Immunoscore Is Prognostic in Low-Risk and High-Risk Stage III Colon Carcinomas Treated With Adjuvant Infusional Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin in a Phase III Trial
PURPOSE The recommended duration of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer is based on tumor classification into clinically low-risk (T1-3 N1) and high-risk (T4 or N2) groups. We determined whether Immunoscore can enhance prognostication within these risk groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with stage III colon carcinomas (N = 600) were randomly selected from the infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin arm of adjuvant trial NCCTG N0147 (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology). Tumors were evaluated for Immunoscore that quantifies CD3+ and CD8+ T-cell densities in the tumor center and invasive margin by digital image analysis. Disease-free survival (DFS) by Immunoscore was analyzed using a multivariable Cox regression model in each risk group with adjustment for covariates including KRAS, BRAF V600E, and mismatch repair status. RESULTS Of 559 cancers with Immunoscore data, 299 (53.5%) were classified as clinically low-risk (T1-3 N1) and 260 (46.5%) as clinically high-risk (T4 and/or N2). Among patients with low-risk tumors, those with Immunoscore-Low versus Immunoscore-High tumors had significantly worse 5-year DFS rates (77.5% v 91.8%; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.79; P = .037). Among patients with high-risk tumors, those with Immunoscore-Low versus Immunoscore-High tumors also had significantly worse DFS (55.3% v 70.3%; hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.47; P = .013). Tumors that were low-risk/Immunoscore-Low had similar outcomes as did tumors that were high-risk/Immunoscore-High ( P = .174). Prognostication was significantly improved in multivariable models where Immunoscore was added to clinical risk parameters and limited biomarkers (likelihood ratio test P = .0003). CONCLUSION Immunoscore can refine patient prognosis beyond clinical risk group classification, suggesting its potential utility for adjuvant decision making.
Dietary fat in relation to all‐cause mortality and cancer progression and death among people with metastatic colorectal cancer: Data fromCALGB80405 (Alliance)/SWOG80405
AbstractData on diet and survival among people with metastatic colorectal cancer are limited. We examined dietary fat in relation to all‐cause mortality and cancer progression or death among 1149 people in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) 80405 trial who completed a food frequency questionnaire at initiation of treatment for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer. We examined saturated, monounsaturated, total and specific types (n‐3, long‐chain n‐3 and n‐6) of polyunsaturated fat, animal and vegetable fats. We hypothesized higher vegetable fat intake would be associated with lower risk of all‐cause mortality and cancer progression. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Over median follow‐up of 6.1 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.3, 7.2 y), we observed 974 deaths and 1077 events of progression or death. Participants had a median age of 59 y; 41% were female and 86% identified as White. Moderate or higher vegetable fat was associated with lower risk of mortality and cancer progression or death (HRs comparing second, third and fourth to first quartile for all‐cause mortality: 0.74 [0.62, 0.90]; 0.75 [0.61, 0.91]; 0.79 [0.63, 1.00];Ptrend: .12; for cancer progression or death: 0.74 [0.62, 0.89]; 0.78 [0.64, 0.95]; 0.71 [0.57, 0.88];Ptrend: .01). No other fat type was associated with all‐cause mortality and cancer progression or death. Moderate or higher vegetable fat intake may be associated with lower risk of cancer progression or death among people with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Using T stage to predict outcomes of adjuvant oxaliplatin (OX)-based chemotherapy (CT) in stage III colon cancer (CC): An ACCENT pooled analysis.
3606 Background: Standard adjuvant CT for stage III CC are FOLFOX and CAPOX. Recently, IDEA study separated stage III patients (pts) into low risk (T1 to 3, N1) and high risk (T4 or N2). We recently confirmed benefit of OX in both risk groups. However, we observed a difference in the two high-risk subgroups, with benefit in N2 but not in T4 (Margalit O et al; Clin Colorectal Cancer 2021). This prompted us to compare outcomes (OS/TTR) between treatment with OX vs. without OX within sub-stage III CC groups defined by T and N. Methods: We pooled 4941 stage III CC pts from the three studies evaluating 6 months of CT with fluoropyrimidine (FP) ± OX: MOSAIC, C-07 and XELOXA. Baseline characteristics were compared using χ2 and t-test. OS was compared between OX and no OX in T and N subgroups. Kaplan-Meier analyses, adjusted and unadjusted Cox models stratified by study were used. Sub-groups classification was done according to OX benefit and verified by interaction test (Int) considered as significant with a P<0.1. We considered for recommendation of using OX-based adjuvant CT, 1) significant benefit in OS, 2) significant Int between substage and adjuvant therapy, and 3) the three individual trials showing similar results (benefit or non-benefit of OX). Results: In stage III population, T3 pts were 74.9%, T1-2 12.4%, T4 13.1%, while N stage was N1 64.7% and N2 35.3%. Population was well balanced according to treatment allocation in most subgroups. A significant benefit of OX was only observed in T3N1 and T3N2 (OS HR 0.76). Whatever N stage, there was no significant benefit of OX in the T1-2 and T4 subgroups. The effect of OX+FP vs FP alone in OS of the three studies differed between T3 and T1-2 subgroups (P = 0.047). Interaction was borderline between T3 and T4 subgroups (P = 0.10) but there was no interaction between T1-2 and T4 subgroups (P = 0.429). A benefit of OX in TTR remained in the T4 population. Discrepancy between advantage in time to relapse (TTR) and no advantage in OS was not explained by survival post relapse. Conclusions: Our analysis suggested that pts with T1-2N1-2 and T4N1-2 disease had no OS benefit of addition of OX to FP. The good survival achieved with FP alone in T1-2N1-2 pts (5-yr OS 89%) question the addition of OX. In the T4 population our results suggested that benefit of OX was limited and that further studies should assess this issue or at least stratify pts on T stage in the future adjuvant trials in CC. [Table: see text]
Predictive value of MAOB gene expression for targeted therapy in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) enrolled in CALGB (Alliance)/SWOG 80405.
3580 Background: Monoamine oxidases (MAOs), including MAOA and MAOB, are mitochondrial enzymes responsible for catalyzing monoamine oxidation. Increased expression of MAOs were found in several cancer types and high MAOB was associated with worse disease stage and poorer survival in CRC. Positive and negative correlations of MAOB expression with mesenchymal type and epithelial type gene expressions, respectively, have been reported. Hence, we investigated whether MAOB expression is predictive for targeted therapies in mCRC. Methods: 430 mCRC pts treated with either bevacizumab (BEV, n = 224) or cetuximab (CET, n = 206) in combination with first-line chemotherapy within the CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial were included in the analysis. MAOB RNA was isolated from FFPE tumor samples and sequenced on the HiSeq 2500 (Illumina). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between groups of pts categorized by tertiles of MAOB expression into high (H), medium (M) and low (L). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed from multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for age, sex, location, number of metastases, KRAS, MSI status, and treatment with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI. Sensitivity analyses were conducted after stratifying by sex. Logrank P-values describe differences without adjustment for patient characteristics. Results: In CET-treated pts, MAOB-L showed significantly longer OS (median 39.2 vs 30.9 vs 15.9 months, logrank P = 4.7E-05, L vs H (as reference) adjusted HR 0.42, 95% CI [0.27, 0.65]) and PFS (median 13.2 vs 11.8 vs 7.6 months, logrank P = 0.006, L vs H adjusted HR 0.59 [0.40, 0.88]) compared to MAOB-M and MAOB-H, respectively. Similar results were observed when evaluating MAOB expression as a continuous variable. In BEV-treated pts, no significant differences were observed when comparing MAOB expression tertiles; however, pts with lower MAOB expression had significantly better OS, but not PFS, when evaluating MAOB as a continuous variable (Cox LRT P = 0.015, covariate adjusted). In CET-treated pts, the effect of MAOB expression was observed in male but not female pts (OS: median 40.3 vs 30.9 vs 16.1 months by MAOB-L, M, H, respectively, logrank P = 6.8E-05, L vs H adjusted HR 0.33 [0.19, 0.59]; PFS: median 13.8 vs 12.6 vs 7.9 months, logrank P = 0.001, L vs H adjusted HR 0.46 [0.28, 0.79]). A significant interaction was observed between MAOB expression and treatment for OS ( P = 0.010) in males and females combined, but only in males ( P = 0.018) when stratified by sex. Conclusions: Our results suggest that pts with MAOB-L tumors may have greater benefit from CET-based treatment and that targeting MAOB may be a promising strategy to improve patient outcomes. Further validation studies are warranted to develop a novel personalized approach based on MAOB expression in mCRC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT00265850.
Gene expression of vitamin D (VitD) pathway markers and survival in patients (Pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance).
3553 Background: Higher levels of plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D)] are associated with better outcomes in mCRC, but underlying biologic mechanisms are unknown. Key components of the VitD metabolic pathway include CYP27B1 (encodes 1-α-hydroxylase, converts 25(OH)D to active calcitriol), VitD receptor (VDR), and CYP24A1 (encodes 24-hydroxylase, degrades calcitriol and 25(OH)D into excreted metabolites). Since these factors may affect 25(OH)D levels and potentially mediate VitD activity in mCRC, we examined the relationship between tumoral gene expression (GEx) of CYP27B1, VDR, and CYP24A and pt outcome in a study nested in a randomized phase III trial of first-line chemotherapy plus biologics in mCRC pts, CALGB/SWOG 80405. Methods: We determined GEx of CYP27B1, VDR, and CYP24A1 by RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) of archival tumor samples using the Illumina TruSeq platform. Primary endpoints were overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for prognostic and molecular characteristics. Results: 562 pts with RNA-Seq data were included. Pts with higher CYP27B1 expression (>median) were less likely to have BRAF wild type (WT) (79% vs 90%) compared to pts with lower expression (p=0.0007). Pts with higher VDR expression (>quartile 1 [Q1]) were younger (median age 59 vs 62 years; p=0.03), more likely to have left-sided (63% vs 46%; p=0.0005) and BRAF WT tumors (89% vs 70%; p<0.0001), and less likely to have RAS WT tumors (70% vs 80%; p=0.02) compared to pts with lower VDR. Pts with higher CYP24A1 expression (>median) were more likely to have left-sided tumors compared to pts with lower expression (63% vs 54%; p=0.03). On multivariable analysis, pts with higher CYP27B1 expression had significantly improved OS (HR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93; p=0.002) and PFS (HR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.99; p=0.04). Higher VDR expression (up to Q1) was associated with significantly improved PFS (HR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.91; p=0.007) but not OS (HR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66-1.09; p=0.20). Above Q1, this improvement attenuated. Higher CYP24A1 GEx was not associated with improved OS (HR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88-1.08; p=0.66) or PFS (HR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.08; p=0.68). We found no significant interactions between GEx of CYP27B1, VDR, or CYP24A with baseline plasma 25(OH)D levels (p for interaction ≥0.10 for all). Conclusions: Our findings suggest an association between GEx of VitD pathway markers, particularly CYP27B1 and VDR, and survival in pts with mCRC, lending biologic plausibility to a role of VitD in CRC pathogenesis. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings and elucidate underlying mechanisms of action. Clinical trial information: NCT00265850 .
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Outcomes by Age Among ARCAD First- and Second-Line Clinical Trials
Abstract Background We evaluated the time to progression (TTP) and survival outcomes of second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer among adults aged 70 years and older compared with younger adults following progression on first-line clinical trials. Methods Associations between clinical and disease characteristics, time to initial progression, and rate of receipt of second-line therapy were evaluated. TTP and overall survival (OS) were compared between older and younger adults in first- and second-line trials by Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, number of metastatic sites and presence of metastasis in the lung, liver, or peritoneum. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Older adults comprised 16.4% of patients on first-line trials (870 total older adults aged >70 years; 4419 total younger adults aged ≤70 years, on first-line trials). Older adults and those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status >0 were less likely to receive second-line therapy than younger adults. Odds of receiving second-line therapy decreased by 11% for each additional decade of life in multivariable analysis (odds ratio = 1.11, 95% confidence interval = 1.02 to 1.21, P = .01). Older and younger adults enrolled in second-line trials experienced similar median TTP and median OS (median TTP = 5.1 vs 5.2 months, respectively; median OS = 11.6 vs 12.4 months, respectively). Conclusions Older adults were less likely to receive second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, though we did not observe a statistical difference in survival outcomes vs younger adults following second-line therapy. Further study should examine factors affecting decisions to treat older adults with second-line therapy. Inclusion of geriatric assessment may provide better criteria regarding the risks and benefits of second-line therapy.
Trajectories of body weight change and survival among mCRC patients treated with systemic therapy: Pooled analysis from the ARCAD database.
80 Background: Higher baseline body mass index is associated with improved survival in metastatic CRC (mCRC). Whether weight gain or loss after mCRC diagnosis is associated with survival remains largely unknown. Methods: We analyzed individual patient data from 3504 patients with previously untreated mCRC enrolled in five phase III randomized trials (AVF2017g, AVF2192g, CRYSTAL, N9741, OPUS) conducted between 2000 and 2006. Weight measurements were prospectively collected at 3 months after diagnosis and then up to 5 years. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the percent weight change at 3 months: stable weight or gain, weight loss up to 5% of baseline weight, and ≥5% weight loss of baseline weight. Cox models were used to assess the prognostic associations of weight change at 3 months with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), adjusting for baseline BMI, age, sex, performance score, chemotherapy backbone (oxaliplatin vs. irinotecan), and biologics type (cetuximab vs. bevacizumab). Sub-analyses included Cox models adjusted for additional clinical-pathological factors (primary tumor sidedness [right colon vs. left colon-rectum], and BRAF status; N=1,511). Results: Median percent weight change at 3 months was -0.5% (IQR -4.0 to+1.6%). OS was better in patients with weight stability or gain than in those with weight loss (up to 5% or ≥5%; (Table). Results were consistent for PFS for patients with ≥5% weight loss of baseline weight, as well as for sub-analyses. Conclusions: Patients losing weight during the first 3 months of systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer have significantly shorter overall survival than those with stable or increasing weight. Degree of weight loss is proportional to the observed increased risk of death and remains evident among underweight, normal weight and obese individuals. Further studies examining possible usefulness of on-treatment early weight loss as a novel intermediary end-point are needed.[Table: see text]
Clinical Trial Endpoints in Metastatic Cancer: Using Individual Participant Data to Inform Future Trials Methodology
Abstract Meta-analysis based on individual participant data (IPD) is a powerful methodology for synthesizing evidence by combining information drawn from multiple trials. Hitherto, its principal application has been in questions of clinical management, but an increasingly important use is in clarifying trials methodology, for instance in the selection of endpoints, as discussed in this review. In oncology, the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive (ARCAD) Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Database is a leader in the use of IPD-based meta-analysis in methodological research. The ARCAD database contains IPD from more than 38 000 patients enrolled in 46 studies and continues to collect phase III trial data. Here, we review the principal findings of the ARCAD project in respect of endpoint selection and examine their implications for cancer trials. Analysis of the database has confirmed that progression-free survival (PFS) is no longer a valid surrogate endpoint predictive of overall survival in the first-line treatment of colorectal cancer. Nonetheless, PFS remains an endpoint of choice for most first-line trials in metastatic colorectal cancer and other solid tumors. Only substantial PFS effects are likely to translate into clinically meaningful benefits, and accordingly, we advocate an oncology research model designed to identify highly effective treatments in carefully defined patient groups. We also review the use of the ARCAD database in assessing clinical response including novel response metrics and prognostic markers. These studies demonstrate the value of IPD as a tool for methodological studies and provide a reference point for the expansion of this approach within clinical cancer research.
Survival in Young-Onset Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Findings From Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/SWOG 80405
Abstract Background The incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yoCRC) is increasing. It is unknown if there are survival differences between young and older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods We studied the association of age with survival in 2326 mCRC patients enrolled in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B and SWOG 80405 trial, a multicenter, randomized trial of first-line chemotherapy plus biologics. The primary and secondary outcomes of this study were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively, which were assessed by Kaplan-Meier method and compared among younger vs older patients with the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated based on Cox proportional hazards modeling, adjusting for known prognostic variables. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Of 2326 eligible subjects, 514 (22.1%) were younger than age 50 years at study entry (yoCRC cohort). The median age of yoCRC patients was 44.3 vs 62.5 years in patients aged 50 years and older. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between yoCRC vs older-onset patients (median = 27.07 vs 26.12 months; adjusted HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.10; P = .78). The median PFS was also similar in yoCRC vs older patients (10.87 vs 10.55 months) with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% CI = 0.92 to 1.13; P = .67). Patients younger than age 35 years had the shortest OS with median OS of 21.95 vs 26.12 months in older-onset patients with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.08 (95% CI = 0.81 to 1.44; Ptrend = .93). Conclusion In this large study of mCRC patients, there were no statistically significant differences in survival between patients with yoCRC and CRC patients aged 50 years and older.
Reevaluating Disease-Free Survival as an Endpoint vs Overall Survival in Stage III Adjuvant Colon Cancer Trials
Abstract Background Disease-free survival (DFS) with a 3-year median follow-up (3-year DFS) was validated as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) with a 5-year median follow-up (5-year OS) in adjuvant chemotherapy colon cancer (CC) trials. Recent data show further improvements in OS and survival after recurrence in patients who received adjuvant FOLFOX. Hence, reevaluation of the association between DFS and OS and determination of the optimal follow-up duration of OS to aid its utility in future adjuvant trials are needed. Methods Individual patient data from 9 randomized studies conducted between 1998 and 2009 were included; 3 trials tested biologics. Trial-level surrogacy examining the correlation of treatment effect estimates of 3-year DFS with 5 to 6.5-year OS was evaluated using both linear regression (RWLS2) and Copula bivariate (RCopula2) models and reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For R2, a value closer to 1 indicates a stronger correlation. Results Data from a total of 18 396 patients were analyzed (median age = 59 years; 54.0% male), with 54.1% having low-risk tumors (T1-3 and N1), 31.6% KRAS mutated, 12.3% BRAF mutated, and 12.4% microsatellite instability high or deficient mismatch repair tumors. Trial-level correlation between 3-year DFS and 5-year OS remained strong (RWLS2 = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.98; RCopula2 = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.83 to 1.00) and increased as the median follow-up of OS extended. Analyses limited to trials that tested biologics showed consistent results. Conclusions Three-year DFS remains a validated surrogate endpoint for 5-year OS in adjuvant CC trials. The correlation was likely strengthened with 6 years of follow-up for OS.