Meropol, Neal J.

Abstract Background Adjuvant 5-FU monotherapy was previously the standard treatment for stage II/III rectal cancer. This study compared adjuvant FOLFIRI, FOLFOX, and 5-FU/LV. Methods Eligible patients had T3-T4 N0 or Tany N1-3 rectal adenocarcinoma ≤12 cm from the anal verge and received pre-operative or postoperative 5-FU chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Patients were randomized to adjuvant FOLFIRI (8 cycles), FOLFOX (8 cycles), or 5-FU/LV weekly (6/8 weeks; 3 cycles). The trial planned to enroll 3,150 patients but was closed early following activation of an alternative adjuvant rectal cancer study including bevacizumab (E5204). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS), sphincter preservation, tolerability, and quality of life (QOL). Results The trial enrolled 225 patients (179 randomized) before early closure. Grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 59%, with neutropenia, leukopenia, and diarrhea being the most common. At a median follow-up of 9.7 years, no significant OS or DFS differences were observed. The rate of sphincter preservation was numerically higher with FOLFIRI and FOLFOX versus 5-FU/LV, but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion FOLFOX and FOLFIRI can be safely administered after CRT in rectal cancer patients safely with expected toxicities. Due to early trial closure and small sample size, the survival analysis was underpowered to detect a significant difference between regimens. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00068692

Abstract The increase in the complexity of cancer clinical trials over the past several decades has led to a dramatic growth in trial cost and operational burden. The extent and frequency of data collection, particularly in late-phase trials that enroll many participants, have been major contributors to this problem. The Clinical Trials and Translational Research Advisory Committee of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) recently assessed the effect of these stressors on the NCI National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and recommended that data collection in late-phase NCTN trials be limited to data elements essential to address the primary and secondary objectives of the trial. The purpose of this commentary is to describe the rationale for this recommendation, progress toward implementation, and the development of new streamlined standard practices for data collection for late-phase NCTN trials effective January 1, 2025.

Abstract Background In 2008, bevacizumab received accelerated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Based on the preclinical and preliminary clinical activity of the trastuzumab and bevacizumab combination, ECOG-ACRIN E1105 trial was developed to determine if the addition of bevacizumab to a chemotherapy and trastuzumab combination for first-line therapy would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with HER2-positive MBC. Findings: 96 patients were randomized to receive standard first-line chemotherapy and trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab between November 2007 and October 2009, and 93 began protocol therapy. Induction therapy was given for 24 weeks, followed by maintenance trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab. 60% (56/93) began carboplatin and 74% (69/93) completed 6 cycles of induction therapy. Primary endpoint was PFS. Median PFS was 11.1 and 13.8 months for placebo and bevacizumab arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 95%, Confidence Interval [Cl] for bevacizumab vs. placebo: 0.73 [0.43–1.23], p = 0.24), and at a median follow-up of 70.7 months, median survival was 49.1 and 63 months (HR [95% Cl] for OS: 1.09 [0.61–1.97], p = 0.75). The most common toxicities across both arms were neutropenia and hypertension, with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, fatigue, and sensory neuropathy reported more frequently with bevacizumab. Conclusions In this trial, the addition of bevacizumab did not improve outcomes in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. Although the trial was underpowered due to smaller than anticipated sample size, these findings corroborated other clinical trials during this time.

Purpose Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States. Antiangiogenic therapy with bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy improves survival in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. This study was conducted to determine the effect of bevacizumab (at 10 mg/kg) on survival duration for oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Eight hundred twenty-nine metastatic colorectal cancer patients previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) with bevacizumab; FOLFOX4 without bevacizumab; or bevacizumab alone. The primary end point was overall survival, with additional determinations of progression-free survival, response, and toxicity. Results The median duration of survival for the group treated with FOLFOX4 and bevacizumab was 12.9 months compared with 10.8 months for the group treated with FOLFOX4 alone (corresponding hazard ratio for death = 0.75; P = .0011), and 10.2 months for those treated with bevacizumab alone. The median progression-free survival for the group treated with FOLFOX4 in combination with bevacizumab was 7.3 months, compared with 4.7 months for the group treated with FOLFOX4 alone (corresponding hazard ratio for progression = 0.61; P < .0001), and 2.7 months for those treated with bevacizumab alone. The corresponding overall response rates were 22.7%, 8.6%, and 3.3%, respectively ( P < .0001 for FOLFOX4 with bevacizumab v FOLFOX4 comparison). Bevacizumab was associated with hypertension, bleeding, and vomiting. Conclusion The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin improves survival duration for patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

4045 Background: Our group previously reported on patient (Pt) recollections of adjuvant therapy (AT) for colon cancer and their grading of medical oncologists (MO) regarding various aspects of care. Overall, MO were highly rated, but grades for presenting information were lower, and patient expectations about side effects often did not match experiences. To further examine the Pt experience with AT, a prospective study was launched in Feb 2008. Methods: Pts with Stage II/III colon cancer about to begin or within 4 months of starting AT were recruited for a 4-part survey regarding sources and quality of treatment information and their experiences with AT. The survey also asked Pts to provide a grade (A-F) for their MO in 8 areas. Results: 85 Pts (71% female, 79% Stage III, median age 52 years) completed Part 1 of the survey. 93% stated that their MO explained the risks and benefits of AT. Of those, 92% stated they understood this information completely or almost completely (3 or 4 on a 0–4 scale) and 79% received numerical estimates of recurrence risk with and without treatment. When questioned about the potential absolute benefit of AT, 26% of Pts who received numerical estimates “had no idea” and other answers ranged from 3% to 100% for recurrence risk. Pt grade point averages for their MO ranged from 3.0 to 3.6 ( Table 1 ). As in the prior survey, expectations about side effects frequently did not accurately reflect experiences. For example, 54% of Pts expected alopecia but only 5% experienced it to a significant degree. 84% of Pts also sought information from websites, and 87% rated this as helpful and valuable (3 or 4 on a 0–4 scale). Conclusions: Pts are generally satisfied with their MO but less so with the presentation of treatment-related information and thus frequently consult additional resources, such as cancer information websites. This suggests an opportunity for improved information delivery within oncology offices and via the Internet. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

605 Background: Pre-clinical and nonrandomized clinical data support synergy of the combination of bevacizumab and trastuzumab. We conducted a randomized double-blinded phase III trial of chemotherapy/trastuzumab ± bevacizumab to evaluate efficacy (PFS after treatment initiation) of the addition of bevacizumab in first-line treatment of HER2+ MBC. Methods: Days 1, 8 and 15 paclitaxel ± carboplatin were administered with trastuzumab and either placebo or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks for a total of 6 months. Antibody therapy was then continued without chemo every 3 weeks, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Disease assessments were performed every 3 months. Results: Ninety-six of the planned 489 analyzable patients (pts) were accrued between 2007 and 2009, at which time the study terminated due to poor accrual. Seventy % of pts were post-menopausal, 60% had ER+/HER2+ BC. Median age was 55 years (28-80). Outcomes and toxicities are summarized on the tables below. Median follow-up was 30 months. Conclusions: The combination of chemotherapy, trastuzumab, and bevacizumab did not significantly increased toxicity, and was overall safe and well tolerated. No significant differences in clinical benefit were observed between both treatment arms. Data on CTCs and Quality of Life will be presented at the meeting. This study was conducted by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (Robert L. Comis, MD, Chair) and supported in part by Public Health Service Grants CA23318, CA66636, CA21115, CA32291, CA31946, CA49957, CA27525, CA14548, CA17145, CA32102, CA25224, CA49. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

e14711 Background: Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy has been historically limited to single agent 5FU in stage II/III rectal cancer pts. This phase III trial evaluated differences between pts treated with adjuvant FOLFOX versus FOLFIRI versus FU alone in stage II/III rectal cancer. Methods: Eligibility: resectable (T3-4 N0,Tany N1-3) adenocarcinoma rectum ≤12cm from anal verge. Pts had the option to receive FU with pre or postoperative XRT (50.4Gy). Preoperative FU/XRT pts were randomized to adjuvant FOLFIRI (arm A), FOLFOX (arm B), FU/LV(arm C). Postoperative FU/XRT pts were randomized to adjuvant FOLFIRI (arm D), FOLFOX (arm E), FU/LV (arm F). Pts received 8 cycles. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included toxicity, sphincter preservation and patterns of failure. Results: 225pts out of planned 3150 were enrolled (10/03 to 10/05). Data Monitoring Committee closed E3201 when the GI Intergroup developed an alternative trial with bevacizumab (E5204). 179 pts were randomized; (A:28, B:25, C:30, D:31, E:33, F:32). There was increased grade 3/4 toxicity, mainly diarrhea,in postoperative FU/XRT arms (D:39%), (E:28%), (F:48%). Twenty-two (12%) pts did not receive adjuvant therapy. At a median follow up of 7.4yrs, the five-year recurrence free rate was 69%. Median OS was 8.3 yrs. There was no statistical difference in OS between all randomized groups. Five-year OS in arms (A:B:C:D:E:F) were (73%, 83%, 83%, 73%, 78%, 73%) respectively. Conclusions: FOLFOX can be safely administered to rectal cancer pts following chemo radiation. Given limitations of early trial closure and small sample size, there was no difference in OS between pts who received FU alone, oxaliplatin based or irinotecan based adjuvant therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT00068692.

3526 Background: In the US pts with stage II/III rectal cancer routinely receive pre or postoperative RT/FU. To date, in addition to chemoradiation, standard adjuvant chemotherapy has been limited to single agent FU. Improved survival with irinotecan and oxaliplatin in pts with metastatic colorectal cancer led to exploration of combination chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting in pts with rectal cancer. Methods: Pts on E3201 (T3–4 Nany M0, T1- 2 N + M0) had the option to receive FU with either pre- or postoperative RT (50.4 Gy). Pts were randomized to postoperative chemotherapy: FU (500mg/m2) + LV (500mg/m2) weekly x 6/8 wks x 3 cycles or irinotecan (FOLFIRI) (180mg/m2) vs oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) (85mg/m2) both administered with LV (400 mg/m2) FU (400mg/m2 bolus) + continuous FU (2.4 gm/m2/46 hours) q 2 wks x 8 cycles. Results: 225 pts of 3150 planned were recruited. 178 pts were randomized and 126 pts submitted treatment completion forms (accrual period 10/03–4/05). The Data Monitoring Committee closed E3201 when the GI Intergroup developed an alternative trial with bevacizumab (E5204). Toxicity information is reported for 93% of pts (165/178) ( Table ). There were no significant differences in toxicity between those pts treated with pre- vs postoperative RT/FU, although, for the subset of pts who received adjuvant FOLFIRI after postoperative RT/FU, there was a trend towards more diarrhea. Conclusion: FOLFOX as rectal adjuvant therapy is a common platform for new clinical trials, although there have been limited toxicity data reported. E3201 provides important comparative toxicity information demonstrating that FOLFOX can be safely administered to rectal cancer pts following chemoradiation. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

3515 Background: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with 5Fluorouracil plus leucovorin (5FU/LV) have a median life expectancy (LE) of approximately12 months. The addition of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab and cetuximab has increased LE significantly. Although they have been widely adopted, little is known about the financial impact of these new drugs. Methods: Using published reports and aggregate data from NCCTG 9741, we developed a Markov Model which assumes forward progression through up to three lines of therapy compared to 5FU/LV alone. Patients who do not die of toxicity (tox) transition through supportive care prior to death. State changes are based on progression and dose-limiting toxicity. Drug costs are based on Average Sales Price. No other direct or indirect costs are included. Dose modifications for toxicity are defined as 80% of standard doses. Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed on key variables. Results: LE, total drug costs, and cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios compared to single line-5FU/LV and FOLFOX for 9 commonly used treatement sequences are presented below. SA show that results are sensitive to progression rates,drug costs and length of time on supportive care. Changes in 1st line tox rates have a greater impact on final results than changes in 2nd or 3rd line therapy tox rates. Conclusions: Using drug costs alone, this model shows sequential combination therapy including all available agents to cost $2000-$2800K/week life gained ($100-$145K/year) compared to both 5FU/LV and FOLFOX. For clarity only 9 strategies are presented, but the model presented will contain multiple sequences consisting of 1–3 lines of therapy. Refined tox data, associated costs and quality of life adjustments are needed for realistic comparisons among specific combinations. Combination therapy may have CE ratios similar to other currently accepted intensive medical interventions. These data can help inform discussions of how the cost of care impacts patients, providers, and societies. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

4020 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) presents a substantial patient education challenge to medical oncologists (MOs). Findings from our 2005 pilot survey suggest that a significant fraction of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors are willing to undergo AC for modest treatment benefits, but their understanding of risks and benefits may be suboptimal. This project attempted to validate these findings by surveying patients with CRC (Pts) who previously received AC. Methods: 150 Pts who received AC for CRC in the last 5 years were recruited to listen to an audio program on AC featuring interviews with clinical investigators (CIs) and Pts who received AC. Based on this input, Pts were asked whether they would undergo the same AC again for varying absolute treatment benefits. A corresponding survey asked 24 CRC CIs and 150 MOs to predict how patients would respond. The survey also queried Pts about their expectations of and experiences with AC side effects. Results: About 1/3 of Pts would be treated again with AC for a 1% absolute reduction in recurrence risk (ARRR), and about 2/3 believed a 5% ARRR would justify treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between responses of males and females or between Pts receiving oxaliplatin (OX) and those receiving other regimens. ( Table 1 ) The corresponding estimates of CIs and MOs were lower. Additionally, AC side effects were different than expected: 57% and 66% of Pts experienced less GI toxicity and alopecia, respectively, while 38% and 46% of Pts receiving OX experienced greater cold intolerance and numbness. Conclusions: Many potential obstacles exist in communicating with Pts about AC including heterogeneity in Pts’ attitudes towards risk/benefit trade-offs and preconceptions about treatment side effects. The next step in this initiative will be to examine these issues prospectively by evaluating the impact of an audio/web education supplement on the decision-making process. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.