v 24%; hazard ratio [HR] for death: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.95; P = .02); and a better disease-free survival (5-year rate: 34% v 19%; HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89; P = .003). In the multivariable analysis, the favorable prognostic factors for survival were perioperative chemotherapy (P = .01) and stomach tumor localization (P < .01). Perioperative chemotherapy significantly improved the curative resection rate (84% v 73%; P = .04). Grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred in 38% of CS patients (mainly neutropenia) but postoperative morbidity was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION In patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus, GEJ, or stomach, perioperative chemotherapy using fluorouracil plus cisplatin significantly increased the curative resection rate, disease-free survival, and OS.

Chemoradiation Followed by Surgery Compared With Chemoradiation Alone in Squamous Cancer of the Esophagus: FFCD 9102

PURPOSE Uncontrolled studies suggest that chemoradiation has similar efficacy as surgery for esophageal cancer. Therefore, a randomized trial was carried out to compare, in responders only, chemoradiation alone with chemoradiation followed by surgery in patients with locally advanced tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had operable T3N0-1M0 thoracic esophageal cancer. Patients received two cycles of fluorouracil (FU) and cisplatin (days 1 to 5 and 22 to 26) and either conventional (46 Gy in 4.5 weeks) or split-course (15 Gy, days 1 to 5 and 22 to 26) concomitant radiotherapy. Patients with response and no contraindication to either treatment were randomly assigned to surgery (arm A) or continuation of chemoradiation (arm B; three cycles of FU/cisplatin and either conventional [20 Gy] or split-course [15 Gy] radiotherapy). Chemoradiation was considered equivalent to surgery if the difference in 2-year survival rate was less than 10%. RESULTS Of 444 eligible patients, 259 were randomly assigned; 230 patients (88.8%) had epidermoid cancer, and 29 (11.2%) had glandular carcinoma. Two-year survival rate was 34% in arm A versus 40% in arm B (hazard ratio for arm B v arm A = 0.90; adjusted P = .44). Median survival time was 17.7 months in arm A compared with 19.3 months in arm B. Two-year local control rate was 66.4% in arm A compared with 57.0% in arm B, and stents were less required in the surgery arm (5% in arm A v 32% in arm B; P < .001). The 3-month mortality rate was 9.3% in arm A compared with 0.8% in arm B (P = .002). Cumulative hospital stay was 68 days in arm A compared with 52 days in arm B (P = .02). CONCLUSION Our data suggest that, in patients with locally advanced thoracic esophageal cancers, especially epidermoid, who respond to chemoradiation, there is no benefit for the addition of surgery after chemoradiation compared with the continuation of additional chemoradiation.

Continuation of bevacizumab after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (ML18147): a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND Bevacizumab plus fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy is standard treatment for first-line and bevacizumab-naive second-line metastatic colorectal cancer. We assessed continued use of bevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer progressing after standard first-line bevacizumab-based treatment. METHODS In an open-label, phase 3 study in 220 centres in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland, patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable, histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer progressing up to 3 months after discontinuing first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to second-line chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab 2·5 mg/kg per week equivalent (either 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks, intravenously). The choice between oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based second-line chemotherapy depended on the first-line regimen (switch of chemotherapy). A combination of a permuted block design and the Pocock and Simon minimisation algorithm was used for the randomisation. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00700102. FINDINGS Between Feb 1, 2006, and June 9, 2010, 409 (50%) patients were assigned to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy and 411 (50%) to chemotherapy alone. Median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 6·4-15·6) in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy group and 9·6 months (5·4-13·9) in the chemotherapy alone group. Median overall survival was 11·2 months (95% CI 10·4-12·2) for bevacizumab plus chemotherapy and 9·8 months (8·9-10·7) for chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·69-0·94; unstratified log-rank test p=0·0062). Grade 3-5 bleeding or haemorrhage (eight [2%] vs one [<1%]), gastrointestinal perforation (seven [2%] vs three [<1%]), and venous thromboembolisms (19 [5%] vs 12 [3%]) were more common in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy group than in the chemotherapy alone group. The most frequently reported grade 3-5 adverse events were neutropenia (65 [16%] in the bevacizumab and chemotherapy group vs 52 [13%] in the chemotherapy alone group), diarrhoea (40 [10%] vs 34 [8%], respectively), and asthenia (23 [6%] vs 17 [4%], respectively). Treatment-related deaths were reported for four patients in the bevacizumab plus chemotherapy group and three in the chemotherapy alone group. INTERPRETATION Maintenance of VEGF inhibition with bevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy beyond disease progression has clinical benefits in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. This approach is also being investigated in other tumour types, including metastatic breast and non-small cell lung cancers. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Analysis of PTEN, BRAF, and EGFR Status in Determining Benefit From Cetuximab Therapy in Wild-Type KRAS Metastatic Colon Cancer

PURPOSE The occurrence of KRAS mutation is predictive of nonresponse and shorter survival in patients treated by anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) antibody for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), leading the European Medicine Agency to limit its use to patients with wild-type KRAS tumors. However, only half of these patients will benefit from treatment, suggesting the need to identify additional biomarkers for cetuximab-based treatment efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively collected tumors from 173 patients with mCRC. All but one patient received a cetuximab-based regimen as second-line or greater therapy. KRAS and BRAF status were assessed by allelic discrimination. EGFR amplification was assessed by chromogenic in situ hybridization and fluorescent in situ hybridization, and the expression of PTEN was assessed by immunochemistry. RESULTS In patients with KRAS wild-type tumors (n = 116), BRAF mutations (n = 5) were weakly associated with lack of response (P = .063) but were strongly associated with shorter progression-free survival (P < .001) and shorter overall survival (OS; P < .001). A high EGFR polysomy or an EGFR amplification was found in 17.7% of the patients and was associated with response (P = .015). PTEN null expression was found in 19.9% of the patients and was associated with shorter OS (P = .013). In multivariate analysis, BRAF mutation and PTEN expression status were associated with OS. CONCLUSION BRAF status, EGFR amplification, and cytoplasmic expression of PTEN were associated with outcome measures in KRAS wild-type patients treated with a cetuximab-based regimen. Subsequent studies in clinical trial cohorts will be required to confirm the clinical utility of these markers.

Comparison of Two Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Regimens for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Results of the Phase III Trial ACCORD 12/0405-Prodige 2

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is considered a standard approach for T3-4 M0 rectal cancer. In this situation, we compared neoadjuvant radiotherapy plus capecitabine with dose-intensified radiotherapy plus capecitabine and oxaliplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS We randomly assigned patients to receive 5 weeks of treatment with radiotherapy 45 Gy/25 fractions with concurrent capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily 5 days per week (Cap 45) or radiotherapy 50 Gy/25 fractions with capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) twice daily 5 days per week and oxaliplatin 50 mg/m(2) once weekly (Capox 50). The primary end point was complete sterilization of the operative specimen (ypCR). RESULTS Five hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive Cap 45 (n = 299) or Capox 50 (n = 299). More preoperative grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred in the Capox 50 group (25 v 1%; P < .001). Surgery was performed in 98% of patients in both groups. There were no differences between groups in the rate of conservative surgery (75%) or postoperative deaths at 60 days (0.3%). The ypCR rate was 13.9% with Cap 45 and 19.2% with Capox 50 (P = .09). When ypCR was combined with yp few residual cells, the rate was respectively 28.9% with Cap 45 and 39.4% with Capox 50 (P = .008). The rate of positive circumferential rectal margins (between 0 and 2 mm) was 19.3% with Cap 45 and 9.9% with Capox 50 (P = .02). CONCLUSION The benefit of oxaliplatin was not demonstrated and this drug should not be used with concurrent irradiation. Cap 50 merits investigation for T3-4 rectal cancers.