| 1. |
- Jensen, Lars Henrik, et al.
(author)
-
Phase III randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and standard treatment in patients with locally advanced colon cancer: The NeoCol trial.
- 2023
-
In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 41:17_SUPPL
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- LBA3503Background: Locally advanced colon cancer presents a therapeutic challenge regarding improving survival and minimizing side effects by optimizing the timing of surgical and systemic treatments. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a widely accepted approach in numerous cancers as it aims to eliminate micrometastases and reduce tumor size. Our study aimed to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on locally advanced colon cancer compared to standard initial surgery. Methods: This was a randomized, controlled, phase III clinical trial. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven colon cancer were eligible for inclusion if staged as T4 or T3 with invasion depth >= 5 mm, N0-2, and M0 according to CT scan evaluation. Patients were randomly assigned to either standard upfront surgery or surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with either 3 cycles of CAPOX (oxaliplatin, capecitabine every 3 weeks) or 4 cycles of FOLFOX (oxaliplatin, 5FU every 2 weeks). Adjuvant chemotherapy was chosen based on the pathological stage of the cancer according to guidelines. The primary endpoint, disease-free survival (DFS), was analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis. The sample size was set at 125 patients per arm, based on a projected increase in two-year disease-free survival from 80% to 90%, with a two-sided significance level of 5%, power of 80%, 3 years of inclusion, 2 years of follow-up, and a 10% drop-out rate. Results: Nine centers in 3 countries included 122 patients in the standard group and 126 patients in the neoadjuvant group from 10/2013 to 11/2021. Forty-four % were female, the median age was 66 years, and 91% had a performance status (PS) of 0, while 9% had a PS of 1. Seventy-three % of the tumors were classified as T3, with a median outgrowth of 11 mm, while 26% were classified as T4 on the baseline CT scan. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The median number of chemotherapy cycles was lower in the neoadjuvant group, 3 (IQR 1-7) vs. 4 (0-8). There were slightly more postoperative complications in the standard group regarding ileus, anastomotic leakage, and length of stay. Postoperatively, more patients in the standard arm had an indication of adjuvant chemotherapy, 88 vs. 72 (p = 0.02). DFS at 2 years was similar in the two arms (p = 0.95, logrank), as was overall survival (OS) (p = 0.95, logrank). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and standard upfront surgery showed no significant difference in DFS and OS in patients with colon cancer. However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy seemed to have more favorable outcomes in terms of chemotherapy cycles, postoperative complications, and downstaging. CT scan alone may not be sufficient in identifying high-risk patients preoperatively. These findings suggest that neoadjuvant chemotherapy could be considered a viable treatment option for patients with locally advanced colon cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT01918527.
|
|
| 2. |
- Liposits, Gabor, et al.
(author)
-
Prognostic value of baseline functional status measures and geriatric screening in vulnerable older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving palliative chemotherapy : The randomized NORDIC9-study
- 2023
-
In: Journal of Geriatric Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1879-4068 .- 1879-4076. ; 14:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction: Appropriate patient selection based on functional status is crucial when considering older adults for palliative chemotherapy. This pre-planned analysis of the randomized NORDIC9-study explored the prognostic value of four functional status measures regarding progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in vulnerable older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving first-line palliative chemotherapy.Materials and methods: Patients >= 70 years of age with mCRC not candidates for standard full-dose combination chemotherapy were randomized to receive full-dose S1 or reduced-dose S1 + oxaliplatin. At baseline, functional status was assessed using ECOG performance status (ECOG PS), frailty phenotype, Geriatric 8 (G8), and Vulnerable Elderly Survey-13 (VES-13). Multivariable regression models were applied and C-statistics were estimated.Results: In total, 160 patients with a median age of 78 years (IQR: 76-81) were included. While in univariate analyses, ECOG PS, frailty phenotype, and VES-13 were statistically significantly associated with differences in OS between subgroups, G8 was not (HR = 1.55, 95%CI: 0.99-2.41, p = 0.050). In multivariable analyses adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, and treatment allocation, we found significant differences between subgroups for all applied tools and with C-statistics in the moderate range for ECOG PS and VES-13. Concerning PFS, statistically significant differences were observed between subgroups of ECOG PS, G8, and VES-13 both in uni-and multivariable analyses, but not for frailty phenotype.Discussion: In this Nordic cohort of vulnerable older patients with mCRC, baseline ECOG PS, frailty phenotype, G8, and VES-13 showed prognostic value regarding overall survival, and moderate predictive value of models based on ECOG PS and VES-13 was demonstrated.
|
|
| 3. |
- Slipsager, Anna, et al.
(author)
-
Predictive biomarkers in radioresistant rectal cancer : A systematic review
- 2023
-
In: Critical reviews in oncology/hematology. - : Elsevier. - 1040-8428 .- 1879-0461. ; 186
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background and aimsThe treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer often consists of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery. However, approximately 15% of patients show no response to this neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. This systematic review aimed to identify biomarkers of innate radioresistant rectal cancer.MethodThrough a systematic literature search, 125 papers were included and analyzed using ROBINS-I, a Cochrane risk of bias tool for non-randomized studies of interventions. Both statistically significant and nonsignificant biomarkers were identified. Biomarkers mentioned more than once in the results or biomarkers with a low or moderate risk of bias were included as the final results.ResultsThirteen unique biomarkers, three genetic signatures, one specific pathway, and two combinations of two or four biomarkers were identified. In particular, the connection between HMGCS2, COASY, and PI3K-pathway seems promising. Future scientific research should focus on further validating these genetic resistance markers.
|
|
