Sanjay Popat

Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis.

PURPOSE A number of studies have investigated the relationship between microsatellite instability (MSI) and colorectal cancer (CRC) prognosis. Although many have reported a better survival with MSI, estimates of the hazard ratio (HR) among studies differ. To derive a more precise estimate of the prognostic significance of MSI, we have reviewed and pooled data from published studies. METHODS Studies stratifying survival in CRC patients by MSI status were eligible for analysis. The principal outcome measure was the HR. Data from eligible studies were pooled using standard techniques. RESULTS Thirty-two eligible studies reported survival in a total of 7,642 cases, including 1,277 with MSI. There was no evidence of publication bias. The combined HR estimate for overall survival associated with MSI was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.71; heterogeneity P = .16; I(2) = 20%). This benefit was maintained restricting analyses to clinical trial patients (HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.85) and patients with locally advanced CRC (HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.78). In patients treated with adjuvant fluorouracil (FU) CRCs with MSI had a better prognosis (HR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.84). However, while data are limited, tumors with MSI derived no benefit from adjuvant FU (HR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.14). CONCLUSION CRCs with MSI have a significantly better prognosis compared to those with intact mismatch repair. Additional studies are needed to further define the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced tumors with MSI.

Afatinib versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy for EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma (LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6): analysis of overall survival data from two randomised, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND We aimed to assess the effect of afatinib on overall survival of patients with EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma through an analysis of data from two open-label, randomised, phase 3 trials. METHODS Previously untreated patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in LUX-Lung 3 (n=345) and LUX-Lung 6 (n=364). These patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive afatinib or chemotherapy (pemetrexed-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 3] or gemcitabine-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 6]), stratified by EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion [del19], Leu858Arg, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only). We planned analyses of mature overall survival data in the intention-to-treat population after 209 (LUX-Lung 3) and 237 (LUX-Lung 6) deaths. These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00949650 and NCT01121393. FINDINGS Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 3 was 41 months (IQR 35-44); 213 (62%) of 345 patients had died. Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 6 was 33 months (IQR 31-37); 246 (68%) of 364 patients had died. In LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 28.2 months (95% CI 24.6-33.6) in the afatinib group and 28.2 months (20.7-33.2) in the pemetrexed-cisplatin group (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.17, p=0.39). In LUX-Lung 6, median overall survival was 23.1 months (95% CI 20.4-27.3) in the afatinib group and 23.5 months (18.0-25.6) in the gemcitabine-cisplatin group (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72-1.22, p=0.61). However, in preplanned analyses, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with del19-positive tumours in the afatinib group than in the chemotherapy group in both trials: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 33.3 months (95% CI 26.8-41.5) in the afatinib group versus 21.1 months (16.3-30.7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.79, p=0.0015); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 31.4 months (95% CI 24.2-35.3) versus 18.4 months (14.6-25.6), respectively (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.94, p=0.023). By contrast, there were no significant differences by treatment group for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg-positive tumours in either trial: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 27.6 months (19.8-41.7) in the afatinib group versus 40.3 months (24.3-not estimable) in the chemotherapy group (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.11, p=0.29); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 19.6 months (95% CI 17.0-22.1) versus 24.3 months (19.0-27.0), respectively (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.81-1.83, p=0.34). In both trials, the most common afatinib-related grade 3-4 adverse events were rash or acne (37 [16%] of 229 patients in LUX-Lung 3 and 35 [15%] of 239 patients in LUX-Lung 6), diarrhoea (33 [14%] and 13 [5%]), paronychia (26 [11%] in LUX-Lung 3 only), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 [5%] in LUX-Lung 6 only). In LUX-Lung 3, neutropenia (20 [18%] of 111 patients), fatigue (14 [13%]) and leucopenia (nine [8%]) were the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3-4 adverse events, while in LUX-Lung 6, the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (30 [27%] of 113 patients), vomiting (22 [19%]), and leucopenia (17 [15%]). INTERPRETATION Although afatinib did not improve overall survival in the whole population of either trial, overall survival was improved with the drug for patients with del19 EGFR mutations. The absence of an effect in patients with Leu858Arg EGFR mutations suggests that EGFR del19-positive disease might be distinct from Leu858Arg-positive disease and that these subgroups should be analysed separately in future trials. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

Thymidylate synthase expression and prognosis in colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE A number of studies have investigated the relationship between thymidylate synthase (TS) expression and survival in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Although most have reported poorer overall and progression-free survival with high TS expression, estimates of the hazard ratio (HR) between studies differ wildly. To derive a more precise estimate of the prognostic significance of TS expression, we have reviewed published studies and carried out a meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty studies stratifying overall survival and/or progression-free survival in CRC patients by TS expression status were eligible for analysis. The principal outcome measure was the HR. Data from these studies were pooled using standard meta-analysis techniques. RESULTS Thirteen studies investigated outcome in a total of 887 cases with advanced CRC, and seven studies investigated outcome in a total of 2,610 patients with localized CRC. A number of methods were used both to assess TS expression and to assign TS status. Sample sizes varied greatly, small sample sizes being a feature of the advanced disease studies. The combined HR estimate for overall survival (OS) was 1.74 (95% CI, 1.34 to 2.26) and 1.35 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.80) in the advanced and adjuvant settings, respectively, but there was evidence of heterogeneity and possible publication bias. CONCLUSION Tumors expressing high levels of TS appeared to have a poorer OS compared with tumors expressing low levels. Additional studies with consistent methodology are needed to define the precise prognostic value of TS.

Guidelines on the radical management of patients with lung cancer.

A joint initiative by the British Thoracic Society and the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and Ireland was undertaken to update the 2001 guidelines for the selection and assessment of patients with lung cancer who can potentially be managed by radical treatment.

Platinum-based chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND Experimental data suggest that triple-negative (TN) breast cancer may have increased sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy but clinical data are limited. We present our long-term results with platinum-based chemotherapy for TN breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 94 (17 TN), 79 (11 TN) and 155 (34 TN) patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy in neo-adjuvant/adjuvant and advanced setting were included. Response rates and outcome were compared for TN tumours versus others. RESULTS Neo-adjuvant complete response rates were significantly higher for TN tumours (88%) than others (51%; P = 0.005). The 5-year overall survival (OS) for TN tumours following adjuvant/neo-adjuvant chemotherapy was 64% [95% confidence interval (CI) 44% to 79%] compared with 85% (95% CI 79% to 90%) for others. Five-year disease-free survival for TN tumours was 57% (95% CI 37% to 73%) compared with 72% (95% CI 64% to 78%) for others. For patients with advanced breast cancer, overall response rates were 41% for TN tumours and 31% for others (P = 0.3). Patients with TN tumours had a significantly prolonged progression-free survival of 6 months compared with 4 months for others (P = 0.05), though the OS was not significantly different between the two groups (11 versus 7 months). CONCLUSION Platinum-based chemotherapy achieves increased response rates for TN tumours, with a trend towards worse survival in early breast cancer through an improved survival in advanced disease. Prospective randomised trials are warranted.

Contribution of the MHC region to the familial risk of coeliac disease

Susceptibility to coeliac disease is genetically determined by possession of specific HLA-DQ alleles, acting in concert with one or more non-HLA linked genes. The pattern of risk seen in sibs and twins in coeliac disease is most parsimonious with a multiplicative model for the interaction between the two classes of genes. Based on a sib recurrence risk for coeliac disease of 10% and a population prevalence of 0.0033, the sib relative risk is 30. To evaluate the contribution of the MHC region to the familial risk of coeliac disease, we have examined haplotype sharing probabilities across this region in 55 coeliac disease families. Based on these probabilities the sib relative risk of coeliac disease associated with the MHC region is 3.7. Combining these results with published data on allele sharing at HLA, the estimated sib relative risk associated with the MHC region is 3.3. Therefore, the MHC genes contribute no more than 40% of the sib familial risk of coeliac disease and the non-HLA linked gene (or genes) are likely to be the stronger determinant of coeliac disease susceptibility.

Refining the Diagnosis and EGFR Status of Non-small Cell Lung Carcinoma in Biopsy and Cytologic Material, Using a Panel of Mucin Staining, TTF-1, Cytokeratin 5/6, and P63, and EGFR Mutation Analysis

Introduction: The dichotomization of non-small cell carcinoma (NSCLC) subtype into squamous (SQCC) and adenocarcinoma (ADC) has become important in recent years and is increasingly required with regard to management. The aim of this study was to determine the utility of a panel of commercially available antibodies in refining the diagnosis on small biopsies and also to determine whether cytologic material is suitable for somatic EGFR genotyping in a prospectively analyzed series of patients undergoing investigation for suspected lung cancer. Methods: Thirty-two consecutive cases of NSCLC were first tested using a panel comprising cytokeratin 5/6, P63, thyroid transcription factor-1, 34&bgr;E12, and a D-PAS stain for mucin, to determine their value in refining diagnosis of NSCLC. After this test phase, two further pathologists independently reviewed the cases using a refined panel that excluded 34&bgr;E12 because of its low specificity for SQCC, and refinement of diagnosis and concordance were assessed. Ten cases of ADC, including eight derived from cytologic samples, were sent for EGFR mutation analysis. Results: There was refinement of diagnosis in 65% of cases of NSCLC to either SQCC or ADC in the test phase. This included 10 of 13 cases where cell pellets had been prepared from transbronchial needle aspirates. Validation by two further pathologists with varying expertise in lung pathology confirmed increased refinement and concordance of diagnosis. All samples were adequate for analysis, and they all showed a wild-type EGFR genotype. Conclusion: A panel comprising cytokeratin 5/6, P63, thyroid transcription factor-1, and a D-PAS stain for mucin increases diagnostic accuracy and agreement between pathologists when faced with refining a diagnosis of NSCLC to SQCC or ADC. These small samples, even cell pellets derived from transbronchial needle aspirates, seem to be adequate for EGFR mutation analysis.

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

M. Früh1, D. De Ruysscher2, S. Popat3, L. Crinò4, S. Peters5 & E. Felip6, on behalf of the ESMO Guidelines Working Group* Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, Switzerland; Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven/KU Leuven, Belgium; Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK; Department of Oncology, Hospital Santa Maria della Misericordia, Sant Andrea delle Fratte, Perugia, Italy; Département d’Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland; Medical Oncology Service, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain;

First-Line Afatinib versus Chemotherapy in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Common Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Gene Mutations and Brain Metastases

Introduction: Metastatic spread to the brain is common in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but these patients are generally excluded from prospective clinical trials. The studies, phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations (LUX‐Lung 3) and a randomized, open‐label, phase III study of BIBW 2992 versus chemotherapy as first‐line treatment for patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma of the lung harbouring an EGFR activating mutation (LUX‐Lung 6) investigated first‐line afatinib versus platinum‐based chemotherapy in epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation‐positive patients with NSCLC and included patients with brain metastases; prespecified subgroup analyses are assessed in this article. Methods: For both LUX‐Lung 3 and LUX‐Lung 6, prespecified subgroup analyses of progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival, and objective response rate were undertaken in patients with asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline (n = 35 and n = 46, respectively). Post hoc analyses of clinical outcomes was undertaken in the combined data set (n = 81). Results: In both studies, there was a trend toward improved PFS with afatinib versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (LUX‐Lung 3: 11.1 versus 5.4 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.54, p = 0.1378; LUX‐Lung 6: 8.2 versus 4.7 months, HR = 0.47, p = 0.1060). The magnitude of PFS improvement with afatinib was similar to that observed in patients without brain metastases. In combined analysis, PFS was significantly improved with afatinib versus with chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (8.2 versus 5.4 months; HR, 0.50; p = 0.0297). Afatinib significantly improved the objective response rate versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases. Safety findings were consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: These findings lend support to the clinical activity of afatinib in EGFR mutation–positive patients with NSCLC and asymptomatic brain metastases.

Excision Repair Cross-Complementation Group 1 (ERCC1) Status and Lung Cancer Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Published Studies and Recommendations

Purpose Despite discrepant results on clinical utility, several trials are already prospectively randomizing non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients by ERCC1 status. We aimed to characterize the prognostic and predictive effect of ERCC1 by systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Eligible studies assessed survival and/or chemotherapy response in NSCLC or SCLC by ERCC1 status. Effect measures of interest were hazard ratio (HR) for survival or relative risk (RR) for chemotherapy response. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to account for between-study heterogeneity, with unadjusted/adjusted effect estimates considered separately. Results 23 eligible studies provided survival results in 2,726 patients. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in all meta-analyses (I2 always >30%), partly due to variability in thresholds defining ‘low’ and ‘high’ ERCC1. Meta-analysis of unadjusted estimates showed high ERCC1 was associated with significantly worse overall survival in platinum-treated NSCLC (average unadjusted HR = 1.61, 95%CI:1.23–2.1, p = 0.014), but not in NSCLC untreated with chemotherapy (average unadjusted HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.51–1.31). Meta-analysis of adjusted estimates was limited by variable choice of adjustment factors and potential publication bias (Eggers p<0.0001). There was evidence that high ERCC1 was associated with reduced response to platinum (average RR = 0.80; 95%CI:0.64–0.99). SCLC data were inadequate to draw firm conclusions. Conclusions Current evidence suggests high ERCC1 may adversely influence survival and response in platinum-treated NSCLC patients, but not in non-platinum treated, although definitive evidence of a predictive influence is lacking. International consensus is urgently required to provide consistent, validated ERCC1 assessment methodology. ERCC1 assessment for treatment selection should currently be restricted to, and evaluated within, clinical trials.