Benson, Al B.

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.

367 Background: On initial publication of GI Intergroup RTOG 98-11, concurrent chemoradiation with 5FU+mitomycin (MMC) decreased colostomy failure (CF) vs induction plus concurrent 5FU+cisplatin (CDDP), but did not significantly impact disease free or overall survival (DFS, OS). The intent of the current analysis is to determine the long-term impact of treatment on survival (DFS, OS, colostomy-free [CFS]), CF and relapse (local-regional [LRF], distant [DM]) in this patient group. Methods: Stratification factors included gender, clinical node status, and primary size. DFS/OS were estimated univariately by Kaplan-Meier method and treatment arms compared by log-rank test. Time to relapse/CF were estimated by cumulative incidence method and treatment arms compared by Gray's test. Multivariate analyses were done with Cox proportional hazard models to test for treatment differences, adjusting for stratification factors. Results: Of 682 patients accrued, 649 were analyzable for outcomes. As seen in the table, 5-yr DFS and OS were statistically better for RT+5FU/MMC vs RT+5FU/CDDP (67.7 v 57.6%, p=.0.0045; 78.2 v 70.5%, p=0.021) with trends toward statistical significance for CFS, LRF, and CF (71.8 v 64.9%, p=0.053; 20 v 26.5%, 11.9 v 17.3%, p=0.092 and 0.075). Similar results were seen in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Concurrent chemoradiation with 5FU-MMC has a statistically significant impact on DFS and OS vs induction + concurrent 5FU-CDDP and borderline significance for CFS, CF and LRF. Therefore, RT+5FU/MMC remains the preferred standard of care. Potential strategies to improve outcomes include treatment intensification and individualized molecular-based treatment. Supported by RTOG grant U10 CA21661 and CCOP grant U10 CA37422 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract Purpose: We tested whether 18 polymorphisms in 16 genes (GSTP1, COX2, IL10, EGFR, EGF, FGFR4, CCDN1, VEGFR2, VEGF, CXCR2, IL8, MMP3, ICAM1, ERCC1, RAD51, and XRCC3) would predict disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity in the INT0144 trial, which was designed to investigate different postoperative regimens of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)–based chemoradiation (CRT) in locally advanced rectal cancers: Arm 1 consisted of bolus 5-FU followed by 5-FU protracted venous infusion (PVI) with radiotherapy; arm 2 was induction and concomitant PVI 5-FU with radiotherapy and arm 3 was induction and concomitant bolus 5-FU with radiotherapy. Experimental Design: DNA from 746 stage II/III rectal patients enrolled in the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S9304 phase III trial was analyzed. Genomic DNA was extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor tissue. The polymorphisms were analyzed using direct DNA-sequencing or polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP). Results: GSTP1-Ile105Val (rs1695) was significantly associated with DFS and OS and its effect did not vary by treatment arm. The five-year DFS and OS were 53% and 58%, respectively, for G/G, 66% and 72% for G/A, and 57% and 66% for A/A patients. In arm 2, IL8-251A/A genotype (rs4073) was associated with a lower risk of toxicities (P = 0.04). The VEGFR2 H472Q Q/Q genotype (rs1870377) was associated with a higher risk of grade 3–5 proximal upper gastrointestinal tract (PUGIT) mucositis (P = 0.04) in arm 2. However, in arm 1, this genotype was associated with a lower risk of PUGIT mucositis (P = 0.004). Conclusion: rs1695 may be prognostic in patients with rectal cancer treated with adjuvant CRT. rs4073 and rs1870377 may exhibit different associations with toxicity, according to the 5-FU schedule. Clin Cancer Res; 21(7); 1583–90. ©2015 AACR.

Purpose The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing recent clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. Methods The Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) Guideline on Follow-up Care, Surveillance Protocol, and Secondary Prevention Measures for Survivors of Colorectal Cancer was reviewed by ASCO for methodologic rigor and considered for endorsement. Results The ASCO Panel concurred with the CCO recommendations and recommended endorsement, with the addition of several qualifying statements. Conclusion Surveillance should be guided by presumed risk of recurrence and functional status of the patient (important within the first 2 to 4 years). Medical history, physical examination, and carcinoembryonic antigen testing should be performed every 3 to 6 months for 5 years. Patients at higher risk of recurrence should be considered for testing in the more frequent end of the range. A computed tomography scan (abdominal and chest) is recommended annually for 3 years, in most cases. Positron emission tomography scans should not be used for surveillance outside of a clinical trial. A surveillance colonoscopy should be performed 1 year after the initial surgery and then every 5 years, dictated by the findings of the previous one. If a colonoscopy was not preformed before diagnosis, it should be done after completion of adjuvant therapy (before 1 year). Secondary prevention (maintaining a healthy body weight and active lifestyle) is recommended. If a patient is not a candidate for surgery or systemic therapy because of severe comorbid conditions, surveillance tests should not be performed. A treatment plan from the specialist should have clear directions on appropriate follow-up by a nonspecialist.

PurposeOn initial publication of GI Intergroup Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 98-11 [A Phase III Randomized Study of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU), Mitomycin, and Radiotherapy Versus 5-Fluorouracil, Cisplatin and Radiotherapy in Carcinoma of the Anal Canal], concurrent chemoradiation (CCR) with fluorouracil (FU) plus mitomycin (MMC) decreased colostomy failure (CF) when compared with induction plus concurrent FU plus cisplatin (CDDP), but did not significantly impact disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS) for anal canal carcinoma. The intent of the updated analysis was to determine the long-term impact of treatment on survival (DFS, OS, colostomy-free survival [CFS]), CF, and relapse (locoregional failure [LRF], distant metastasis) in this patient group.Patients and MethodsStratification factors included sex, clinical node status, and primary size. DFS and OS were estimated univariately by the Kaplan-Meier method, and treatment arms were compared by log-rank test. Time to relapse and CF were estimated by the cumulative incidence method and treatment arms were compared by using Gray's test. Multivariate analyses used Cox proportional hazard models to test for treatment differences after adjusting for stratification factors.ResultsOf 682 patients accrued, 649 were analyzable for outcomes. DFS and OS were statistically better for RT + FU/MMC versus RT + FU/CDDP (5-year DFS, 67.8% v 57.8%; P = .006; 5-year OS, 78.3% v 70.7%; P = .026). There was a trend toward statistical significance for CFS (P = .05), LRF (P = .087), and CF (P = .074). Multivariate analysis was statistically significant for treatment and clinical node status for both DFS and OS, for tumor diameter for DFS, and for sex for OS.ConclusionCCR with FU/MMC has a statistically significant, clinically meaningful impact on DFS and OS versus induction plus concurrent FU/CDDP, and it has borderline significance for CFS, CF, and LRF. Therefore, RT + FU/MMC remains the preferred standard of care.

Purpose The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the role of radiation therapy with concurrent gemcitabine (GEM) compared with GEM alone in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with localized unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (at 1,000 mg/m 2 /wk for weeks 1 to 6, followed by 1 week rest, then for 3 of 4 weeks) or GEM (600 mg/m 2 /wk for weeks 1 to 5, then 4 weeks later 1,000 mg/m 2 for 3 of 4 weeks) plus radiotherapy (starting on day 1, 1.8 Gy/Fx for total of 50.4 Gy). Measurement of quality of life using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Hepatobiliary questionnaire was also performed. Results Of 74 patients entered on trial and randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (arm A; n = 37) or GEM plus radiation (arm B; n = 34), patients in arm B had greater incidence of grades 4 and 5 toxicities (41% v 9%), but grades 3 and 4 toxicities combined were similar (77% in A v 79% in B). No statistical differences were seen in quality of life measurements at 6, 15 to 16, and 36 weeks. The primary end point was survival, which was 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.9 to 11.4 months) and 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 15.5 months) for arms A and B, respectively (one-sided P = .017 by stratified log-rank test). Conclusion This trial demonstrates improved overall survival with the addition of radiation therapy to GEM in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer, with acceptable toxicity.