Explore the vast range of titles available.

Because cytidine deaminase (CDA) is the key enzyme in gemcitabine metabolism, numerous studies have attempted to investigate impact of CDA status (i.e. genotype or phenotype) on clinical outcome. To date, data are still controversial because none of these studies has fully investigated genotype-phenotype CDA status, pharmacokinetics and clinical outcome relationships in gemcitabine-treated patients. Besides, most patients were treated with gemcitabine associated with other drugs, thus adding a confounding factor. We performed a multicenter prospective clinical trial in gemcitabine-treated patients which aimed at investigating the link between CDA deficiency on the occurrence of severe toxicities and on pharmacokinetics, and studying CDA genotype-phenotype relationships. One hundred twenty patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma eligible for adjuvant gemcitabine monotherapy were enrolled in this study promoted and managed by the Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive. Toxicities were graded according to National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4. They were considered severe for grade ≥ 3, and early when occurring during the first eight weeks of treatment. CDA status was evaluated using a double approach: genotyping for 79A>C and functional testing. Therapeutic drug monitoring of gemcitabine and its metabolite were performed on the first course of gemcitabine. Five patients out of 120 (i.e., 4.6%) were found to be CDA deficient (i.e., CDA activity <1.3 U/mg), and only one among them experienced early severe hematological toxicity. There was no statistically significant difference in CDA activity between patients experiencing hematological severe toxicities (28.44%) and patients who tolerated the treatment (71.56%). CDA genetic analysis failed in evidencing an impact in terms of toxicities or in CDA activity. Regarding pharmacokinetics, a wide inter-individual variability has been observed in patients. This study, which included only 4.6% of CDA-deficient patients, failed in identifying CDA status as a predictive marker of toxicities with gemcitabine. A lack of statistical power because of smoothing effect of CDA variability as compared with real life conditions could explain this absence of impact. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01416662.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as monotherapy in 2nd line treatment for gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is low, with no evaluation of efficacy and safety of ICI combined with chemotherapy. The DURIGAST PRODIGE 59 study is a randomised, multicentre, phase II study designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the combination of FOLFIRI + Durvalumab +/− Tremelimumab as 2nd line treatment of patients with advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Here, we report data from the safety run-in phase with FOLFIRI Durvalumab (arm A) or FOLFIRI Durvalumab and Tremelimumab (arm B). Among the 11 patients included, 63.6% experienced at least one grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) related to the treatment, most frequently neutropenia (36.4%). There was only one immune-related AE (grade 2 hyperthyroidism). Ten serious AEs were described among six patients, but only two were related to the treatment, due to the chemotherapy. One seizure epilepsy related to a brain metastasis was observed, but was not related by the investigator to the treatment. However, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended brain imaging at inclusion. This safety run-in phase demonstrates an expected safety profile of FOLFIRI with Durvalumab +/− Tremelimumab combination allowing the randomised phase II.

Background The phase II AFUGEM GERCOR trial aimed to assess the efficacy of a first‐line therapy combining nab‐paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine (gemcitabine group) or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil (sLV5FU2 group) in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic cancer. Results of progression‐free survival at 4 months (primary endpoint) were in favor of the sLV5FU2 group. This paper presents health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) data as a secondary endpoint. Methods HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ‐C30 questionnaire at baseline and at each chemotherapy cycle until the end of treatment. The HRQoL deterioration‐free survival (QFS) was used as a modality of longitudinal analysis. QFS was defined as the time between randomization and the first definitive HRQoL score deterioration as compared to the baseline score, or death. Sensitivity analysis was performed excluding death as an event. Univariate Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the treatment effect. Results Between 2013 and 2014, 114 patients were randomized in a 1:2 ratio (39 in the gemcitabine group and 75 in the sLV5FU2 group). Patients in the sLV5FU2 group seemed to present longer QFS than those of the gemcitabine group for 14 out of 15 dimensions, with HRs < 1. Results of the sensitivity analysis excluding death as an event were significantly in favor of the sLV5FU2 group for physical functioning (HR = 0.51 [90% CI 0.27‐0.97]) and pain (HR = 0.26 [90% CI 0.09‐0.74]). Conclusion The nab‐paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil combination had no negative impact in exploratory HRQoL analyses. Adding simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil to chemotherapy does not impair quality of life. Quality of life results were consistent with the progression‐free survival endpoint.

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.

Background Efficacy of 2nd line treatment in advanced gastric or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains limited with no identified strong predictor of treatment efficacy. We evaluated the prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in predicting the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) plus chemotherapy in the randomized PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST trial. Methods ctDNA was evaluated before treatment (baseline) and at 4 weeks (before the third cycle of treatment, C3) using droplet-digital PCR assays based on the detection of CpG methylation. Results Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were shorter in patients with a high (>1.1 ng/mL) versus low (<1.1 ng/mL) ctDNA concentration at baseline (2.3 vs. 5.8 months; HR = 2.19; 95% CI, 1.09–4.41; p  = 0.03 and 4.5 vs. 12.9 months; HR = 2.73; 95% CI, 1.29–5.75; p  < 0.01), respectively, after adjustment for identified prognostic variables. Patients with a ctDNA decrease ≤75% between baseline and C3 versus a ctDNA decrease >75% had a worse objective response rate ( p  = 0.007), shorter PFS (2.2 vs. 7.4 months, HR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.03–3.51; p = 0.04) and OS (6.6 vs 16.0 months; HR = 2.18; 95% CI, 1.09–4.37; p  = 0.03). Conclusions An early decrease in ctDNA concentration is a strong predictor of the therapeutic efficacy of ICI plus chemotherapy in advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Clinical Trial Information NCT03959293 (DURIGAST). Plain language summary Some patients with advanced gastric cancer receive immunotherapy (treatments that help one’s own immune system recognize and attack cancer cells) in addition to other treatments. We measured circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patient’s blood samples and looked at associations with treatment outcome. We found that survival was shorter in patients receiving immunotherapy plus chemotherapy, when the levels of ctDNA in the blood were high at the start of treatment and when they did not decrease over time. Our results suggest that ctDNA could be used as a predictor of how well this specific treatment will work in advanced gastric cancer patients. Tougeron et al. evaluate the prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in predicting the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) plus chemotherapy in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. An early decrease in ctDNA concentration is associated with a worse objective response rate, shorter progression free survival and overall survival.

The incidence of anal squamous cell carcinoma has been increasing markedly in the past few decades. Currently, there is no validated treatment for advanced-stage anal squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, we aimed to validate the clinical activity and safety of docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or unresectable locally recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma. We did a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study. We recruited patients from 25 academic hospitals, cancer research centres, and community hospitals in France who were aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed anal squamous cell carcinoma, with metastatic disease or with unresectable local recurrence; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; and with at least one evaluable lesion according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). Chemotherapy-naive patients received either six cycles of standard DCF (75 mg/m2 docetaxel and 75 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 750 mg/m2 per day of fluorouracil for 5 days, every 3 weeks) or eight cycles of modified DCF (40 mg/m2 docetaxel and 40 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1200 mg/m2 per day of fluorouracil for 2 days, every 2 weeks), which were administered intravenously. The choice between the standard versus modified regimens was recommended based on, but not limited to, age (≤75 years vs >75 years) and ECOG performance status (0 vs 1). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival at 12 months from the first DCF cycle; for the primary endpoint to be met, at least 11 (17%) of 66 enrolled patients had to be alive without disease progression at 12 months. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in a modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were evaluable for progression at 12 months who received at least one cycle of DCF. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02402842, and the final results are presented here. Between Sept 17, 2014, and Dec 7, 2016, we enrolled 69 patients. Of these patients, three did not receive DCF. Of the 66 patients who received treatment, 36 received the standard DCF regimen and 30 received modified DCF. The primary endpoint was met: 31 (47%) of 66 patients were alive and progression free at 12 months. 22 (61%) of 36 patients who received the standard DCF regimen and 18 (60%) of 30 patients who received the modified DCF regimen had disease progression at data cutoff. 46 (70%) of 66 patients had at least one grade 3–4 adverse event (30 [83%] of 36 in the standard DCF regimen and 16 [53%] of 30 in the modified DCF regimen). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (15 [23%]; eight [22%] for standard DCF vs seven [23%] for modified DCF), diarrhoea (12 [18%]; nine [25%] vs three [10%]), asthenia (ten [15%]; eight [22%] vs two [7%]), anaemia (ten [15%]; six [17%] vs four [13%]), lymphopenia (eight [12%]; three [8%] vs five [17%]), mucositis (seven [11%]; seven [19%] vs none), and vomiting (seven [11%]; five [14%] vs two [7%]). No grade 4 non-haematological adverse events and febrile neutropenia were observed with modified DCF, whereas three (8%) grade 4 non-haematological adverse events and five (14%) cases of febrile neutropenia were reported with standard DCF. 97 serious adverse events were reported (69 in patients who received the standard DCF regimen [61 drug-related] and 28 in those given the modified DCF regimen [14 drug-related]). No treatment-related deaths were recorded. Compared with standard DCF, modified DCF provided long-lasting response with good tolerability in patients with metastatic or unresectable locally recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma with ECOG performance status of 0–1 in the first-line setting, and therefore could be considered as a new standard of care for these patients. Regarding the elevated risk of high-grade and serious adverse events and febrile neutropenia, standard DCF cannot be recommended in this situation. Besançon University Hospital and Ligue contre le cancer Grand-Est.

Background Modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen has become a new standard for the treatment of metastatic or unresectable locally advanced recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) after demonstrating improved efficacy (12-month PFS of 47%) in the Epitopes-HPV02 trial. Antibodies targeting the checkpoint inhibitor (CKI) programmed cell death protein-1 (PD1) have demonstrated the efficacy as monotherapies in second-line treatment of SCCA. The aim of this study is to evaluate the combination of atezolizumab and mDCF as first-line chemotherapy in a non-comparative multicentre randomized phase II study of advanced SCCA patients. Methods Patients with chemo-naive advanced histologically proven SCCA, metastatic or unresectable locally advanced recurrence, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (ECOG-PS) < 2 will be eligible. The primary endpoint is a 12-month PFS rate. Using one-arm non-parametric survival with unilateral alpha type I error of 5% and a statistical power of 80%, the upper critical value for the 12-month PFS rate is 47% to reject H0. Assuming 5% lost to follow-up, 99 patients will be randomized on a 2:1 basis, 66 to the experimental arm (arm A, mDCF plus atezolizumab) and 33 to the standard arm (arm B, mDCF). In both arms, 8 cycles of mDCF will be administered. In arm A, patients receive mDCF with a fixed dose of atezolizumab (800 mg every 2 weeks) and are followed up to 1 year. Secondary endpoints are overall survival, PFS, response rate, safety, health-related quality of life, and an extensive biomarker programme and its correlation with the treatment efficacy. Discussion Although the Epitopes-HPV02 trial has changed long-lasting prognosis of patients with SCCA in advanced stage disease, more than 50% of patients will progress at 12 months. The purpose of the SCARCE trial to establish the addition of atezolizumab to mDCF as a new standard in this rare disease. Associated biomarker studies and the control arm could contribute to better understanding of the potential synergic and tumour resistance mechanisms in SCCA. Trial registration NCT03519295 .

Triplet DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-flurouracil) and doublet CP/CF (carboplatin and paclitaxel/cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) regimens were prospectively evaluated in advanced squamous anal cell carcinoma (SCCA), and validated as standard treatments. Even though the high efficacy and good tolerance of DCF regimen were confirmed in 3 independent prospective trials, doublet CP regimen is still recommended in several guidelines based in its better safety profile with similar efficacy compared to CF regimen. We performed a propensity score-adjusted method with inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) and matched case control (MCC) comparison among patients with metastatic or non-resectable locally advanced recurrent SCCA, treated with chemotherapy as first line regimen. The primary endpoint was the overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS). 247 patients were included for analysis. 154 patients received DCF and 93 patients received a doublet regimen. The median OS was 32.3 months with DCF and 18.3 months with doublet regimens (HR 0.53, 95%CI 0.38–0.74; p = 0.0001), and the median PFS was 11.2 months with DCF versus 7.6 months with doublet regimens (HR 0.53, 95%CI 0.39–0.73; p < 0.0001). The hazard ratios by IPTW and MCC analyses were 0.411 (95% CI, 0.324–0.521; p < 0.0001) and 0.406 (95% CI, 0.261–0.632; p < 0.0001) for OS, and 0.466 (95% CI, 0.376–0.576; p < 0.0001) and 0.438 (95% CI, 0.298–0.644; P < 0.0001) for PFS. The triplet DCF regimen provides a high and significant benefit in OS and PFS over doublet regimens, and should be considered as upfront treatment for eligible patients with advanced SCCA.

Background: Folfirinox (FFX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) are both standard first-line treatments in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, data comparing these two chemotherapeutic regimens and their sequential use remain scarce. Methods: Data from two independent cohorts enrolling patients treated with FFX (n = 107) or GN (n = 109) were retrospectively pooled. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the secondary endpoint. A propensity score based on age, gender, performance status (PS), and presence of liver metastases was used to make groups comparable. Results: In the whole study population, OS was significantly higher in FFX (14 months; 95% CI: 10–21) than in GN groups (9 months; 95% CI: 8–12) before (p = 0.008) and after (p = 0.021) adjusting for age, number of metastatic sites, liver metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis and CA19.9 level at baseline. PFS tends to be higher in FFX (6 months) than GN groups (5 months; p = 0.053). After matching (n = 49/group), patients were comparable for all baseline characteristics including PS. In the matched population, there was a trend toward greater OS in patients treated with FFX (HR = 0.67; p = 0.097). However, survival in each group was not solely a result of the first-line regimen. The proportion of patients who were fit for GN after FFX failure (FFX–GN sequence) was higher (46.9%) than the reverse sequence (20.4%; p = 0.01), which suggests a higher feasibility for the FFX–GN sequence. Corresponding median OS were 19 months versus 9.5 months, respectively (p = 0.094). Conclusion: This study shows greater OS with FFX than with GN in patients with mPC. GN after FFX failure appears more feasible than the reverse sequence.

Background Efficacy of 2nd line treatment in advanced gastric or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains limited with no identified strong predictor of treatment efficacy. We evaluated the prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in predicting the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) plus chemotherapy in the randomized PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST trial. Methods ctDNA was evaluated before treatment (baseline) and at 4 weeks (before the third cycle of treatment, C3) using droplet-digital PCR assays based on the detection of CpG methylation.Results Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were shorter in patients with a high (>1.1 ng/mL) versus low (<1.1 ng/mL) ctDNA concentration at baseline (2.3 vs. 5.8 months; HR = 2.19; 95% CI, 1.09-4.41; p = 0.03 and 4.5 vs. 12.9 months; HR = 2.73; 95% CI, 1.29-5.75; p < 0.01), respectively, after adjustment for identified prognostic variables. Patients with a ctDNA decrease ≤75% between baseline and C3 versus a ctDNA decrease >75% had a worse objective response rate (p = 0.007), shorter PFS (2.2 vs. 7.4 months, HR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.03-3.51; p = 0.04) and OS (6.6 vs 16.0 months; HR = 2.18; 95% CI, 1.09-4.37; p = 0.03). Conclusions An early decrease in ctDNA concentration is a strong predictor of the therapeutic efficacy of ICI plus chemotherapy in advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Clinical Trial Information NCT03959293 (DURIGAST).The prognosis of advanced gastric and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains poor, with overall survival (OS) ranging from 10% to 15% at 5 years 1 . In Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2 (HER2) negative unresectable advanced/metastatic tumors, the most frequently used first-line palliative chemotherapy is a doublet of fluoropyrimidine (5fluorouracil (5FU) or capecitabine) plus a platinum salt (cisplatin or oxaliplatin) 2,3 . Recently, the addition of docetaxel (TFOX regimen), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI, in PD-L1 positive tumors) and anti-claudin 18.