BACKGROUND:Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus radiotherapy is a standard of care for men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PC). Adding docetaxel in this setting demonstrated better relapse-free survival (RFS) but not survival. Few data are available on relapse patterns. Our aim was to investigate whether different patterns of relapses exist in men with high-risk localized PC. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Prospective data from the GETUG12 phase 3 randomized controlled trial comparing ADT alone vs ADT + docetaxel and estramustine (DE) was examined. RFS (main endpoint) was analysed using parametric survival models and second event-free survival (SEFS) defined from biochemical progression (BP) was analysed using a competing-risk approach. RESULTS:Overall, 413 patients were randomized from 2002 to 2006, 206 treated with ADT and 207 with ADT+DE, in addition to local treatment. First analysis showed that the piecewise-exponential model with two time-intervals ([0-3[; ≥3 years) was the model that best characterized RFS with no time-dependent effect of risk factors and treatment. Second analyses limited to patients with a BP showed that the risk of a second event was significantly lower in patients with a longer time-interval from randomization to BP (hazard ratio (HR≥ 3 versus < 3 years): 0.49 [95% CI 0.30-0.79]). In competing-risk analysis, a significant and protective effect of this time-interval was observed for metastases (sub-HR≥ 3 versus < 3 years: 0.41 [0.23-0.73] accounting for salvage treatment. CONCLUSION:Time-interval from randomization to BP is a major prognostic factor for developing local or distant recurrences for patients with high-risk localized PC.

Purpose Preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is expected to increase the rate of curative resection and complete histological response. In this trial, we investigated the efficacy of a neoadjuvant CRT regimen in gastric adenocarcinoma (NCT01565109 trial). Materials and Methods Patients with stage IB to IIIC gastric adenocarcinoma, endoscopy ultrasound and computed tomography- scan diagnosed, were eligible for this phase II trial. Neoadjuvant treatment consisted of 2 cycles of chemotherapy with DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil [5FU]) followed by preoperative CRT with oxaliplatin, continuous 5FU and radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions of 1.8 Gy, 5 fractions per week for 5 weeks) administered before surgery. R0-resection rate, pathological complete response (pathCR) rate, and survival (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) were evaluated as primary endpoints. Results Among 33 patients included, 32 patients (97%) received CRT and 26 (78.8%) were resected (R0 resection for all patients resected). Among resected patients, we report pathCR in 23,1% and pathologic major response (tumor regression grade 2 according to Mandard's classification) in 26,9%. With a median follow-up duration of 5.82 years (range, 0.4 to 9.24 years), the estimated median OS for all 33 patients was not reached; 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 85%, 61%, and 52%, respectively. Among resected patients, those whose histological response was tumor grade regression (TRG) 1-2 had significantly better OS and PFS rates than those with a TRG 3-4-5 response (p=0.019 and p=0.016, respectively). Conclusion Promising results from trials involving preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgery in gastric cancer need to be further evaluated in a phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION:Predictive markers of LV5FU2 maintenance benefit after first-line induction with FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer are necessary to select patients who will not be harmed by this strategy. PATIENTS AND METHODS:We focused on patients who received 12 cycles of FOLFIRINOX (arm A, N = 88) or 8 cycles of FOLFIRINOX followed by LV5FU2 maintenance in controlled patients (arm B, N = 91) from the PRODIGE-35 trial. Prognostic factors and predictors of efficiency were identified by using Cox regression. Median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and time to deterioration of quality of life (TTD-QoL) were evaluated. RESULTS:Poor independent prognostic factors were primary tumor in place, age <65 years and the presence of liver metastases for PFS, a baseline neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥5 and CA19.9 ≥500 UI/L for OS, independent of the treatment arm. Patients with one metastatic site had a longer PFS in arm A, whereas patients with ≥2 metastatic sites had a longer PFS in arm B. We also identified predictors of OS and TTD-QoL in arm B but these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION:Except for patients with one metastatic site who benefited more from 12 cycles of FOLFIRINOX, a maintenance strategy with LV5FU2 should be widely offered to mPC patients whose survival and QoL are preserved after 4 months of FOLFIRINOX. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02352337).

INTRODUCTION:Serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) is a well-known prognostic parameter in men with prostate cancer. The treatment of men with very high PSA values and apparently no detectable metastases is not fully established. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Ancillary analysis from the GETUG 12 phase 3 trial. Patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer by bone and computerized tomography (CT) scan were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel plus estramustine or ADT alone. Relapse-free survival (RFS), clinical RFS, metastases-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method for different levels of PSA (50 ng/mL, 75 ng/mL, and 100 ng/mL). The relationship between PSA and outcomes was studied using residual-based approaches and spline functions. RESULTS:The median follow-up was 12 years (range: 0-15.3). Baseline PSA (<50 ng/mL, n = 328; ≥50ng/mL, n = 85) was associated with improved RFS (P = .0005), cRFS (P = .0024), and MFS (P = .0068). The 12-year RFS rate was 46.33% (CI 40.59-51.86), 33.59% (CI 22.55-44.97), and 11.76% (1.96-31.20) in men with PSA values <50 ng/mL (n = 328), 50-100 ng/mL (n = 68), and ≥100 ng/mL (n = 17), respectively. Exploratory analyses revealed no deviation from the linear relationship assumption between PSA and the log hazard of events. CONCLUSIONS:Men with apparently localized prostate cancer and a high baseline PSA value have a reasonable chance of being long-term disease-free when treated with curative intent combining systemic and local therapy.

Importance DCVAC/PCa is an active cellular immunotherapy designed to initiate an immune response against prostate cancer. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of DCVAC/PCa plus chemotherapy followed by DCVAC/PCa maintenance treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Design, Setting, and Participants The VIABLE double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolled patients with mCRPC among 177 hospital clinics in the US and Europe between June 2014 and November 2017. Data analyses were performed from December 2019 to July 2020. Interventions Eligible patients were randomized (2:1) to receive DCVAC/PCa (add-on and maintenance) or placebo, both in combination with chemotherapy (docetaxel plus prednisone). The stratification was applied according to geographical region (US or non-US), prior therapy (abiraterone, enzalutamide, or neither), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0-1 or 2). DCVAC/PCa or placebo was administered subcutaneously every 3 to 4 weeks (up to 15 doses). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), defined as the time from randomization until death due to any cause, in all randomized patients. Survival was compared using 2-sided log-rank test stratified by geographical region, prior therapy with abiraterone and/or enzalutamide, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Results A total of 1182 men with mCRPC (median [range] age, 68 [46-89] years) were randomized to receive DCVAC/PCa (n = 787) or placebo (n = 395). Of these, 610 (81.8%) started DCVAC/PCa, and 376 (98.4%) started placebo. There was no difference in OS between the DCVAC/PCa and placebo groups in all randomized patients (median OS, 23.9 months [95% CI, 21.6-25.3] vs 24.3 months [95% CI, 22.6-26.0]; hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90-1.21;P = .60). No differences in the secondary efficacy end points (radiological progression-free survival, time to prostate-specific antigen progression, or skeletal-related events) were observed. Treatment-emergent adverse events related to DCVAC/PCa or placebo occurred in 69 of 749 (9.2%) and 48 of 379 (12.7%) patients, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (DCVAC/PCa [n = 749] vs placebo [n = 379]) were fatigue (271 [36.2%] vs 152 [40.1%]), alopecia (222 [29.6%] vs 130 [34.3%]), and diarrhea (206 [27.5%] vs 117 [30.9%]). Conclusions and Relevance In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, DCVAC/PCa combined with docetaxel plus prednisone and continued as maintenance treatment did not extend OS in patients with mCRPC and was well tolerated. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT02111577

There is limited data regarding the role for systemic treatment in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Child–Pugh B cirrhosis. PRODIGE 21 was a multicentric prospective non-comparative randomized trial. Patients were randomized to receive sorafenib (Arm A), pravastatin (Arm B), sorafenib–pravastatin (Arm C) combination, or best supportive care (Arm D). Primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP), secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival (OS). 160 patients were randomized and 157 patients were included in the final analysis. 86% of patients were BCLC C and 55% had macrovascular invasion. The safety profiles of the drugs were as expected. Median TTP was 3.5, 2.8, 2.0 and 2.2 months in arms A, B, C and D, respectively, but analysis was limited by the number of patients deceased without radiological progression (59%). Median OS was similar between the four arms: 3.8 [95% CI: 2.4–6.5], 3.1 [95% CI: 1.9–4.3], 4.0 [95% CI: 3.2–5.5] and 3.5 months [95% CI: 2.2–5.4] in arms A, B, C and D, respectively. Median OS was 4.0 months [95% CI: 3.3–5.5] for patients treated with sorafenib, vs 2.9 months [95% CI: 2.2–3.9] for patients not treated with sorafenib. In patients with ALBI grade 1/2, median OS was 6.1 months [95% CI: 3.8–8.3] in patients treated with sorafenib vs 3.1 months [95% CI: 1.9–4.8] for patients not treated with sorafenib. In the overall Child–Pugh B population, neither sorafenib nor pravastatin seemed to provide benefit. In the ALBI grade 1/2 sub-population, our trial suggests potential benefit of sorafenib. The study was referenced in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01357486).

Although elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are underrepresented in clinical trials, this study mainly aimed to describe real-world outcomes of first-line bevacizumab D chemotherapy regimens in older patients with metastatic CRC. Because the benefit/risk balance observed was similar to that previously described in younger patients, our findings support the use of such a combination therapy in medically fit older patients. Background: Although elderly patients are the first concerned by colorectal cancer (CRC), they are underrepresented in clinical trials. The real-world CASSIOPEE study was thus conducted in elderly patients treated for metastatic CRC (mCRC). Methods: This French prospective, multicenter, noninterventional study aimed to estimate 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and describe treatments, patient autonomy (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living; Balducci scale), and safety over 24 months, in patients older than 75 with mCRC, starting first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (NCT01555762). Results: From 2012 to 2014, 402 patients were included (safety population: n = 383, efficacy population: n = 358). Patient characteristics were as follows: mean age, 81 +/- 4 years (<80 years, 46%; 80-85 years, 44%; >85 years, 10%); men, 52%; colon primary tumor, 80%; main metastatic site, liver 66%; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance 0-1, 81%. Median PFS was 9.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.3-10.2). It was superior for patients <= 85 years (<80 years: 9.3 months; 80-85 years: 9.5 months) compared with patients >85 years (8.3 months). Median OS was 19.0 months (95% CI, 16.5-21.5) and decreased in the 2 oldest groups (20.6, 17.8, and 13.0 months). Autonomy assessments decreased over time leading to nonconclusive results. Twenty-six percent of patients experienced serious adverse events (SAEs): 7% bevacizumab-related SAEs, and 6% bevacizumab-targeted SAEs. Two fatal bevacizumab-related adverse events were reported (hemorrhagic stroke and intestinal ischemia). Conclusions: This large French real-world study showed that medically fit older patients with mCRC could have a benefit/risk balance similar to that of younger patients when treated with first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Improvements in geriatric assessments are needed to better define this population. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background: Trans-arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is one first-line option therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) not suitable for surgical resection. Aims: We evaluated the effects of sunitinib plus doxorubicin-TACE on bleeding or liver failure. Methods: Seventy-eight patients with HCC were included in this randomized, double-blind study. They received one to three TACE plus either sunitinib or placebo four weeks out of six for one year. The occurrence of severe bleeding or liver failure was assessed during the week after the TACE. The safety and survival outcomes were evaluated. Results: No bleeding complication was reported. One and two liver failures were respectively observed in sunitinib and placebo patients. Compliance to sunitinib treatment was acceptable. Sunitinib dose reduction occurred in 37% of patients due to acute toxicity. Main grade 3-4 toxicities were: thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, increased bilirubin, increased ALT and asthenia. In the sunitinib group, the median PFS and OS were 9.05 [5.81;11.63] and 25.0 [13.5;36.8] months, respectively. In the placebo group, the median PFS and OS were 5.51 [4.14;7.79] and 20.5 [15.1;30.6] months, respectively. Conclusions: TACE plus sunitinib in the first-line therapy for patients with HCC not suitable for surgical resection was feasible. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01164202. (c) 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Aflibercept in combination with 5‑fluorouracil (5‑FU)/irinotecan improves overall survival in the second‑line therapy of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this study, we evaluated the effects of aflibercept in first‑line therapy with FOLFOX followed by maintenance with fluoropyrimidine. VELVET was a prospective, single‑arm multicenter phase II study (completed). Patients with previously untreated, unresectable, evaluable or measurable mCRC, with an age ≥18 years, and an ECOG performance status of 0‑2 received 6 cycles of modified FOLFOX7 (5‑FU/folinic acid and oxaliplatin) with aflibercept at 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks followed by maintenance therapy with fluoropyrimidine with aflibercept until disease progression or limiting toxicity. The reintroduction of oxaliplatin was performed at first progression. The primary endpoint was progression‑free survival (PFS) at 6 months. From May, 2013 to May, 2014, 49 patients were included and 48 were evaluable for response. In total, 33 patients (67.4%) were alive without progression at 6 months. The Kaplan‑Meier survival 6‑month and 1‑year PFS rates were 79.1 and 36.1%, respectively, and the median PFS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 8.3‑12.5). The objective response rate was 59.2% (N=29/49). The most common (≥10%) grade 3‑4 adverse events were hypertension (23%), fatigue (15%), neutropenia (12%), neuropathy (12%) and stomatitis (10%). Three (6%) treatment‑related deaths occurred: One from stroke, one from pulmonary embolism and one from neutropenic sepsis. On the whole, this study demonstrates the efficacy of aflibercept in combination with an oxaliplatin‑based regimen in the first‑line therapy of patients with mCRC. A strict monitoring of blood pressure and immediate management of hypertension during therapy is mandatory.

Importance Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel is the standard of care in hormone-naive metastatic prostate cancer but is of uncertain benefit in a nonmetastatic, high-risk prostate cancer setting. Objective To assess the benefit of ADT plus docetaxel in patients presenting with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after primary local therapy and high-risk factors but no evidence of metastatic disease. Design, Setting, and Participants This open-label, phase 3, randomized superiority trial comparing ADT plus docetaxel vs ADT alone enrolled patients from 28 centers in France between June 4, 2003, and September 25, 2007; final follow-up was conducted April 12, 2017, and analysis was performed May 2 to July 31, 2017. Patients had undergone primary local therapy for prostate cancer, were experiencing rising PSA levels, and were considered to be at high risk of metastatic disease. Stratification was by prior local therapy and PSA-level doubling time (⩽6 vs >6 months), and intention-to-treat analysis was used. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to receive ADT (1 year) plus docetaxel, 70 mg/m2 (every 3 weeks [6 cycles]), or ADT alone (1 year). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS). Secondary end points were PSA response, radiologic PFS, overall survival, safety, and quality of life. Results Overall, 254 patients were randomized (1:1) to the trial; median age, 64 years in the ADT plus docetaxel arm, 66 years in the ADT alone arm. At a median follow-up of 30.0 months, the median PSA-PFS was 20.3 (95% CI, 19.0-21.6) months in the ADT plus docetaxel arm vs 19.3 (95% CI, 18.2-20.8) months in the ADT alone arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.16; P = .31). At a median follow-up of 10.5 years, there was no significant between-arm difference in radiologic PFS (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.43; P = .88). Overall survival data were not mature. The most common grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxic effects in the ADT plus docetaxel arm were neutropenia (60 of 125 patients [48.0%]), febrile neutropenia (10 [8.0%]), and thrombocytopenia (4 [3.0%]). There was no significant between-arm difference in overall quality of life. Conclusions and Relevance Compared with ADT alone, combined ADT plus docetaxel therapy with curative intent did not significantly improve PSA-PFS in patients with high-risk prostate cancer and rising PSA levels and no evidence of metastatic disease. Trial Registration French Health Products Safety Agency identifier: 030591; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00764166

Introduction > Oral anticancer drugs hove disrupted hospital and community practices. A better coordination and patient support for medication and adverse events management by primary core providers (general practitioner, community pharmacist and liberal nurse) could improve the situation. The CHIMORAL study evaluated a model of coordination by territorial health networks. Methods > A here and elsewhere, prospective and multicentric study, comparing coordinated core with standard care. Primary outcome was the use of the hospital structure for adverse events within 6 months of initiating treatment. Results > In all, 283 patients were included. 92% had at least one adverse event, with a higher median number in the coordinated group (12.5 vs. 9.0, P = 0.02). No difference in hospital use by arm (P = 0.502). Increase in the use of community care for adverse events in the coordinated group (27% vs. 16%, P = 0.009). No observed impact on progression rates, quality of life and treatment adherence. The overall survival rate at 6 months is numerically higher in the coordinated group (87% vs. 76%, P = 0.064). Discussion > This model does not show any difference on the primary endpoint. The lack of randomization, patient selection, power loss, and local initiatives to monitor these patients may hove biased the analysis. A large number of uses of the healthcare system were observed. These results confirm the need for a dedicated care pathway for the patient with oral anticancer drugs.

Background ctDNA has been recently suggested as a major prognostic factor in resected stage II and III colon cancer patients (pts)1,2. Its predictive value for adjuvant treatment intensity or duration is currently unknown. We have analyzed here ctDNA from pts enrolled in the IDEA-FRANCE trial3, its prognostic value and its predictive value for treatment duration (3 or 6 months). Methods ctDNA was tested by using the detection of 2 methylated markers (WIF1 and NPY) by digital droplet PCR accordingly to a method developed and validated for colorectal cancer 4-6. Comparisons for pts and tumour characteristics and DFS will be done between the ctDNA tested pts and the full study population and between ctDNA positive and negative pts. DFS has been analyzed in the 6 and 3M treatment arms according to ctDNA results. Subgroup analyses for high- and low-risk pts were pre-planned. Results Of the 1345/2010 pts that consented to the IDEA translational research program, with available blood sample for ctDNA testing, 805 have been sampled before chemotherapy start and fully analyzed. More PS 0 (77% vs 71%) and more T4 and/or N2 (28% vs 23%) were observed in the 805 pts studied here than in the 1205 pts left. 696 pts were found ctDNA- and 109 ctDNA + (13.5%). ctDNA+ pts were more often T4, poorly differentiated and with tumour perforation. 2-year DFS was 64% vs 82% in ctDNA+ and – pts, respectively (HR :1.75 (95%CI 1.25-2.45) p = 0.001). In multivariate analysis including Age, Gender, MSI, perforation, T stage, N stage and treatment arm, ctDNA was confirmed as an independent prognostic marker (adj.HR: 1.85 (95%CI 1.31 to 2.61) p Conclusions In this first ctDNA assessment on a large series coming from a phase III clinical trial we found 13.5% of pts with ctDNA post-surgery. ctDNA was confirmed as an independent prognostic marker. In this series, 6 months of treatment seems better in both ctDNA+ and- pts. [1]Tie J, et al. Circulating tumor DNA analysis detects minimal residual disease and predicts recurrence in patients with stage II colon cancer.Sci Transl Med. 2016 Jul 6;8(346):346ra92. [2]Scholer LV, et al. Clinical Implications of Monitoring Circulating Tumor DNA in Patients with Colorectal Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Sep 15;23(18):5437-5445. [3] Andre T, et al.Three Versus 6 Months of Oxaliplatin-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: Disease-Free Survival Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant (IDEA) France, phase III Trial.J Clin Oncol. 2018 May 20;36(15):1469-1477. [4] Garrigou S, et al. A Study of Hypermethylated Circulating Tumor DNA as a Universal Colorectal Cancer Biomarker. Clin Chem. 2016;62:1129-1139. [5] Garlan F, et al. Early Evaluation of Circulating Tumor DNA as Marker of Therapeutic Efficacy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients (PLACOL Study). Clin Cancer Res.2017;23:5416-5425. [6] Bachet JB, et al. RAS mutation analysis in circulating tumor DNA from patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the AGEO RASANC prospective multicenter study. Ann Oncol. 2018May 1;29(5):1211-1219. Clinical trial identification NCT00958737. Legal entity responsible for the study Gercor-Prodige. Funding Clinical trial: INCa, GERCOR; Translational project: ARC (Association de Recherche contre le Cancer, Paris, France). Disclosure J. Taieb: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: merck; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: amgen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Servier; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: pierre fabre; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: MSD; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Lilly; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Sanofi. D. Vernerey: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: HalioDX; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Janssen. J. Bennouna: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: MSD; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Importance:Second-line treatment with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab or cetuximab is a valid option for metastatic colorectal cancer.Objective:To evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 4 months with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab vs cetuximab for patients with progression of metastatic colorectal cancer after bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.Design, Setting, and Participants:A prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial was conducted from December 14, 2010, to May 5, 2015. The main eligibility criterion was disease progression after bevacizumab plus fluorouracil with irinotecan or oxaliplatin in patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. All analyses were performed on the modified intent-to-treat population.Interventions:Patients were randomized to arm A (FOLFIRI [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with irinotecan] or modified FOLFOX6 [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with oxaliplatin] plus bevacizumab) or arm B (FOLFIRI or modified FOLFOX6 plus cetuximab); the second-line chemotherapy regimen was chosen according to first-line treatment (crossover).Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary end point was the 4-month PFS rate. Secondary end points included safety, objective response rate, overall survival, and PFS.Results:A total of 132 patients (47 women and 85 men; median age, 63.0 years [range, 33.0-84.0 years]; 74 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 54 patients with a performance status of 1, and 4 patients with unknown performance status) were included at 25 sites. The 4-month PFS rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 68.0%-88.3%) in arm A and 66.7% (95% CI, 53.6%-76.8%) in arm B. The median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.7-8.2 months) in arm A and 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.2-6.5 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-1.02; P = .06), and the median overall survival was 15.8 months (95% CI, 9.5-22.3 months) in arm A and 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.0-16.2 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.04; P = .08). A central analysis of KRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), NRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), and BRAF (V600) was performed for 95 tumor samples. Eighty-one patients had wild-type KRAS and wild-type NRAS tumors.Conclusions and Relevance:The results of the PRODIGE18 (Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie DIGEstive) study showed a nonsignificant difference but favored continuation of bevacizumab with chemotherapy crossover for patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer that progressed with first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01442649 and clinicaltrialsregister.eu identifier: EUDRACT 2009-012942-22.

Galunisertib, the first small molecule transforming growth factor beta (TGFβ) receptor inhibitor, plus gemcitabine resulted in the improvement of survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer, but markers to identify patients likely to respond are lacking.

Galunisertib is the first-in-class, first-in-human, oral small-molecule type I transforming growth factor-beta receptor (ALK5) serine/threonine kinase inhibitor to enter clinical development. The effect of galunisertib vs. placebo in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer was determined. This was a two-part, multinational study: phase 1b was a non-randomised, open-label, multicentre, and dose-escalation study; phase 2 was a randomised, placebo- and Bayesian-augmented controlled, double-blind study in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma considered candidates for first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine. Patients were randomised 2:1 to galunisertib–gemcitabine (N = 104) or placebo-gemcitabine (N = 52). Gemcitabine dose was 1000 mg/m2 QW. Primary endpoints for phases 1b and 2, respectively, were phase 2 dose and overall survival. Secondary objectives included tolerability and biomarkers. Dose-escalation suggested a 300-mg/day dose. Primary objective was met: median survival times were 8.9 and 7.1 months for galunisertib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.79 [95% credible interval: 0.59–1.09] and posterior probability HR < 1 = 0.93). Lower baseline biomarkers macrophage inflammatory protein-1-alpha and interferon-gamma-induced protein 10 were associated with galunisertib benefit. Galunisertib–gemcitabine combination improved overall survival vs. gemcitabine in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer, with minimal added toxicity. Future exploration of galunisertib in pancreatic cancer is ongoing in combination with durvalumab.

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel is the standard of care in fit men with metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer (mCNPC) following results from GETUG-AFU 15, CHAARTED, and STAMPEDE. No data are available on the efficacy of treatments used for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in men treated upfront with ADT plus docetaxel for mCNPC. Objective: To investigate the efficacy and tolerance of subsequent treatments in patients treated upfront with chemo-hormonal therapy for mCNPC. Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective data from the GETUG-AFU 15 phase 3 trial were collected for treatments received for mCRPC. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: For the first three lines of salvage treatment for mCRPC we investigated the biochemical progression-free survival, maximum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline, overall survival, and tolerance. Results and limitations: Overall, 245 patients received at least one treatment for mCRPC. For docetaxel used in first-line, a PSA decline >= 50% was observed in 25/66 (38%) and in 4/20 patients (20%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel (p = 0.14). The median biochemical progression-free survival was 6.0 mo (95% confidence interval: 3.6-7.7) and 4.1 mo (95% confidence interval: 1.3-4.9), respectively. For docetaxel used in first- or second-line, a PSA decline >= 50% was observed in 36/80 (45%) and in 4/29 patients (14%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel (p = 0.07). PSA declines >= 50% were observed with bicalutamide in 12/28 (43%) and 4/23 patients (17%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel. Among men treated upfront with ADT plus docetaxel who received abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC, 10/19 patients (53%) achieved a PSA decline >= 50%. Few grade 3-4 events occurred. Study limitations include the observational design and retrospective characteristics of this analysis, without standardized therapeutic salvage protocols, and the limited number of patients in some of the treatment subgroups. Conclusions: Docetaxel rechallenge following progression to mCRPC after upfront ADT plus docetaxel for mCNPC was active only in a limited number of patients. Available data on abiraterone and enzalutamide support maintained efficacy in this setting. The lack of standardized therapeutic protocols for men developing mCRPC limits the comparability between patients. Patient summary: Rechallenging docetaxel at castration-resistance was active only in a limited number of patients treated upfront with chemo-hormonal therapy for metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer. Anticancer activity was suggested with abiraterone or enzalutamide in this setting. (C) 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Purpose Reduction of adjuvant treatment duration may decrease toxicities without loss of efficacy in stage III colon cancer. This could offer clear advantages to patients and health care providers. Methods In International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) France, as part of the IDEA international collaboration, patient with colon cancer patients were randomly assigned to 3 and 6 months of modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6: infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) by physician choice. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), and analyses were descriptive. Results A total of 2,010 eligible patients received either 3 or 6 months of chemotherapy (modified intention-to-treat population); 2,000 (99%) had stage III colon cancer (N1: 75%, N2: 25%); 1,809 (90%) received mFOLFOX6, and 201 (10%) received CAPOX. The median age was 64 years, and the median follow-up time was 4.3 years. Overall, 94% (3 months) and 78% (6 months) of patients completed treatment (fluoropyrimidines ± oxaliplatin). Maximal grade 2 and 3 neuropathy rates were 28% and 8% in the 3-month arm and 41% and 25% in the 6-month arm ( P < .001). Final rates of residual neuropathy greater than grade 1 were 3% in the 3-month arm and 7% in the 6-month arm ( P < .001). There were 578 DFS events: 314 and 264 in the 3- and 6-month arms, respectively. The 3-year DFS rates were 72% and 76% in the 3- and 6-month arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.46; P = .0112). In the 3 and 6-month arms, respectively, for patients who received mFOLFOX6, the 3-year DFS rates were 72% and 76% (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.51); for the T4 and/or N2 population, they were 58% and 66% (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.82); and for the T1-3N1 population, they were 81% and 83% (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.49). Conclusion IDEA France, in which 90% of patients received mFOLFOX6, shows superiority of 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy compared with 3 months, especially in the T4 and/or N2 subgroups. These results should be considered alongside the international IDEA collaboration data.

Variations in the reporting of potentially confounding variables in studies investigating systemic treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer pose challenges in drawing accurate comparisons between findings. In this Review, we establish the first international consensus on mandatory baseline and prognostic characteristics in future trials for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. We did a systematic literature search to find phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify baseline characteristics and prognostic variables. We created a structured overview showing the reporting frequencies of baseline characteristics and the prognostic relevance of identified variables. We used a modified Delphi panel of two rounds involving an international panel of 23 leading medical oncologists in the field of pancreatic cancer to develop a consensus on the various variables identified. In total, 39 randomised controlled trials that had data on 15 863 patients were included, of which 32 baseline characteristics and 26 prognostic characteristics were identified. After two consensus rounds, 23 baseline characteristics and 12 prognostic characteristics were designated as mandatory for future pancreatic cancer trials. The COnsensus statement on Mandatory Measurements in unresectable PAncreatic Cancer Trials (COMM-PACT) identifies a mandatory set of baseline and prognostic characteristics to allow adequate comparison of outcomes between pancreatic cancer studies.

3500 Background: The IDEA international collaboration was established to combine data from 6 randomized trials to assess whether a 3-month (3M) of oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidines-based adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is non-inferior to the 6-month (6M) for 3-year disease free survival (DFS) in stage III colon cancer (CC). Methods: French IDEA randomized patients (pts) between 3M and 6M of CT with mFOLFOX6 or XELOX (physician/pts choice). DFS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and described using 3 years DFS rate. Results: Among 2022 randomized pts between May 2009 and May 2014, 2010 (99.4%) received CT and were enrolled in the mITT population: 49.9 and 50.1% in 3M and 6M, respectively. 99.5% of the mITT pts had stage III (N1: 74.9%; N2: 25.2%); median age 63.9 years; mFOLFOX6: 90% and XELOX 10% of pts. DFS median follow-up is 50.2 months. There were 578 DFS events (314 in 3M and 264 in 6M arm) leading to a 3-year DFS rate of 72.1% in the 3M vs. 75.7% in the 6M (HR=1.24; 95%CI 1.05–1.46, p=0.0112). For pts receiving mFOLFOX6, 3-year DFS rate was 72.0% in the 3M vs. 76.3% in the 6M (HR=1.27; 95%CI 1.07–1.51 p=0.0069). 94.2% and 78.0% of pts completed 3 and 6 months of CT, respectively. Median oxaliplatin doses intensity were 96.9% in 3M and 72.1% in 6M (495.0 and 735.1 mg/m2). By considering the neuropathy grade with 15375 neuropathy longitudinal measurements the overall maximal neuropathy grade 0-1/2/3-4 was 63.6/28.5/7.9% in 3M and 33.4/41.3/25.3% in 6M; p<0.0001. At last follow-up assessment, with a median of 43.1 months, final residual grade 2/3-4 neuropathy was 2.1/0.4% in 3M and 5.4/1.3% in 6M; p<0.0001. Conclusions: The IDEA France study, with 90% of patients treated with mFOLFOX6 regimen has shown that 6 months adjuvant treatment is superior to 3 months treatment. IDEA France study results should be considered in line with the international IDEA project that will also be presented at ASCO 2017. Clinical trial information: 2009-010384-16.