Publications by authors named "Jean-François Seitz"

108 Publications

Phase 2 trial comparing sorafenib, pravastatin, their combination or supportive care in HCC with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

Hepatol Int 2021 Feb 9;15(1):93-104. Epub 2021 Jan 9.

Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France.

Background And Aims: There is limited data regarding the role for systemic treatment in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

Methods: PRODIGE 21 was a multicentric prospective non-comparative randomized trial. Patients were randomized to receive sorafenib (Arm A), pravastatin (Arm B), sorafenib-pravastatin (Arm C) combination, or best supportive care (Arm D). Primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP), secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival (OS).

Results: 160 patients were randomized and 157 patients were included in the final analysis. 86% of patients were BCLC C and 55% had macrovascular invasion. The safety profiles of the drugs were as expected. Median TTP was 3.5, 2.8, 2.0 and 2.2 months in arms A, B, C and D, respectively, but analysis was limited by the number of patients deceased without radiological progression (59%). Median OS was similar between the four arms: 3.8 [95% CI: 2.4-6.5], 3.1 [95% CI: 1.9-4.3], 4.0 [95% CI: 3.2-5.5] and 3.5 months [95% CI: 2.2-5.4] in arms A, B, C and D, respectively. Median OS was 4.0 months [95% CI: 3.3-5.5] for patients treated with sorafenib, vs 2.9 months [95% CI: 2.2-3.9] for patients not treated with sorafenib. In patients with ALBI grade 1/2, median OS was 6.1 months [95% CI: 3.8-8.3] in patients treated with sorafenib vs 3.1 months [95% CI: 1.9-4.8] for patients not treated with sorafenib.

Conclusion: In the overall Child-Pugh B population, neither sorafenib nor pravastatin seemed to provide benefit. In the ALBI grade 1/2 sub-population, our trial suggests potential benefit of sorafenib.

Clinical Trial Registration: The study was referenced in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01357486).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12072-020-10120-3DOI Listing
February 2021

Microsatellite Instability in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Receiving Fluoropyrimidine With or Without Oxaliplatin: An ACCENT Pooled Analysis of 12 Adjuvant Trials.

J Clin Oncol 2021 Feb 23;39(6):642-651. Epub 2020 Dec 23.

Department of Health Science Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Purpose: In patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) whose tumors demonstrate microsatellite instability (MSI), the efficacy of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine (FP) with or without oxaliplatin has not been clearly demonstrated and the prognostic value of MSI remains uncertain.

Materials And Methods: Individual patient data from the ACCENT database were used to evaluate the effect of FP with or without oxaliplatin on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with MSI stage III CC and the prognostic value of MSI in patients treated with FP plus oxaliplatin, by stratified Cox models adjusted for demographic and clinicopathological factors.

Results: MSI status was available for 5,457 patients (609 MSI, 11.2%; 4848 microsatellite stable [MSS], 88.8%) from 12 randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Oxaliplatin significantly improved OS of MSI patients from the two RCTs testing FP with or without oxaliplatin (n = 185; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.93). Among the 4,250 patients treated with FP plus oxaliplatin (461 MSI and 3789 MSS), MSI was associated with better OS in the N1 group compared with MSS (aHR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.95) but similar survival in the N2 population (aHR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.48; interaction = .029). The main independent prognosticators of MSI patients treated with FP plus oxaliplatin were T stage (aHR = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.29 to 3.38) and N stage (aHR = 3.57; 95% CI, 2.32 to 5.48). Similar results were observed for DFS in all analyses.

Conclusion: Adding oxaliplatin to FP improves OS and DFS in patients with MSI stage III CC. Compared with MSS, MSI patients experienced better outcomes in the N1 group but similar survival in the N2 group.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.20.01600DOI Listing
February 2021

Comparison of 18FDG-PET/CT and conventional follow-up methods in colorectal cancer: A randomised prospective study.

Dig Liver Dis 2021 Feb 2;53(2):231-237. Epub 2020 Nov 2.

Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital, Limoges, France.

Background: A surveillance program was performed in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients after surgery, to diagnose asymptomatic recurrence.

Aims: To assess whether 18-FDG positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT) improved the detection of recurrence during a 3-year follow-up.

Methods: A multicentre, two-arm randomised prospective trial comparing different 36-month follow-up strategies. Complete colonoscopy was performed at baseline and after 3 years and clinical exams with imaging every 3 months. The conventional arm (A) received carcinoembryonic antigen, liver echography, and alternated between lung radiography and computed tomography (CT) scans. The experimental arm (B) received PET/CT.

Results: A total of 365 patients with colon (79.4%) or rectal cancer (20.6%), stages II (48.2%) or III (50.8%), were enroled in this study. At 36 months, intention-to-treat analysis revealed recurrence in 31 (17.2%) patients in arm A and 47 (25.4%) in arm B (p = 0.063). At 3 years, 7 of 31 relapses (22.5%) in arm A were surgically treated with curative intent, compared to 17 of 47 (36.2%) in arm B (p = 0.25). The rates of recurrence and new cancers were higher in arm B than arm A (p = 0.038).

Conclusions: PET/CT follow-up every 6 months did not increase the rate of recurrence at 3 years or the rate of surgically treated recurrence compared with conventional follow-up.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dld.2020.10.012DOI Listing
February 2021

Sorafenib Plus Irinotecan Combination in Patients With RAS-mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Refractory To Standard Combined Chemotherapies: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase 2 Trial (NEXIRI-2/PRODIGE 27).

Clin Colorectal Cancer 2020 Dec 15;19(4):301-310.e1. Epub 2020 May 15.

Medical Oncology Departement, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier (ICM), Univ. Montpellier, Montpellier, France; Institut régional du Cancer de Montpellier (IRCM), INSERM, Univ. Montpellier, ICM, Montpellier.

Background: No treatment option was available for patients with RAS-mutated (RASmt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who progress after standard combined chemotherapies at the time of the study. After promising results in phase II, the aim of the present NEXIRI-2/PRODIGE 27 trial was to assess the 2-month non-progression rate for sorafenib (NEX) plus irinotecan (IRI), that is, NEXIRI, treatment.

Methods: Patients with RASmt mCRC after failure of oxaliplatin, IRI, fluoropyrimidines, and bevacizumab were randomized between NEXIRI (IRI 120-180 mg/m intravenous, D1 = D15 plus oral NEX 400 mg twice a day) versus IRI (180 mg/m) versus NEX. Primary endpoint was the 2-month non-progression rate. Secondary endpoints included progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS), safety, and germline cyclin D1 (CCND1) rs9344 polymorphisms analyses.

Results: A total of 173 patients were included, 59 in NEXIRI, 57 in IRI, and 57 in NEX arms. The 2-month non-progression rate was 52.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39%-66%), 21.4% (10%-33%), and 19.3% (9%-30%) for NEXIRI, IRI, and NEX. Median PFS was 3.6 (95% CI: 2-4.2), 1.7 (1.7-1.8), and 2 (1.8-2.3) months and the median OS was 7.2 (5.8-9.4), 6.3 (4.8-8), and 5.6 (3.9-7.7) months for NEXIRI, IRI, and NEX, respectively. For NEXIRI rs9344CCND1 A/A genotype patients, OS was 19.6 months (95% CI: 4.8-not reached). Main grade 3 toxicities included neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome, and hypertension.

Conclusions: In patients with RASmt mCRC who progressed after standard combined chemotherapies, the results of 2-month non-progression rate and median PFS in the NEXIRI arm were in favor of an increase of the time before progression.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clcc.2020.04.008DOI Listing
December 2020

Impact on health-related quality of life deterioration-free survival of a first-line therapy combining nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: Results of the randomized phase II AFUGEM GERCOR clinical trial.

Cancer Med 2019 Sep 17;8(11):5079-5088. Epub 2019 Jul 17.

Methodology and Quality of Life Unit in Oncology, INSERM UMR 1098, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.

Background: The phase II AFUGEM GERCOR trial aimed to assess the efficacy of a first-line therapy combining nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine (gemcitabine group) or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil (sLV5FU2 group) in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic cancer. Results of progression-free survival at 4 months (primary endpoint) were in favor of the sLV5FU2 group. This paper presents health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data as a secondary endpoint.

Methods: HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline and at each chemotherapy cycle until the end of treatment. The HRQoL deterioration-free survival (QFS) was used as a modality of longitudinal analysis. QFS was defined as the time between randomization and the first definitive HRQoL score deterioration as compared to the baseline score, or death. Sensitivity analysis was performed excluding death as an event. Univariate Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the treatment effect.

Results: Between 2013 and 2014, 114 patients were randomized in a 1:2 ratio (39 in the gemcitabine group and 75 in the sLV5FU2 group). Patients in the sLV5FU2 group seemed to present longer QFS than those of the gemcitabine group for 14 out of 15 dimensions, with HRs < 1. Results of the sensitivity analysis excluding death as an event were significantly in favor of the sLV5FU2 group for physical functioning (HR = 0.51 [90% CI 0.27-0.97]) and pain (HR = 0.26 [90% CI 0.09-0.74]).

Conclusion: The nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil combination had no negative impact in exploratory HRQoL analyses.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2311DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6718524PMC
September 2019

[Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency screening for management of patients receiving a fluoropyrimidine: Results of two national practice surveys addressed to clinicians and biologists].

Bull Cancer 2019 Sep 25;106(9):759-775. Epub 2019 Jun 25.

Laboratoire d'oncopharmacologie, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice cedex 2, France. Electronic address:

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is the main cause of early severe toxicities induced by fluoropyrimidines (FP). The French Group of Clinical Oncopharmacology (GPCO)-Unicancer and the French Pharmacogenetics Network (RNPGx) initiated two surveys, one addressed to oncologists, the other to biologists, in order to evaluate routine practices regarding DPD deficiency screening at national level, as well as compliance, motivations and obstacles for implementation of these tests. These anonymized online surveys were performed with the logistic assistance of the Francophone Federation of Digestive Oncology (FFCD) and the support of numerous medical and biological societies. The surveys were conducted in 2016-2017 before the creation of the French INCa/HAS expert panel, which contributed to the drafting of rules and recommendations for DPD deficiency screening published in December 2018. In all, 554 questionnaires from clinicians were analyzed (23% participation) and 35 from biologists. The main arguments raised by clinicians for justifying the limited practice of DPD deficiency screening were: the lack of recommendations from medical societies or Health Authorities, delays in obtaining results, and the lack of adequate reimbursement by the health insurance system. The goal of these surveys was to provide the French Health Authorities with an overview on nationwide DPD-deficiency screening practices and thus help to design recommendations for the standardization and improvement of the management and safety of cancer patients receiving FP-based chemotherapy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bulcan.2019.04.013DOI Listing
September 2019

Pravastatin combination with sorafenib does not improve survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

J Hepatol 2019 09 22;71(3):516-522. Epub 2019 May 22.

Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Saint-Etienne - Hôpital Nord, Saint-Priest-en-Jarez, France.

Background & Aims: Sorafenib is the standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Combining sorafenib with another treatment, to improve overall survival (OS) within an acceptable safety profile, might be the next step forward in the management of patients with advanced HCC. We aimed to assess whether a combination of sorafenib and a statin improved survival in patients with HCC.

Methods: The objective of the PRODIGE-11 trial was to compare the respective clinical outcomes of the sorafenib-pravastatin combination (arm A) versus sorafenib alone (arm B) in patients with advanced HCC. Child-Pugh A patients with advanced HCC who were naive to systemic treatment (n = 323) were randomly assigned to sorafenib-pravastatin combination (n = 162) or sorafenib alone (n = 161). The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, time to tumor progression, time to treatment failure, safety, and quality of life.

Results: After randomization, 312 patients received at least 1 dose of study treatment. After a median follow-up of 35 months, 269 patients died (arm A: 135; arm B: 134) with no difference in median OS between treatments arms (10.7 months vs. 10.5 months; hazard ratio = 1.00; p = 0.975); no difference was observed in secondary survival endpoints either. In the univariate analysis, the significant prognostic factors for OS were CLIP score, performance status, and quality of life scores. The multivariate analysis showed that the only prognostic factor for OS was the CLIP score. The main toxicity was diarrhea (which was severe in 11% of patients in arm A, and 8.9% in arm B), while severe nausea-vomiting was rare, and no toxicity-related deaths were reported.

Conclusion: Adding pravastatin to sorafenib did not improve survival in patients with advanced HCC.

Lay Summary: Sorafenib has proven efficacy for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, overall survival remains poor in these patients, so we were interested to see if the addition of a statin, pravastatin, improved outcomes in patients with advanced HCC. This randomized-controlled trial demonstrated that the sorafenib-pravastatin combination did not improve overall survival in this study population compared to sorafenib alone. Clinical trial number: NCT01075555.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2019.04.021DOI Listing
September 2019

Impact of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in DNA repair pathway genes on response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer patients: Results from ACCORD-12/PRODIGE-2 phase III trial.

Int J Cancer 2019 12 31;145(11):3163-3172. Epub 2019 May 31.

Université Paris Descartes; Paris Sorbonne Cité INSERM UMR-S775, Paris, France.

We examined whether 66 germline single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 10 candidate genes would predict clinical outcome in 316 patients with resectable locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) enrolled in the ACCORD-12 phase III trial who were randomly treated with preoperative radiotherapy plus capecitabine (CAP45; n = 155) or dose-intensified radiotherapy plus capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX50; n = 161). The primary endpoint was tumor response according to the Dworak score. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusted on treatment arm and T stage determined the SNPs prognostic and predictive values for tumor response. In univariate analysis, five SNPs in ERCC2, XPA, MTHFR and ERCC1 were associated with the Dworak score in the CAPOX50 arm. In the overall population, interaction with treatment arm was significant for ERCC2 rs1799787 (p = 0.05) and XPA rs3176683 (p = 0.008), suggesting a predictive effect for response to oxaliplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT). All but XPA rs3176683 had a prognostic effect on tumor response. In a multivariate model, interaction remained significant for XPA rs3176683 ([OR 7.33, 95% CI 1.40-38.23], p = 0.018) and the prognostic effect significant for ERCC2 rs1799787 ([OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.32-0.93], p = 0.027) and ERCC1 rs10412761 ([OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.34-0.98], p = 0.042). Patients with the T/G haplotype of rs1799787 and rs10412761 had a 60% decrease in odds of response (p < 0.001). None of the five SNPs were associated with toxicity, overall and disease-free survival. These data suggest that genetic variation in DNA repair genes influences response to preoperative CRT in LARC and identify patients who benefit from the addition of oxaliplatin to CRT.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.32417DOI Listing
December 2019

Early evaluation using a radiomic signature of unresectable hepatic metastases to predict outcome in patients with colorectal cancer treated with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab.

Gut 2020 03 17;69(3):531-539. Epub 2019 May 17.

Radiology, Hopital Maison Blanche, Reims, Champagne-Ardenne, France.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to build and validate a radiomic signature to predict early a poor outcome using baseline and 2-month evaluation CT and to compare it to the RECIST1·1 and morphological criteria defined by changes in homogeneity and borders.

Methods: This study is an ancillary study from the PRODIGE-9 multicentre prospective study for which 491 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated by 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and bevacizumab had been analysed. In 230 patients, computed texture analysis was performed on the dominant liver lesion (DLL) at baseline and 2 months after chemotherapy. RECIST1·1 evaluation was performed at 6 months. A radiomic signature (Survival PrEdiction in patients treated by FOLFIRI and bevacizumab for mCRC using contrast-enhanced CT TextuRe Analysis (SPECTRA) Score) combining the significant predictive features was built using multivariable Cox analysis in 120 patients, then locked, and validated in 110 patients. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups with the logrank test. An external validation was performed in another cohort of 40 patients from the PRODIGE 20 Trial.

Results: In the training cohort, the significant predictive features for OS were: decrease in sum of the target liver lesions (STL), (adjusted hasard-ratio(aHR)=13·7, p=1·93×10), decrease in kurtosis (ssf=4) (aHR=1·08, p=0·001) and high baseline density of DLL, (aHR=0·98, p<0·001). Patients with a SPECTRA Score >0·02 had a lower OS in the training cohort (p<0·0001), in the validation cohort (p<0·0008) and in the external validation cohort (p=0·0027). SPECTRA Score at 2 months had the same prognostic value as RECIST at 6 months, while non-response according to RECIST1·1 at 2 months was not associated with a lower OS in the validation cohort (p=0·238). Morphological response was not associated with OS (p=0·41).

Conclusion: A radiomic signature (combining decrease in STL, density and computed texture analysis of the DLL) at baseline and 2-month CT was able to predict OS, and identify good responders better than RECIST1.1 criteria in patients with mCRC treated by FOLFIRI and bevacizumab as a first-line treatment. This tool should now be validated by further prospective studies.

Trial Registration: Clinicaltrial.gov identifier of the PRODIGE 9 study: NCT00952029.Clinicaltrial.gov identifier of the PRODIGE 20 study: NCT01900717.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316407DOI Listing
March 2020

Sorafenib alone vs. sorafenib plus GEMOX as 1-line treatment for advanced HCC: the phase II randomised PRODIGE 10 trial.

Br J Cancer 2019 04 4;120(9):896-902. Epub 2019 Apr 4.

Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.

Background: Sorafenib remains one major first-line therapeutic options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC), with modest efficacy. We investigated the addition of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) to sorafenib in aHCC patients.

Methods: Our multicentre phase II trial randomised aHCC first-line patients to sorafenib (400 mg BID) or sorafenib-GEMOX every 2 weeks (1000 mg/m gemcitabine; 100 mg/m oxaliplatin). Primary endpoint was the 4-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate.

Results: Ninety-four patients were randomised (sorafenib-GEMOX: n = 48; sorafenib: n = 46). Median age was 64 years, PS 0 (69%) or 1 (31%), 63% patients had cirrhosis, 29% portal vein thrombosis and 70% extra-hepatic disease. Median duration of sorafenib treatment was 4 months (1-51); median number of GEMOX cycles was 7 (1-16). The 4-month PFS rates were 64% and 61% in the sorafenib-GEMOX and sorafenib arms, respectively; median PFS and OS were 6.2 (95% CI: 3.8-6.8) and 13.5 (7.5-16.2) months, and 4.6 (3.9-6.2) months and 14.8 (12.2-22.2), respectively. The ORR/DCR were 9%/70% and 15%/77% in the sorafenib-GEMOX and sorafenib alone arms, respectively. Main toxicities were (sorafenib-GEMOX/sorafenib) neutropenia (23%/0), thrombocytopenia (33%/0), diarrhoea (18%/9), peripheral neuropathy (5%/0) and hand-foot syndrome (5%/18).

Conclusions: Addition of GEMOX had an inpact on ORR and was well-tolerated as frontline systemic therapy. The benefit on PFS seems moderate; no subsequent study was planned.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-019-0443-4DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734663PMC
April 2019

[Gastric tumors].

Rev Prat 2018 Feb;68(2):e47-e52

Service d'oncologie digestive, CHU La Timone, Aix-Marseille-Université, 13005 Marseille, France.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
February 2018

Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin Chemotherapy or Surveillance in Resected Biliary Tract Cancer (PRODIGE 12-ACCORD 18-UNICANCER GI): A Randomized Phase III Study.

J Clin Oncol 2019 03 1;37(8):658-667. Epub 2019 Feb 1.

24 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire St Etienne, St Etienne, France.

Purpose: No standard adjuvant treatment currently is recommended in localized biliary tract cancer (BTC) after surgical resection. We aimed to assess whether gemcitabine and oxaliplatin chemotherapy (GEMOX) would increase relapse-free survival (RFS) while maintaining health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients who undergo resection.

Patients And Methods: We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial in 33 centers. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) within 3 months after R0 or R1 resection of a localized BTC to receive either GEMOX (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m on day 1 and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m infused on day 2 of a 2-week cycle) for 12 cycles (experimental arm A) or surveillance (standard arm B). Primary end points were RFS and HRQOL.

Results: Between July 2009 and February 2014, 196 patients were included. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two arms. After a median follow-up of 46.5 months (95% CI, 42.6 to 49.3 months), 126 RFS events and 82 deaths were recorded. There was no significant difference in RFS between the two arms (median, 30.4 months in arm A v 18.5 months in arm B; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.25; P = .48). There was no difference in time to definitive deterioration of global HRQOL (median, 31.8 months in arm A v 32.1 months in arm B; HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.73 to 2.26; log-rank P = .39). Overall survival was not different (median, 75.8 months in arm A v 50.8 months in arm B; HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.66; log-rank P = .74). Maximal adverse events were grade 3 in 62% (arm A) versus 18% (arm B) and grade 4 in 11% versus 3% ( P < .001).

Conclusion: There was no benefit of adjuvant GEMOX in resected BTC despite adequate tolerance and delivery of the regimen.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.00050DOI Listing
March 2019

Continuation of Bevacizumab vs Cetuximab Plus Chemotherapy After First Progression in KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The UNICANCER PRODIGE18 Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA Oncol 2019 01;5(1):83-90

Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon, Besançon, France.

Importance: Second-line treatment with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab or cetuximab is a valid option for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Objective: To evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 4 months with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab vs cetuximab for patients with progression of metastatic colorectal cancer after bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.

Design, Setting, And Participants: A prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial was conducted from December 14, 2010, to May 5, 2015. The main eligibility criterion was disease progression after bevacizumab plus fluorouracil with irinotecan or oxaliplatin in patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. All analyses were performed on the modified intent-to-treat population.

Interventions: Patients were randomized to arm A (FOLFIRI [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with irinotecan] or modified FOLFOX6 [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with oxaliplatin] plus bevacizumab) or arm B (FOLFIRI or modified FOLFOX6 plus cetuximab); the second-line chemotherapy regimen was chosen according to first-line treatment (crossover).

Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary end point was the 4-month PFS rate. Secondary end points included safety, objective response rate, overall survival, and PFS.

Results: A total of 132 patients (47 women and 85 men; median age, 63.0 years [range, 33.0-84.0 years]; 74 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 54 patients with a performance status of 1, and 4 patients with unknown performance status) were included at 25 sites. The 4-month PFS rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 68.0%-88.3%) in arm A and 66.7% (95% CI, 53.6%-76.8%) in arm B. The median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.7-8.2 months) in arm A and 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.2-6.5 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-1.02; P = .06), and the median overall survival was 15.8 months (95% CI, 9.5-22.3 months) in arm A and 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.0-16.2 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.04; P = .08). A central analysis of KRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), NRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), and BRAF (V600) was performed for 95 tumor samples. Eighty-one patients had wild-type KRAS and wild-type NRAS tumors.

Conclusions And Relevance: The results of the PRODIGE18 (Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie DIGEstive) study showed a nonsignificant difference but favored continuation of bevacizumab with chemotherapy crossover for patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer that progressed with first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01442649 and clinicaltrialsregister.eu identifier: EUDRACT 2009-012942-22.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4465DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6440242PMC
January 2019

A prospective clinical and biological database for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: the BACAP cohort.

BMC Cancer 2018 Oct 16;18(1):986. Epub 2018 Oct 16.

The Department of Gastroenterology and Pancreatology, CHU - Rangueil and the University of Toulouse, 1 avenue Jean Poulhès, TSA 50032, 31059, Toulouse Cedex 9, France.

Background: The prognosis for pancreatic cancer remains poor despite diagnostic advances and treatments with new chemotherapeutic regimens. The five year survival rate remains below 3%. Consequently, there is an urgent need for new treatments to significantly improve the prognosis. In addition, there is a big gap in terms of the screening, early diagnosis and prevention of pancreatic cancer the incidence of which is increasing dramatically.

Methods: Design: the BACAP cohort is a prospective multicenter pancreatic cancer cohort (pancreatic ductal carcinoma) with clinical and multiple biological samples; Participating centers: 15 French academic and private hospitals; Study Population: any cytologically and/or histologically proven pancreatic carcinoma regardless of the stage (resectable, borderline, locally advanced or metastatic) or treatment (surgery, palliative chemotherapy, best supportive care). At least 1500 patients will be included. Clinical data collected include: disease presentation, epidemiological and social factors, baseline biology, radiology, endoscopic ultrasound, staging, pathology, treatments, follow-up (including biological and radiological), and survival. All these data are collected and stored through an e-observation system at a centralized data center. Biological samples and derived products (i.e. before any treatment): blood, saliva, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration materials from the primary tumor, fine needle biopsy of metastases and surgically resected tissue. DNA and RNA are extracted from fine needle aspiration materials and are quantified and characterized for quality. Whole blood, plasma and serum are isolated from blood samples. Frozen tissues were specifically allocated to the cohort. All derived products and saliva are stored at - 80 °C. Main end-points: i) to centralize clinical data together with multiple biological samples that are harmonized in terms of sampling, the post sampling process and storage; ii) to identify new molecular markers for the diagnosis, prognosis and possibly the predictive response to pancreatic cancer surgery and or chemotherapy.

Discussion: The BACAP cohort is a unique prospective biological clinical database that provides the opportunity to identify correlations between the presence/expression of a broad panel of biomarkers (DNA, RNA, miRNA, proteins, etc.), epidemiological and social data, various clinical situations, various stages and the differentiation of the tumor, treatments and survival.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02818829 . Registration date: June 30, 2016.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4906-4DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6191891PMC
October 2018

Regorafenib for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Progressed After Standard Therapy: Results of the Large, Single-Arm, Open-Label Phase IIIb CONSIGN Study.

Oncologist 2019 02 6;24(2):185-192. Epub 2018 Sep 6.

Department of Oncology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.

Background: In the phase III CORRECT trial, regorafenib significantly improved survival in treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The CONSIGN study was designed to further characterize regorafenib safety and allow patients access to regorafenib before market authorization.

Methods: This prospective, single-arm study enrolled patients in 25 countries at 186 sites. Patients with treatment-refractory mCRC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≤1 received regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. Progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator assessment was the only efficacy evaluation.

Results: In total, 2,872 patients were assigned to treatment and 2,864 were treated. Median age was 62 years, ECOG PS 0/1 was 47%/53%, and 74% had received at least three prior regimens for metastatic disease. Median treatment duration was three cycles. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) led to dose reduction in 46% of patients. Regorafenib-related TEAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 9%. Grade 5 regorafenib-related TEAEs occurred in <1%. The most common grade ≥3 regorafenib-related TEAEs were hypertension (15%), hand-foot skin reaction (14%), fatigue (13%), diarrhea (5%), and hypophosphatemia (5%). Treatment-emergent grade 3-4 laboratory toxicities included alanine aminotransferase (6%), aspartate aminotransferase (7%), and bilirubin (13%). Ongoing monitoring identified one nonfatal case of regorafenib-related severe drug-induced liver injury per DILI Working Group criteria. Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 2.7 months (2.6-2.7).

Conclusion: In CONSIGN, the frequency and severity of TEAEs were consistent with the known safety profile of regorafenib. PFS was similar to reports of phase III trials. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01538680.

Implications For Practice: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who fail treatment with standard therapies, including chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor or epidermal growth factor receptor, have few treatment options. The multikinase inhibitor regorafenib was shown to improve survival in patients with treatment-refractory mCRC in the phase III CORRECT ( = 760) and CONCUR ( = 204) trials. However, safety data on regorafenib for mCRC in a larger number of patients were not available. The CONSIGN trial, carried out prospectively in more than 2,800 patients across 25 countries, confirmed the safety profile of regorafenib from the phase III trials and reinforced the importance of using treatment modifications to manage adverse events.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0072DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6369948PMC
February 2019

Prognostic Value of Methylator Phenotype in Stage III Colon Cancer Treated with Oxaliplatin-based Adjuvant Chemotherapy.

Clin Cancer Res 2018 10 19;24(19):4745-4753. Epub 2018 Jun 19.

Pathological Department, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Ambroise Paré, Boulogne, France.

There are conflicting results concerning the prognostic value of the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) in patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. We studied this phenotype in stage III colon cancer characterized for mismatch repair (MMR), , and status, and treated with adjuvant FOLFOX-based regimen. Tumor samples of 1,907 patients enrolled in the PETACC-8 adjuvant phase III trial were analyzed. The method used was methylation-specific PCR, where CIMP status was defined by methylation of at least 3 of 5 following genes: , and Association between CIMP status and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and survival after recurrence (SAR), was assessed by Cox model adjusted for prognostic factors and treatment arm (FOLFOX4 ± cetuximab). CIMP status was successfully determined in 1,867 patients (97.9%): 275 (14.7%) tumors were CIMP Compared with CIMP patients, CIMP patients were more frequently older ( = 0.002), females ( = 0.04), with right-sided ( < 0.0001), grade 3-4 ( < 0.0001), pN2 ( = 0.001), dMMR ( < 0.0001), BRAF mutated ( < 0.0001), and RAS wild-type ( < 0.0001) tumors. In multivariate analysis, CIMP status was associated with shorter OS [HR, 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.94; = 0.04] and SAR [HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.20-2.56; < 0.0004]; but not DFS [HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.86-1.54; = 0.34]. A nonsignificant trend of detrimental effect of cetuximab was observed in patients with CIMP tumors for OS, DFS, and SAR. In a large cohort of well-defined patients with stage III colon cancer, CIMP phenotype is associated with a shorter OS and SAR but not to DFS. .
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0866DOI Listing
October 2018

Overweight is associated to a better prognosis in metastatic colorectal cancer: A pooled analysis of FFCD trials.

Eur J Cancer 2018 07 26;98:1-9. Epub 2018 May 26.

Digestive Oncology Department, CHU La Timone, APHM, Aix-Marseille Univ, Marseille, France.

Background: Previous studies showed that high and low body mass index (BMI) was associated with worse prognosis in early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC), and low BMI was associated with worse prognosis in metastatic CRC (mCRC). We aimed to assess efficacy outcomes according to BMI.

Patients And Methods: A pooled analysis of individual data from 2085 patients enrolled in eight FFCD first-line mCRC trials from 1991 to 2013 was performed. Comparisons were made according to the BMI cut-off: Obese (BMI ≥30), overweight patients (BMI ≥ 25), normal BMI patients (BMI: 18.5-24) and thin patients (BMI <18.5). Interaction tests were performed between BMI effect and sex, age and the addition of antiangiogenics to chemotherapy.

Results: The rate of BMI ≥25 patients was 41.5%, ranging from 37.6% (1991-1999 period) to 41.5% (2000-2006 period) and 44.8% (2007-2013 period). Comparison of overweight patients versus normal BMI range patients revealed a significant improvement of median overall survival (OS) (18.5 versus 16.3 months, HR = 0.88 [0.80-0.98] p = 0.02) and objective response rate (ORR) (42% versus 36% OR = 1.23 [1.01-1.50] p = 0.04) but a comparable median progression-free survival (PFS) (7.8 versus 7.2 months, HR = 0.96 [0.87-1.05] p = 0.35). Subgroup analyses revealed that overweight was significantly associated with better OS in men. OS and PFS were significantly shorter in thin patients.

Conclusion: Overweight patients had a prolonged OS compared with normal weight patients with mCRC. The association of overweight with better OS was only observed in men. The pejorative prognosis of BMI <18.5 was confirmed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2018.03.031DOI Listing
July 2018

Hepatocellular carcinoma is diagnosed at a later stage in alcoholic patients: Results of a prospective, nationwide study.

Cancer 2018 05 28;124(9):1964-1972. Epub 2018 Mar 28.

University of Grenoble, Grenoble, France.

Background: Recent data suggest that alcohol-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is diagnosed at a later stage. The aim of this study was to compare HCC characteristics and outcomes in an alcohol-related group (group A) and a non-alcohol-related group (group NA).

Methods: A total of 1207 patients with newly diagnosed HCC were prospectively included between May 2008 and October 2009. Patients with multiple causes (alcohol plus another cause) were excluded. Patients were followed every year for 5 years. Recorded variables, including etiologies were tested as prognostic factors of survival in a multivariate Cox model after adjustments for a lead-time bias.

Results: In all, 894 patients were analyzed: 582 (65.1%) were in group A, and 312 (34.9%) were in group NA. Alcohol-related HCC was more likely to be diffuse and detected in patients with a worse performance status and worse liver function. After adjustments for a lead-time bias, the median overall survival (OS) was 9.7 and 5.7 months in groups NA and A, respectively (P = .0002), and 5.8 and 5.0 months in alcohol-abstinent and alcohol non-abstinent groups, respectively (P = .09). The prognostic role of alcohol disappeared when survival was assessed at each Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage. Patients with HCC detected during a cirrhosis follow-up program (n = 199 [22.3% of the whole cohort]) had increased lead time-adjusted median OS in comparison with patients with HCC diagnosed incidentally (11.7 vs 5.4 months; P < .0001).

Conclusions: In comparison with patients with non-alcohol-related HCC, patients with alcohol-related HCC have reduced OS, mainly because of worse liver function and tumor characteristics at diagnosis, as attested by similar survival within each BCLC stage. Cancer 2018;124:1964-72. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31215DOI Listing
May 2018

Clinical and Biomarker Evaluations of Sunitinib in Patients with Grade 3 Digestive Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

Neuroendocrinology 2018 8;107(1):24-31. Epub 2018 Mar 8.

Medical Oncology, Hôpital Saint Joseph, AP-HP, Paris, France.

Background/aims: Angiogenesis is extensively developed in well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNET) where sunitinib was shown to prolong progression-free survival, leading to nationwide approval. However, clinical experience in patients with grade 3 gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEPNEN-G3) remains limited. This prospective phase II trial evaluated potential predictive biomarkers of sunitinib activity in patients with advanced GEPNEN-G3.

Methods: Sunitinib was given at a dose of 37.5 mg/day as a continuous daily dosing until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Evaluation of activity was based on RECIST1.1. Safety was evaluated according to NCI-CTCAE v4. Pharmacokinetics of sunitinib and its main active metabolite SU12662 were evaluated. All tumour samples were reviewed histologically for tumour differentiation. PDGFRβ, carbonic anhydrase 9, Ki-67, VEGFR2, and p-AKT were quantified using immunohistochemistry and their expression correlated with response by RECIST1.1.

Results: Thirty-one patients were included and 26 had available histological tissue. Six and 20 patients presented well-differentiated tumours (NET-G3) and neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), respectively. Eighteen patients responded to sunitinib (4 experienced partial responses and 14 tumour stabilization). A high p-AKT expression correlated with lower response to sunitinib (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, p = 0.04). Safety and PK exposure to sunitinib and SU12662 in these patients were consistent with that reported in PanNET.

Conclusion: Sunitinib showed evidence of activity in patients with GEPNEN-G3 with expected toxicity profile. In the NET-G3 and NEC groups, 4/6 and 11/20 patients were responders, respectively. High p-AKT expression predicted a lower response to sunitinib. Our study allowed the identification of a potential biomarker of resistance/sensitivity to sunitinib in aggressive GEPNEN-G3.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000487237DOI Listing
January 2019

Efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy with yttrium-90 resin microspheres compared with sorafenib in locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH): an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial.

Lancet Oncol 2017 12 26;18(12):1624-1636. Epub 2017 Oct 26.

Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France; Université Paris Est Créteil, Faculté de Médecine, Créteil, France; INSERM IMRB U955 Equipe 18, Créteil, France.

Background: Sorafenib is the recommended treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sorafenib to that of selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 (Y) resin microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods: SARAH was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial done at 25 centres specialising in liver diseases in France. Patients were eligible if they were aged at least 18 years with a life expectancy greater than 3 months, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, Child-Pugh liver function class A or B score of 7 or lower, and locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] stage C), or new hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for surgical resection, liver transplantation, or thermal ablation after a previously cured hepatocellular carcinoma (cured by surgery or thermoablative therapy), or hepatocellular carcinoma with two unsuccessful rounds of transarterial chemoembolisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a permutated block method with block sizes two and four to receive continuous oral sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or SIRT with Y-loaded resin microspheres 2-5 weeks after randomisation. Patients were stratified according to randomising centre, ECOG performance status, previous transarterial chemoembolisation, and presence of macroscopic vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib or underwent at least one of the SIRT work-up exams. This study has been completed and the final results are reported here. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01482442.

Findings: Between Dec 5, 2011, and March 12, 2015, 467 patients were randomly assigned; after eight patients withdrew consent, 237 were assigned to SIRT and 222 to sorafenib. In the SIRT group, 53 (22%) of 237 patients did not receive SIRT; 26 (49%) of these 53 patients were treated with sorafenib. Median follow-up was 27·9 months (IQR 21·9-33·6) in the SIRT group and 28·1 months (20·0-35·3) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·7-9·9) in the SIRT group versus 9·9 months (8·7-11·4) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% CI 0·94-1·41] for SIRT vs sorafenib; p=0·18). In the safety population, at least one serious adverse event was reported in 174 (77%) of 226 patients in the SIRT group and in 176 (82%) of 216 in the sorafenib group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20 [9%] vs 41 [19%]), liver dysfunction (25 [11%] vs 27 [13%]), increased laboratory liver values (20 [9%] vs 16 [7%]), haematological abnormalities (23 [10%] vs 30 [14%]), diarrhoea (three [1%] vs 30 [14%]), abdominal pain (six [3%] vs 14 [6%]), increased creatinine (four [2%] vs 12 [6%]), and hand-foot skin reaction (one [<1%] vs 12 [6%]). 19 deaths in the SIRT group and 12 in the sorafenib group were deemed to be treatment related.

Interpretation: In patients with locally advanced or intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma after unsuccessful transarterial chemoembolisation, overall survival did not significantly differ between the two groups. Quality of life and tolerance might help when choosing between the two treatments.

Funding: Sirtex Medical Inc.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30683-6DOI Listing
December 2017

[Clinical research activity of the French cancer cooperative network: Overview and perspectives].

Bull Cancer 2017 Jul - Aug;104(7-8):652-661. Epub 2017 Jul 5.

Groupes coopérateurs en oncologie (GCO), 10, rue de la Grange-Batelière, 75009 Paris, France; Intergroupe francophone en cancérologie thoracique (IFCT), 10, rue de la Grange-Batelière, 75009 Paris, France.

Introduction: The French Cancer Plan 2014-2019 stresses the importance of strengthening collaboration between all stakeholders involved in the fight against cancer, including cancer cooperative groups and intergroups. This survey aimed to describe the basics characteristics and clinical research activity among the Cancer Cooperative Groups (Groupes coopérateurs en oncologie). The second objective was to identify facilitators and barriers to their research activity.

Methods: A questionnaire was sent to all the clinicians involved in 2014 as investigators in a clinical trial sponsored by one of the ten members of the Cancer Cooperative Groups network. The questions were related to their profile, research activity and the infrastructure existing within their healthcare center to support clinical research and related compliance activities.

Results: In total, 366 investigators responded to our survey. The academic clinical trials sponsored by the Cancer Cooperative Groups represented an important part of the research activity of the investigators in France in 2014. These academic groups contributed to the opening of many research sites throughout all regions in France. Factors associated with a higher participation of investigators (more than 10 patients enrolled in a trial over a year) include the existing support of healthcare professionals (more than 2 clinical research associate (CRA) OR=11.16 [3.82-32.6] compared to none) and the practice of their research activity in a University Hospital Center (CHU) rather than a Hospital Center (CH) (OR=2.15 [1.20-3.83]).

Conclusion: This study highlighted factors that can strengthen investigator clinical research activities and subsequently improve patient access to evidence-based new cancer therapies in France.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bulcan.2017.05.006DOI Listing
August 2017

Ramucirumab as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib: Patient-focused outcome results from the randomised phase III REACH study.

Eur J Cancer 2017 08 4;81:17-25. Epub 2017 Jun 4.

Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Purpose: To report patient-focused outcomes as measured by quality of life (QoL) and performance status (PS) in REACH, a phase III placebo-controlled randomised study, assessing ramucirumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who received prior sorafenib.

Methods: Eligible patients had advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A, PS 0 or 1 and prior sorafenib. Patients received ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo (1:1) on day 1 of a 2-week cycle. QoL was assessed by FACT Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI)-8 and EuroQoL (EQ-5D) at baseline; cycles 4, 10, and 16; and end of treatment. PS was assessed at baseline, each cycle, and end of treatment. Deterioration in FHSI-8 was defined as a ≥3-point decrease from baseline and PS deterioration was defined as a change of ≥2. Both intention-to-treat and pre-specified subgroup of patients with baseline serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL were assessed.

Results: There were 565 patients randomised to ramucirumab and placebo. Compliance with FHSI and EQ-5D was high and similar between groups. In the ITT population, deterioration in FHSI-8, EQ-5D, and PS was similar between ramucirumab and placebo. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, ramucirumab significantly reduced deterioration in FHSI-8 at the end of treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.0381), and there was a trend towards a delay in the deterioration of symptoms in FHSI-8 (HR 0.690; P = 0.054) and PS (HR 0.642; P = 0.057) in favour of ramucirumab.

Conclusions: We report one of the most comprehensive data sets of QoL and symptom burden in patients undergoing systemic therapy for advanced HCC. Ramucirumab was associated with no worsening of QoL. In patients with baseline AFP ≥400 ng/mL, the significant survival benefit observed in patients treated with ramucirumab was coupled with a trend in patient-focused outcome benefits.

Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01140347.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.05.001DOI Listing
August 2017

Nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (AFUGEM GERCOR): a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial.

Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017 05 28;2(5):337-346. Epub 2017 Feb 28.

Department of Oncology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.

Background: Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine has become a standard treatment regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, retrospective data suggest that gemcitabine might be inefficient in 50-60% of patients and thus not an optimum regimen in combination with nab-paclitaxel. We did a phase 2 trial to assess the activity and safety of a new regimen of nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil.

Methods: We did a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial in 15 hospitals and institutions in France. Eligible participants were previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (previous adjuvant chemotherapy after curative intent resection was allowed if the interval between the end of chemotherapy and relapse was more than 12 months). Patients had to have at least one measurable lesion assessed by CT scan or MRI and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less. We randomly assigned participants (1:2) centrally to 28-day cycles of either gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil plus nab-paclitaxel. The randomisation was by minimisation, stratified by centre and ECOG performance status. Drugs were administered in each cycle as follows: nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m) as 30-min intravenous infusions on days 1, 8, and 15; leucovorin (400 mg/m) as a 120-min intravenous infusion on days 1 and 15; and fluorouracil (400 mg/m) as a 5-min bolus intravenous infusion followed by a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion of 2400 mg/m on days 1 and 15. Patients continued treatment until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or patient withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months in the first 72 assessable patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with a target of 50% for the regimen to be deemed sufficiently active to warrant further study. We did the primary analysis on the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population, defined as all randomly assigned and assessable patients regardless of their eligibility and received treatments. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01964534. The trial has ended and we report the final analysis here.

Findings: Between Dec 12, 2013, and Oct 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 114 patients to treatment: 75 patients to the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and 39 to the gemcitabine group. One patient in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group did not have a 4-month assessment, and was thus excluded from the modified ITT analysis. Median follow-up was 13·1 months (95% CI 12·5-14·1). At 4 months, 40 (56%, 90% CI 45-66) of 72 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were alive and free from disease progression (21 [54%, 40-68] of 39 patients in the gemcitabine group were also alive and progression-free at 4 months). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 33 (87%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group and in 56 (77%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with different toxicity profiles. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were neutropenia without fever (17 [23%]), fatigue (16 [22%]), paraesthesia (14 [19%]), diarrhoea (nine [12%]), and mucositis (seven [10%]); in the gemcitabine group they were neutropenia without fever (12 [32%]), thrombocytopenia (seven [18%]), fatigue (eight [21%]), anaemia (five [13%]), increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase concentrations (five [13%] for both), and paraesthesia (four [11%]). Two participants died; one in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group from septic shock, and one in the gemcitabine group from diabetes compensation with acidosis; these deaths were deemed to be not related to treatment. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 28 (38%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and in 14 (37%) of 38 in the gemcitabine group.

Interpretation: Nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil fulfilled the primary endpoint in that more than the required 50% of our study population were progression-free at 4 months, with a tolerable toxicity profile. This regimen thus deserves further assessment in a phase 3 trial.

Funding: GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) and Celgene through grants to GERCOR.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30046-8DOI Listing
May 2017

Population Pharmacokinetics of Gemcitabine and dFdU in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Using an Optimal Design, Sparse Sampling Approach.

Ther Drug Monit 2017 06;39(3):290-296

*SMARTc, CRO2, UMR S_911, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France; †IRCM, Institut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier, INSERM U1194, ICM, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France; ‡Digestive Oncology Unit, La Timone Hospital, AP-HM, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France; §Gastroenterology Department, CHRU Besançon, Besançon, France; ¶Digestive Pathologies Department, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France; ‖Pôle de Médecine, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France; **Institut Arnault Tzanck, Saint Laurent du Var, France; and ††Service Interdisciplinaire de Cancérologie, Riviera-Chablais Hospital, Vevey, Switzerland.

Background: Gemcitabine remains a pillar in pancreatic cancer treatment. However, toxicities are frequently observed. Dose adjustment based on therapeutic drug monitoring might help decrease the occurrence of toxicities. In this context, this work aims at describing the pharmacokinetics (PK) of gemcitabine and its metabolite dFdU in pancreatic cancer patients and at identifying the main sources of their PK variability using a population PK approach, despite a sparse sampled-population and heterogeneous administration and sampling protocols.

Methods: Data from 38 patients were included in the analysis. The 3 optimal sampling times were determined using KineticPro and the population PK analysis was performed on Monolix. Available patient characteristics, including cytidine deaminase (CDA) status, were tested as covariates. Correlation between PK parameters and occurrence of severe hematological toxicities was also investigated.

Results: A two-compartment model best fitted the gemcitabine and dFdU PK data (volume of distribution and clearance for gemcitabine: V1 = 45 L and CL1 = 4.03 L/min; for dFdU: V2 = 36 L and CL2 = 0.226 L/min). Renal function was found to influence gemcitabine clearance, and body surface area to impact the volume of distribution of dFdU. However, neither CDA status nor the occurrence of toxicities was correlated to PK parameters.

Conclusions: Despite sparse sampling and heterogeneous administration and sampling protocols, population and individual PK parameters of gemcitabine and dFdU were successfully estimated using Monolix population PK software. The estimated parameters were consistent with previously published results. Surprisingly, CDA activity did not influence gemcitabine PK, which was explained by the absence of CDA-deficient patients enrolled in the study. This work suggests that even sparse data are valuable to estimate population and individual PK parameters in patients, which will be usable to individualize the dose for an optimized benefit to risk ratio.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/FTD.0000000000000399DOI Listing
June 2017

Geriatric factors analyses from FFCD 2001-02 phase III study of first-line chemotherapy for elderly metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Eur J Cancer 2017 03 5;74:98-108. Epub 2016 Nov 5.

CHU Le Bocage and INSERM U866 Dijon, France. Electronic address:

Aim: Several predictors of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) outcomes have been described. Specific geriatric characteristics could be of interest to determine prognosis.

Method: Elderly patients (75+) with previously untreated mCRC were randomly assigned to receive infusional 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, either alone (FU) or in combination with irinotecan (IRI). Geriatric evaluations were included as an optional procedure. The predictive value of geriatric parameters was determined for the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: From June 2003 to May 2010, the FFCD 2001-02 randomised trial enrolled 282 patients. A baseline geriatric evaluation was done in 123 patients; 62 allocated to the FU arm and 61 to the IRI arm. The baseline Charlson index was ≤1 in 75%, Mini-Mental State Examination was ≤27/30 in 31%, Geriatric Depression Scale was >2 in 10% and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) was impaired in 34% of the patients. Multivariate analyses revealed that no geriatric parameter was predictive for ORR or PFS. Normal IADL was independently associated with better OS. The benefit of doublet chemotherapy on PFS differed in subgroups of patients ≤80 years, with unresected primary tumour, leucocytes >11,000 mm and carcinoembryonic antigen >2N. There was a trend towards better OS in patients with normal IADL.

Conclusion: The autonomy score was an independent predictor for OS. A trend toward a better efficacy of doublet chemotherapy in some subgroups of patients was reported and should be further explored.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.09.029DOI Listing
March 2017

Monoclonal antibodies for treating gastric cancer: promises and pitfalls.

Expert Opin Biol Ther 2016 06 25;16(6):759-69. Epub 2016 Mar 25.

a Department of Digestive Oncology , Aix-Marseille University - Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Marseille , Marseille , France.

Introduction: Gastric cancer (GC) presents dismal prognosis when diagnosed at advanced stages, standard chemotherapy having shown little efficacy. Introduction of biotherapies interfering with novel targets and signaling pathways is currently an emerging strategy.

Areas Covered: Only two monoclonal antibodies (trastuzumab and ramucirumab) have been approved, mostly in association with cytotoxics. Conversely, testing other promising biotherapies (panitumumab, cetuximab, bevacizumab, rilotumumab) have yielded conflicting results, since encouraging early clinical trials have failed to be confirmed in larger phase-III studies. Empirical and underpowered strategies when designing combinational studies, lack of comprehensive knowledge of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) relationships, and underestimation of the large inter-patient variability in drug exposure levels with monoclonal antibodies, could explain the failures in developing biotherapies in gastric cancer. This review covers the achievements and limits of monoclonal antibodies in gastric cancer and proposes clues to overcome current failures.

Expert Opinion: Trastuzumab efficacy could be improved thanks to its combination with triplet chemotherapy or with another anti-HER2 agents or in continuation during second-line chemotherapy. Concerning ramucirumab, further studies are necessary to prove its interest in first line treatment of advanced GC, to use the optimal dose in each patient-given the large inter-patients variability, and to find predictive biomarkers of efficacy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2016.1164137DOI Listing
June 2016

Determinants of Early Mortality Among 37,568 Patients With Colon Cancer Who Participated in 25 Clinical Trials From the Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints Database.

J Clin Oncol 2016 Apr 8;34(11):1182-9. Epub 2016 Feb 8.

Winson Y. Cheung, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia; Chris O'Callaghan, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Lindsay A. Renfro, Axel Grothey, Steven R. Alberts, and Daniel J. Sargent, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; David Kerr, University of Oxford, Oxford; Chris Twelves, University of Leeds and St James Institute of Oncology, Leeds, United Kingdom; Aimery de Gramont, Franco-British Institute, Levallois-Perret; Thierry Andre, Hospital Saint-Antoine and Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris; Jean-Francois Seitz, La Timone Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France; Leonard B. Saltz, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Katherine A. Guthrie, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA; Roberto Labianca, Ospedale Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo; Guido Francini, University of Siena, Siena, Italy; Eric Van Cutsem, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Daniel G. Haller, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; and Greg Yothers, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.

Purpose: Factors associated with early mortality after surgery and treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer are poorly understood. We aimed to characterize the determinants of early mortality in a large cohort of colon cancer trial participants.

Methods: A pooled analysis of 37,568 patients in 25 randomized trials of adjuvant systemic therapy was conducted. Multivariable logistic regression models with several definitions of early mortality (30, 60, and 90 days, and 6 months) were constructed, adjusting for clinically and statistically significant variables. A nomogram for 6-month mortality was developed and validated.

Results: Median age among patients was 61 years, patient demographics included 54% men and 90% White, 29% and 71% had stage II and III disease, respectively, and 79%, 20%, and 1% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) of 0, 1, and ≥ 2, respectively. Early mortality was low: 0.3% at 30 days, 0.6% at 60 days, 0.8% at 90 days, and 1.4% at 6 months. Of those patients who died by 6 months post-random assignment, 40% had documented disease recurrence prior to death. Early disease recurrence was associated with a markedly increased risk of death during the first 6 months post-treatment (hazard ratio, 82.6; 95%CI, 66.9 to 102.1). In prognostic analyses, advanced age, male sex, poorer PS, increasing ratio of positive to examined lymph nodes, earlier decade of enrollment, and higher tumor stage and grade predicted a greater likelihood of early mortality, whereas treatment received was not strongly predictive. A multivariable model for 6-month mortality showed strong optimism-adjusted discrimination (concordance index, 0.73) and calibration.

Conclusion: Early mortality was infrequent but more prevalent in patients with advanced age and a PS of ≥ 2, underscoring the need to carefully consider the risk-to-benefit ratio when making treatment decisions in these subgroups.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.65.1158DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4933130PMC
April 2016

Beating the odds: efficacy and toxicity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase-driven adaptive dosing of 5-FU in patients with digestive cancer.

Br J Clin Pharmacol 2016 Jan 28;81(1):124-30. Epub 2015 Nov 28.

Digestive Oncology Unit, La Timone University Hospital of Marseille, Marseille.

Aims: 5-FU is the backbone of most regimens in digestive oncology. Administration of standard 5-FU leads to 15-30% of severe side effects, and lethal toxicities are regularly reported with fluoropyrimidine drugs. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is a pharmacogenetic syndrome responsible for most cases of life-threatening toxicities upon 5-FU intake, and pre-treatment checking for DPD status should help to reduce both incidence and severity of side effects through adaptive dosing strategies.

Methods: We have used a simple method for rapidly establishing the DPD phenotype of patients with cancer and used it prospectively in 59 routine patients treated with 5-FU-based therapy for digestive cancers. No patient with total DPD deficiency was found but 23% of patients exhibited poor metabolizer phenotype, and one patient was phenotyped as profoundly deficient. Consequently, 5-FU doses in poor metabolizer patients were cut by an average 35% as compared with non deficient patients (2390 ± 1225 mg vs. 3653 ± 1371 mg, P < 0.003, t-test).

Results: Despite this marked reduction in 5-FU dosing, similar efficacy was achieved in the two subsets (clinical benefit: 40 vs. 43%, stable disease: 40 vs. 37%, progressive disease: 20% in both subsets, P = 0.893, Pearson's chi-square). No difference in toxicities was observed (P = 0.104, Fisher's exact test). Overall, only 3% of early severe toxicities were recorded, a value markedly lower than the 15-30% ones usually reported with 5-FU.

Conclusions: This feasibility study shows how simplified DPD-based adaptive dosing of 5-FU can reduce sharply the incidence of treatment-related severe toxicities while maintaining efficacy as part of routine clinical practice in digestive oncology.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcp.12790DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4693577PMC
January 2016