Panitumumab-based maintenance after oxaliplatin discontinuation in metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective analysis of two randomised trials

Panitumumab is approved for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer and was evaluated in Phase III (PRIME, NCT00364013) and Phase II (PEAK, NCT00819780) first-line randomised studies. This retrospective analysis of these trials investigated efficacy and toxicity of panitumumab-based maintenance after oxaliplatin discontinuation in RAS wild-type patients. First-line regimens were FOLFOX4 \ub1 panitumumab in PRIME and mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab in PEAK. Outcomes included median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), from randomisation and oxaliplatin discontinuation, and toxicity. Overall, median duration of panitumumab plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) maintenance was 21 (interquartile range: 11-41) weeks; that of 5-FU/LV \ub1 bevacizumab maintenance was 16 (6-31) weeks. Median OS from randomisation was 40.2 (95% confidence interval: 30.3-50.4) and 39.1 (34.2-63.0) months for panitumumab plus 5-FU/LV maintenance and 24.1 (17.7-33.0) and 28.9 (21.0-32.0) months for 5-FU/LV \ub1 bevacizumab maintenance in PRIME and PEAK, respectively. Median PFS from randomisation was 16.6 (11.3-23.6) and 15.4 (11.6-18.4) months for panitumumab plus 5-FU/LV maintenance and 12.6 (9.4-16.2) and 13.1 (9.5-16.6) months for 5-FU/LV \ub1 bevacizumab maintenance in PRIME and PEAK, respectively. From oxaliplatin discontinuation, median OS was 33.9 (24.7-42.8) and 33.5 (24.5-54.9) months for panitumumab plus 5-FU/LV maintenance and 16.4 (12.4-24.1) and 23.3 (15.7-26.3) months for 5-FU/LV \ub1 bevacizumab maintenance in PRIME and PEAK, respectively; PFS was 11.7 (7.8-19.2) and 9.7 (5.8-14.8) months and 7.1 (5.6-10.2) and 7.0 (3.9-10.6) months, respectively. The most frequently reported adverse events were rash, fatigue and diarrhoea. Maintenance of panitumumab plus 5-FU/LV after oxaliplatin discontinuation was well tolerated and may be an acceptable treatment paradigm for patients demonstrating a good response to first-line treatment. Prospective studies are warranted

FIRE-9 - PORT / AIO-KRK-0418: a prospective, randomized, open, multicenter Phase III trial to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant/additive chemotherapy in patients with definitely-treated metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Additive/adjuvant chemotherapy as concept after local treatment of colorectal metastases has not been proven to be successful by phase III trials. Accordingly, a standard of care to improve relapse rates and long-term survival is not established and adjuvant chemotherapy cannot be recommended as a standard therapy due to limited evidence in literature. The PORT trial aims to generate evidence that post-resection/ablation/radiation chemotherapy improves the survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Patients to be included into this trial must have synchronous or metachronous metastases of colorectal cancer-either resected (R0 or R1) and/or effectively treated by ablation or radiation within 3-10 weeks before randomization-and have the primary tumor resected, without radiographic evidence of active metastatic disease at study entry. The primary endpoint of the trial is progression-free survival after 24 months, secondary endpoints include overall survival, safety, quality of life, treatments (including efficacy) beyond study participation, translational endpoints, and others. One arm of the study comprising 2/3 of the population will be treated for 6 months with modified FOLFOXIRI or modified FOLFOX6 (investigator´s choice, depending on the performance status of the patients but determined before randomization), while the other arm (1/3 of the population) will be observed and undergo scheduled follow-up computed tomography scans according to the interventional arm. DISCUSSION: Optimal oncological management after removal of colorectal metastases is unclear. The PORT trial aims to generate evidence that additive/adjuvant chemotherapy after definitive treatment of colorectal metastases improves progression free and overall survival in patients with colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT05008809 ) and EudraCT (2020-006,144-18)

Risk of bowel obstruction in patients with colon cancer responding to immunotherapy: an international case series

Background Immunotherapy is used routinely for treating deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) colon cancer (CC). This case series highlights an emerging safety issue, where patients develop bowel obstruction associated with immunotherapy response. Patients and methods Patients with dMMR CC who developed bowel obstruction while responding to immunotherapy were retrospectively identified. Data on patient, disease, treatment, and response-specific factors were explored for potential risk factors. Overall treatment numbers were used to estimate incidence. Results Nine patients from eight European centres were included. Common features were hepatic flexure location (5/9), T4 radiological staging (6/9), annular shape (8/9), radiological stricturing (5/9), and endoscopic obstruction (6/9). All received pembrolizumab and obstructed between 45 and 652 days after starting treatment. Seven patients underwent surgical resection; one was managed with a defunctioning stoma; and one was managed conservatively. One patient died from obstruction. Radiological response was seen in eight patients, including two complete responses. Pathological response was seen in all seven who underwent resection, including four complete responses. The overall incidence of immunotherapy response-related obstruction in these centres was 1.51%. Conclusions Bowel obstruction associated with immunotherapy response may represent a rare treatment-related complication in dMMR CC. Clinicians must recognise this safety signal and share experience to maintain patient safety

Treatment sequencing in metastatic colorectal cancer

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains incurable in most cases, but survival has improved with advances in cytotoxic chemotherapy and targeted agents. However, the optimal use and sequencing of these agents across multiple lines of treatment is unclear. Here, we review current treatment approaches and optimal treatment sequencing across the first-, second- and third-line settings in mCRC, including biological aspects affecting sequencing and rechallenge. Effective first-line therapy is a key determinant of treatment outcomes and should be selected after considering both clinical factors and biological markers, notably RAS and BRAF. The second-line regimen choice depends on the systemic therapies given in first-line. Anti-angiogenic agents (e.g. bevacizumab, ramucirumab and aflibercept) are indicated for most patients, whereas epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors do not improve survival in the second-line setting. Molecular profiling is important in third-line treatment, with options in RAS wild-type patients including EGFR inhibitors (cetuximab or panitumumab), regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil. Immunotherapy with pembrolizumab or nivolumab \ub1 ipilimumab may be considered for patients with high microsatellite instability disease. Targeting HER2/neu amplification shows promise for the subset of CRC tumours displaying this abnormality. Sequencing decisions are complicated by the potential for any treatment break or de-escalation to evoke a distinct clinical progression type. Ongoing trials are investigating the optimal sequencing and timing of therapies for mCRC. Molecular profiling has established new targets, and increasing knowledge of tumour evolution under drug pressure will possibly impact on sequencing