Mowat, Rex B.

AbstractBackgroundSeveral registry-based analyses suggested a survival advantage for married versus single patients with pancreatic cancer. The mechanisms underlying the association of marital status and survival are likely multiple and complex and, therefore, may be obscured in analyses generated from large population-based databases. The goal of this research was to characterize this potential association of marital status with outcomes in patients with resected pancreatic cancer who underwent combined modality adjuvant therapy on a prospective clinical trial.Materials and MethodsThis is an ancillary analysis of 367 patients with known marital status treated on NRG Oncology/RTOG 97-04. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.ResultsOf 367 patients, 271 (74%) were married or partnered and 96 (26%) were single. Married or partnered patients were more likely to be male. There was no association between marital status and overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) on univariate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09 and 1.01, respectively) or multivariate analyses (HR, 1.05 and 0.98, respectively). Married or partnered male patients did not have improved survival compared with female or single patients.ConclusionAncillary analysis of data from NRG Oncology/RTOG 97-04 demonstrated no association between marital and/or partner status and OS or DFS in patients with resected pancreatic cancer who received adjuvant postoperative chemotherapy followed by concurrent external beam radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Clinical trial identification number. NCT00003216.

453 Background: A 12-gene assay (Oncotype DX Colon Cancer) has been clinically validated as a predictor of recurrence risk in stage 2 colon cancer patients following surgery. We conducted the first prospective study to characterize the impact of Recurrence Score results on medical oncologists’ recommendations regarding adjuvant chemotherapy in T3, Mismatch Repair-proficient (MMR-P) stage 2 colon cancer patients. Methods: Consecutive patients with resected stage 2A colon cancer who were candidates for adjuvant chemotherapy were consented and enrolled by 105 medical oncologists from 17 sites in the Mayo Clinic Cancer Research Consortium. Each patient’s tumor specimen was assessed by the Recurrence Score test (quantitative RT-PCR) and MMR (IHC). Prior to and after receiving these results, physicians completed surveys indicating their planned treatments given hypothetical or known MMR results, recorded as Observation (Obs), 5FU-based chemotherapy (5FU), or 5FU + Oxaliplatin (Oxal). Change in treatment recommendation intensity from baseline to follow-up was defined as: increased if change from Obs to 5FU +/- Oxal or from 5FU to 5FU+Oxal, decreased if change from 5FU + Oxal to 5FU or Obs, or from 5FU to Obs, or no change. Results: 187 of 221 patients enrolled were evaluable including 141 who were MMR-P (avg age 63, 65% ECOG PS 0, med tumor size 5 cm, 11% high grade, 91% with 12+ nodes examined). In the primary analysis treatment recommendations changed for 63 (45%) of 141 MMR-P patients, with intensity decreasing for 47 (33%) and increasing for 16 (11%). Recommendations for chemotherapy (5-FU +/- Oxal) decreased from 73 (52%) patients pre-assay to 42 (30%) post-assay. Increased treatment intensity was more likely at higher Recurrence Score values and decreased intensity at lower Recurrence Score values (p=0.011), and any change was more likely when MMR status was unknown at baseline (p = 0.041). Conclusions: In this prospective study, quantitative recurrence risk information provided by the Recurrence Score test was associated with treatment recommendation changes for 45% of T3 MMR-P stage II colon cancer patients. Use of the 12-gene assay may lead to overall reductions in chemotherapy.

391 Background: Prior economic analysis of a 12-gene assay (Oncotype DX), compared with patterns of care reported in the NCCN database of patients with stage II, T3, DNA mismatch repair proficient (MMR-P) colon cancer, predicted that the assay would save medical costs and improve patient well-being (Hornberger et al., Value Health, 2012). This study assessed the validity of those findings with actual adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) recommendations. Methods: Outcomes and costs were estimated for patients with stage II, T3, MMR-P colon cancer using a Markov model. A study of 141 patients from 17 sites in the Mayo Clinic Cancer Research Consortium collected data on aCT recommended before and after knowledge of the 12-gene assay results (Srivastava et al. abstract). Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and medical resource use after recurrence were computed using guideline-validated state-transition probability estimation methods. Risk of progression and incidence of adverse events with different aCT regimens were based on published literature. Drug and administration costs for aCT were obtained from 2012 Medicare fee schedules. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate parameter influence on economic impact. Results: After receiving the 12-gene assay results, physician recommendations in favor of aCT decreased 22% (95% CI 11%-32%; McNemar test p<0.001) from 73 (52%) to 42 (30%) patients. Oxaliplatin aCT and 5-FU monotherapy recommendations each declined 11%. Average aCT costs decreased $5,738 for drugs, $668 for administration, and $3,268 for adverse events management. Overall, average total direct medical costs decreased $4,203. The net effect on average patient well-being was a gain of 0.083 QALYs. Total medical costs are most influenced by change in aCT recommendations, 5-FU monotherapy efficacy, and oxaliplatin drug acquisition cost. Savings are expected to persist even if the cost of oxaliplatin dropped by >75% due to generic substitution. Conclusions: The 12-gene assayhas been shown to alter aCT recommendations for patients with stage II, T3, MMR-P colon cancer. This study provides real-world confirmation that these changes in aCT reduce direct medical costs and improve patient well-being.

314 Background: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SB-ACA) is rare, having little prospective data guiding management. A prior phase I study evaluated UGT1A1 genotype specific dosing of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine. Our prospective, multicenter clinical trial assessing tumor response in pts having metastatic SB-ACA, used a similar dosing strategy. Methods: Genotypes were determined via central lab. Previously untreated pts were dosed by UGT1A1*28 genotypes 6/6, 6/7, and 7/7 receiving 100/85/85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin d1, 150/150/75 mg/m2 irinotecan d1, and 1600/400/200 mg/m2 capecitabine (BID) d2-15 of 21 days. The study design was such that 1 confirmed response in 16 pts expanded enrollment to 33 pts, with 7 required for demonstrating efficacy. Results: 28 pts (13-6/6, 10-6/7, 5-7/7) have been enrolled [75% male, mean age 62.5 (range 41-77)]. Location of primary included: duodenum (63%), jejunum (26%), and ileum (7%), with pts having >1 metastatic site (abdominal-41%, bone-7%, liver-56%, lung-30%, nodal-52%, subcutaneous-4%, other-19%). Gr 3+ treatment related toxicity was not significantly different by genotype (50%-6/6, 44%-6/7, 20%-7/7, p=0.48) and included (pts): diarrhea(5), vomiting(5), leukopenia(5), neutropenia(7), and nausea(6). 57% (13 of 23) pts achieved responses during therapy, with a confirmed response rate of 39% (95% CI 0-58%). 18 have died, with a median follow-up of 8.3 mos (range 0-43). Conclusions: UGT1A1 genotype directed dosing with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine appears to result in prolonged response in this population. Larger studies are needed to determine comparability to CapeOx alone or if response/toxicity differs among genotypes. Supported by NIH Grant CA25224, Sanofi-Aventis, and Pfizer. [Table: see text]

238 Background: Dual inhibition of the EGFR pathway using erlotinib and the monoclonal antibody panitumumab results in greater antitumor activity in preclinical pancreatic cancer models. A trial evaluating this approach was conducted. Methods: A safety analysis was initially performed with 6 patients at P 4 mg/kg every two weeks, E 100 mg daily, G 1000 mg/m2 weekly of a 28-day cycle. PGE was well tolerated with a grade 3 fatigue as only dose-limiting toxicity. Patients (pts) were then randomized to either PGE or GE alone. Eligibility included: no prior chemo, ECOG PS 0-1, bilirubin <2x UL, AST <2.5x UL. CT scans every 2 cycles. Results: 93 pts (46-GE; 47-PGE) were randomized from January to August, 2010. Median age 61 years and 65% male. ECOG PS 0 (51%) and PS 1 (49%). No significant differences in baseline characteristics observed between treatment arms. 81 pts evaluable for AEs; 37 (46%) had a maximum grade 3 (at least possibly related to treatment), and 12 (15%) maximum grade 4 or 5. Treatment arms similar with respect to the overall AEs with exception grade 1-3 acneiform rash, GE (65%) vs. PGE (85%). Commonly occurring grade 4 AEs (at least possibly related) consisted of thrombosis (3 pts) and thrombocytopenia (2 pts). Two grade 5 events occurred in PGE arm—duodenal hemorrhage (possibly related) and pancolitis with multisystem failure (unlikely). An additional PGE pt died 30 days off study (grade 5 CHF, possibly). 54 patients (67%; 31-GE, 23-PGE) ended treatment; 38 (70%) for disease progression (24-GE; 14-PGE). Other reasons for treatment discontinuation: AEs (9; 17%), pt refusal (4; 7%), death on study (2; 4%), other (1). In 81 pts with at least 1 cycle of chemotherapy, the median PFS for GE 2.0 months and 3.3 months for PGE. Accrual for the study was recently completed and overall and 6-month survival data will be presented. Conclusions: This study involved an initial run-in design to define tolerable doses of dual EGFR inhibitors, PGE, in pancreatic cancer patients. Although preliminary, the randomized phase II portion has been completed and differences between GE and PGE in terms of relevant clinical outcomes, PFS, are observed. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract Purpose. The Oncotype DX colon cancer assay is a clinically validated predictor of recurrence risk in stage II colon cancer patients. This prospective study evaluated the impact of recurrence score (RS) results on physician recommendations regarding adjuvant chemotherapy in T3, mismatch repair-proficient (MMR-P) stage II colon cancer patients. Patients and Methods. Stage IIA colon cancer patients were enrolled in 17 centers. Patient tumor specimens were assessed by the RS test (quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) and mismatch repair (immunohistochemistry). For each patient, the physician's recommended postoperative treatment plan of observation, fluoropyrimidine monotherapy, or combination therapy with oxaliplatin was recorded before and after the RS and mismatch repair results were provided. Results. Of 221 enrolled patients, 141 patients had T3 MMR-P tumors and were eligible for the primary analysis. Treatment recommendations changed for 63 (45%; 95% confidence interval: 36%–53%) of these 141 T3 MMR-P patients, with intensity decreasing for 47 (33%) and increasing for 16 (11%). Recommendations for chemotherapy decreased from 73 patients (52%) to 42 (30%), following review of RS results by physician and patient. Increased treatment intensity was more often observed at higher RS values, and decreased intensity was observed at lower values (p = .011). Conclusion. Compared with traditional clinicopathological assessment, incorporation of the RS result into clinical decision making was associated with treatment recommendation changes for 45% of T3 MMR-P stage II colon cancer patients in this prospective multicenter study. Use of the RS assay may lead to overall reduction in adjuvant chemotherapy use in this subgroup of stage II colon cancer patients.