Benson, Al B.

AbstractBackgroundEnergy balance-related biomarkers are associated with risk and prognosis of various malignancies. Their relationship to survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) requires further study.MethodsBaseline plasma insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1, IGF-binding protein (IGFBP)-3, IGFBP-7, C-peptide, and adiponectin were measured at time of trial registration in a prospective cohort of patients with mCRC participating in a National Cancer Institute–sponsored trial of first-line systemic therapy. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for confounders and examine associations of each biomarker with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). P values are 2-sided.ResultsMedian follow-up for 1086 patients was 6.2 years. Compared with patients in the lowest IGFBP-3 quintile, patients in the highest IGFBP-3 quintile experienced an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for OS of 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42 to 0.78; Pnonlinearity < .001) and for PFS of 0.61 (95% CI = 0.45 to 0.82; Ptrend = .003). Compared with patients in the lowest IGFBP-7 quintile, patients in the highest IGFBP-7 quintile experienced an adjusted hazard ratio for OS of 1.60 (95% CI = 1.30 to 1.97; Ptrend < .001) and for PFS of 1.38 (95% CI = 1.13 to 1.69; Ptrend < .001). Plasma C-peptide and IGF-1 were not associated with patient outcomes. Adiponectin was not associated with OS; there was a nonlinear U-shaped association between adiponectin and PFS (Pnonlinearity = .03).ConclusionsAmong patients with mCRC, high plasma IGFBP-3 and low IGFBP-7 were associated with longer OS and PFS. Extreme levels of adiponectin were associated with shorter PFS. These findings suggest potential avenues for prognostic and therapeutic innovation.

The NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with rectal cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines. These updates include clarifying the definition of rectum and differentiating the rectum from the sigmoid colon; the total neoadjuvant therapy approach for localized rectal cancer; and biomarker-targeted therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, with a focus on new treatment options for patients with BRAF V600E– or HER2 amplification–positive disease.

Abstract Background: Hyperinsulinemia is considered to be important in the development of colon cancer, but few studies have investigated the associations of hyperinsulinemia with colon cancer survival via dietary scores. Methods: Empirical dietary index for hyperinsulinemia (EDIH) was derived to assess the insulinemic potential of daily diets reflecting the long-term insulin exposure, with higher (more positive) scores indicating higher insulinemic diets. We prospectively estimated the HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to investigate the association of EDIH with disease-free, recurrence-free, and overall survival among patients with stage III colon cancer (1999–2009) enrolled in a randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial (CALGB 89803). Results: Of 1,024 patients (median follow-up: 7.3 years), 311 died, 350 had recurrences, and 394 had events for disease-free survival. Compared with patients in the lowest quintile of EDIH, the corresponding HRs of patients in the highest quintile for disease-free survival events, cancer recurrence, and overall mortality were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.56–1.15), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.51–1.11), and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.52–1.14). Conclusions: Higher EDIH was not associated with the risk of colon cancer recurrence or mortality in this population of patients with stage III colon cancer. Impact: EDIH, as a measure of dietary insulinemic potential, may be associated with colon cancer risk but not survival in patients with late-stage colon cancer.

Abstract Background The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and other prognostic tools fail to account for stage-independent variability in outcome. We developed a prognostic classifier adding Immunoscore to clinicopathological and molecular features in patients with stage III colon cancer. Methods Patient (n = 559) data from the FOLFOX arm of adjuvant trial NCCTG N0147 were used to construct Cox models for predicting disease-free survival (DFS). Variables included age, sex, T stage, positive lymph nodes (+LNs), N stage, performance status, histologic grade, sidedness, KRAS/BRAF, mismatch repair, and Immunoscore (CD3+, CD8+ T-cell densities). After determining optimal functional form (continuous or categorical) and within Cox models, backward selection was performed to analyze all variables as candidate predictors. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Poorer DFS was found for tumors that were T4 vs T3 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19 to 2.60; P = .004), right- vs left-sided (HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.14 to 2.04; P = .005), BRAF V600E (HR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.26 to 2.40; P < .001), mutant KRAS (HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.08 to 2.55; P = .02), and low vs high Immunoscore (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.22 to 2.33; P = .001) (all P < .02). Increasing numbers of +LNs and lower continuous Immunoscore were associated with poorer DFS that achieved significance (both Ps< .0001). After number of +LNs, T stage, and BRAF/KRAS, Immunoscore was the most informative predictor of DFS shown multivariately. Among T1–3 N1 tumors, Immunoscore was the only variable associated with DFS that achieved statistical significance. A nomogram was generated to determine the likelihood of being recurrence-free at 3 years. Conclusions The Immunoscore can enhance the accuracy of survival prediction among patients with stage III colon cancer.

e22093 Background: Biomarkers are an integral part of cancer care. A variety of testing methods exist, allowing institutional selection of which technologies to use and in what order to run them. This descriptive study provides a benchmark on methods used in practice for biomarker testing in breast (BC), gastric/esophageal (GC), and non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Methods: We conducted an IRB-approved web survey of the 58 NCI designated cancer centers (pathologists and oncologists) providing adult care in BC, GC, and NSCLC. We developed a survey instrument with 14 BC, 5 GC, and 10 NSCLC items asking about methods used, order of testing, turn around time (TAT) and if tests are internally developed (ID). Results: For BC, 32% (18/57) of sites run concurrent rather than reflex HER2 FISH and IHC testing, citing quality assurance reasons. Average TAT for concurrent vs reflex testing is 6.5 and 9.5 days. Rates of ID tests are 14% (8/57) for PgR, 12% (7/57) for ER and 7% (4/57) for HER2. For GC, 39% (21/54) of sites run concurrent HER2 FISH and IHC tests, citing reasons of quality assurance and evolving guidelines. TAT for concurrent vs reflex testing is 6.3 and 9.5 days. 19% (10/54) of sites use ID HER2 tests. All reporting sites use EGFR and ALK testing in NSCLC and 96% use KRAS. 24% (13/55) of sites run them concurrently with an average TAT of 7.6 days, while the average TAT for sites with sequential testing is 22.8 days. CAP recommends a 10 day TAT for NSCLC tests, and 92% (12/13) of sites with concurrent testing meet this guideline vs only 11% (4/38) of sites with sequential testing (p<.0001). Rates of ID tests are 57% (30/53) for KRAS, 47% (26/55) for EGFR and 35% (19/55) for ALK, for which a kit is listed on the FDA drug label. There is a difference in the use of ID tests between BC and NSCLC, p<.0148. Conclusions: Concurrent testing for BC and GC HER2, and for NSCLC markers is a common practice at NCI cancer centers; and it improves TAT. Concurrent NSCLC testing allows meeting CAP TAT guideline, but sequential testing does not. New markers (GC HER2, EGFR, KRAS and ALK) are commonly adopted, with a higher rate of internally developed tests than for BC HER2. [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.

4009 Background: An ∼65% 5-year disease-free-survival (DFS) rate from 5-FU/mitomycin/radiation for anal carcinoma needs improvement. Methods: A phase III randomized trial compared 5-FU (1,000mg/m2 days 1–4 and 29–32) plus mitomycin (10mg/m2 days 1 and 29) and radiation (45 to 59 Gy) (Arm A) to 5-FU (1,000mg/m2 days 1–4, 29–32, 57–60 and 85–88) plus cisplatin (75mg/m2 on days 1, 29, 57 and 85) and radiation (45 to 59 Gy; start day=57) (Arm B) in anal carcinoma patients. Stratification included gender, clinical N status and tumor diameter. Primary endpoint was DFS. Statistical power was 80% with two-sided test to detect 10% DFS increase for Arm B. Results: Of 682 patients accrued, 598 were analyzable. Most unanalyzed patients’ data are early. Patient characteristics were balanced. Median age was 55 years, women predominated (69%), 27.5% had >5 cm tumor diameter and 26% had clinically N+ cancer. Preliminary 5-year estimated DFS was 56% for Arm A and 48% for Arm B (p=0.28) and 5-year estimated overall survival was 69% for both arms (p=0.24). Men(p=0.04), clinically N+ cancer (p<0.0001) and tumor diameter >5 cm (p=0.005) independently prognosticated DFS in a multivariate analysis. 5-year colostomy rate was 10% for Arm A and 20% for arm B(p=0.12). Grade 3/4 toxicity rates: non-hematologic=76% for Arm A and 75% for Arm B but hematologic=67% for Arm A and 47% for Arm B(p=0.0004). Conclusions: In Intergroup-98–11, induction 5-FU/cisplatin followed by 5-FU/cisplatin/radiation failed to improve DFS compared to the standard treatment, 5-FU/mitomycin/radiation. Supported by RTOG U10 CA21661, CCOP U10 CA37422, Stat U10 CA32115. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

LBA4004 Background: Gemcitabine (GEM) is the cornerstone of treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (PANCA). FDR GEM or GEMOX are promising, but have yet to convincingly demonstrate a survival advantage over GEM alone. E6201 compares overall survival (OS) of standard GEM 1000 mg/m2/30 min wkly ×7 over 56 days then wkly ×3 q28 d (ARM A) vs. FDR GEM 1500 mg/m2/150 min wkly ×3 q28 days (ARM B) or GEM 1000 mg/m2/100-min/d1 + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2/d2 q14d (ARM C). Secondary endpoints are the comparison of the experimental regimens, toxicity, response, patterns of failure, progression-free survival and quality-of-life. Methods: This multi-institutional trial included patients (pts) with measurable and non-measurable advanced, unresectable PAN CA, normal organ function and PS 0–2. Pts were chemonaive, although prior adjuvant radiosensitizing 5FU was permitted. Pts were stratified by PS 0–1 vs 2 and locally advanced vs metastatic disease The study was designed to detect a 33% difference in median survival (hazard ratio 1.33) with 81% power while maintaining a significance level of 2.5% in a two-sided test for each of the two primary comparisons, assuming exponential failure and median survival of 6 mo for Arm A and 8 mo for Arm B and C (N = 750 eligible). Results: Accrual started in 3/03 and completed in 3/05. Median follow up is 5.8 mo. 833 pts (53% men; 88% PS 0–1; 88% metastatic), were randomized with 280, 277 and 276 pts in Arms A, B and C. The third interim analysis was conducted with 89.5% information on 3/2006. The predominant toxicity, available for 758 pts, was grade 3/4 myelosuppression and fatigue. Two deaths from ARDS and infection occurred. Median OS for ARMS A, B, and C are 4.96, 6.01 and 6.47 months, respectively. Hazard ratio A vs B is 1.21 with stratified log rank of 0.053 and for A vs C is 1.22 with stratified log rank of 0.045, neither statistically significant. Conclusion: E6201 final OS results will be available in June, 2006. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

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]