Faiza Khemissa-Akouz

Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as compared with gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Among patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, combination chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) leads to longer overall survival than gemcitabine therapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen with gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.We randomly assigned 493 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to receive a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen (oxaliplatin [85 mg per square meter of body-surface area], irinotecan [180 mg per square meter, reduced to 150 mg per square meter after a protocol-specified safety analysis], leucovorin [400 mg per square meter], and fluorouracil [2400 mg per square meter] every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival and safety.At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, the median disease-free survival was 21.6 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 12.8 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for cancer-related event, second cancer, or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.73; P<0.001). The disease-free survival rate at 3 years was 39.7% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 21.4% in the gemcitabine group. The median overall survival was 54.4 months in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 35.0 months in the gemcitabine group (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86; P=0.003). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 63.4% in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and 48.6% in the gemcitabine group. Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 75.9% of the patients in the modified-FOLFIRINOX group and in 52.9% of those in the gemcitabine group. One patient in the gemcitabine group died from toxic effects (interstitial pneumonitis).Adjuvant therapy with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen led to significantly longer survival than gemcitabine among patients with resected pancreatic cancer, at the expense of a higher incidence of toxic effects. (Funded by R&D Unicancer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01526135 ; EudraCT number, 2011-002026-52 .).

Importance Early results at 3 years from the PRODIGE 24/Canadian Cancer Trials Group PA6 randomized clinical trial showed survival benefits with adjuvant treatment with modified FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; mature data are now available. Objective To report 5-year outcomes and explore prognostic factors for overall survival. Design, Setting, and Participants This open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 77 hospitals in France and Canada and included patients aged 18 to 79 years with histologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had undergone complete macroscopic (R0/R1) resection within 3 to 12 weeks before randomization. Patients were included from April 16, 2012, through October 3, 2016. The cutoff date for this analysis was June 28, 2021. Interventions A total of 493 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive treatment with modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m 2 of body surface area; irinotecan, 150-180 mg/m 2 ; leucovorin, 400 mg/m 2 ; and fluorouracil, 2400 mg/m 2 , every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m 2 , days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks) as adjuvant therapy for 24 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, metastasis-free survival, and cancer-specific survival. Prognostic factors for overall survival were determined. Results Of the 493 patients, 216 (43.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 62.0 (8.9) years. At a median of 69.7 months’ follow-up, 367 disease-free survival events were observed. In patients receiving chemotherapy with modified FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine, median disease-free survival was 21.4 months (95% CI, 17.5-26.7) vs 12.8 months (95% CI, 11.6-15.2) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.82; P &amp;amp;lt; .001) and 5-year disease-free survival was 26.1% vs 19.0%; median overall survival was 53.5 months (95% CI, 43.5-58.4) vs 35.5 months (95% CI, 30.1-40.3) (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.85; P = .001), and 5-year overall survival was 43.2% vs 31.4%; median metastasis-free survival was 29.4 months (95% CI, 21.4-40.1) vs 17.7 months (95% CI, 14.0-21.2) (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.80; P &amp;amp;lt; .001); and median cancer-specific survival was 54.7 months (95% CI, 45.8-68.4) vs 36.3 months (95% CI, 30.5–43.9) (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.82; P &amp;amp;lt; .001). Multivariable analysis identified modified FOLFIRINOX, age, tumor grade, tumor staging, and larger-volume center as significant favorable prognostic factors for overall survival. Shorter relapse delay was an adverse prognostic factor. Conclusions and Relevance The final 5-year results from the PRODIGE 24/Canadian Cancer Trials Group PA6 randomized clinical trial indicate that adjuvant treatment with modified FOLFIRINOX yields significantly longer survival than gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Trial Registration EudraCT: 2011-002026-52; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01526135

Purpose The objective of this study was to build and validate a radiomic signature to predict early a poor outcome using baseline and 2-month evaluation CT and to compare it to the RECIST1·1 and morphological criteria defined by changes in homogeneity and borders. Methods This study is an ancillary study from the PRODIGE-9 multicentre prospective study for which 491 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated by 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and bevacizumab had been analysed. In 230 patients, computed texture analysis was performed on the dominant liver lesion (DLL) at baseline and 2 months after chemotherapy. RECIST1·1 evaluation was performed at 6 months. A radiomic signature (Survival PrEdiction in patients treated by FOLFIRI and bevacizumab for mCRC using contrast-enhanced CT TextuRe Analysis (SPECTRA) Score) combining the significant predictive features was built using multivariable Cox analysis in 120 patients, then locked, and validated in 110 patients. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups with the logrank test. An external validation was performed in another cohort of 40 patients from the PRODIGE 20 Trial. Results In the training cohort, the significant predictive features for OS were: decrease in sum of the target liver lesions (STL), (adjusted hasard-ratio(aHR)=13·7, p=1·93×10 –7 ), decrease in kurtosis (ssf=4) (aHR=1·08, p=0·001) and high baseline density of DLL, (aHR=0·98, p&lt;0·001). Patients with a SPECTRA Score &gt;0·02 had a lower OS in the training cohort (p&lt;0·0001), in the validation cohort (p&lt;0·0008) and in the external validation cohort (p=0·0027). SPECTRA Score at 2 months had the same prognostic value as RECIST at 6 months, while non-response according to RECIST1·1 at 2 months was not associated with a lower OS in the validation cohort (p=0·238). Morphological response was not associated with OS (p=0·41). Conclusion A radiomic signature (combining decrease in STL, density and computed texture analysis of the DLL) at baseline and 2-month CT was able to predict OS, and identify good responders better than RECIST1.1 criteria in patients with mCRC treated by FOLFIRI and bevacizumab as a first-line treatment. This tool should now be validated by further prospective studies. Trial registration Clinicaltrial.gov identifier of the PRODIGE 9 study: NCT00952029 . Clinicaltrial.gov identifier of the PRODIGE 20 study: NCT01900717 .

The management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and potentially resectable liver metastases (LM) requires quick assessment of mutational status and of response to pre-operative systemic therapy. In a prospective phase II trial (NCT01442935), we investigated the clinical validity of circulating tumor cell (CTC) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection. CRC patients with potentially resectable LM were treated with first-line triplet or doublet chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy. CTC (Cellsearch®) and Kirsten RAt Sarcoma (KRAS) ctDNA (droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR)) levels were assessed at inclusion, after 4 weeks of therapy and before LM surgery. 153 patients were enrolled. The proportion of patients with high CTC counts (≥3 CTC/7.5mL) decreased during therapy: 19% (25/132) at baseline, 3% (3/108) at week 4 and 0/57 before surgery. ctDNA detection sensitivity at baseline was 91% (N=42/46) and also decreased during treatment. Interestingly, persistently detectable KRAS ctDNA (p=0.01) at 4 weeks was associated with a lower R0/R1 LM resection rate. Among patients who had a R0/R1 LM resection, those with detectable ctDNA levels before liver surgery had a shorter overall survival (p<0.001). In CRC patients with limited metastatic spread, ctDNA could be used as liquid biopsy tool. Therefore, ctDNA detection could help to select patients eligible for LM resection.

Background Cytotoxic chemotherapy is generally ineffective in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. We assessed the intravenous perfusion of doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in whom previous sorafenib therapy had failed. Methods We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial at 70 sites in 11 countries. Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with one or more previous systemic therapies, including sorafenib, were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg/m2 doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles (30 mg/m2 group), 20 mg/m2 doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles (20 mg/m2 group), or standard care using a computer-generated randomisation list prepared by the funder and stratified by geographic region. Patients in the experimental groups received perfusion of the drug every 4 weeks and those in the control group received any systemic anticancer therapy (except sorafenib) as per investigator decision. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01655693. Findings Between June 15, 2012, and Jan 27, 2017, 541 patients were screened, of whom 144 were excluded and 397 were randomly assigned to one of the groups (133 to the 30 mg/m2 group; 130 to the 20 mg/m2 group; and 134 to the control group). Median follow-up was 22·7 months (IQR 11·2–34·9). After pooling the doxorubicin groups for the efficacy analysis, median overall survival was 9·1 months (95% CI 8·1–10·4) in the pooled doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles group and 9·0 months (7·1–11·8) in the control group (HR 1·00 [95% CI 0·78–1·28], two-sided p=0·99). 227 (94%) of 242 patients who received doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and 100 (75%) of 134 patients in the control group had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event. The most common drug-related grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (25 [10%] of 242 treated with doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and eight [6%] of 134 in the control group), asthenia (six [2%] and four [3%]), and thrombocytopenia (three [1%] and ten [7%]). Six (2%) patients treated with doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and one (1%) of those in the control group were deemed by investigators to have had a drug-related death. Serious adverse events occurred in 74 (31%) patients who received doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles and 48 (36%) in the control group. Interpretation Doxorubicin-loaded nanoparticles did not improve overall survival for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in whom previous sorafenib treatment had failed. Funding Onxeo.

•The assessment of GMI was possible in 42% of the patients included in the FFCD 0307 trial.•Patients assessable for GMI had a better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status than the overall population.•The GMI was higher in arm A (ECX then FOLFIRI) than in arm B (FOLFIRI then ECX), whereas ORR, PFS and OS were not different.•GMI exceeding 1.3 correlated with prolonged OS.•First-line ECX followed by FOLFIRI might be a better strategy than FOLFIRI followed by ECX for advanced gastric cancer. BackgroundPrecision medicine trials disrupted the paradigm of randomized controlled trials in large populations. Patient selection may be based on molecular alterations rather than on primary tumor location. In small patient populations, the growth modulation index (GMI) has been developed to evaluate treatment efficacy by using each patient as its own control. The FFCD 0307 randomized phase III trial compared two sequences of chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer, which represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the relevance of the GMI.Patients and methodsIn the FFCD 0307 trial, patients with advanced gastric cancer were randomized between two chemotherapy sequences [ECX followed by FOLFIRI at disease progression (arm A) versus FOLFIRI followed by ECX (arm B)]. GMI was defined as the ratio of the progression-free survival on second treatment (PFS2) to the time to progression on first treatment (TTP1). Sequence benefit was defined as a GMI exceeding 1.3 (GMI-high). GMI was correlated with overall survival (OS). OS1 and OS2 were measured from first randomization and second-line failure to death.ResultsFour hundred and sixteen patients were randomized (209 in arm A, 207 in arm B). One hundred and seventy-five patients (42%) received the two sequences and were assessable for GMI (97 in arm A, 79 in arm B). The median GMI was higher in arm A than in arm B (0.62 versus 0.47, P = 0.04). Patients with a high GMI had a longer OS1 (median 14.9 versus 11.5 months, NS). Median OS2 was doubled in the GMI-high group (3.4 versus 1.6 months, NS).ConclusionGMI analyses suggest that ECX followed by FOLFIRI might represent a better therapeutic strategy than FOLFIRI followed by ECX. High GMI was associated with prolonged survival. Precision medicine trials disrupted the paradigm of randomized controlled trials in large populations. Patient selection may be based on molecular alterations rather than on primary tumor location. In small patient populations, the growth modulation index (GMI) has been developed to evaluate treatment efficacy by using each patient as its own control. The FFCD 0307 randomized phase III trial compared two sequences of chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer, which represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the relevance of the GMI. In the FFCD 0307 trial, patients with advanced gastric cancer were randomized between two chemotherapy sequences [ECX followed by FOLFIRI at disease progression (arm A) versus FOLFIRI followed by ECX (arm B)]. GMI was defined as the ratio of the progression-free survival on second treatment (PFS2) to the time to progression on first treatment (TTP1). Sequence benefit was defined as a GMI exceeding 1.3 (GMI-high). GMI was correlated with overall survival (OS). OS1 and OS2 were measured from first randomization and second-line failure to death. Four hundred and sixteen patients were randomized (209 in arm A, 207 in arm B). One hundred and seventy-five patients (42%) received the two sequences and were assessable for GMI (97 in arm A, 79 in arm B). The median GMI was higher in arm A than in arm B (0.62 versus 0.47, P = 0.04). Patients with a high GMI had a longer OS1 (median 14.9 versus 11.5 months, NS). Median OS2 was doubled in the GMI-high group (3.4 versus 1.6 months, NS). GMI analyses suggest that ECX followed by FOLFIRI might represent a better therapeutic strategy than FOLFIRI followed by ECX. High GMI was associated with prolonged survival.

We prospectively detected circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and circulating tumor cells (CTC) levels in patients (pts) included in the PRODIGE14-ACCORD21-METHEP2 randomized phase II trial. The trial enrolled colorectal cancer pts with potentially resectable liver metastases & no prior treatment; the primary endpoint was the rate of R0/R1 liver metastases resection achieved by 1st line regimen (targeted therapies & bi- vs tri-chemotherapy; Ychou, ASCO 2016). Blood samples were collected at inclusion, after 1 month of therapy and before any liver metastases surgery. CTCs (CellSearch) & ctDNA (ddPCR, BioRad) were detected in an experienced laboratory (Inst. Curie). 153 pts had at least one blood analysis. High CTC count (≥3 CTC/7.5ml) was detected in 25/132 pts (19%) at baseline and associated with synchronous liver metastases (p = 0.03) and % of liver involvement (p = 0.001). At baseline, a 91% sensitivity of KRAS ctDNA detection was observed (42/46 pts with KRAS mutated tumors, as determined per standard of care). In addition, 6 of 79 pts (7%) with tumors considered as KRASwt had >150 KRASmut copies/ml at baseline. After 1 month of therapy, only 3/108 pts (3%) had high CTC count and KRAS ctDNA “sensitivity” dropped to 63% (22/35 pts with KRAS mutated tumors). Among pts planned for liver metastases surgery, none had high CTC count before surgery (0/57) and ctDNA “sensitivity” was 19% (4/21 pts with KRAS mutated tumors). Interestingly, persistently high CTC count (p = 0.06) and detectable KRAS mutated copies (p = 0.002) after 1 month of therapy were significantly associated with a lower R0/R1 liver metastasis resection rate (main study endpoint). Regarding overall survival, CTC count impacted OS at baseline and after 1 month of therapy (p = 0.001), while ctDNA was a prognostic marker only before liver surgery (p = 0.0001). This is the first study to assess CTC and ctDNA clinical validity in pts with potentially resectable liver metastases. ctDNA detection demonstrated excellent sensitivity at baseline but detection rates dropped during therapy. The major finding is that persistently elevated ctDNA and CTCs after 1 month of therapy may help to select pts that won't undergo later R0/R1 liver metastasis resection.

Cyfra 21-1 is a useful marker in lung cancer. The only tumor marker used at the present time in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is SCC (squamous cell carcinoma). In this study we evaluated the pre-treatment sensitivity and specificity of these two markers in this setting. Cyfra 21-1 and SCC were determined by radio-immunoassay on 76 patients having OSCC. Staging was done according to the UICC 1978 classification based on endoscopy, baryum enema and CT scan. The sensitivity of Cyfra 21-1 is better at the 1.5 ng/ml level (54%) than at the usual reported level of 3.6 ng/ml (26%). The best level for sensitivity of SCC is 1.5 ng/ml. At these levels, sensitivity of Cyfra 21-1 and SCC for advanced stages (T3 or M1) are respectively 72% and 50%. The specificity of Cyfra 21-1 and SCC for stages T1 or T2 are respectively 53% and 73%. The combination of these two markers increase sensitivity at 64% for all stages and at 89% for advanced stages (T3 or M1) and is a significant prognostic factor for survival. This study confirms the value of Cyfra 21-1 in OSCC at the normal level of 1.5 ng/ml. The combination with SC improves the results. We now need to evaluate the role of these two markers in the follow up of oesophageal carcinoma.