Citations

Purpose With three available chemotherapy drugs for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), response rate (RR) and survival outcomes have improved with associated morbidity, accentuating the need for tools to select optimal individualized treatment. Pharmacogenetics identifies the likelihood of adverse events or response based on variants in genes involved in drug transport, metabolism, and cellular targets. Patients and Methods Germline DNA was extracted from 520 patients on the North American Gastrointestinal Intergroup N9741 study. Three study arms were evaluated: IFL (fluorouracil [FU] + irinotecan [IRN]), FOLFOX (FU + oxaliplatin), and IROX (IRN + oxaliplatin). Information on adverse events, response, and disease-free survival was available. Thirty-four variants in 15 candidate genes for analysis based on previous associations with adverse events or outcome were assessed. Genotyping was performed using pyrosequencing. Results All variants were polymorphic. The homozygous UGT1A1*28 allele observed in 9% of patients was associated with risk of grade 4 neutropenia in patients on IROX (55% v 15%; P = .002). Deletion in GSTM1 was associated with grade 4 neutropenia after FOLFOX (28% v 16%; P = .02). Patients with a homozygous variant genotype for GSTP1 were more likely to discontinue FOLFOX because of neurotoxicity (24% v 10%; P = .01). The presence of a CYP3A5 variant was significantly associated with RR on IFL (29% v 60%; P = .0074). Most previously published genotype-toxicity or -efficacy relationships were not validated in this study. Conclusion This study provides a platform to evaluate pharmacogenetic predictors of response or severe adverse events in advanced CRC. Pharmacogenetic studies can be conducted in multicenter trials, and our findings demonstrate that with continued research, clinical application is practical.

Purpose Prior reports have indicated that patients with colon cancer who demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or defective DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have improved survival and receive no benefit from fluorouracil (FU) -based adjuvant therapy compared with patients who have microsatellite-stable or proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors. We examined MMR status as a predictor of adjuvant therapy benefit in patients with stages II and III colon cancer. Methods MSI assay or immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins were performed on 457 patients who were previously randomly assigned to FU-based therapy (either FU + levamisole or FU + leucovorin; n = 229) versus no postsurgical treatment (n = 228). Data were subsequently pooled with data from a previous analysis. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Results Overall, 70 (15%) of 457 patients exhibited dMMR. Adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.93; P = .02) in patients with pMMR tumors. Patients with dMMR tumors receiving FU had no improvement in DFS (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.42 to 2.91; P = .85) compared with those randomly assigned to surgery alone. In the pooled data set of 1,027 patients (n = 165 with dMMR), these findings were maintained; in patients with stage II disease and with dMMR tumors, treatment was associated with reduced overall survival (HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.02 to 8.54; P = .04). Conclusion Patient stratification by MMR status may provide a more tailored approach to colon cancer adjuvant therapy. These data support MMR status assessment for patients being considered for FU therapy alone and consideration of MMR status in treatment decision making.

Purpose To improve the understanding of the appropriate design of phase II oncology clinical trials, we compared error rates in single-arm, historically controlled and randomized, concurrently controlled designs. Patients and Methods We simulated error rates of both designs separately from individual patient data from a large colorectal cancer phase III trials and statistical models, which take into account random and systematic variation in historical control data. Results In single-arm trials, false-positive error rates (type I error) were 2 to 4 times those projected when modest drift or patient selection effects (eg, 5% absolute shift in control response rate) were included in statistical models. The power of single-arm designs simulated using actual data was highly sensitive to the fraction of patients from treatment centers with high versus low patient volumes, the presence of patient selection effects or temporal drift in response rates, and random small-sample variation in historical controls. Increasing sample size did not correct the over optimism of single-arm studies. Randomized two-arm design conformed to planned error rates. Conclusion Variability in historical control success rates, outcome drifts in patient populations over time, and/or patient selection effects can result in inaccurate false-positive and false-negative error rates in single-arm designs, but leave performance of the randomized two-arm design largely unaffected at the cost of 2 to 4 times the sample size compared with single-arm designs. Given a large enough patient pool, the randomized phase II designs provide a more accurate decision for screening agents before phase III testing.

Abstract Genomics and proteomics have held out the promise of individualized medicine for the last 10 or 20 years, but clinical medicine has not yet delivered on this promise. Some cancers, such as breast cancer and some hematologic malignancies, have been at the forefront of individualized therapeutic approaches by integrating molecular biomarkers into treatment decision algorithms. Until recently, the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) has lagged behind these other cancers in this regard and therapeutic decisions have been solely empirical. Data from various clinical trials and translational studies have now opened the door for individualized treatment approaches by identifying patients with metastatic CRC who are most likely to benefit from antibodies against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), cetuximab and panitumumab. Activating mutations of KRAS, a downstream mediator of EGFR signaling, has been shown to render EGFR antibodies ineffective, such that analyzing tumors for these mutations has become mandatory before the use of EGFR antibodies is considered in CRC. Beyond KRAS, several additional biomarkers are currently being investigated as potential positive or negative predictors for the efficacy of EGFR-targeted therapy. Most of these markers are alterations of molecules integrated in the EGFR pathway. This review will focus on the type and quality of evidence that has been gathered to date to predict resistance to monoclonal antibodies against EGFR in CRC. (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(24):7492–501)

Purpose We previously validated disease-free survival (DFS) as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) in fluorouracil-based adjuvant colon cancer clinical trials. New therapies have extended survival after recurrence from 1 to approximately 2 years. We examined the possible impact of this improvement on the DFS/OS association. Methods The Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints (ACCENT) data set of 20,898 patients was analyzed. In an exploratory fashion, time from recurrence to death in patients experiencing recurrence was extended using several algorithms, and the association of DFS after 3 years of median follow-up and OS after varying lengths of follow-up (median of 5, 6, and 7 years) was assessed. Results Seven thousand four hundred two patients (35%) experienced recurrence. Median time from recurrence to death was 24 months in the hypothetical data sets. When times from recurrence to death were doubled, the association between treatment effects on DFS and 5-year OS was modest (R2 = 0.51 for both 2- and 3-year DFS) but remained strong for DFS and 6-year OS (R2 = 0.67 for both 2- and 3-year DFS) and 7-year OS (R2 = 0.70 for both 2- and 3-year DFS). The reduced DFS/OS association with extended survival after recurrence was greater in stage II than stage III patients. Multiple simulations provided consistent findings. Conclusion Extended survival after recurrence reduces the association between treatment effects on 3-year DFS and 5-year OS, particularly in stage II patients; longer follow-up strengthens the association. In modern adjuvant trials, 6 or 7 years may be required to demonstrate OS improvements, further supporting DFS as the preferred primary end point for future adjuvant colon cancer clinical trials.

Abstract Background. The Bevacizumab Regimens’ Investigation of Treatment Effects (BRiTE) study is a prospective, observational cohort study designed to elucidate safety and effectiveness outcomes associated with bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy as used in clinical practice for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and Methods. Baseline characteristics, prespecified bevacizumab-related adverse events, and effectiveness data were collected from 1,953 mCRC patients who were receiving first-line treatment including bevacizumab at 248 U.S. sites. Results. At database lock, the median follow-up was 20.1 months. At baseline, 46% of patients were aged ≥65 years and 49% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥1. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin was the most common first-line chemotherapy regimen (56%). Overall rates of bevacizumab-related adverse events in the BRiTE study, such as gastrointestinal perforation (1.9%), arterial thromboembolic events (2%), grade 3–4 bleeding (2.2%), and de novo hypertension requiring medication (22%), were consistent with those reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of bevacizumab in first-line mCRC treatment. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were 9.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.5–10.3) months and 22.9 (95% CI, 21.9–24.4) months, respectively. Conclusion. The median PFS and OS durations and safety profile of bevacizumab in the BRiTE study were similar to those in RCTs of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in first-line mCRC patients. The observations from the BRiTE study complement and expand upon RCT data, providing clinical information in a large cohort of bevacizumab-treated patients and subgroups such as the elderly.

The treatment options currently available in the medical therapy of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) appear to be an abundance of riches. The integration of oxaliplatin and irinotecan as conventional cytotoxic agents as well as bevacizumab and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies, cetuximab and panitumumab, as novel targeted agents into standard medical therapy have improved median overall survival in metastatic CRC beyond 2 years. It cannot be overemphasized that these significant improvements in outcome of patients with CRC are closely linked to the number of active drugs available to treat this disease. The abundance of treatment options, however, comes with specific challenges for the practical management of palliative medical therapy in advanced CRC, in particular with regard to the utilization of targeted agents. In this context, bevacizumab has established itself as the standard component of first-line chemotherapy. It is of interest for clinical practice that so far no predictive marker for the activity of bevacizumab in metastatic CRC has been identified. The key questions surrounding the use of bevacizumab in the palliative setting are whether its continuation beyond tumor progression provides clinical benefit, and which patient group is at higher risk for bevacizumab-related toxicities. Cetuximab and panitumumab have demonstrated efficacy both in combination with chemotherapy or — in contrast to bevacizumab — as single agent. In unselected patients, the effect of both EGFR antibodies on time-related parameters, progression free survival and overall survival, is moderate at best with emphasis more on the induction of tumor responses in a select group of patients. Therefore, until recently, EGFR antibodies were mainly regarded as salvage therapy options, in particular, since there did not appear to be a loss of activity when used in later lines of therapy. The finding that CRC harboring KRAS (and BRAF) mutations are resistant to EGFR antibodies, has allowed us to enrich the patient population with CRC that have a chance to benefit from cetuximab or panitumumab therapy. Biomarker-based treatment decisions are therefore now an integral part of clinical practice and trial design in CRC. In conclusion, targeted agents have become an integral part of medical therapy for advanced CRC. The challenge for current oncologic practice is to develop a rationale and biomarker-based treatment algorithm utilizing all potentially active agents as individualized therapy.