Sargent, Daniel J

Purpose Surgical resection of liver-only metastases from colorectal cancer has undergone extensive evaluation and review. The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to improve the likelihood of resection in disease that is not optimally resectable has not been as well studied. Patients and Methods Patients with liver-only metastases from colorectal cancer deemed not optimally resectable by a surgeon with expertise in liver surgery received fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4). Patients were periodically reassessed for resectability. Surgical response was classified as completely resectable (S-CR), partially resectable (S-PR), or unresectable (S-UR). Study design specified the accrual of 39 patients, with two or more S-CRs considered evidence of promising activity with respect to increasing the S-CR rate. Results Forty-two of 44 patients were assessable for this analysis. Twenty-five patients (60%) had tumor reduction by serial imaging. Seventeen patients (40%) underwent surgery (S-CR, n = 14; S-PR, n = 1; and S-UR, n = 2) after a median of 6 months of chemotherapy. With a median postsurgical follow-up of 22 months (range, 13 to 32 months), 11 recurrences have occurred in the 15 S-CR and S-PR patients. Median survival time was 26 months. Conclusion Our data suggest that FOLFOX4 has a high response rate (complete response, partial response, or reduction) in patients with liver-only metastases from colorectal cancer, allowing for successful resection of disease in a portion of patients initially not judged to be optimally resectable. However, a high recurrence rate after surgery was observed, which, in 73% of patients, involved the liver. Further trials are indicated based on the promising results observed in this trial.

Abstract Purpose: Most colorectal cancers that have high levels of microsatellite instability (MSI-H) show loss of immunohistochemical expression of proteins that participate in the DNA mismatch repair process, most often involving MLH1 and MSH2. Less commonly, a third DNA mismatch repair protein, MSH6, may also be lost as the primary event. Rarely, tumors with MSI-H show normal expression of these three proteins. The genetic deficiency leading to the MSI-H phenotype in such cases is unknown. PMS2 is another member of the DNA mismatch repair complex. Its expression is generally lost in tumors with MLH1 loss of expression. Rarely, there is selective loss of PMS2 expression. We sought to describe the frequency and clinical correlates of selective loss of expression of PMS2 with the MSI-H tumor phenotype. Experimental Design: Two thousand seven hundred nineteen colorectal cancers from both clinic- and research-based ascertainment were studied. Tumor MSI testing and immunohistochemistry for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 were conducted. Medical records were abstracted for age at diagnosis, gender, colorectal cancer site, and family history. Results: Five hundred thirty-five of the 2,719 tumors were MSI-H. Of these, 93% showed loss of expression of MLH1, MSH2, and/or MSH6. Thirty-eight showed normal expression for these proteins. PMS2 immunohistochemical staining was successful in 32 of 38 of these tumors. Of the 32, 23 showed selective loss of expression of PMS2. This was associated with young age of diagnosis and right-sided location but not with a striking family history of cancer. Conclusions: Overall, 97% of the MSI-H tumors showed loss of expression for one or more of these four mismatch repair proteins. Selective loss of expression of PMS2 was present in 72% of cases in which colorectal cancers had an MSI-H phenotype but no alteration of expression of MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6. The underlying mechanism involved cannot be determined from this study but could involve point mutations in other DNA mismatch repair genes with retention of immunohistochemical expression, somatic inactivation of PMS2, or germ line mutation of PMS2.

Abstract Objective: Predictors of quality of life (QOL) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer are lacking. The insulin-like growth factor (IGF) family of proteins is associated with QOL in noncancer populations. We sought to study whether these proteins are associated with QOL in patients with colorectal cancer. Method: We used a cohort of 526 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with combination chemotherapy. Plasma samples of IGF-I, IGF-II, IGF binding protein-3, and C-peptide were collected before initiation of chemotherapy. QOL was measured by the uniscale instrument and the Symptom Distress Scale at baseline and throughout treatment. Results: Baseline plasma levels of IGF-I and IGF-II before initiation of chemotherapy were significantly associated with several important baseline QOL measures in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with lower levels of IGF-I reported increased distress with regard to appearance, appetite, cough, and nausea intensity after adjustment for potential confounders. Similarly, decreased levels of IGF-II were predictive of worse quality related to appearance, appetite, fatigue, nausea frequency and intensity, pain frequency, and composite Symptom Distress Scale score. IGF binding protein-3 and C-peptide were not predictive of baseline QOL. Baseline biomarkers were not associated with subsequent changes in QOL during treatment. Higher body mass index was significantly associated with superior baseline QOL in several areas; nonetheless, the association of IGF-I and IGF-II with baseline QOL measures remained significant even after controlling for baseline body mass index. Conclusion: Baseline plasma IGF-I and IGF-II are significantly associated with symptom distress. Whether this association is simply reflective of patient nutritional status and/or disease burden or represents an independent biological effect of IGFs on QOL remains uncertain. Nonetheless, these data suggest that molecular biomarkers may be useful predictors of QOL in cancer patients.

Current staging and risk-stratification methods in oncology, while helpful, fail to adequately predict malignancy aggressiveness and/or response to specific treatment. Increased knowledge of cancer biology is generating promising marker candidates for more accurate diagnosis, prognosis assessment, and therapeutic targeting. To apply these exciting results to maximize patient benefit, a disciplined application of well-designed clinical trials for assessing the utility of markers should be used. In this article, we first review the major issues to consider when designing a clinical trial assessing the usefulness of a predictive marker. We then present two classes of clinical trial designs: the Marker by Treatment Interaction Design and the Marker-Based Strategy Design. In the first design, we assume that the marker splits the population into groups in which the efficacy of a particular treatment will differ. This design can be viewed as a classical randomized clinical trial with upfront stratification for the marker. In the second design, after the marker status is known, each patient is randomly assigned either to have therapy determined by their marker status or to receive therapy independent of marker status. The predictive value of the marker is assessed by comparing the outcome of all patients in the marker-based arm to that of all of the patients in the non–marker-based arm. We present detailed sample size calculations for a specific clinical scenario. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the two trial designs and their appropriateness to specific clinical situations to assist investigators seeking to design rigorous, marker-based clinical trials.

Purpose Some patients with colon cancer have a high risk of local recurrence postoperatively. This trial was undertaken to determine whether radiation therapy added to an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen improves outcome in high-risk patients. Patients and Methods Patients with resected colon cancer with tumor adherence or invasion of surrounding structures, or with T3N1 or T3N2 tumors of the ascending or descending colon were randomly assigned to receive fluorouracil and levamisole therapy with or without radiation therapy. Patients who received chemotherapy and radiation therapy (chemoRT) received 45 to 50.4 Gy in 25 to 28 fractions beginning 28 days after starting chemotherapy. Patient enrollment was terminated because of slow accrual after 222 patients enrolled (original goal was 700 patients); 187 patients were assessable. Results Overall 5-year survival was 62% for chemotherapy patients and 58% for chemoRT patients (P > .50); 5-year disease-free survival was 51% for both groups (P > .50). Toxicity (≥ grade 3) occurred in 42% of chemotherapy patients and 54% of chemoRT patients (P = .04). Leukopenia (≥ grade 3) occurred in 10% of chemotherapy patients and 22% of chemoRT patients (P = .02). No significant difference in nonhematologic toxicity (≥ grade 3) was observed between chemoRT and chemotherapy patients (35% v 44%; P = .26). Conclusion Patients who received chemotherapy or chemoRT had similar overall survival and disease-free survival. Toxicity was higher among chemoRT patients. These results must be interpreted with caution because of the high number of ineligible patients and the limited power of the study to detect potentially meaningful differences.

Purpose Molecular studies of colon cancer have provided insights into pathogenesis, yet it is unclear how important these markers are in predicting prognosis. This study investigated the prognostic significance of TUNEL, bcl-2, p53, proliferation marker Ki-67 and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status in patients with Dukes' stage B2 and C colorectal adenocarcinomas. Patients and Methods Tumor tissue from 366 patients (75% Dukes' C, 25% Dukes' B2) from four randomized North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase III surgical adjuvant trials were used. Eighty-one percent of patients received adjuvant treatment, which was primarily fluorouracil (FU) based (90%). Tumor location was predominantly (87%) the colon. Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated dUTP nick-end labeling (TUNEL), Ki-67, p53, bcl-2, and MMR were assayed using immunohistochemistry. Stage, grade, MMR, Ki-67, and previously determined flow cytometry markers (ploidy and S phase) were explored for associations with each other and with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results Univariately, stage B2, low grade, diploid, Ki-67 more than 27%, normal p53, and FU-based adjuvant treatment were significantly associated with improved OS and DFS (P < .05). After adjusting for stage, grade, and ploidy in multivariate analysis, Ki-67 remained significantly related to both OS and DFS (P < .01). Active FU-based adjuvant treatment was significant only for OS in this multivariate model. Neither bcl-2 nor TUNEL were significant. Conclusion This retrospective study indicates that Ki-67 and ploidy may have stronger prognostic impact on OS and DFS than other parameters investigated after adjusting for stage and tumor grade. Prospective studies to elucidate the mechanism and prognostic significance of these findings are necessary.