Person:

Meyerhardt, Jeffrey

Background: Patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer who are treated with trimodality therapy have a high recurrence rate. Preclinical evidence suggests that inhibition of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2) increases the effectiveness of chemoradiation, and observational studies in humans suggest that COX-2 inhibition may reduce esophageal cancer risk. This trial tested the safety and efficacy of combining a COX2 inhibitor, celecoxib, with neoadjuvant irinotecan/cisplatin chemoradiation. Methods: This single arm phase 2 trial combined irinotecan, cisplatin, and celecoxib with concurrent radiation therapy. Patients with stage IIA-IVA esophageal cancer received weekly cisplatin 30 mg/m2 plus irinotecan 65 mg/m2 on weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5 concurrently with 5040 cGy of radiation therapy. Celecoxib 400 mg was taken orally twice daily during chemoradiation, up to 1 week before surgery, and for 6 months following surgery. Results: Forty patients were enrolled with stage IIa (30 %), stage IIb (20 %), stage III (22.5 %), and stage IVA (27.5 %) esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer (AJCC, 5th Edition). During chemoradiation, grade 3–4 treatment-related toxicity included dysphagia (20 %), anorexia (17.5 %), dehydration (17.5 %), nausea (15 %), neutropenia (12.5 %), diarrhea (10 %), fatigue (7.5 %), and febrile neutropenia (7.5 %). The pathological complete response rate was 32.5 %. The median progression free survival was 15.7 months and the median overall survival was 34.7 months. 15 % (n = 6) of patients treated on this study developed brain metastases. Conclusions: The addition of celecoxib to neoadjuvant cisplatin-irinotecan chemoradiation was tolerable; however, overall survival appeared comparable to prior studies using neoadjuvant cisplatin-irinotecan chemoradiation alone. Further studies adding celecoxib to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in esophageal cancer are not warranted. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00137852, registered August 29, 2005.

The International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) collaboration was established to prospectively combine and analyze data from several randomized trials conducted around the world to answer whether a three-month course of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy (FOLFOX4/modified FOLFOX6 or XELOX) is non-inferior to the current standard six-month treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer, with a primary endpoint of three years disease-free survival. The IDEA steering committee comprises two members from each group coordinating an individual trial and two members from a secretariat who coordinate combining of the data and management of the joint analysis. Members of the IDEA agreed to combine the data from their individual trials to enable definitive analysis consisting of at least 10,500 patients. With accrual of 8,797 patients at the end of February 2013, the IDEA is on track to achieve its accrual objective of at least 10,500 patients by the end of 2013.

Background: KRAS mutations in codons 12 and 13 are established predictive biomarkers for anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer. Previous studies suggest that KRAS codon 61 and 146 mutations may also predict resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer. However, clinicopathological, molecular, and prognostic features of colorectal carcinoma with KRAS codon 61 or 146 mutation remain unclear. Methods: We utilized a molecular pathological epidemiology database of 1267 colon and rectal cancers in the Nurse’s Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. We examined KRAS mutations in codons 12, 13, 61 and 146 (assessed by pyrosequencing), in relation to clinicopathological features, and tumor molecular markers, including BRAF and PIK3CA mutations, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), LINE-1 methylation, and microsatellite instability (MSI). Survival analyses were performed in 1067 BRAF-wild-type cancers to avoid confounding by BRAF mutation. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute mortality hazard ratio, adjusting for potential confounders, including disease stage, PIK3CA mutation, CIMP, LINE-1 hypomethylation, and MSI. Results: KRAS codon 61 mutations were detected in 19 cases (1.5%), and codon 146 mutations in 40 cases (3.2%). Overall KRAS mutation prevalence in colorectal cancers was 40% (=505/1267). Of interest, compared to KRAS-wild-type, overall, KRAS-mutated cancers more frequently exhibited cecal location (24% vs. 12% in KRAS-wild-type; P < 0.0001), CIMP-low (49% vs. 32% in KRAS-wild-type; P < 0.0001), and PIK3CA mutations (24% vs. 11% in KRAS-wild-type; P < 0.0001). These trends were evident irrespective of mutated codon, though statistical power was limited for codon 61 mutants. Neither KRAS codon 61 nor codon 146 mutation was significantly associated with clinical outcome or prognosis in univariate or multivariate analysis [colorectal cancer-specific mortality hazard ratio (HR) = 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.29-2.26 for codon 61 mutation; colorectal cancer-specific mortality HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.42-1.78 for codon 146 mutation]. Conclusions: Tumors with KRAS mutations in codons 61 and 146 account for an appreciable proportion (approximately 5%) of colorectal cancers, and their clinicopathological and molecular features appear generally similar to KRAS codon 12 or 13 mutated cancers. To further assess clinical utility of KRAS codon 61 and 146 testing, large-scale trials are warranted.

Background: To evaluate the impact of diabetes on outcomes in colorectal cancer patients and to examine whether this association varies by the location of tumor (colon vs. rectum). Patients and methods This study includes 4,131 stage I-III colorectal cancer patients, treated between 1995 and 2007 (12.5% diabetic, 53% colon, 47% rectal) in South Korea. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to determine the prognostic influence of DM on survival endpoints. Results: Colorectal cancer patients with DM had significantly worse disease-free survival (DFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00–1.37] compared with patients without DM. When considering colon and rectal cancer independently, DM was significantly associated with worse overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.11–1.92), DFS (HR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.15–1.84) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR: 1.32, 95% CI: 0.98–1.76) in colon cancer patients. No association for OS, DFS or RFS was observed in rectal cancer patients. There was significant interaction of location of tumor (colon vs. rectal cancer) with DM on OS (P = 0.009) and DFS (P = 0.007). Conclusions: This study suggests that DM negatively impacts survival outcomes of patients with colon cancer but not rectal cancer.

Studies have reported conflicting results on the association between body mass index (BMI) and prognosis of colorectal cancer. Therefore, we have conducted a meta-analysis of prospective studies, which examined the association of pre- and post-diagnostic BMI with colorectal cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality in patients with colorectal cancer. We searched Medline and EMBASE database published between 1970 and September 2014. A total of 508 articles were identified, of which 16 prospective cohort studies were included for the current meta-analysis. The analysis included 58,917 patients who were followed up over a period ranging from 4.9 to 20 years (median: 9.9 years). We found that being underweight before cancer diagnosis was associated with increased all-cause mortality (Relative risk [RR]: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.18–2.23, p < 0.01) and being obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) before cancer diagnosis was associated with increased colorectal cancer-specific mortality (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.003–1.35, p < 0.01) and all-cause mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.14–1.36, p < 0.01). On the other hand, being underweight (RR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.20–1.47, p < 0.01), obese (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03–1.3, p < 0.01), and class II/III obese (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2; RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04–1.23, p < 0.01) after diagnosis were associated with significantly increased all-cause mortality. Being obese prior to diagnosis of colorectal cancer was associated with increased colorectal cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality, whereas being obese after diagnosis was associated with increased all-cause mortality. The associations with being underweight may reflect reverse causation. Maintaining a healthy body weight should be discussed with colorectal cancer survivors.

Colorectal tumors arise with genomic and epigenomic alterations through interactions between neoplastic cells, immune cells, and microbiota that vary along the proximal to distal axis of colorectum. Long interspersed nucleotide element-1 (LINE-1) hypomethylation in colorectal cancer has been associated with worse clinical outcome. Utilizing 1,317 colon and rectal carcinoma cases in two U.S.-nationwide prospective cohort studies, we examined patient survival according to LINE-1 methylation level stratified by tumor location. Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess a statistical interaction between LINE-1 methylation level and tumor location in colorectal cancer-specific mortality analysis, controlling for potential confounders including microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype, and KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations. A statistically significant interaction was found between LINE-1 methylation level and tumor location in colorectal cancer-specific mortality analysis (Pinteraction = 0.011). The association of LINE-1 hypomethylation with higher colorectal cancer-specific mortality was stronger in proximal colon cancers (multivariable hazard ratio [HR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21 to 2.28) than in distal colon cancers (multivariable HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.72) or rectal cancers (multivariable HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.34). Our data suggest the interactive effect of LINE-1 methylation level and colorectal cancer location on clinical outcome.

Background: Borderline resectable pancreatic cancers infiltrate into adjacent vascular structures to an extent that makes an R0 resection unlikely when pancreatectomy is performed de novo. In a pilot study, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology Trial A021101, the median survival of patients who received chemotherapy and radiation prior to anticipated pancreatectomy was 22 months, and 64% of operations achieved an R0 resection. However, the individual contributions of preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy to therapeutic outcome remain poorly defined. Methods: In Alliance for Clinical Oncology Trial A021501, a recently activated randomized phase II trial, patients (N = 134) with a CT or MRI showing a biopsy-confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma that meets centrally-reviewed anatomic criteria for borderline resectable disease will be randomized to receive either 8 cycles of modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2 and infusional 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 2 days for 4 cycles) or to 7 cycles of modified FOLFIRINOX followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (33–40 Gy in 5 fractions). Patients without evidence of disease progression following preoperative therapy will undergo pancreatectomy and will subsequently receive 4 cycles of postoperative modified FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, bolus 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2, and infusional 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 2 days for 4 cycles). The primary endpoint is the 18-month overall survival rate of patients enrolled into each of the two treatment arms. An interim analysis of the R0 resection rate within each arm will be conducted to assess treatment futility after accrual of 30 patients. Secondary endpoints include rates of margin-negative resection and event-free survival. The primary analysis will compare the 18-month overall survival rate of each arm to a historical control rate of 50%. The trial is activated nationwide and eligible to be opened for accrual at any National Clinical Trials Network cooperative group member site. Discussion This study will help define standard preoperative treatment regimens for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and position the superior arm for further evaluation in future phase III trials. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02839343, registered July 14, 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3441-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evidence suggests that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) may improve patient survival in PIK3CA-mutant colorectal carcinoma, but not in PIK3CA-wild-type carcinoma. However, whether aspirin directly influences the viability of PIK3CA-mutant colon cancer cells is poorly understood. We conducted in vitro experiments to test our hypothesis that the anti-proliferative activity of aspirin might be stronger for PIK3CA-mutant colon cancer cells than for PIK3CA-wild-type colon cancer cells. We measured the anti-proliferative effect of aspirin at physiologic concentrations in seven PIK3CA-mutant and six PIK3CA-wild-type human colon cancer cell lines. After exposure to aspirin, the apoptotic index and cell cycle phase of colon cancer cells were assessed. In addition, the effect of aspirin was examined in parental SW48 cells and SW48 cell clones with individual knock-in PIK3CA mutations of either c.3140A>G (p.H1047R) or c.1633G>A (p.E545K). Aspirin induced greater dose-dependent loss of cell viability in PIK3CA-mutant cells than in PIK3CA-wild-type cells after treatment for 48 and 72 hours. Aspirin treatment also led to higher proportions of apoptotic cells and G0/G1 phase arrest in PIK3CA-mutant cells than in PIK3CA-wild-type cells. Aspirin treatment of isogenic SW48 cells carrying a PIK3CA mutation, either c.3140A>G (p.H1047R) or c.1633G>A (p. E545K), resulted in a more significant loss of cell viability compared to wild-type controls. Our findings indicate that aspirin causes cell cycle arrest, induces apoptosis, and leads to loss of cell viability more profoundly in PIK3CA-mutated colon cancer cells than in PIK3CA-wild-type colon cancer cells. These findings support the use of aspirin to treat patients with PIK3CA-mutant colon cancer.

Objectives: Evidence suggests a possible role of Fusobacterium nucleatum in colorectal carcinogenesis, especially in right-sided proximal colorectum. Considering a change in bowel contents and microbiome from proximal to distal colorectal segments, we hypothesized that the proportion of colorectal carcinoma enriched with F. nucleatum might gradually increase along the bowel subsites from rectum to cecum. Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis was conducted on 1,102 colon and rectal carcinomas in molecular pathological epidemiology databases of the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. We measured the amount of F. nucleatum DNA in colorectal tumor tissue using a quantitative PCR assay and equally dichotomized F. nucleatum-positive cases (high vs. low). We used multivariable logistic regression analysis to examine the relationship of a bowel subsite variable (rectum, rectosigmoid junction, sigmoid colon, descending colon, splenic flexure, transverse colon, hepatic flexure, ascending colon, and cecum) with the amount of F. nucleatum. Results: The proportion of F. nucleatum-high colorectal cancers gradually increased from rectal cancers (2.5% 4/157) to cecal cancers (11% 19/178), with a statistically significant linear trend along all subsites (P<0.0001) and little evidence of non-linearity. The proportion of F. nucleatum-low cancers was higher in rectal, ascending colon, and cecal cancers than in cancers of middle segments. Conclusions: The proportion of F. nucleatum-high colorectal cancers gradually increases from rectum to cecum. Our data support the colorectal continuum model that reflects pathogenic influences of the gut microbiota on neoplastic and immune cells and challenges the prevailing two-colon (proximal vs. distal) dichotomy paradigm.