PURPOSE Total neoadjuvant therapy is a new paradigm for rectal cancer treatment. Optimal scheduling of preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and chemotherapy remains to be established. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a multicenter, randomized, phase II trial using a pick-the-winner design on the basis of the hypothesis of an increased pathologic complete response (pCR) of 25% after total neoadjuvant therapy compared with standard 15% after preoperative CRT. Patients with stage II or III rectal cancer were assigned to group A for induction chemotherapy using three cycles of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin before fluorouracil/oxaliplatin CRT (50.4 Gy) or to group B for consolidation chemotherapy after CRT. Secondary end points included toxicity, compliance, and surgical morbidity. RESULTS Of the 311 patients enrolled, 306 patients were evaluable (156 in group A and 150 in group B). CRT-related grade 3 or 4 toxicity was lower (37% v 27%) and compliance with CRT higher in group B (91%, 78%, and 76% v 97%, 87%, and 93% received full-dose radiotherapy, concomitant fluorouracil, and concomitant oxaliplatin in groups A and B, respectively); 92% versus 85% completed all induction/consolidation chemotherapy cycles, respectively. The longer interval between completion of CRT and surgery in group B (median 90 v 45 days in group A) did not increase surgical morbidity. A pCR in the intention-to-treat population was achieved in 17% in group A and in 25% in group B. Thus, only group B ( P < .001), but not group A ( P = .210), fulfilled the predefined statistical hypothesis. CONCLUSION Up-front CRT followed by chemotherapy resulted in better compliance with CRT but worse compliance with chemotherapy compared with group A. Long-term follow-up will assess whether improved pCR in group B translates to better oncologic outcome.
Complete and intermediate tumor regressions were associated with improved long-term outcome in patients with rectal carcinoma after preoperative CRT independent of clinicopathologic parameters. This classification system needs to be prospectively tested in multiple data sets to validate its reproducibility in a wider setting.
Purpose Gemcitabine is standard of care in the adjuvant treatment of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib in combination with gemcitabine has shown efficacy in the treatment of advanced PDAC and was considered to improve survival in patients with primarily resectable PDAC after R0 resection. Patients and Methods In an open-label, multicenter trial, patients were randomly assigned to one of two study arms: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m days 1, 8, 15, every 4 weeks plus erlotinib 100 mg once per day (GemErlo) or gemcitabine (Gem) alone for six cycles. The primary end point of the study was to improve disease-free survival (DFS) from 14 to 18 months by adding erlotinib to gemcitabine. Results In all, 436 patients were randomly assigned at 57 study centers between April 2008 and July 2013. A total of 361 instances (83%) of disease recurrence were observed after a median follow-up of 54 months. Median treatment duration was 22 weeks in both arms. There was no difference in median DFS (GemErlo 11.4 months; Gem 11.4 months) or median overall survival (GemErlo 24.5 months; Gem 26.5 months). There was a trend toward long-term survival in favor of GemErlo (estimated survival after 1, 2, and 5 years for GemErlo was 77%, 53%, and 25% v 79%, 54%, and 20% for Gem, respectively). The occurrence or the grade of rash was not associated with a better survival in the GemErlo arm. Conclusion To the best of our knowledge, CONKO-005 is the first study to investigate the combination of chemotherapy and a targeted therapy in the adjuvant treatment of PDAC. GemErlo for 24 weeks did not improve DFS or overall survival over Gem.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.