Grothey, Axel

Purpose With three available chemotherapy drugs for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), response rate (RR) and survival outcomes have improved with associated morbidity, accentuating the need for tools to select optimal individualized treatment. Pharmacogenetics identifies the likelihood of adverse events or response based on variants in genes involved in drug transport, metabolism, and cellular targets. Patients and Methods Germline DNA was extracted from 520 patients on the North American Gastrointestinal Intergroup N9741 study. Three study arms were evaluated: IFL (fluorouracil [FU] + irinotecan [IRN]), FOLFOX (FU + oxaliplatin), and IROX (IRN + oxaliplatin). Information on adverse events, response, and disease-free survival was available. Thirty-four variants in 15 candidate genes for analysis based on previous associations with adverse events or outcome were assessed. Genotyping was performed using pyrosequencing. Results All variants were polymorphic. The homozygous UGT1A1*28 allele observed in 9% of patients was associated with risk of grade 4 neutropenia in patients on IROX (55% v 15%; P = .002). Deletion in GSTM1 was associated with grade 4 neutropenia after FOLFOX (28% v 16%; P = .02). Patients with a homozygous variant genotype for GSTP1 were more likely to discontinue FOLFOX because of neurotoxicity (24% v 10%; P = .01). The presence of a CYP3A5 variant was significantly associated with RR on IFL (29% v 60%; P = .0074). Most previously published genotype-toxicity or -efficacy relationships were not validated in this study. Conclusion This study provides a platform to evaluate pharmacogenetic predictors of response or severe adverse events in advanced CRC. Pharmacogenetic studies can be conducted in multicenter trials, and our findings demonstrate that with continued research, clinical application is practical.

PurposePerformance status (PS) is a prognostic factor in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Clinical trials typically enroll less than 10% of patients with a PS of 2 (PS2); thus, the benefit of systemic chemotherapy in PS2 patients is uncertain.Patients and MethodsIndividual data from 6,286 patients (509 PS2 patients) from nine clinical trials were used to compare treatment efficacy by PS. Progression-free survival (PFS), grade ≥ 3 adverse events, 60-day all-cause mortality, overall survival (OS), and response rate (RR) were explored in the full set of nine trials and in the five trials comparing first-line monotherapy with combination therapy.ResultsCompared with patients with PS of 0 or 1, PS2 patients had significantly higher rates of grade ≥ 3 nausea (8.5% v 16.4%, respectively; P < .0001) and vomiting (7.6% v 11.9%, respectively; P = .006) and 60-day all-cause mortality (2.8% v 12.0%, respectively; P < .0001). PS2 was prognostic for PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.52; P < .0001; median PFS, 7.6 months for PS 0 or 1 v 4.9 months for PS2), OS (HR = 2.18; P < .0001; median OS, 17.3 months for PS 0 or 1 v 8.5 months for PS2), and RR (odds ratio = 0.61; P < .0001; 43.8% for PS 0 or 1 v 32.0% for PS2). The relative benefit and toxicity of experimental versus control treatment and monotherapy versus combination therapy were not different in PS 0 or 1 patients versus PS2 patients.ConclusionIn clinical trials, PS2 patients derive similar benefit from superior treatment as patients with PS of 0 to 1 but with an increased risk of toxicities and 12% 60-day mortality. Although current treatment provides benefit, new approaches are required to approach 1-year median survival for PS2 patients.

Abstract For nearly two decades, adjuvant chemotherapy has been the standard of care in patients with early-stage colon cancer at high risk of recurrence. Until now, treatment has been based on the use of cytotoxic drugs that have well-demonstrated efficacy in advanced colorectal cancer. Most recently, targeted biological agents [i.e., antibodies against the epidermal growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor] have become essential components of the palliative medical treatment of colorectal cancer. Proof of efficacy of these agents in advanced disease has led to the initiation of several trials testing epidermal growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies in the adjuvant setting. Although definitive results of ongoing adjuvant studies will not be available for 2 to 3 years, some oncologists might already inappropriately consider the use of these targeted agents as a component of adjuvant therapy in selected patients. Whether the results obtained in advanced colorectal cancer can be readily translated into a projected efficacy in early-stage colon cancer, however, is unclear. In addition, the long-term safety of biological agents in potentially surgically cured patients has not yet been established. This review discusses the potential caveats and concerns associated with the uncritical use of targeted agents as adjuvant therapy before their safety and efficacy in this setting has been indisputably established in definitive phase III trials.

Learning ObjectivesAfter completing this course, the reader should be able to: Discuss recent progress in the treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer.Define the continuum-of-care approach and how it may differ from our current approach to the treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer.Identify key factors in treatment selection for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.Explain the impact of each active drug in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer and the impact of treatment with multiple agents over the course of the disease.CME Access and take the CME test online and receive 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™ at CME.TheOncologist.com

Purpose This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods Randomized phase II and III clinical trials on first-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer were identified by electronic searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and Cancerlit; hand searches of relevant abstract books and reference lists; and contact to experts. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed-effect model. Overall survival, reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI, was the primary outcome measure. Results Analysis of chemotherapy versus best supportive care (HR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52) and combination versus single agent, mainly fluorouracil (FU) -based chemotherapy (HR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.93) showed significant overall survival benefits in favor of chemotherapy and combination chemotherapy, respectively. In addition, comparisons of FU/cisplatin-containing regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.95) and FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.91) both demonstrated a significant survival benefit for the three-drug combination. Comparing irinotecan-containing versus nonirinotecan-containing combinations (mainly FU/cisplatin) resulted in a nonsignificant survival benefit in favor of the irinotecan-containing regimens (HR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.06), but they have never been compared against a three-drug combination. Conclusion Best survival results are achieved with three-drug regimens containing FU, an anthracycline, and cisplatin. Among these, regimens including FU as bolus exhibit a higher rate of toxic deaths than regimens using a continuous infusion of FU, such as epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous-infusion FU.