Post on 22-Mar-2022
1
Can we refine the selection for adjuvant treatment in stage III colon cancer?
High vs Low Risk
Thierry André, MDService d’Oncologie MédicaleEt unité INSERM UMRS 938
‘Microsatellite Instability and Cancer’Sorbonne universitéHôpital Saint Antoine
Et GERCOR
2
Consultant and or Advisory board :
Amgen, BMS,Gritstone, HalioDx, MSD Oncology, Roche, Sevier
Honoraria :
Amgen, Bayer, BMS, MSD Oncology, Roche/Genentech, Xbiotech
Sanofi Aventis
Disclosure
4
Stage III Colon CancerCured with Surgery Alone
(55%)
Patients cured byFOLFOX or CAPOX
Patients cured by chemo: 20%
Moertel CG, N Engl J Med 1990 ; IMPACT investigators, Lancet 1995; André T, J Clin Oncol. 2009; Yothers G, J Clin Oncol 2011; Haller D, J Clin Oncol 2011
Patients with recurrence: 25 %
5
OS with 10 yr Follow Up : ITTStage III
Hazard ratio 0,8095% CI 0,66 to 0,96
P = 0,015André T et al et al. JCO 2015
+ 8,1%+ 4,2%
MOSAIC 2015
6
Year Overall Survival: Stage III
André T et al et al. JCO 2015
Stage III N1 (1 to 3 N+) Stage III N2 (≥ 4N+)
+ 6%
- 5;5%+
+ 13%+6%
7
Stage III ACCENT Database Fluoropyrimidines ± Oxali (n=8993)
• Higher risk of recurrence over time was associated with higher T and N Stage• Oxaliplatin demonstrating more benefit in patients with more advanced T and
nodal stage• Addition of oxaliplatin to FU is associated with benefit for T4 and T3, however
this benefit exist but is little for T1 and T2 Shah MA et al et al. JCO 2016
8
• Open SEER population-based data from 1992-2004
• The relative weights of the T and N stages were calculated by multiple linear regressions
• For colon cancer, Relative T and N stage weight were 0.58 and 0.42
• Conclusion: T stage affects colon cancer survival more significantly than the N stage
TNM7 TNM8
T4 Perforates serosa Tumor invades the visceral peritoneum or invades or adheres to adjacent organ or structure
T4a Tumor penetrates to the surface of the visceral peritoneum
Tumor invades through the visceral peritoneum (including gross perforation of the bowel through tumor and continuous invasion of tumor through areas of inflammation to the surface of the visceral peritoneum)
T4b Tumor directly invades or is adherent to other organs or structures
Tumor directly invades or is adherent to other organs or structures
T4TNM8
10
Prospective Pooled Analysis of Six Phase III Trials Investigating Duration of Adjuvant Oxaliplatin-based therapy (3 vs. 6 months) for Patients with Stage III Colon Cancer:
The IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy) Collaboration
Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018André T et al. JCO 2018
Sobrero A et al. JCO 2018Ivenson T et al. Lancet Oncol 2018
11
Study Schema
Stage III Colon Cancer Patients
R
3 months
6 months
Investigator’s choiceFOLFOX or CAPOX
Total planned accrual ≥ 10,500
1:1
FOLFOX: 5FU/LV + Oxaliplatin CAPOX: Capecitabine + Oxaliplatin
Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018
12
Results: mITT Population
Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018
N patients 12,834
N1 72%
N2 28%
T1-2 13%
T3 66%
T4 21%
T1-T3 N1 59%
T4 or N2 41%
FOLFOX / CAPOX 60% / 40%
13
DFS HR = 1.0795% CI, 1.00 to 1.15
Duration 3-yr DFS
6m 75.5 %
3m 74.6%
3-yr DFS diff. = -0.9%, 95% CI, (-2.4 to 0.6%)
DFS HR = 1.0795% CI, 1.00 to 1.15
Primary DFS Analysis (mITT)
Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018
14
DFS Comparison by Regimen, cont.
FOLFOX CAPOX
HR 1.12
3m TRT better 6m TRT better
Inferiority
1.0
NI Margin
DFS HR = 1.1695% CI, 1.06 to 1.26
HR 1.12
3m TRT better 6m TRT better
Non-Inferiority
1.0
NI Margin
DFS HR = 0.9595% CI, 0.85 to 1.06
TRT: treatment
Interaction p-value = 0.0051Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018
15
DFS Comparison by Risk Groups, cont mITT all patients independently of the
duration of chemotherapy
T1-3 N1 (59%)
T4 or N2 (41%)
IDEA, Shi Q et al , personal data
16
Analysis by Risk Groups and Regimens
• Large difference in overall prognosis observed between (T1-3 N1) and (T4 or N2) cancers*– 3 year DFS ∆ 20%Analysis of 3m vs 6m adjuvant therapy for these groups
* Shah MA et al et al. JCO 2016
17
DFS Comparison by Risk Groups, cont.
T1-3 N1 (58.7%) T4 or N2 (41.3%)
Interaction p-value = 0.11
HR 1.12
3m TRT better 6m TRT better
Non-Inferiority
1.0
NI Margin
DFS HR = 1.0195% CI, 0.90 to 1.12
HR 1.12
3m TRT better 6m TRT better
Inferiority
1.0
NI Margin
DFS HR = 1.1295% CI, 1.03 to 1.23
TRT: treatmentGrothey A et al. NEJM 2018
18
N2
N1
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
--
4583 4006 3334 2262 1212 600 2344585 4064 3378 2337 1265 658 2511798 1409 1108 721 387 222 851769 1429 1072 712 408 214 83
mITT: DFS Comparison by N Groups: N1 vs N2
IDEA, Shi Q et al , personal data
N1
N2
19
T4
T1-3
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
--
5068 4397 3665 2518 1387 714 2855022 4412 3624 2519 1416 744 2941320 1023 777 466 213 108 351335 1082 826 527 251 123 37
mITT: DFS Comparison by N Groups: T1-T3 vs T4
IDEA, Shi Q et al , personal data
T1-T3
T4
20
T4 or N2
T1-3 N1
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
--
3744 3313 2796 1934 1064 527 2113727 3336 2788 1949 1081 566 2212634 2099 1640 1044 531 292 1072622 2151 1655 1094 586 301 110
mITT: DFS Comparison by N Groups: Low Risk vs High risk
IDEA, Shi Q et al , personal data
T1-T3 N1
T4 or N2
21
mITT population T4 or N2 FOLFOX
mITT population T4 or N2 XELOX
1531 1242 937 648 396 228 1031523 1189 900 612 360 216 94
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Years from Randomization
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Years from Randomization
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
Stratified Non Inferiority P-value: 0.8825
1091 909 718 446 190 73 71111 910 740 432 171 76 13
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Years from Randomization
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Years from Randomization
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Perc
ent W
ithou
t Eve
nt
Stratified Non Inferiority P-value: 0.0974
mITT: DFS T4 and/or N2 FOLFOX vs XELOX
IDEA, Shi Q et al , personal data
22
(3m/6m)HR
6m ArmPatients
3m ArmPatients
1.07
1.07
1.16
1.12
1.07
1.04
1.01
1769
841
1335
2622
4585
4181
3727
1798
849
1320
2634
4583
4219
3744
N2
T1/T2
T4
T4 or N2
N1
T3
T1-3 N1
N stage
T stage
Risk Group
0.5 1 1.12 1.5Hazard Ratio
Favors 3m Favors 6m
mITT: DFS Comparison by Stage, cont.
InteractionP-value
0.44
0.36
0.11
Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018
23
mITT: DFS Comparison by Regimen, N, T and Low versus High risk
Grothey A et al. NEJM 2018
+2.4% - 1.1% +1.1% +0.2% +0.3% + 3.3% +0.2% +1.7%
24
My Consensus: Risk-based approach to adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III colon cancer
Stage Recommended durationof adjuvant therapy
T1-3 N1CAPOX or
(FOLFOX)
Stop at 3 months if CAPOX T1-T3 N2 ?
Clinical decision point- Tolerability of therapy- Regimen FOLFOX or CAPOX- Patient preference- T4 or N2
If FOLFOX and or T4Continue oxaliplatin with stop if neuropathy ≥ grade 2and continue fluoropyrimidines
T4 and/or N2CAPOX or FOLFOX
3 months
6 months
3 months
End of therapy
25
KRAS, BRAF, MSI assessments
• Important for clinical research: • Stratification factors for future clinical trials (Kras and
Braf)
• For daily practice: No interest for the indication and choice of adjuvant treatment
- except MSI / dMMR in elderly subjects because if a chemo is decided, indication to a combination of fluoropyrimidines and oxaliplatin is mandatory
26
IDEA and after ?• 20 000 patients included in 8 studies for evolution of 3 drugs: irinotecan,
bevacizumab and cetuximab
• 1000 Millions of Dollars (cost of one adjuvant trial with2000 patients with a new drug ≥ 80-130 Millions $)
• A disaster for patients, physicians, and companies
• Difficult to find a new industrial partner !
• No indisputable signals emerging from results of trials performed in the metastatic setting, which argue to go in adjuvant settings 1
• We need study with selected population with a predictive test for new drugs
de Gramont A et al, Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 2013
28Song N et al. JAMA Oncol 2016
The consensus molecular subtypes of CRC
Clinical Outcome From Oxaliplatin Treatment in Stage II/III Colon Cancer According to Intrinsic Subtypes: Secondary Analysis of NSABP C-07/NRG Oncology Randomized Clinical Trial.
The stemlike subtype (CMS3 and 4) was associated with poor prognosis and lack of benefit from oxaliplatin (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.73-1.34]; P = .96 [N = 367]).
30
Digital Droplet PCR for Circulating Tumor DNA
Pekin D. et al., Quantitative and sensitive detection of rare mutations using droplet-based microfluidics, Lab on Chip, 2011: 2156-66.Taly V. et al., Detecting biomarkers with microdroplet technology,Trends in Molecular Medicine, 2012;18:405-16.
31Tie J et al., abstr. 3516 ASCO 2018
• 95 patients with colon cancer stage III• Fluoropyrimidine alone: 23 % and Fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin : 77 %
Colon Cancer Stage III : tumoral circulating DNA
32
New Trials for stage III in 2018
• Strong prognostic factor: ctDNA- DYNAMIC-III, Phase III for stage III guided by ctDNA
• Focus on T4 or N2 because 40% relapse and need only between 500 to 800 patients to answer the question
- IROCAS/PRODIGE study: FOLFOX6 vs FOLFIRINOX
• Predictive factor of efficacy- MSI/dMMR (NCT02912559 with atezolizumab)- Aspirin and mutation of PI3K (1 PRODIGE study in France with aspirin)- High Immuno-Score and Immuno-oncology ?
33
Take home message stage III
• T stage affects colon cancer survival more significantly than the N stage
• Prognosis if stage III T1-T3 N1 : DFS is 83% with 3 or 6 months of fluoropyrimidines & oxaliplatin and 3 months of CAPOX will be the new standard
• Prognosis if stage III T4 or N2 : DFS is 62.7 % with 3 and 64.4% with 6 months of fluoropyrimidines & oxaliplatin: 6 months of CAPOX or FOLFOX are the standard, with stopping oxaliplatin in case of neuropathy grade ≥ 2