Duke Cancer Institute-Biostatistics Shared Resource, Durham, NC.
Citations 55
Prospective pooled analysis of six phase III trials investigating duration of adjuvant (adjuv) oxaliplatin-based therapy (3 vs 6 months) for patients (pts) with stage III colon cancer (CC): The IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant chemothera
LBA1 The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstracts.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Sunday, June 4, 2017, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2017, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Sunday edition of ASCO Daily News.
Causal modeling of CALGB 80405 (Alliance) to identify network drivers of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC).
Effect of First-Line Chemotherapy Combined With Cetuximab or Bevacizumab on Overall Survival in Patients With
KRAS
Wild-Type Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Prospective pooled analysis of six phase III trials investigating duration of adjuvant (adjuv) oxaliplatin-based therapy (3 vs 6 months) for patients (pts) with stage III colon cancer (CC): The IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant chemothera
LBA1 Background: Since 2004, 6 months (m) of oxaliplatin (oxali)-based treatment has been the standard of care as adjuvant therapy for stage III CC. Since oxali is associated with cumulative neurotoxicity, shorter duration of adjuv therapy could spare pts toxicity and lead to substantial saving in health expenditures. Methods: A prospective, pre-planned pooled analysis of 6 concurrently conducted randomized phase III trials (SCOT, TOSCA, Alliance/SWOG 80702, IDEA France (GERCOR/PRODIGE), ACHIEVE, HORG) was performed to evaluate the non-inferiority (NI) of 3m compared with 6m (ref) of adjuv FOLFOX/XELOX. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), defined as time from enrolment to relapse, 2nd CRC, and death (all causes). NI was to be declared if the 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for DFS hazard ratio (HR 3m v 6m) estimated by a stratified Cox model was below 1.12. NI was examined within regimen and stage subgroups as pre-planned. Results: The analysis included 12,834 pts from 12 countries, accrued from 6/07 to 12/15. Stage distribution: 13% T1-2, 66% T3, 21% T4; 28% N2; 40% received XELOX. G3+ neurotoxicity was higher in the 6m v 3m arm (16 v 3% FOLFOX, 9 v 3% XELOX, p<0.0001). With a median follow-up of 39 mos, 3263 DFS events were observed. Overall, the 3 year DFS rate was 74.6% (3m) and 75.5% (6m), with estimated DFS HR of 1.07 (95%CI, 1.00-1.15). The 3m v 6m DFS HRs were 1.16 (95%CI, 1.06-1.26) and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.85-1.06) for FOLFOX and XELOX treated pts, respectively. The 3m v 6m DFS HRs were 1.01 (95%CI, 0.90-1.12) in T1-3 N1, and 1.12 (95%CI, 1.03-1.23) for T4 or N2 pts. Conclusions: While NI was not established for the overall cohort, NI of 3m v 6m oxali-based adjuv therapy was supported for XELOX. As each IDEA trial treated varying proportions of pts with XELOX (0 to 75%), the regimen interaction likely produced the differential outcomes observed between individual studies. Certain substages (T1-3 N1) also showed NI for 3m v 6m. These data provide a framework for discussions on risks and benefits of individualized adjuv therapy approaches. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180888, U10CA180835, INCA, PHRC2009, EME 09/800/34, HTA 14/140/84, CRUK C1348/A15960, JFMC. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045.
Associations of physical activity with survival and progression in metastatic colorectal cancer: Results from CALGB 80405 (Alliance).
659 Background: Regular physical activity (PA) is associated with reduced risk of recurrence and mortality in non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Its influence on patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is largely unexplored. Methods: 1231 patients participating in CALGB 80405 (first-line phase III chemotherapy trial for mCRC) completed questionnaires that included self-report on PA at time of chemotherapy initiation and total metabolic equivalent task (MET)-hours/week were determined based on responses. The primary endpoint of the clinical trial and this companion study was overall survival (OS), with progression-free survival (PFS) as a secondary endpoint. To minimize confounding by poor and rapidly declining health, we excluded patients who experienced progression or died within 60 days of activity assessment and adjusted for known prognostic factors, comorbid illness, and weight loss over the previous six months. Results: Compared with patients engaged in less than three MET-hours/week of PA, patients engaged in 18 or more MET-hours/week experienced an adjusted hazard ratio for OS of 0.81 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98, P for trend 0.03) and for PFS of 0.84 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.00, P for trend 0.03). Greater nonvigorous PA and walking duration were both associated with improved OS ( P for trend 0.01 and 0.04, respectively). Conclusions: In mCRC patients from CALGB 80405, greater total PA was associated with improved PFS and OS, while greater walking duration and non-vigorous PA were associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00265850 [Table: see text]
Initial results of CALGB 80803 (Alliance): A randomized phase II trial of PET scan-directed combined modality therapy for esophageal cancer.
1 Background: To determine whether changing chemotherapy (CT) during pre-op chemoradiation (CRT) based on response to induction CT by 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose PET imaging can lead to improved pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients (pts) with resectable esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinomas. Methods: 257 eligible pts were enrolled, underwent baseline PET scan, and were randomized to one of 2 induction CT arms: Modified FOLFOX-6 (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, 5-FU), days 1, 15, 29 or Carboplatin/Paclitaxel (CP), days 1, 8, 22, 29. Repeat PET was performed days 36-42; change in max standardized uptake value (SUV) from baseline was assessed. PET non-responders (≤35% decrease in SUV – PET-NR) crossed over to alternative CT regimen during CRT (50.4Gy/28 fractions). PET responders (>35% decrease in SUV – PET-R) continued on same CT during CRT. Pts underwent surgery 6 wks post-CRT. Pts evaluable if had surgery, disease progression (PD), death due to disease, were unresectable or had adverse event (AE). Primary endpoint was pCR in PET-NR who crossed over to alternative CT (expected 5% under H0 to 20% under Ha). Results: Pre-audit PET response data after induction CT and pCR rates after CRT and surgery are shown in the table. For PET-NR who crossed over to alternative CT during CRT, pCR was 15.6%; 95% CI (0.08, 0.26). Conclusions: Efficacy criteria were met for an improvement in pCR rates among pts who were PET-NR after induction CT and received alternative CT during CRT for esophageal and GEJ adenoca. Pts receiving induction and concurrent CP had an unexpectedly low pCR. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882 Clinical trial information: NCT01333033. [Table: see text]
Impact of Number of Nodes Retrieved on Outcome in Patients With Rectal Cancer
PURPOSE: We postulated that the pathologic evaluation of the lymph nodes of surgical specimens from patients with rectal cancer can have a substantial impact on time to relapse and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from 1,664 patients with T3, T4, or node-positive rectal cancer treated in a national intergroup trial of adjuvant therapy with chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Associations between the number of lymph nodes found by the pathologist in the surgical specimen and the time to relapse and survival outcomes were investigated. RESULTS: Patients were divided into groups by nodal status and the corresponding quartiles of numbers of nodes examined. The number of nodes examined was significantly associated with time to relapse and survival among patients who were node-negative. For the first through fourth quartiles, the 5-year relapse rates were 0.37, 0.34, 0.26, and 0.19 (P = .003), and the 5-year survival rates were 0.68, 0.73, 0.72, and 0.82 (P = .02). No significant differences were found by quartiles among patients determined to be node-positive. We propose that observed differences are primarily related to the incorrect determination of nodal status in node-negative patients. Approximately 14 nodes need to be studied to define nodal status accurately. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the pathologic assessment of lymph nodes in surgical specimens is often inaccurate and that examining greater number of nodes increases the likelihood of proper staging. Some patients who might benefit from adjuvant therapy are misclassified as node-negative due to incomplete sampling of lymph nodes.
Projecting Event-Based Analysis Dates in Clinical Trials: An Illustration Based on the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) Collaboration. Projecting Analysis Dates for the IDEA Collaboration
Abstract Purpose: Clinical trials are expensive and lengthy, where success of a given trial depends on observing a prospectively defined number of patient events required to answer the clinical question. The point at which this analysis time occurs depends on both patient accrual and primary event rates, which typically vary throughout the trial's duration. We demonstrate real-time analysis date projections using data from a collection of six clinical trials that are part of the IDEA collaboration, an international preplanned pooling of data from six trials testing the duration of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer, and we additionally consider the hypothetical impact of one trial's early termination of follow-up. Patients and Methods: In the absence of outcome data from IDEA, monthly accrual rates for each of the six IDEA trials were used to project subsequent trial-specific accrual, while historical data from similar Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints (ACCENT) Group trials were used to construct a parametric model for IDEA's primary endpoint, disease-free survival, under the same treatment regimen. With this information and using the planned total accrual from each IDEA trial protocol, individual patient accrual and event dates were simulated and the overall IDEA interim and final analysis times projected. Projections were then compared with actual (previously undisclosed) trial-specific event totals at a recent census time for validation. The change in projected final analysis date assuming early termination of follow-up for one IDEA trial was also calculated. Results: Trial-specific predicted event totals were close to the actual number of events per trial for the recent census date at which the number of events per trial was known, with the overall IDEA projected number of events only off by eight patients. Potential early termination of follow-up by one IDEA trial was estimated to postpone the overall IDEA final analysis date by 9 months. Conclusions: Real-time projection of the final analysis time during a trial, or the overall analysis time during a trial collaborative such as IDEA, has practical implications for trial feasibility when these projections are translated into additional time and resources required.