Shi, Qian

4029 Background: The clearance of 5-FU differs significantly between men (M) and women (W). Adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) for CRC has a higher toxicity in W. The impact of sex on efficacy and toxicity in first-line trials of metastatic CRC (mCRC) is unknown. Methods: We analyzed patient (pt) and tumor characteristics, toxicities (nausea (AE1), vomiting (AE2), diarrhea, neutropenia (AE3)) and efficacy (overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS)) according to sex in the following treatment groups: A: CT alone, B: CT + bevacizumab, C: CT + EGFR-antibodies, with subgroup analyses in the CT alone group for single-agent, doublets and triplets, as well as irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-based regimens. Pts from trials with treatments still used today and all relevant data available were eligible. OS and PFS were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusted for primary tumor location and performance status (PS). Results: We included 28 trials with 18.399 pts (11.352 M and 7.047 W). W were younger (61 vs. 63 years), had more often a PS of 1 (49 vs 45%), BRAF mutations (10 vs. 7%), right-sided tumors (42 vs. 35%) and less often rectal tumors (26 vs. 32%). Significant differences in toxicity are reported in table. Rates of diarrhea were similar. There was no sex disparity in OS in the predefined subgroups except for pts receiving triplets where OS was better in M (HRadj=1.39 (1.05 - 1.85)). Median (interquartile range) OS in months for M and W was 16.7 (9.2-27.4) and 16.2 (8.9-27.2) in group 1, 21.9 (12.7-37.5) and 22.3 (12.9 – 39.0) in group 2, and 26.8 (14.6-45.3) and 24.8 (12.3-49.2) in group 3. HRsadj (W vs M) (95% CI), p values for OS were 1.02 (0.96-1.09), .557, 0.92 (0.83-1.03), .142, 0.99 (0.85-1.14), .866. Conclusions: M and W with mCRC differ significantly regarding patient and tumor characteristics. The significant higher toxicity in W does not translate in a higher treatment efficacy. Apart from known sex differences in pharmacokinetics of 5-FU, differences in pharmacodynamics must be postulated. [Table: see text]

4010 Background: Survival outcomes in patients with stage III colon cancer varies widely according to T-N sub-stages. The ability to estimate the benefit of each therapeutic option (surgery alone, fluoropyrimidines alone, oxaliplatin-based doublet for either 3 or 6 months) in each T-N subgroup within stage III, may provide more accurate information helping doctors and patients in the complex shared decision-making process surrounding adjuvant therapy. Methods: Theoutcomedata of 12,834 patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in the IDEA trial served as our database. Patients were categorized in 16 sub-stages, based on the T-N categories. We created a meta-regression model to predict the expected 3-year DFS within each T-N sub-stage and hence the 5-year DFS rates were projected. We then evaluated the efficacy of each therapeutic option in every sub-stage, working backward by subtraction, using an average of the HRs reported in the pertinent trials publication as conversion factor. Results: Large differences in 3-year DFS rate were observed among the subgroups, ranging from 95% (T1N1a) to 29% (T4N2b) in the overall population. The contribution to outcome of each therapeutic option in this setting varied widely across sub-stages. According to our model, patients with T1N1a cancers have a projected 5-year DFS of 85% with surgery alone. Adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone results in 4.2% absolute DFS gain; an additional 1.7% and 0.6% gain is seen with oxaliplatin for 3 and 6 months, respectively. Patients with T4N2b cancers show a 4.7% 5-year DFS with surgery alone, and a 7.1%, 5.0%, 2.1% increase with the aforementioned adjuvant options, respectively. Conclusions: The resulting overlay bar graph gives patients and doctors the projected relative benefit of each treatment option and may substantially help the shared decision-making process.

4004 Background: In overall population, IDEA pooled analysis did not demonstrate non-inferiority (NI) regarding 3y DFS in pts with stage III CC receiving 3m vs. 6m of adj FOLFOX/CAPOX. However, in pts treated with CAPOX (especially in low-risk pts), 3m of therapy was as effective as 6m. Results of OS and 5y DFS are reported. Methods: OS was defined as time from enrollment to death due to all causes. OS NI margin was conservatively set to be Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.11, which is equivalent to: the maximum acceptable loss of OS efficacy, by shortening treatment to 3m, was half of the OS efficacy gained in MOSAIC trial (i.e., 2.26% absolute reduction in 5y OS rate). Pre-planned sub-group analyses included by regimen and risk group for both OS and 5y DFS. NI was to be declared if the one-sided false discovery rate adjusted (FDRa) NI p-value < 0.025. Results: With an overall median survival follow-up of 72 m (range per study, 62 to 84 m), 2584 deaths and 3777 DFS events among 12,835 pts from six trials were observed. Across 6 studies, 39.5% of pts received CAPOX (rate by study, 0% to 75.1%). Overall, the 5y OS rate was 82.4% (3m) and 82.8% (6m), with estimated OS HR of 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.11; FDRa NI p, 0.058) and absolute 5-y OS rate difference of -0.4% (95% CI, -2.1 to 1.3%). Overall, the 5y DFS rate was 69.1% (3m) and 70.8% (6m), with estimated DFS HR of 1.08 (95%CI, 1.01-1.15, FDRa NI p, 0.22). HRs (95% CI) within subgroups see table. Conclusions: 5y OS rate reported in IDEA trials was higher than historical rates, regardless of duration of therapy. While overall survival in IDEA did not meet prior statistical assumptions for NI in overall population, the 0.4% difference in 5y OS should be placed in clinical context. OS and 5y DFS results continue to support the use of 3m adjuvant CAPOX for the vast majority of stage III colon cancer pts. This conclusion is strengthened by the substantial reduction of toxicities, inconveniencies and cost associated with shorter treatment duration. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045; 2009-010384-16; NCT00749450; ISRCTN59757862; 2007-003957-10; UMIN000008543; 2007-000354 . [Table: see text]

4003 Background: Aspirin and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal polyps and cancer in observational and randomized studies. CALGB/SWOG 80702 tested the effect of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, on reducing the risk of recurrence in stage III CC. Methods: CALGB/SWOG 80702 is a 2x2 randomized controlled phase III trial of 3 v 6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX (data previously reported as part of the IDEA collaboration) with concurrent celecoxib (400 mg daily) v placebo x 3 yrs for patients (pts) with resected stage III CC. The primary endpoint of the trial is disease-free survival (DFS), defined as time from randomization to recurrence or death from any cause. The trial was designed to provide 91% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.79 in favor of celecoxib with 2-sided alpha = 0.05 (775 events required); due to slowing accumulation of events 4 years after complete accrual, power was lowered to 85% with same HR and alpha assumptions (696 events required). The DSMB released data on February 24, 2020 at median f/u of 5.6 yrs with 689 DFS events. Results: Between June 2010 and November 2015, 2,526 pts were consented and randomized to the trial. Treatment arms were well balanced by patient and tumor prognostic features, as well as low-dose aspirin use. Baseline characteristics included 45% female, 18% non-White, 8% Hispanic, 15% T4, 26% N2. 3-yr DFS for celecoxib was 76.3% v 73.3% for placebo (HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.77-1.04]; P = 0.14). 5-yr overall survival (OS) was 83.9% for celecoxib v 81.7% for placebo (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.72-1.05]; P = 0.14). When considering the 4 treatment arms separately, 3-yr DFS was 77.0% for 12 months FOLFOX + celecoxib, 74.9% for 12 months FOLFOX + placebo, 75.5% for 6 months FOLFOX + celecoxib, and 71.9% for 6 months FOLFOX + placebo (log rank P = 0.22; P interaction = 0.64). There were no significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicity with celecoxib v placebo. Compliance with protocol celecoxib treatment, defined as 3 yrs of therapy completion or recurrence/death while on treatment, was 58.1% pts on celecoxib and 60.2% pts on placebo. Conclusions: The addition of celecoxib to standard chemotherapy did not significantly improve DFS or OS. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045 .

Abstract Great heterogeneity in survival exists for patients newly diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Three scoring systems incorporating simple clinical parameters (age, lactate dehydrogenase, number/sites of involvement, stage, performance status) are widely used: the International Prognostic Index (IPI), revised IPI (R-IPI), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI). We evaluated 2124 DLBCL patients treated from 1998 to 2009 with frontline rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP; or variant) across 7 multicenter randomized clinical trials to determine which scoring system best discriminates overall survival (OS). Median age was 63 years, and 56% of patients were male. Five-year OS estimates ranged from 54% to 88%, from 61% to 93%, and from 49% to 92% using the IPI, R-IPI, and NCCN-IPI, respectively. The NCCN-IPI had the greatest absolute difference in OS estimates between the highest- and lowest-risk groups and best discriminated OS (concordance index = 0.632 vs 0.626 [IPI] vs 0.590 [R-IPI]). For each given IPI risk category, NCCN-IPI risk categories were significantly associated with OS (P ≤ .01); the reverse was not true, and the IPI did not provide additional significant prognostic information within all NCCN-IPI risk categories. Collectively, the NCCN-IPI outperformed the IPI and R-IPI. Patients with low-risk NCCN-IPI had favorable survival outcomes with little room for further improvement. In the rituximab era, none of the clinical risk scores identified a patient subgroup with long-term survival clearly &lt;50%. Integrating molecular features of the tumor and microenvironment into the NCCN-IPI or IPI might better characterize a high-risk group for which novel treatment approaches are most needed.

Abstract Background The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and other prognostic tools fail to account for stage-independent variability in outcome. We developed a prognostic classifier adding Immunoscore to clinicopathological and molecular features in patients with stage III colon cancer. Methods Patient (n = 559) data from the FOLFOX arm of adjuvant trial NCCTG N0147 were used to construct Cox models for predicting disease-free survival (DFS). Variables included age, sex, T stage, positive lymph nodes (+LNs), N stage, performance status, histologic grade, sidedness, KRAS/BRAF, mismatch repair, and Immunoscore (CD3+, CD8+ T-cell densities). After determining optimal functional form (continuous or categorical) and within Cox models, backward selection was performed to analyze all variables as candidate predictors. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Poorer DFS was found for tumors that were T4 vs T3 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19 to 2.60; P = .004), right- vs left-sided (HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.14 to 2.04; P = .005), BRAF V600E (HR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.26 to 2.40; P &lt; .001), mutant KRAS (HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.08 to 2.55; P = .02), and low vs high Immunoscore (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.22 to 2.33; P = .001) (all P &lt; .02). Increasing numbers of +LNs and lower continuous Immunoscore were associated with poorer DFS that achieved significance (both Ps&lt; .0001). After number of +LNs, T stage, and BRAF/KRAS, Immunoscore was the most informative predictor of DFS shown multivariately. Among T1–3 N1 tumors, Immunoscore was the only variable associated with DFS that achieved statistical significance. A nomogram was generated to determine the likelihood of being recurrence-free at 3 years. Conclusions The Immunoscore can enhance the accuracy of survival prediction among patients with stage III colon cancer.

Abstract Background Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels are used in conjunction with imaging to monitor response to systemic therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We sought to identify a threshold for CEA change from baseline to predict progressive disease (PD) in mCRC patients receiving first-line therapy. Methods Patients from trials collected in the ARCAD database were included if baseline CEA was at least 10 ng/mL and repeat CEA was available within 14 days of first restaging scan. Optimal cutoffs for CEA change were identified by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Prediction performance of cutoffs was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value. Analyses were conducted by treatment class: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody, and chemotherapy with anti-EGFR antibody. Results A total of 2643 mCRC patients treated with systemic therapy were included. Median percent change of CEA from baseline to first restaging for patients with complete response, partial response, or stable disease (non-PD) and PD was −53.1% and +23.6% for chemotherapy alone (n = 957) and −71.7% and −45.3% for chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody (n = 1355). The optimal area under the curve cutoff for differentiating PD from non-PD on first restaging was −7.5% for chemotherapy alone and −62.0% for chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody; chemotherapy alone, adjusted odds ratio = 6.51 (95% CI = 3.31 to 12.83, P &lt; .001), chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody, adjusted odds ratio = 3.45 (95% CI = 1.93 to 6.18, P &lt; .001). A 99% negative predictive value clinical cutoff for prediction of non-PD would avoid CT scan at first restaging in 21.0% of chemotherapy alone and 16.2% of chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody–treated patients. Among patients with stable disease on first restaging, those with decreased CEA from baseline had statistically significantly improved progression-free and overall survival. Conclusions Change in CEA from baseline to first restaging can accurately predict non-progression and correlates with long-term outcomes in patients receiving systemic chemotherapy.

7544 Background: Great heterogeneity in survival exists for patients (pts) newly diagnosed with aggressive BCL. Three scoring systems based on simple clinical parameters (age, lactate dehydrogenase, number/sites of involvement, stage, performance status) are widely used: the international prognostic index (IPI), revised-IPI (R-IPI), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI). We studied BCL pts treated with R-CHOP to determine which scoring systems best identifies subgroups with poor outcomes that might benefit from new approaches. Methods: Individual pt data from 7 multicenter trials (1998-2009) of pts with BCL (86% DLBCL) treated front-line with R-CHOP (or variant) were analyzed to determine whether IPI, R-IPI, or NCCN-IPI best discriminated overall survival (OS). The concordance index (c-index) from a proportional hazards model, stratifying on trial and induction therapy, quantified predictive accuracy of each scoring system. Results: 2561 pts (median age 63 yrs, 56% male) were classified into IPI, R-IPI, and NCCN-IPI risk groups (Table). With a median follow-up of 5 yrs, NCCN-IPI had the greatest absolute difference in OS estimates between the highest and lowest risk groups at 1, 3, and 5 yrs, and best discriminated OS (c-index = 0.631, Table). Conclusions: In an independent and large cohort of pts, NCCN-IPI performs best in risk-stratifying pts with aggressive BCL, readily distinguishing pts at high and low risk for treatment failure using clinical parameters (5-yr OS between 48 and 92%). Improvement over the simpler IPI appears incremental, and IPI may remain a valuable alternative. Work integrating molecular features of the tumor into the (NCCN-) IPI is in progress to define high risk groups where targeted novel approaches are needed most. [Table: see text]

4071 Background: Selection of patients for HER2-targeted therapy is based on HER2 analysis in primary EACs. Since EACs metastasize via regional lymph nodes, concordance of HER2 gene amplification results between primary tumors and their metastatic lymph nodes (MLN) is a clinically important issue. Methods: Resected EACs (N = 103) having at least three distinct regional MLNs (total 508 MLNs; median 4 [range 3-11]) were sectioned using routine procedures and tested for HER2 amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Primary tumors were also evaluated for HER2 protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and by FISH. Amplification was defined as HER2/CEP17 ≥ 2. IHC was scored as 0, 1+, 2+, or 3+. Primaries whose HER2 status was positive by both FISH and IHC (ie, amplified and IHC3+), or negative by both (ie, nonamplified and IHC0-1+), were selected. HER2 status was compared between primaries and their MLNs (kappa). Results: Concordant HER2 results between primaries and their MLNs were found in 92% (95/103) of EACs (Table; κ = .76 [95% CI .60 - .92]). However, among patients with HER2-positive primaries, 19% (4/21) had HER2-nonamplified MLNs; among these cases, either all MLNs were HER2-nonamplified (n = 2), or both HER2-nonamplified and –amplified MLNs were present (n = 2). Among HER2-negative primary EACs, 5% (4/82) of cases had MLNs that were all HER2-amplified (n = 3) or both HER2-nonamplified and -amplified (n = 1). Conclusions: A patient subset whose primary EACs were HER2-positive (by both FISH and IHC) were unexpectedly found to lack HER2 amplification in corresponding MLNs. Conversely, a subgroup with HER2-negative primaries had HER2-amplified MLNs, and would have been deemed ineligible for HER2-targeted therapy. These preliminary data suggest that evaluating MLNs in resected EACs has the potential to better identify patients who benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. [Table: see text]

4026 Background: Patients (pts) with locally advanced esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma commonly receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (chemo-RT). Despite this approach the rate of recurrence remains high. Given the difficulties of postoperative therapy, the efficacy of extended neoadjuvant therapy was assessed. Methods: Eligibility criteria included T3-4,N0 – Tany,N(+) disease amenable to radiation and surgery. Pts were randomized to either arm A (docetaxel 60 mg/m2 day 1 , oxaliplatin [Oxal] 85 mg/m2 day 1, and capecitabine 1250 mg/m2/day days 1-14 x 2 cycles [DOC] followed by 5-FU 180 mg/m2/day continuous IV through radiation + Oxal 85 mg/m2 days 1,15,29 + 50.4 Gy radiation (chemo-RT)) or arm B (chemo-RT alone). Randomization was stratified by ECOG PS (0/1 vs 2) and stage (II vs III/IVA). Primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (PCR) rate, defined as no gross or microscopic tumor identified in the surgical specimen. Interim analysis assessed efficacy and futility of the experimental intervention. Wilcoxon rank sum and Fisher’s exact tests were used to compare clinical/pathologic factors between arms. Results: Baseline and stratification factors were well balanced between arms. Of 42 pts included in the interim analysis (86% male; age [median 63, range 38-88], 100% PS 0/1; 71% stage III; 55% esophagus, 40% GEJ; 36% measurable disease), 4 and 1 pts in arms A and B, respectively, did not have surgery due to death (A, 2), progressive disease (A, 1), alternative treatment (A, 1) or adverse event (B, 1). Among 21 arm A pts, 21, 20, and 19 pts started 1st cycle of DOC, 2nd cycle of DOC and chemo-RT, respectively. All arm B pts received chemo-RT. 33% (7/21) of arm A and 48% (10/21) of arm B pts achieved PCR (p=0.53). Among pts undergoing surgery, 94% (16/17) and 100% (20/20) of arm A and B pts had complete resection (p=0.46). 38% and 24% of arm A and B pts experienced at least one grade 4+ adverse event at least possibly related to treatment (p=0.51). Conclusions: Extended neoadjuvant therapy in pts with locally advanced esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma failed to improve the PCR rate. Follow-up in regard to survival and rate of recurrence is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT00938470.