Relationship between metformin use and recurrence and survival in patients (pts) with resected stage III colon cancer (CC) receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: Results from NCCTG N0147 (Alliance).
Comparison of HER2 gene amplification (AMP) in primary esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas (EAC) and their metastatic regional lymph nodes (MLNs).
Prognostic value of BRAF V600E and KRAS exon 2 mutations in microsatellite stable (MSS), stage III colon cancers (CC) from patients (pts) treated with adjuvant FOLFOX+/- cetuximab: A pooled analysis of 3934 pts from the PETACC8 and N0147 tria
Analysis of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) and clinical outcome in stage III colon cancers from patients (pts) treated with adjuvant FOLFOX +/- cetuximab in the PETACC8 and NCCTG N0147 adjuvant trials.
Predicting the times of milestone events, ie, interim and final analyses in clinical trials, helps resource planning. This manuscript presents and compares several easily implemented methods for predicting when a milestone event is achieved. We show that it is beneficial to combine the predictions from different models to craft a better predictor through prediction synthesis. Furthermore, a Bayesian approach provides a better measure of the uncertainty involved in prediction of milestone events. We compare the methods through two simulations where the model has been correctly specified and where the models are a mixture of three incorrectly specified model classes. We then apply the methods on two real clinical trial data, North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N0147 and N9841. In summary, the Bayesian prediction synthesis methods automatically perform well even when the data collection is far from homogeneous. AnRshiny app is under development to carry out the prediction in a user‐friendly fashion.
A near‐haploid clone harboring a BCR/ABL1 gene fusion in an adult patient with newly diagnosed B‐lymphoblastic leukemia
AbstractThe detection of recurrent genetic abnormalities in B‐lymphoblastic leukemia (B‐ALL) is critical for risk stratification and therapy‐related decisions. Near‐haploidy (24‐30 chromosomes), a subgroup of hypodiploidy (<46 chromosomes), and BCR/ABL1 gene fusions are both recurrent genetic abnormalities in B‐ALL and are considered adverse prognostic findings, although outcomes in BCR/ABL1‐positive patients have improved with tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. While near‐haploid clones are primarily observed in children and rarely harbor structural abnormalities, BCR/ABL1‐positive B‐ALL is primarily observed in adults. Importantly, recurrent genetic abnormalities are considered mutually exclusive and rarely exist within the same neoplastic clone. We report only the second case to our knowledge of a near‐haploid clone that harbors a BCR/ABL1 fusion in an adult with newly diagnosed B‐ALL. Conventional chromosome studies revealed a near‐haploid clone (27 chromosomes) along with a der(22)t(9;22)(q34.1;q11.2) in 17 of 20 metaphases analyzed. Our B‐ALL fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) panel confirmed the BCR/ABL1 fusion and monosomies consistent with chromosome studies in approximately 95% of interphase nuclei. Moreover, no evidence of a “doubled” near‐haploid clone was observed by chromosome or FISH studies. This highly unusual case illustrates that while rare, recurrent genetic abnormalities in B‐ALL can exist within the same neoplastic clone.
Background More than half of the 40,000 incident rectal cancer patients in the United States each year are diagnosed at clinical stage II and III (locally advanced stage). For this group, high rates of cure can be achieved with the combination of pelvic radiation and sensitizing 5-fluorouracil (chemoradiation), surgery and chemotherapy, but treatment is long, arduous and toxicities are substantial. The PROSPECT trial (N1048, NCT01515787) was designed to determine whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) could be used as an alternative to neoadjuvant chemoradiation without compromising treatment outcomes and to spare these patients excess toxicity. The statistical design balanced the twin co-primary goals of achieving low local and distant recurrence rates. Study design features contended with the need for stringent safeguards given limited phase II data, the need for straightforward criteria to facilitate both accrual and protocol fidelity and the importance of patients’ perspectives on symptom burden and treatment toxicity. Methods PROSPECT is an ongoing multi-site two-group seamless phase II/III randomized trial comparing standard neoadjuvant chemoradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy with selective use of chemoradiation for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Challenges addressed in the design and conduct of PROSPECT have included the following: (1) setting safety thresholds given limited single-center phase II data, (2) establishing workable eligibility criteria, (3) balancing competing time to local and distant recurrence as co-primary endpoints and (4) obtaining reliable and complete data for patients’ symptom burden. The design and implementation challenges, choices, modifications and their implications for the design of future national cooperative group clinical trials are presented. Results PROSPECT incorporated stringent thresholds for both complete surgical resection (R0) and the time to local recurrence as early stopping rules. When predetermined stopping criteria were not met after evaluation of the first 366 participants in the randomized phase II, the study transitioned seamlessly to phase III with cumulative accrual of over 1000 participants. Eligibility criteria stipulating rectal tumor location based on distance from the anal verge were unworkable, and the protocol was amended to a more pragmatic approach that assigned surgeons with primary responsibility for determining eligibility. Central radiology review was feasible and in some cases prompted discontinuation of protocol treatment. Participation in toxicity reporting using the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events was uniformly high and was well accepted by participants from over 200 sites in the United States, Canada and Switzerland. Conclusion The strategies used to overcome these obstacles may inform the design of other studies that involve multi-modality treatment interventions, particularly trials where implementation of consistent criteria for eligibility and outcomes across hundreds of practice settings is necessary.
Marine omega‐3 fatty acid intake and survival of stage III colon cancer according to tumor molecular markers in NCCTG Phase III trial N0147 (Alliance)
Marine omega‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (MO3PUFAs) have anticancer properties and may improve colon cancer survival. However, it remains unknown whether the benefit differs by tumor molecular subtype. We examined data from a phase III randomized trial of FOLFOX or FOLFOX + cetuximab among 1,735 stage III colon cancer patients who completed a dietary questionnaire at enrollment. Multivariable hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the association between MO3PUFA and disease‐free survival (DFS) and overall survival according toKRASandBRAFV600Emutations and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status. Higher MO3PUFA intake was associated with improved 3‐year DFS forKRASwild‐type tumors (77%vs. 73%; HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.67–1.05) but notKRAS‐mutant tumors (64%vs. 70%; HR: 1.30; 95% CI: 0.97–1.73;Pinteraction= 0.02). Similar heterogeneity was found by MMR (Pinteraction= 0.14): higher MO3PUFA was associated with better 3‐year DFS for tumors with deficient MMR (72%vs. 67%) but not proficient MMR (72%vs. 72%). No heterogeneity was found byBRAFV600Emutation. Similar findings were obtained for overall survival. In conclusion, we found a suggestive beneficial association between higher MO3PUFA intake and improved survival among stage III colon cancer patients with wild‐typeKRASand deficient MMR. Given the relatively small number of cases with tumor molecular assessments, further studies, preferably through pooled analyses of multiples cohorts, are needed to validate our findings.