Benson, Al B.

PURPOSECurrent tools in predicting survival outcomes for patients with colon cancer predominantly rely on clinical and pathologic characteristics, but increasing evidence suggests that diet and lifestyle habits are associated with patient outcomes and should be considered to enhance model accuracy.METHODSUsing an adjuvant chemotherapy trial for stage III colon cancer (CALGB 89803), we developed prediction models of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival by additionally incorporating self-reported nine diet and lifestyle factors. Both models were assessed by multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression and externally validated using another trial for stage III colon cancer (CALGB/SWOG 80702), and visual nomograms of prediction models were constructed accordingly. We also proposed three hypothetical scenarios for patients with (1) good-risk, (2) average-risk, and (3) poor-risk clinical and pathologic features, and estimated their predictive survival by considering clinical and pathologic features with or without adding self-reported diet and lifestyle factors.RESULTSAmong 1,024 patients (median age 60.0 years, 43.8% female), we observed 394 DFS events and 311 deaths after median follow-up of 7.3 years. Adding self-reported diet and lifestyle factors to clinical and pathologic characteristics meaningfully improved performance of prediction models (c-index from 0.64 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.67] to 0.69 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.72] for DFS, and from 0.67 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.70] to 0.71 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.75] for overall survival). External validation also indicated good performance of discrimination and calibration. Adding most self-reported favorable diet and lifestyle exposures to multivariate modeling improved 5-year DFS of all patients and by 6.3% for good-risk, 21.4% for average-risk, and 42.6% for poor-risk clinical and pathologic features.CONCLUSIONDiet and lifestyle factors further inform current recurrence and survival prediction models for patients with stage III colon cancer.

Abstract Meta-analysis based on individual participant data (IPD) is a powerful methodology for synthesizing evidence by combining information drawn from multiple trials. Hitherto, its principal application has been in questions of clinical management, but an increasingly important use is in clarifying trials methodology, for instance in the selection of endpoints, as discussed in this review. In oncology, the Aide et Recherche en Cancérologie Digestive (ARCAD) Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Database is a leader in the use of IPD-based meta-analysis in methodological research. The ARCAD database contains IPD from more than 38 000 patients enrolled in 46 studies and continues to collect phase III trial data. Here, we review the principal findings of the ARCAD project in respect of endpoint selection and examine their implications for cancer trials. Analysis of the database has confirmed that progression-free survival (PFS) is no longer a valid surrogate endpoint predictive of overall survival in the first-line treatment of colorectal cancer. Nonetheless, PFS remains an endpoint of choice for most first-line trials in metastatic colorectal cancer and other solid tumors. Only substantial PFS effects are likely to translate into clinically meaningful benefits, and accordingly, we advocate an oncology research model designed to identify highly effective treatments in carefully defined patient groups. We also review the use of the ARCAD database in assessing clinical response including novel response metrics and prognostic markers. These studies demonstrate the value of IPD as a tool for methodological studies and provide a reference point for the expansion of this approach within clinical cancer research.

The NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), gallbladder cancer, and cancer of the bile ducts (intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma). Due to the multiple modalities that can be used to treat the disease and the complications that can arise from comorbid liver dysfunction, a multidisciplinary evaluation is essential for determining an optimal treatment strategy. A multidisciplinary team should include hepatologists, diagnostic radiologists, interventional radiologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, and pathologists with hepatobiliary cancer expertise. In addition to surgery, transplant, and intra-arterial therapies, there have been great advances in the systemic treatment of HCC. Until recently, sorafenib was the only systemic therapy option for patients with advanced HCC. In 2020, the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab became the first regimen to show superior survival to sorafenib, gaining it FDA approval as a new frontline standard regimen for unresectable or metastatic HCC. This article discusses the NCCN Guidelines recommendations for HCC.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Gland Tumors focus on the diagnosis, treatment, and management of patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), adrenal tumors, pheochromocytomas, paragangliomas, and multiple endocrine neoplasia. NETs are generally subclassified by site of origin, stage, and histologic characteristics. Appropriate diagnosis and treatment of NETs often involves collaboration between specialists in multiple disciplines, using specific biochemical, radiologic, and surgical methods. Specialists include pathologists, endocrinologists, radiologists (including nuclear medicine specialists), and medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists. These guidelines discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary neuroendocrine and adrenal tumors and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. This article is focused on the 2021 NCCN Guidelines principles of genetic risk assessment and counseling and recommendations for well-differentiated grade 3 NETs, poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, adrenal tumors, pheochromocytomas, and paragangliomas.

12003 Background: AIMSS are common and frequently lead to early discontinuation of adjuvant AI therapy. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes have been associated with AIMSS and AI discontinuation. The primary objective of E1Z11 was to validate previously identified associations between 10 specific SNPs in candidate genes and AI discontinuation due to AIMSS in a community-based, racially diverse cohort. Methods: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive stage I-III breast cancer enrolled onto a prospective multi-site cohort study, the majority through the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). Participants received anastrozole 1 mg oral daily, and completed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. AIMSS was defined as >20% increase in Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score over baseline occurring within 1 year of AI therapy. We projected 40% would develop AIMSS and 25% would discontinue AI treatment within 1 year, informing a planned enrollment of 1000 women with a fixed number per strata (600 Caucasian, 200 African-American [AA] & 200 Asian) to provide 80% power to detect an effect size of 1.5-4. SNPs include ESR1 (rs2234693, rs2347868, rs9340835), CYP19A1 (rs1062033, rs4646), TCL1A (rs11849538, rs2369049, rs7158782, rs7159713), and HTR2A (rs2296972). Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) was evaluated within each racial subset. SNP genotypes were coded as additive effects on the log odds ratio by coding as 0, 1 or 2 for the count of the minor allele. A Cochran-Armitage trend test was used with a 1-sided alpha of 0.0025 (Bonferroni correction for 10 tests). Results: We enrolled 999 evaluable women (616 Caucasian, 184 AA, 199 Asian). Genotyping was successful in 974 (98%). AIMSS developed in 43%, and AI therapy was discontinued in 12% within 1 year. While more AA and Asians developed AIMSS compared to Caucasians (48% vs 38%, p=0.017; 50% vs 38%, p=0.004), AI discontinuation rates were similar across racial groups. HWE was satisfied for all SNPs at the 5% alpha level, except for TCL1A/rs11849538 (p=0.002) in the AA cohort. None of the 10 SNPs were significantly associated with AI discontinuation or development of AIMSS in the overall population, or in any of the 3 cohorts. Conclusions: Although AIMSS were more common in AA and Asians, AI discontinuation rates were similar in the 3 cohorts. We were unable to prospectively validate 10 SNPs in 4 genes previously associated with AI discontinuation due to AIMSS. Future analyses will include other predictors of AIMSS, PROs, and additional genetic markers for the entire cohort and by race. Support: NCI UG1CA189828, UG1CA233196, UG1CA233277, UG1CA233320, UG1CA233178, UG1CA233160, UG1CA232760, UG1CA233341, UG1CA233329, U10CA180821, UG1CA189821, UG1CA189830, U10CA180888, UG1CA189859, UG1CA189863, UG1CA189971. Clinical trial information: NCT01824836.

3575 Background: Pts with mCRC frequently receive ≥1 sequential treatment TL. Approximately 50%-60% of pts receive second-line (L2) and 20%-30% third-line (L3) regimens in routine practice. We investigated the pts clinical/tumor characteristics and their prognostic impact across TL. Methods: Data from 37,560 pts enrolled in 48 randomized trials (34 in first (L1), 9 in L2, and 5 in L3) were analyzed. Candidate variables (VAR) measured at enrollment were sex, age, body mass index, performance status (PS), bilirubin, hemoglobin (Hb), platelets (Pl), derived white blood cells-to-absolute neutrophil counts ratio (WBC/ANC), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), primary tumor location, and number and location of metastatic sites (MS). Missing data were imputed. VAR with significant value at all TL were selected to construct a prognostic score of overall survival (OS) in training set (TS, n=30,050; 80%). For each TL, the score was calculated as the sum on the estimations of the VAR’ coefficients from the common multivariate model; Cox’s model was used to define risk groups. The discrimination capability was assessed using the Harrell’s C-index. External validation was done in the validation set (VS, n=7,510; 20%). Results: A total of 26,974 pts in L1, 7,693 pts in L2 and 2,893 pts in L3 were analyzed. The following characteristics increased continuously over TL: ≥2 MS (57%, 72%, 82%), lung metastases (50%, 74%, 91%), lymph nodes metastases (51%, 61%, 80%), KRAS mutation (37%, 47%, 51%) and elevated ALP (46%, 52%, 61%). BRAF mutation decreased (9%, 7%, 5%). In L1 vs L3 trials, 70% vs 89% of patients had primary tumor resection, 10% vs 80% had at least one metastasectomy and 31% vs 78% had a late metachronous (>12 months) metastasis. 7 independent VAR were retained in the prognostic score (PS, Hb, Pl, WBC/ANC, LDH, ALP, and the number of MS); four pt groups with significantly different prognoses were defined (table). This score remained valid when excluding pts with PS 2. Third-line oral drugs (vs placebo) and subsequent line (L2/L1 or L3/L2) were effective in all prognostic groups. Conclusions: Clinical/tumor pt characteristics significantly varied over subsequent TL in patients included in randomized trials. The same prognostic model using practical clinical and biological variables can be used in all TL.[Table: see text]

Abstract Background Disparities in colon cancer outcomes have been reported across race and socioeconomic status, which may reflect, in part, access to care. We sought to assess the influences of race and median household income (MHI) on outcomes among colon cancer patients with similar access to care. Methods We conducted a prospective, observational study of 1206 stage III colon cancer patients enrolled in the CALGB 89803 randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial. Race was self-reported by 1116 White and 90 Black patients at study enrollment; MHI was determined by matching 973 patients’ home zip codes with publicly available US Census 2000 data. Multivariate analyses were adjusted for baseline sociodemographic, clinical, dietary, and lifestyle factors. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Over a median follow-up of 7.7 years, the adjusted hazard ratios for Blacks (compared with Whites) were 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.35, P = .75) for disease-free survival, 0.91 (95% CI = 0.62 to 1.35, P = .65) for recurrence-free survival, and 1.07 (95% CI = 0.73 to 1.57, P = .73) for overall survival. Relative to patients in the highest MHI quartile, the adjusted hazard ratios for patients in the lowest quartile were 0.90 (95% CI = 0.67 to 1.19, Ptrend = .18) for disease-free survival, 0.89 (95% CI = 0.66 to 1.22, Ptrend = .14) for recurrence-free survival, and 0.87 (95% CI = 0.63 to 1.19, Ptrend = .23) for overall survival. Conclusions In this study of patients with similar health-care access, no statistically significant differences in outcomes were found by race or MHI. The substantial gaps in outcomes previously observed by race and MHI may not be rooted in differences in tumor biology but rather in access to quality care.

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation–positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org . Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.

4627 Background: E4201 compared radiation and gemcitabine (RT+Gem) versus Gem alone in LAPC. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary objectives included: objective response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity and QOL. We previously reported that RT+Gem was associated with improved overall survival compared with Gem alone [median survival time, 11 months and 9.2 months, respectively; p=0.034], without impact in RR or PFS. (ASCO 2008, abstract # 4506). We now report on QOL as measured by the Hep subscale from the FACT-Hepatobiliary [FACT-Hep] between both arms. Methods: Eligible patients had LAPC adenocarcinoma, PS <2, without prior therapy. They were randomized to Arm A: Gem alone (1,000 mg/m2/week x 3, every 4 weeks, 7 cycles), or Arm B: RT (50.4Gy/28 fractions) plus Gem (600 mg/m2/weekly x 6) followed by 5 cycles of Gem alone (1,000 mg/m2/weekly x 3 every 4 wks). The FACT-Hep was administered at baseline (before starting induction), 6 weeks (immediately after completing induction), week 16 (Arm A) or week 15 (Arm B) mid-consolidation, and at 9 months. Results: From April, 2003 to December, 2005, 74 patients were enrolled, 71 were eligible [37 Arm A; 34 Arm B]. Grade ≥3 was reported in 80% and 82.4% in ARM A and B, respectively (p=1.00). Grade IV toxicities, mainly gastrointestinal and hematologic, were more common in ARM B (41.2% vs 5.7%, p=<0.0001). QOL compliance declined over time, most commonly attributable to either patients or staff choosing not to complete or administer the instrument due to declining health (96%, 69%, 60%, and 40% at baseline, week 6, 15/16 weeks and 9 months, respectively). Within Arm B, QoL scores dropped significantly from baseline to 6 weeks. By week 15, QoL scores for patients on Arm B rebounded to levels similar to baseline. Two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum tests failed to suggest differences in median FACT-Hep subscale score between treatment arms at any of the four time-points (alpha = 0.10). Conclusions: RT+Gem is associated with an overall survival benefit without apparent long term adverse impact on QOL when compared with Gem alone. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

4530 Background: EAC has eluded cure even with platin-based CRT. Stratifying pts by likelihood of success is one approach to improving outcomes. We assessed whether SNPs in DNA repair paths are associated with complete pathologic response (pCR) in EAC pts who received C-based CRT followed by surgery. Methods: Patients and specimens: Pretreatment biopsy or post-CRT resection samples were obtained from pts (EAC, stage II-IVa) treated on a randomized phase II trial, E1201 (n=86), of preop CRT (RT to 45 Gy). Arm A: Preop C 30 mg/m2 + irinotecan (I) 50 mg/m2 days (d) 1, 8, 22, 29 with RT. Post-op C 30 mg/m2 + I 65 mg/m2 d 1, 8 q21 days x 3. Arm B: Preop C 30 mg/m2 + paclitaxel (P) 50 mg/m2 d 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 with RT. Post-op C 75 mg/m2 + P 175 mg/m2 d 1 q21 days x 3. Clinical outcome - pCR: (A) 14% [95% CI 5.5%, 28.5%]; (B) 16% [95% CI 6.7%, 30.1%]. Median overall survival (OS): (A) 34.9 m (months) [90% CI 23.5, not reached]; (B) 20.9 m [90% CI 17.4, 46.7]. Experimental procedure: Normal tissue was microdissected from unstained sections of paraffin-embedded tissue. DNA was extracted (Qiagen). Genotyping was performed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (Sequenom) for all SNPs. Each SNP was dichotomized a priori into: (1) major homozygote vs (2) minor (heterozygote plus minor homozygote) allele groups. Data analysis was performed centrally, with lab investigators blinded to clinical data. Exact logistic regression was used to derive ORs for non-pCR, using the major homozygote as the reference (2-sided p values). Results: Germline DNA was available in 68 pts; 60 were eligible and began therapy ( Table ). Conclusions: In this homogenous, well-defined cohort, the XRCC1 Arg399Gln minor allele group was associated with lower pCR (p=0.06). Lab data on a panel of additional SNPs have been collected and are under analysis for presentation at the meeting. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]