Anal Cancer Rob Glynne-Jones Mount Vernon Cancer Centre on behalf of NCRI anal cancer subgroup.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (bev) vs FOLFIRI plus bev

Advertisements

Xeloda X-panding options in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer

An Intergroup Randomised Trial of Rituximab versus a Watch & Wait Approach in Patients with Advanced Stage, Asymptomatic, Non-bulky Follicular Lymphoma.

I I. B.- T R E A T M E N T P L A N: DOCETAXEL 75 mg/m2 40 mg/m2 THORACIC RT (66 Gys: 180 cGy/d) CISPLATIN 40 mg/m2 Days E V A L U A.

Rectal Cancer: Advanced Technologies Chris Willett, M.D. Department of Radiation Oncology Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC.

Statements on Head and Neck Cancer 2006 Primary Radiochemotherapy Arlene A. Forastiere, M.D. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Department of.

Follicular lymphoma Optimal primary therapy and consolidation ? Seminars in Hematological Oncology * Israel, April M. Dreyling, Dept. of Medicine.

1 N9841: A Randomized Phase III Equivalence Trial of Irinotecan (CPT-11) versus FOLFOX4 in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Carcinoma Previously Treated.

Controversies in Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer Parag Sanghvi M.D. Tasha McDonald M.D. Department of Radiation Medicine OHSU.

Have the OPTIMOX-2, CAIRO-3, COIN, DREAM and other recent trials settled the question of maintenance versus observation in advanced CRC? Yes Deborah Schrag,

ANDREW NG PRINCE OF WALES HOSPITAL Role of primary chemoradiation in esophageal carcinoma.

Chemotherapy in Anal cancer ?Lessons for vulva ANZGOG 2013 Michelle Vaughan.

Mary McCormack & Jonathan Ledermann NCRI Gynae Clinical Studies Group.

Hot topics in breast radiotherapy Mark Beresford.

Phase III Study Comparing Gemcitabine plus Cetuximab versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Southwest.

GCIG Meeting 29th May 2009 The Implications of Primary Chemotherapy for Clinical Trials Iain McNeish Professor of Gynaecological Oncology Barts and the.

IMRT for the Treatment of Anal Cancer Kristen O’Donnell, MS3 December 12, 2007.

C. ENG 1, G. J. CHANG 2, P. DAS 3, M. RODRIGUEZ-BIGAS 2, J. M. SKIBBER 2, W. QIAO 4, G. L. ROSNER 4, L. T. UKEGBU 1, R. A. WOLFF 1, C.H. CRANE 3 DEPARTMENT.

Patterns of Care in Medical Oncology Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Treatment of Rectal Cancer.

Sequential vs. concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell carcinoma.

1 Phase II trial of sequential gemcitabine and carboplatin followed by paclitaxel as first-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma Presented by.

Dr Mark Saunders Christie Hospital and Paterson Institute of Cancer Research “Anal cancer chemoradiotherapy”

Phase III studies of Xeloda® in colorectal cancer (CRC)

Oxaliplatin/5FU/LV in adjuvant colon cancer: Updated efficacy results of the MOSAIC trial, including survival, with a median follow-up.

Adjuvant Therapy of Colon Cancer 2005 Daniel G. Haller, M.D. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA.

What to do in stage III non small-cell lung cancer? Miklos Pless 28. November 2013.

What is the reference cytotoxic regimen in advanced gastric cancer? Florian Lordick Klinikum Braunschweig Germany.

Assistant Professor of Medicine Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

This house believes that FOLFIRINOX is the best treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma Pro Marc YCHOU Montpellier.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy with 5-FU and oxaliplatin versus 5-FU alone in locally advanced rectal cancer: First results.

Phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without irinotecan in the front-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in elderly patients. FFCD

Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing FOLFIRINOX (F: 5FU/Leucovorin [LV], Irinotecan [I], and Oxaliplatin [O]) versus Gemcitabine (G) as First-Line Treatment.

T Andre, E Quinaux, C Louvet, E Gamelin, O Bouche, E Achille, P Piedbois, N Tubiana-Mathieu, M Buyse and A de Gramont. Updated results at 6 year of the.

Comparison of SIB-IMRT and Conventional Accelerated Hyper-fractionated IMRT With Concurrent Cisplatin and Etoposide for Limited Disease SCLC Baosheng Li.

Gemcitabine + Cisplatin +/- Bevacizumab as 1st-line Treatment of Advanced NSCLC: AVAiL Study Manegold PASCO 25:#7514, 2007/Ann.

CJ Allegra, G Yothers, MJ O’Connell, MS Roh, RW Beart, NJ Petrelli, S Lopa, S Sharif, and N Wolmark Neoadjuvant Therapy For Rectal Cancer: Mature Results.

EARLY PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH HIGH-RISK SOFT TISSUE SARCOMAS AN ANALYSIS FROM A PHASE III RANDOMIZED PROSPECTIVE TRIAL (EORTC 62961/ESHO) OF NEOADJUVANT.

THE OUTBACK TRIAL A Phase III trial of adjuvant chemotherapy following chemoradiation as primary treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer compared.

Rituximab maintenance for the treatment of indolent NHL Dr Christian Buske.

A prospective randomized trial

Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemo-bevacizumab therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized.

A Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Consolidation with a Single Dose of 90 Y Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin ® ) (Z) vs Maintenance with Rituximab (R)

Ruan J et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 247.

AVADO TRIAL David Miles Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, United Kingdom A randomized, double-blind study of bevacizumab in combination with docetaxel.

Background Carcinoma of the anal canal accounts for 1.5% of all digestive system malignancies in the United States. 1 The annual incidence continues to.

Preliminary Results of the MRC CR07 / NCIC CO16 Randomized Trial Short course pre-op vs selective post-op chemo-RT for rectal cancer Local Recurrence after.

Low Dose Decitabine Versus Best Supportive Care in Elderly Patients with Intermediate or High Risk MDS Not Eligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: Final Results.

EORTC OSN/CTOS11 Safety of Caelyx combined with ifosfamide in previously untreated adult patients with advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcomas. Final.

Moskowitz CH et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 673.

Journal Club Dr. Eyad Al-Saeed Radiation Oncology 12 January, 2008.

Multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer. Medical oncology Carlo Aschele E.O. Ospedali Galliera – Genova - Italy Carlo Aschele E.O. Ospedali Galliera.

2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial Aron Goldhirsch, Richard.

Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine and cisplatin vs. gemcitabine alone inpatients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a performance status.

Bladder Cancer R. Zenhäusern.

Alessandra Gennari, MD PhD

Treatment options for HPV+ disease

LUX-Lung 3 clinical trial

Results of Definitive Radiotherapy in Anal Canal Carcinoma

นายแพทย์ธราธร ตุงคะสมิต นายแพทย์ชำนาญการพิเศษ โรงพยาบาลมะเร็งอุดรธานี

Treatment With Continuous, Hyperfractionated, Accelerated Radiotherapy (CHART) For Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): The Weston Park Hospital Experience.

What do we do after FOLFIRINOX? Gemcitabine-Based Therapy is Standard

IMRT delivery of preoperative, high dose radiotherapy to a large volume, with Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) in retroperitoneal sarcomas: The Ottawa.

What is the optimal management of a 43-year-old man with high-risk FL not in CR after R-chemo? Answer: Radioimmunotherapy Peter Martin, M.D. The Charles,

ACT II: The Second UK Phase III Anal Cancer Trial

Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil-based (neo-)adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: safety results of a randomized phase III.

Alan P. Venook, MD University of California, SF

LV5FU2-cisplatin followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: Preliminary results of a randomized phase III trial (FFCD.

Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, CPT-11: Use and Sequencing (MRC FOCUS)

Boccadoro M et al. Proc ASCO 2011;Abstract 8020.

Presentation transcript:

Anal Cancer Rob Glynne-Jones Mount Vernon Cancer Centre on behalf of NCRI anal cancer subgroup

Aim to discuss The EORTC trials in anal cancer US and UK trials What we have learnt so far Where do we go from here?

Randomised trials UKCCR ACT 1 CRT vs RT EORTC CRT vs RT RTOG 8704/ECOG Role of MMC RTOG Role of NACT/cisplat ACCORD-03 Role of NACT cisplat/ RT dose CRUK ACT 2 Role of cisplat vs MMC + maintenance 5FU/cisplat EORTC Role of 5FU vs CDDP/MMC not extended to phase III

UKCCCR Anal Cancer Trial (ACT 1) CMT – 45Gy + Mitomycin C 5FU RT alone 45Gy Boost 25Gy implant or 15Gy in 6F Boost 25Gy implant or 15Gy in 6F 6 weeks

ACT I :Time to first local relapse Percentage of patients having a local relapse (%) Time since randomisation (years) RT alone CMT HR 0.46, p<0.001

Colostomy-free survival

ACT II Factorial Design Chemoradiation Comparison MMC 5FU CRT No maintenance CisP 5FU CRT No maintenance MMC 5FU CRT +Maintenance CisP 5FU CRT +Maintenance MMC N=472 CisP N=468 versus

MMC 5FU CRT No maintenance CisP 5FU CRT No maintenance MMC 5FU CRT Maintenance CisP 5FU CRT Maintenance No Maint N=446 Maint N=448 versus ACT II Factorial Design Maintenance Comparison

Chemoradiation Regimens RT week 5FU MMC RT week 5FU CisP 1000mg/m 2 d1-4 & hour continuous iv infusion 12mg/m 2 d1 only iv bolus, max single dose 20 mg 60mg/m 2 d1 & 29 iv infusion 1000mg/m 2 d1-4 & hour continuous iv infusion 6 6

ACT II Endpoints Chemoradiation (CRT) comparison Primary Endpoints Complete response rate at 6 months Acute Toxicity (CTC Grade 3 & 4) Maintenance comparison Primary Endpoint Recurrence Free Survival Both comparisons Secondary Endpoints Colostomy Rate Cause-specific & Overall survival

50.4 Gy in 28 fractions over 5 ½ weeks (no gap) Phase I 30.6 Gy in 17 fractions Parallel opposed 3cm below inf. tumour (or margin) Anal bolus Phase II GTV + 3cm 19.8Gy in 11 fractions N0 groins Planned volume (canal) Direct field (margin only) N+ groins all GTV +3cm Anal bolus

Mean Doses Received PTV primary 51.37Gy ± 0.84 (95% CI) PTV inguinal nodes 51.41Gy ± 1.54 Uninvolved inguinal 36.53Gy ± 3.38 Uninvolved external iliac 34.28Gy Femoral heads 47.32Gy ± 3.45 Aggarwal A, et al., Radiother Oncol Jun;103(3):341-6

Tumour Stage MMC (472) CisP (468) T stage T1 T2 49% (232)54% (254) T3 T4 48% (225)44% (205) TX 1513 N Stage Node negative 63% (297)62% (290) Node positive 32% (150)33% (155) NX 2523

Response at 26 weeks Patients with response data (863) MMC (432/472) CisP (431/468) CR primary 90% CR N0 83% (358) 84% (362) CR N+ 3% (15)3% (12) CR Nx 4% (18)3% (12) PR 3% (14)6% (24) SD 1% (5)1% (6) PD 5% (22)3% (15) P=0.66

ACT II Compliance & Toxicity Radiotherapy –92% MMC vs 90% CisP - total dose 50.4Gy –~3% >7 days interruptions Chemotherapy - weeks 1 & 5 –75% MMC vs 72% CisP full dose weeks 1 & 5 Acute toxicity –58% MMC vs 60% CisP Grade 3 –13% MMC vs 12% CisP Grade 4 –71% MMC vs 72% CisP combined Grade 3/4

CR at 26 weeks Difference (95% CI)P value MMCCisP 83% (358/432) 84% (362/431) +1% (-3.8 to 6.1)p =0.66 No MaintMaint 82% (337/409) 85% (348/410) +3% (-2.6 to 7.5)p = 0.34

PFS -free survival MMC vs CisP comparison 73% 74%

Overall Survival CR vs Not CR week 26 93% 61%

ACT II – Conclusions Excellent CR rate at 6 months - 83% v 84% - no difference MMC/Cisp No difference in colostomy rate No difference in PFS 60% of pts not in CR at 11 weeks achieved CR at 26 weeks. We recommend assessment at 26 weeks in future trials

Maintenance Comparison- Recurrence Free Survival Event is progression, recurrence or death Recurrence-free survival (%) Maint No Maint No. at risk Time from randomisation (years) No Maint events Maint events HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.24, P= %

Overall survival (%) Maint No Maint No. at risk Time from randomisation (years) HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.13, P= % 85% No Maint - 74 events Maint - 60 events Maintenance Comparison - Overall Survival HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.13, P=0.21

ACT II – Conclusions 2 Maintenance comparison Preliminary data shown 2009 Median follow-up now 5 years No evidence of any difference in PFS, cause specific survival or overall survival

ACT II Timing of pelvic recurrences (93% in years 1-3) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Site of relapse Number% total relapses PELVIC NO METS13364% PELVIC WITH METS3014% DISTANT METS ONLY 4622% TOTAL CRUDE PF (WITH OR WITHOUT METS) 16378% TOTAL RELAPSES209 The pattern was similar for PF only and PF + mets (data not shown)

ACCORD- 03 Locally advanced >4cm or N1 anal canal Therapeutic intensification –Induction chemotherapy –High dose radiotherapy Primary endpoint: colostomy-free-survival(CFS). Secondary endpoint : QoL, local control (LC), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival.

ACCORD 03 70% 82% 77% 73% 5 years CFS

RTOG 9811 Time to Colostomy Cisplat MMC RTOG 9811 Ajani JA et al JAMA 2008

MMC Cisplatin RTOG 9811 Ajani JA et al JAMA 2008 RTOG 9811 Disease Free Survival

Thoughts No longer feasible to think that one size fits all in anal cancer We improved overall 3 year DFS from 54% (ACT I) to 74% (ACT II) We took 7 years to do ACT II We probably need international collaboration for next studies

Radiotherapy strategies which need exploring (1) Optimization of radiotherapy (optimal dose/fractionation/concomitant boost/brachytherapy) (2) Optimal field sizes (3) Evaluation of new radiosensitization protocols (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, taxanes). (4) Optimization of radiotherapy techniques (IMRT/VMAT/Brachytherapy)