Explore the vast range of titles available.

Effective systemic therapies for patients with advanced, progressive neuroendocrine tumours of the lung or gastrointestinal tract are scarce. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of everolimus compared with placebo in this patient population. In the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumours of lung or gastrointestinal origin were enrolled from 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio by an interactive voice response system to receive everolimus 10 mg per day orally or identical placebo, both with supportive care. Patients were stratified by tumour origin, performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. Patients, investigators, and the study sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by central radiology review, analysed by intention to treat. Overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, a total of 302 patients were enrolled, of whom 205 were allocated to everolimus 10 mg per day and 97 to placebo. Median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 9·2–13·3) in the everolimus group and 3·9 months (3·6–7·4) in the placebo group. Everolimus was associated with a 52% reduction in the estimated risk of progression or death (hazard ratio [HR] 0·48 [95% CI 0·35–0·67], p<0·00001). Although not statistically significant, the results of the first pre-planned interim overall survival analysis indicated that everolimus might be associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·40–1·05], one-sided p=0·037, whereas the boundary for statistical significance was 0·0002). Grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were infrequent and included stomatitis (in 18 [9%] of 202 patients in the everolimus group vs 0 of 98 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (15 [7%] vs 2 [2%]), infections (14 [7%] vs 0), anaemia (8 [4%] vs 1 [1%]), fatigue (7 [3%] vs 1 [1%]), and hyperglycaemia (7 [3%] vs 0). Treatment with everolimus was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival in patients with progressive lung or gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours. The safety findings were consistent with the known side-effect profile of everolimus. Everolimus is the first targeted agent to show robust anti-tumour activity with acceptable tolerability across a broad range of neuroendocrine tumours, including those arising from the pancreas, lung, and gastrointestinal tract. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Until now, only imatinib and sunitinib have proven clinical benefit in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST), but almost all metastatic GIST eventually develop resistance to these agents, resulting in fatal disease progression. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with metastatic or unresectable GIST progressing after failure of at least imatinib and sunitinib. We did this phase 3 trial at 57 hospitals in 17 countries. Patients with histologically confirmed, metastatic or unresectable GIST, with failure of at least previous imatinib and sunitinib were randomised in a 2:1 ratio (by computer-generated randomisation list and interactive voice response system; preallocated block design (block size 12); stratified by treatment line and geographical region) to receive either oral regorafenib 160 mg daily or placebo, plus best supportive care in both groups, for the first 3 weeks of each 4 week cycle. The study sponsor, participants, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). At disease progression, patients assigned placebo could crossover to open-label regorafenib. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01271712. From Jan 4, to Aug 18, 2011, 240 patients were screened and 199 were randomised to receive regorafenib (n=133) or matching placebo (n=66). Data cutoff was Jan 26, 2012. Median PFS per independent blinded central review was 4·8 months (IQR 1·4–9·2) for regorafenib and 0·9 months (0·9–1·8) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·27, 95% CI 0·19–0·39; p<0·0001). After progression, 56 patients (85%) assigned placebo crossed over to regorafenib. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 130 (98%) patients assigned regorafenib and 45 (68%) patients assigned placebo. The most common regorafenib-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (31 of 132, 23%), hand-foot skin reaction (26 of 132, 20%), and diarrhoea (seven of 132, 5%). The results of this study show that oral regorafenib can provide a significant improvement in progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with metastatic GIST after progression on standard treatments. As far as we are aware, this is the first clinical trial to show benefit from a kinase inhibitor in this highly refractory population of patients. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

In the phase 3 RADIANT-4 trial, everolimus increased progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced, progressive, non-functional, well-differentiated gastrointestinal or lung neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). We now report the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) secondary endpoint. RADIANT-4 is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 97 centres in 25 countries worldwide. Adults (aged ≥18 years) were eligible for the study if they had pathologically confirmed, advanced (unresectable or metastatic), non-functional, well-differentiated (grade 1 or 2) NETs of lung or gastrointestinal origin. Patients were randomly allocated (2:1) using block randomisation (block size of three) by an interactive voice response system to receive oral everolimus (10 mg per day) or placebo, both with best supportive care, with stratification by tumour origin, WHO performance status, and previous somatostatin analogue treatment. HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy—General (FACT-G) questionnaire at baseline (visit 2, day 1), every 8 weeks (± 1 week) during the study for the first 12 months after randomisation, and every 12 weeks thereafter until study drug discontinuation. The primary endpoint, reported previously, was progression-free survival assessed by central review; HRQOL was a prespecified secondary endpoint. The prespecified secondary outcome measure was time to definitive deterioration (≥7 points) in FACT-G total score. Analyses were done on the full analysis set, consisting of all randomised patients, by intention to treat. Only data obtained while receiving the randomly allocated treatment were included in this analysis. Enrolment for RADIANT-4 was completed on Aug 23, 2013, but the trial is ongoing pending final analysis of the key secondary endpoint of overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524783. Between April 3, 2012, and Aug 23, 2013, 302 patients were enrolled; 205 were randomly allocated everolimus and 97 were assigned placebo. At baseline, 193 (94%) of 205 patients assigned everolimus and 95 (98%) of 97 allocated placebo had completed either fully or partly the FACT-G questionnaire; at week 48, 70 (83%) of 84 patients assigned everolimus and 22 (85%) of 26 allocated placebo completed FACT-G. Median time to definitive deterioration in FACT-G total score was 11·27 months (95% CI 9·27–19·35) with everolimus and 9·23 months (5·52–not estimable) with placebo (adjusted hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·55–1·21; log-rank p=0·31). HRQOL was maintained for patients with advanced, non-functional, gastrointestinal or lung NETs, with no relevant differences noted between the everolimus and placebo groups. In view of the previous RADIANT-4 findings of longer progression-free survival with everolimus, our findings suggest that everolimus delays disease progression while preserving overall HRQOL, even with the usual toxic effects related to active targeted drug treatment for cancer. Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

The long-term impact of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) discontinuation on resistance and survival in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) is unclear. We report the exploratory long-term outcomes of patients with advanced GIST stopping imatinib in the BFR14 trial. BFR14, an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, was done in 17 comprehensive cancer centres or hospitals across France. Patients with advanced GIST aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–3, no previous treatment with imatinib, and no previous malignancy were eligible. Patients were treated with oral imatinib 400 mg daily. Patients with a complete or partial response, or stable disease, according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (1.0) at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years from the start of treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment discontinuation until progression (interruption group) or treatment continuation until progression (continuation group). Randomisation was done centrally with computer-generated permuted blocks of two and six patients stratified by participating centre and presence or absence of residual disease on CT scan. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included time to imatinib resistance and overall survival. Analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis in all randomly assigned patients who were not lost to follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT00367861. Between May 12, 2003, and March 16, 2004, after 1 year of imatinib, 32 patients were randomly assigned to the interruption group and 26 to the continuation group. Between June 13, 2005, and May 30, 2007, after 3 years of imatinib, 25 patients were randomly assigned to the interruption group and 25 to the continuation group. Between Nov 9, 2007, and July 12, 2010, after 5 years of imatinib, 14 patients were randomly assigned to the interruption group and 13 to the continuation group. Median follow-up was 235·2 months (IQR 128·8–236·6) after the 1-year randomisation, 200·9 months (190·2–208·4) after the 3-year randomisation, and 164·5 months (134·4–176·4) after the 5-year randomisation. Median progression-free survival in the interruption group versus the continuation group after 1 year of imatinib was 6·1 months (95% CI 2·5–10·1) versus 27·8 months (19·5–37·9; hazard ratio [HR] 0·36 [95% CI 0·20–0·64], log-rank p=0·0003), after 3 years of imatinib was 7·0 months (3·5–11·7) versus 67·0 months (48·8–85·6; 0·15 [0·07–0·32], log-rank p<0·0001), and after 5 years of imatinib was 12·0 months (9·0–16·6) versus not reached (NR; NR–NR; 0·13 [0·03–0·58], log-rank p=0·0016). The median time to imatinib resistance after 1 year of imatinib was 28·7 months (95% CI 18·1–39·1) versus 90·6 months (25·3–156·1; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·51–1·71], log-rank p=0·82), after 3 years was 66·2 months (43·0–89·6) versus 127·3 months (15·0–239·7; 0·35 [0·17–0·72, log-rank p=0·0028), and after 5 years was 58·6 months (0·0–167·4) versus NR (NR–NR; 0·24 [0·05–1·12], log-rank p=0·049). Median overall survival after 1 year of imatinib was 56·0 months (95% CI 30·3–82·9) versus 105·0 months (20·6–189·6; HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·46–1·54], log-rank p=0·57), after 3 years was 104·0 months (90·7–118·7) versus 134·0 months (89·7–178·3; 0·40 [0·20–0·82], log-rank p=0·0096), and after 5 years was NR (NR–NR) versus 110·4 months (82·7–154·1; 1·28 [0·41–3·99]; log-rank p=0·67), Imatinib interruption in patients with GIST without progressive disease is not recommended. Imatinib interruption in non-progressing patients with GIST was associated with rapid progression, faster resistance to imatinib, and shorter overall survival in the long-term follow-up when compared with imatinib continuation in patients after 3 years and 5 years of imatinib. Centre Léon Bérard, INCa, CONTICANET, Ligue Contre le Cancer, and Novartis.

Background Patients with ruptured gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) have poor prognosis. Little information is available about how adjuvant imatinib influences survival. Methods We explored recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with ruptured GIST who participated in a randomised trial (SSG XVIII/AIO), where 400 patients with high-risk GIST were allocated to adjuvant imatinib for either 1 year or 3 years after surgery. Of the 358 patients with confirmed localised GIST, 73 (20%) had rupture reported. The ruptures were classified retrospectively using the Oslo criteria. Results Most ruptures were major, four reported ruptures were reclassified unruptured. The 69 patients with rupture had inferior RFS and OS compared with 289 patients with unruptured GIST (10-year RFS 21% vs. 55%, OS 59% vs. 78%, respectively). Three-year adjuvant imatinib did not significantly improve RFS or OS of the patients with rupture compared with 1-year treatment, but in the largest mutational subset with KIT exon 11 deletion/indel mutation OS was higher in the 3-year group than in the 1-year group (10-year OS 94% vs. 54%). Conclusions About one-fifth of ruptured GISTs treated with adjuvant imatinib did not recur during the first decade of follow-up. Relatively high OS rates were achieved despite rupture. Clinical Trial Registration NCT00116935.

Patients with advanced cancer undergoing chemotherapy experience significant symptoms and declines in functional status, which are associated with poor outcomes. Remote monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PROs; symptoms) and step counts (functional status) may proactively identify patients at risk of hospitalization or death. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association of (1) longitudinal PROs with step counts and (2) PROs and step counts with hospitalization or death. The PROStep randomized trial enrolled 108 patients with advanced gastrointestinal or lung cancers undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy at a large academic cancer center. Patients were randomized to weekly text-based monitoring of 8 PROs plus continuous step count monitoring via Fitbit (Google) versus usual care. This preplanned secondary analysis included 57 of 75 patients randomized to the intervention who had PRO and step count data. We analyzed the associations between PROs and mean daily step counts and the associations of PROs and step counts with the composite outcome of hospitalization or death using bootstrapped generalized linear models to account for longitudinal data. Among 57 patients, the mean age was 57 (SD 10.9) years, 24 (42%) were female, 43 (75%) had advanced gastrointestinal cancer, 14 (25%) had advanced lung cancer, and 25 (44%) were hospitalized or died during follow-up. A 1-point weekly increase (on a 32-point scale) in aggregate PRO score was associated with 247 fewer mean daily steps (95% CI -277 to -213; P<.001). PROs most strongly associated with step count decline were patient-reported activity (daily step change -892), nausea score (-677), and constipation score (524). A 1-point weekly increase in aggregate PRO score was associated with 20% greater odds of hospitalization or death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4; P=.01). PROs most strongly associated with hospitalization or death were pain (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6-6.5; P<.001), decreased activity (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.1; P=.01), dyspnea (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.2-5.5; P=.02), and sadness (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.3; P=.03). A decrease in 1000 steps was associated with 16% greater odds of hospitalization or death (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.3; P=.03). Compared with baseline, mean daily step count decreased 7% (n=274 steps), 9% (n=351 steps), and 16% (n=667 steps) in the 3, 2, and 1 weeks before hospitalization or death, respectively. In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial among patients with advanced cancer, higher symptom burden and decreased step count were independently associated with and predictably worsened close to hospitalization or death. Future interventions should leverage longitudinal PRO and step count data to target interventions toward patients at risk for poor outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04616768; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04616768. RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054675.

Purpose Availability data are scarce and primarily retrospective in patients with brain metastasis (BM) from gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. The objective of this cohort was to determine prognostic factors for survival outcomes in patients with BM from GI cancers. Methods METACER is a national multicentric prospective cohort study which included patients with BM diagnosis during a histologically proven digestive cancer follow-up between 2010 and 2014. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were Progression-Free survival (PFS), prognostic factors, and BM-free survival as time from disease diagnosis to BM diagnosis. Results METACER included 130 patients, with colorectal cancer (CRC) ( N  = 105) and eso-gastric ( N  = 25) cancer (EGC). The median OS was 6.6 months: 7.1 months (95%CI: 4.7–9.7) in CRC patients and 5.2 months, (95%CI: 1.9–7.6) in EG patients ( p  = 0.827). In multivariate analysis, cerebral BM location (versus cerebellar), BM surgery, performance status (0–1 versus 2), and a unique BM were significantly associated with prolonged OS. BM-free survival were 30.8 months (95%CI:25.2–36.9) in CRC patients and 7.8 months (95%CI:3.8–13.6) in EGC patients ( p  < 0.001). In synchronous metastatic disease, BM-free survival were 18.6 months (95%CI:13.1–25.2) in CRC patients and 3.7 months (95%CI:0.03–7.8) in EGC patients ( p  < 0.001). Conclusion BM in GI cancers are of poor prognosis. BM surgery should be considered in case of unique brain lesion. In metastatic settings, EGC patients have shorter BM-free survival than CRC patients.

The effect of imatinib discontinuation on progression-free survival and overall survival in long-lasting responders with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) is unknown. We assessed treatment interruption in patients with non-progressive disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors criteria after 3 years of imatinib in a randomised trial. In this open-label national multicentre phase 3 study in France, patients with GIST free of progression after 3 years of imatinib 400 mg/day were randomly assigned to continue or interrupt imatinib. Randomisation was done centrally and independently from other study procedures with computer-generated permuted blocks of two and four patients stratified by participating centre and presence or absence of residual disease on CT scan. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. An interim analysis was planned after the first 50 randomly assigned patients. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle—ie, all patients randomly assigned to a study group were included. This study is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, number NCT00367861. 434 patients were enrolled in this trial between May 27, 2002, and May 5, 2009. Between June 13, 2005, and May 30, 2007, 50 patients with non-progressive disease who had received 3 years of treatment with imatinib were randomly assigned to continue or interrupt their treatment, 25 patients in each group. By Dec 7, 2009, after a median follow-up of 35 months (95% CI 33–38) after random assignment, 2-year progression-free survival was 80% (95% CI 58–91) in the continuation group and 16% (5–33) in the interruption group (p<0·0001). There was no difference in adverse events grade 3 or greater (oedema and asthenia) between the two groups. Imatinib interruption after 3 years in responders results in a high risk of rapid progression in patients with advanced GIST. Discontinuation of imatinib is not recommended outside clinical trials unless patients experience significant toxic effects. Conticanet, the Ligue Contre Le Cancer du Rhone, and Novartis.

Imatinib is approved worldwide for use in gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST). We aimed to assess dose dependency of response and progression-free survival with imatinib for metastatic GIST. 946 patients were randomly allocated imatinib 400 mg either once or twice a day. Those assigned the once a day regimen who had progression were offered the option of crossover. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. At median follow-up of 760 days (IQR 644–859), 263 (56%) of 473 patients allocated imatinib once a day had progressed compared with 235 (50%) of 473 who were assigned treatment twice a day (estimated hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·69–0·98]; p=0·026). Side-effects arose in 465/470 (99%) patients allocated the once daily regimen compared with 468/472 (99%) assigned treatment twice a day. By comparison with the group treated once a day, more dose reductions (77 [16%] vs 282 [60%]) and treatment interruptions (189 [40%] vs 302 [64%]) were recorded in patients allocated the twice daily regimen, but treatment in both arms was fairly well tolerated. 52 (5%) patients achieved a complete response, 442 (47%) a partial response, and 300 (32%) stable disease, with no difference between groups. Median time to best response was 107 days (IQR 58–172). If response induction is the only aim of treatment, a daily dose of 400 mg of imatinib is sufficient; however, a dose of 400 mg twice a day achieves significantly longer progression-free survival.

Some coauthors of this study previously performed the AMATERASU randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of postoperative oral vitamin D supplementation (2,000 IU/day) in 417 patients with stage I to III digestive tract cancer from the esophagus to the rectum who underwent curative surgery (UMIN000001977). We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the AMATERASU trial to explore the effects of modification of vitamin D supplementation by histopathological characteristics on survival. Among patients with poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, the 5-year relapse-free survival rate of patients supplemented with vitamin D was 91% compared with 63% in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08 to 0.78; P = 0.017; P for interaction = 0.023). Similarly, the 5-year overall survival rate was 92% in the vitamin D group compared with 72% in the placebo group (HR, 0.25; 95%CI, 0.07 to 0.94; P = 0.040; P for interaction = 0.012). In contrast, there were no significant effects in other histopathological characteristics between vitamin D and placebo groups. These findings generated the hypothesis that oral vitamin D supplementation may improve both relapse-free survival and overall survival in a subgroup of patients with poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma.