Clinical Edge Journal Scan

Key clinical point: Radium-223 in combination with enzalutamide is safe in the long term and improves second-line prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) vs. enzalutamide alone.

Major finding: Median follow-up was 22 months. Radium-223 plus enzalutamide vs. enzalutamide alone did not improve median overall survival (P = .73), PSA-PFS (P = .97), and radiographic PFS (P= .96). Radium-223 plus enzalutamide vs enzalutamide alone significantly improved second-line PSA-PFS (18.7 months vs 8.41 months; P = .033).

Study details: A phase 2 randomized trial of 47 patients with mCRPC randomly assigned to receive either radium-223 dichloride with enzalutamide or enzalutamide alone.

Disclosures: The study was supported by the University of Utah. The authors did not disclose any conflict of interests.

Source: Maughan BL et al. Oncologist. 2021 Aug 22. doi: 10.1002/onco.13949.

Key clinical point: Radium-223 in combination with enzalutamide is safe in the long term and improves second-line prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) vs. enzalutamide alone.

Major finding: Median follow-up was 22 months. Radium-223 plus enzalutamide vs. enzalutamide alone did not improve median overall survival (P = .73), PSA-PFS (P = .97), and radiographic PFS (P= .96). Radium-223 plus enzalutamide vs enzalutamide alone significantly improved second-line PSA-PFS (18.7 months vs 8.41 months; P = .033).

Study details: A phase 2 randomized trial of 47 patients with mCRPC randomly assigned to receive either radium-223 dichloride with enzalutamide or enzalutamide alone.

Disclosures: The study was supported by the University of Utah. The authors did not disclose any conflict of interests.

Source: Maughan BL et al. Oncologist. 2021 Aug 22. doi: 10.1002/onco.13949.

Key clinical point: Radium-223 in combination with enzalutamide is safe in the long term and improves second-line prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) vs. enzalutamide alone.

Major finding: Median follow-up was 22 months. Radium-223 plus enzalutamide vs. enzalutamide alone did not improve median overall survival (P = .73), PSA-PFS (P = .97), and radiographic PFS (P= .96). Radium-223 plus enzalutamide vs enzalutamide alone significantly improved second-line PSA-PFS (18.7 months vs 8.41 months; P = .033).

Study details: A phase 2 randomized trial of 47 patients with mCRPC randomly assigned to receive either radium-223 dichloride with enzalutamide or enzalutamide alone.

Disclosures: The study was supported by the University of Utah. The authors did not disclose any conflict of interests.

Source: Maughan BL et al. Oncologist. 2021 Aug 22. doi: 10.1002/onco.13949.

Key clinical point: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in combination with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positron emission tomography (PET) decreases false negatives for clinically significant prostate cancer vs. MRI alone in men with suspected prostate cancer.

Major finding: PSMA-PET+MRI vs. MRI alone improved negative predictive value (91% vs 72%; test ratio, 1.27; P < .001) and sensitivity (97% vs 83%; P < .001). PSMA-PET+MRI missed 5 cases of clinically significant cancer.

Study details: A prospective, phase 2, multicenter PRIMARY trial of 291 men with suspected prostate cancer who underwent MRI, PSMA-PET, and biopsy.

Disclosures: The study was supported by grants from St Vincent’s Curran Foundation, St Vincent’s Clinic Foundation, Cancer Institute of New South Wales, and Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research, and Enterprise. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Emmett L et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Aug 28. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.002.

Key clinical point: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in combination with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positron emission tomography (PET) decreases false negatives for clinically significant prostate cancer vs. MRI alone in men with suspected prostate cancer.

Major finding: PSMA-PET+MRI vs. MRI alone improved negative predictive value (91% vs 72%; test ratio, 1.27; P < .001) and sensitivity (97% vs 83%; P < .001). PSMA-PET+MRI missed 5 cases of clinically significant cancer.

Study details: A prospective, phase 2, multicenter PRIMARY trial of 291 men with suspected prostate cancer who underwent MRI, PSMA-PET, and biopsy.

Disclosures: The study was supported by grants from St Vincent’s Curran Foundation, St Vincent’s Clinic Foundation, Cancer Institute of New South Wales, and Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research, and Enterprise. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Emmett L et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Aug 28. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.002.

Key clinical point: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in combination with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positron emission tomography (PET) decreases false negatives for clinically significant prostate cancer vs. MRI alone in men with suspected prostate cancer.

Major finding: PSMA-PET+MRI vs. MRI alone improved negative predictive value (91% vs 72%; test ratio, 1.27; P < .001) and sensitivity (97% vs 83%; P < .001). PSMA-PET+MRI missed 5 cases of clinically significant cancer.

Study details: A prospective, phase 2, multicenter PRIMARY trial of 291 men with suspected prostate cancer who underwent MRI, PSMA-PET, and biopsy.

Disclosures: The study was supported by grants from St Vincent’s Curran Foundation, St Vincent’s Clinic Foundation, Cancer Institute of New South Wales, and Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research, and Enterprise. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Emmett L et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Aug 28. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.002.

Key clinical point: In patients with advanced and heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in combination with avelumab shows good response and is well tolerated.

Major finding: Avelumab in combination with SBRT shows a disease control rate of 48% and an objective response rate of 31%. The confirmed prostate-specific antigen response rate was 23%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event rate was 16%.

Study details: A phase 2 ICE-PAC study of 31 patients with progressive metastatic CRPC who previously received at least 1 androgen receptor-directed therapy were treated with avelumab with SBRT.

Disclosures: The study was supported by Merck Healthcare Pty. Ltd., Australia. The authors received consulting/advisory/speaker fees, travel/accommodation expenses, honoraria, and research funding from various sources. Some authors declared being employed and/or owning stocks in Predicine Inc.

Source: Kwan EM et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Sep 4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.011.

Key clinical point: In patients with advanced and heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in combination with avelumab shows good response and is well tolerated.

Major finding: Avelumab in combination with SBRT shows a disease control rate of 48% and an objective response rate of 31%. The confirmed prostate-specific antigen response rate was 23%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event rate was 16%.

Study details: A phase 2 ICE-PAC study of 31 patients with progressive metastatic CRPC who previously received at least 1 androgen receptor-directed therapy were treated with avelumab with SBRT.

Disclosures: The study was supported by Merck Healthcare Pty. Ltd., Australia. The authors received consulting/advisory/speaker fees, travel/accommodation expenses, honoraria, and research funding from various sources. Some authors declared being employed and/or owning stocks in Predicine Inc.

Source: Kwan EM et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Sep 4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.011.

Key clinical point: In patients with advanced and heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in combination with avelumab shows good response and is well tolerated.

Major finding: Avelumab in combination with SBRT shows a disease control rate of 48% and an objective response rate of 31%. The confirmed prostate-specific antigen response rate was 23%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event rate was 16%.

Study details: A phase 2 ICE-PAC study of 31 patients with progressive metastatic CRPC who previously received at least 1 androgen receptor-directed therapy were treated with avelumab with SBRT.

Disclosures: The study was supported by Merck Healthcare Pty. Ltd., Australia. The authors received consulting/advisory/speaker fees, travel/accommodation expenses, honoraria, and research funding from various sources. Some authors declared being employed and/or owning stocks in Predicine Inc.

Source: Kwan EM et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Sep 4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.011.

Key clinical point: Degarelix and leuprolide showed no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at 1 year in patients with prostate cancer.

Major finding: There was no significant difference in the incidence of MACEs between degarelix and leuprolide groups (5.5% vs 4.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.28; P = .53). The rate of disease progression was similar between the groups (HR, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.54). A lower rate of injection site reactions was seen with degarelix vs leuprolide (60.4% vs 26.8%).

Study details: A randomized, open-label, multinational phase 3 PRONOUNCE trial of 545 patients with prostate cancer and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who were randomly assigned to receive degarelix or leuprolide.

Disclosures: This work was supported by Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The authors received grants, consulting/personal fees, membership fees, honoraria, and/or nonfinancial support from various sources. Some of the authors reported being employed at pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Lopes RD et al. Circulation. 2021 Aug 30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056810.

Key clinical point: Degarelix and leuprolide showed no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at 1 year in patients with prostate cancer.

Major finding: There was no significant difference in the incidence of MACEs between degarelix and leuprolide groups (5.5% vs 4.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.28; P = .53). The rate of disease progression was similar between the groups (HR, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.54). A lower rate of injection site reactions was seen with degarelix vs leuprolide (60.4% vs 26.8%).

Study details: A randomized, open-label, multinational phase 3 PRONOUNCE trial of 545 patients with prostate cancer and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who were randomly assigned to receive degarelix or leuprolide.

Disclosures: This work was supported by Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The authors received grants, consulting/personal fees, membership fees, honoraria, and/or nonfinancial support from various sources. Some of the authors reported being employed at pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Lopes RD et al. Circulation. 2021 Aug 30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056810.

Key clinical point: Degarelix and leuprolide showed no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at 1 year in patients with prostate cancer.

Major finding: There was no significant difference in the incidence of MACEs between degarelix and leuprolide groups (5.5% vs 4.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.28; P = .53). The rate of disease progression was similar between the groups (HR, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.54). A lower rate of injection site reactions was seen with degarelix vs leuprolide (60.4% vs 26.8%).

Study details: A randomized, open-label, multinational phase 3 PRONOUNCE trial of 545 patients with prostate cancer and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who were randomly assigned to receive degarelix or leuprolide.

Disclosures: This work was supported by Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The authors received grants, consulting/personal fees, membership fees, honoraria, and/or nonfinancial support from various sources. Some of the authors reported being employed at pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Lopes RD et al. Circulation. 2021 Aug 30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056810.

Key clinical point: In a long-term follow-up, adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer does not show overall survival (OS) benefit after 15 years.

Major finding: The OS curves of the 2 groups converge at 15 years. In the radiotherapy-alone vs combination treatment group, the OS rate at 18 years was 23% vs 23% (hazard ratio, 0.94; P =.94).

Study details: A randomized, phase 3 NRG/RTOG 9408 study of 2,028 patients with localized prostate cancer and prostate-specific antigen of ≤20 ng/mL who were randomly assigned to radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy plus short-term ADT.

Disclosures: This work was supported by National Cancer Institute. The authors performed advisory/consulting roles, received personal fees/grants and/or salary/stipend, chaired committees, and/or were employed by/owned stocks in pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Jones CU et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2021 Aug 31. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.031.

Key clinical point: In a long-term follow-up, adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer does not show overall survival (OS) benefit after 15 years.

Major finding: The OS curves of the 2 groups converge at 15 years. In the radiotherapy-alone vs combination treatment group, the OS rate at 18 years was 23% vs 23% (hazard ratio, 0.94; P =.94).

Study details: A randomized, phase 3 NRG/RTOG 9408 study of 2,028 patients with localized prostate cancer and prostate-specific antigen of ≤20 ng/mL who were randomly assigned to radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy plus short-term ADT.

Disclosures: This work was supported by National Cancer Institute. The authors performed advisory/consulting roles, received personal fees/grants and/or salary/stipend, chaired committees, and/or were employed by/owned stocks in pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Jones CU et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2021 Aug 31. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.031.

Key clinical point: In a long-term follow-up, adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer does not show overall survival (OS) benefit after 15 years.

Major finding: The OS curves of the 2 groups converge at 15 years. In the radiotherapy-alone vs combination treatment group, the OS rate at 18 years was 23% vs 23% (hazard ratio, 0.94; P =.94).

Study details: A randomized, phase 3 NRG/RTOG 9408 study of 2,028 patients with localized prostate cancer and prostate-specific antigen of ≤20 ng/mL who were randomly assigned to radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy plus short-term ADT.

Disclosures: This work was supported by National Cancer Institute. The authors performed advisory/consulting roles, received personal fees/grants and/or salary/stipend, chaired committees, and/or were employed by/owned stocks in pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Jones CU et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2021 Aug 31. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.031.

Key clinical point: Patient-reported outcomes were similar with hypofractionated vs. conventional radiotherapy at 5 years in patients with prostate cancer.

Major finding: There were no differences in the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite or University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index in the overall bowel, urinary, and sexual symptoms between the 3 groups at 5 years.

Study details: Quality of life substudy of phase 3 randomized CHHiP trial of 2,100 patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received conventional (74 Gy in 37 fractions over 7.4 weeks) or hypofractionated (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3.8 weeks) radiotherapy.

Disclosures: This study was supported by Cancer Research UK, Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network, and National Health Service.

Source: Staffurth JN et al. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021 Sep 3. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.07.005.

Key clinical point: Patient-reported outcomes were similar with hypofractionated vs. conventional radiotherapy at 5 years in patients with prostate cancer.

Major finding: There were no differences in the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite or University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index in the overall bowel, urinary, and sexual symptoms between the 3 groups at 5 years.

Study details: Quality of life substudy of phase 3 randomized CHHiP trial of 2,100 patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received conventional (74 Gy in 37 fractions over 7.4 weeks) or hypofractionated (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3.8 weeks) radiotherapy.

Disclosures: This study was supported by Cancer Research UK, Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network, and National Health Service.

Source: Staffurth JN et al. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021 Sep 3. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.07.005.

Key clinical point: Patient-reported outcomes were similar with hypofractionated vs. conventional radiotherapy at 5 years in patients with prostate cancer.

Major finding: There were no differences in the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite or University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index in the overall bowel, urinary, and sexual symptoms between the 3 groups at 5 years.

Study details: Quality of life substudy of phase 3 randomized CHHiP trial of 2,100 patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who received conventional (74 Gy in 37 fractions over 7.4 weeks) or hypofractionated (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3.8 weeks) radiotherapy.

Disclosures: This study was supported by Cancer Research UK, Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network, and National Health Service.

Source: Staffurth JN et al. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021 Sep 3. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.07.005.

Key clinical point: Overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was maintained with the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

Major finding: The change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) total score significantly favored apalutamide vs placebo at treatment cycles 21 (P = .0138) and 25 (P = .0009). No difference was seen in the median time to deterioration in scores for FACT-P and subscales.

Study details: HRQoL analysis of phase 3, randomized SPARTAN trial of patients with nmCRPC who were randomly assigned to receive apalutamide or placebo. All patients continued ADT.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Janssen Research & Development. The authors received consulting/personal/advisory/speaker fees, honoraria, royalties, research funding, lectureship fees, and/or travel expenses from various sources. Some authors reported being an investigator in clinical trials and stock ownership in pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Oudard S et al. Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Aug 31. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.08.005.

Key clinical point: Overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was maintained with the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

Major finding: The change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) total score significantly favored apalutamide vs placebo at treatment cycles 21 (P = .0138) and 25 (P = .0009). No difference was seen in the median time to deterioration in scores for FACT-P and subscales.

Study details: HRQoL analysis of phase 3, randomized SPARTAN trial of patients with nmCRPC who were randomly assigned to receive apalutamide or placebo. All patients continued ADT.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Janssen Research & Development. The authors received consulting/personal/advisory/speaker fees, honoraria, royalties, research funding, lectureship fees, and/or travel expenses from various sources. Some authors reported being an investigator in clinical trials and stock ownership in pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Oudard S et al. Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Aug 31. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.08.005.

Key clinical point: Overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was maintained with the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

Major finding: The change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) total score significantly favored apalutamide vs placebo at treatment cycles 21 (P = .0138) and 25 (P = .0009). No difference was seen in the median time to deterioration in scores for FACT-P and subscales.

Study details: HRQoL analysis of phase 3, randomized SPARTAN trial of patients with nmCRPC who were randomly assigned to receive apalutamide or placebo. All patients continued ADT.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Janssen Research & Development. The authors received consulting/personal/advisory/speaker fees, honoraria, royalties, research funding, lectureship fees, and/or travel expenses from various sources. Some authors reported being an investigator in clinical trials and stock ownership in pharmaceutical companies.

Source: Oudard S et al. Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Aug 31. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.08.005.

Key clinical point: The incidence of ramucirumab-induced infusion-related reaction (IRR) was low in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) who did not receive antihistamine premedication. Moreover, not using antihistamine premedication can reduce medical costs.

Major finding: Overall, IRR was reported in 2 patients (1.4%), both of whom received antihistamine and steroids before the ramucirumab infusion. IRRs were not observed in 41 patients without antihistamine premedication, and these patients were significantly less likely to have IRR vs the previous report of cetuximab (P < .001).

Study details: This was a retrospective, observational study including 147 patients with unresectable CRC who received ramucirumab+FOLFIRI therapy.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Okuyama H et al. Int J Clin Oncol. 2021 Sep 2. doi: 10.1007/s10147-021-02004-9.

Key clinical point: The incidence of ramucirumab-induced infusion-related reaction (IRR) was low in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) who did not receive antihistamine premedication. Moreover, not using antihistamine premedication can reduce medical costs.

Major finding: Overall, IRR was reported in 2 patients (1.4%), both of whom received antihistamine and steroids before the ramucirumab infusion. IRRs were not observed in 41 patients without antihistamine premedication, and these patients were significantly less likely to have IRR vs the previous report of cetuximab (P < .001).

Study details: This was a retrospective, observational study including 147 patients with unresectable CRC who received ramucirumab+FOLFIRI therapy.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Okuyama H et al. Int J Clin Oncol. 2021 Sep 2. doi: 10.1007/s10147-021-02004-9.

Key clinical point: The incidence of ramucirumab-induced infusion-related reaction (IRR) was low in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) who did not receive antihistamine premedication. Moreover, not using antihistamine premedication can reduce medical costs.

Major finding: Overall, IRR was reported in 2 patients (1.4%), both of whom received antihistamine and steroids before the ramucirumab infusion. IRRs were not observed in 41 patients without antihistamine premedication, and these patients were significantly less likely to have IRR vs the previous report of cetuximab (P < .001).

Study details: This was a retrospective, observational study including 147 patients with unresectable CRC who received ramucirumab+FOLFIRI therapy.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Okuyama H et al. Int J Clin Oncol. 2021 Sep 2. doi: 10.1007/s10147-021-02004-9.

Key clinical point: Long-term oncological outcomes after colorectal surgery were not significantly different among patients with ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal cancer (CRC) and sporadic CRC.

Major finding: Disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.32), recurrence-free survival (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.53), and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89-1.48) were similar between the group of patients with ulcerative colitis-associated and sporadic CRC.

Study details: This observational cohort study included 1,332 patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for CRC including 222 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ulcerative colitis who were matched with 1,110 patients with sporadic CRC.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no commercial interest in the subject of the study.

Source: Lin VA et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Sep 5. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10759-8.

Key clinical point: Long-term oncological outcomes after colorectal surgery were not significantly different among patients with ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal cancer (CRC) and sporadic CRC.

Major finding: Disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.32), recurrence-free survival (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.53), and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89-1.48) were similar between the group of patients with ulcerative colitis-associated and sporadic CRC.

Study details: This observational cohort study included 1,332 patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for CRC including 222 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ulcerative colitis who were matched with 1,110 patients with sporadic CRC.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no commercial interest in the subject of the study.

Source: Lin VA et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Sep 5. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10759-8.

Key clinical point: Long-term oncological outcomes after colorectal surgery were not significantly different among patients with ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal cancer (CRC) and sporadic CRC.

Major finding: Disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.32), recurrence-free survival (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.53), and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89-1.48) were similar between the group of patients with ulcerative colitis-associated and sporadic CRC.

Study details: This observational cohort study included 1,332 patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for CRC including 222 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ulcerative colitis who were matched with 1,110 patients with sporadic CRC.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no commercial interest in the subject of the study.

Source: Lin VA et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Sep 5. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10759-8.

Key clinical point: The combination of S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX) with bevacizumab (B-mab) or cetuximab (C-mab) had almost similar efficacy and safety as first-line chemotherapy for previously untreated recurrent advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) with wild-type KRAS.

Major finding: The overall response rates in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab arms were 59.1% and 43.5% (P = .29) and disease control rates were 90.9% and 91.3% (P = .96), respectively. The median overall survival (25.3 months vs 15.5 months; P = .167) and median progression-free survival (11.7 months vs 5.5 months; P = .077) were similar for SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups. Grade 3 or more adverse events were reported by 45.6% and 47.8% of patients in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups, respectively.

Study details: This was a randomized, phase 2 trial including 45 patients with previously untreated, locally advanced, or metastatic CRC with wild-type KRAS randomly assigned to SOX+B-mab or SOX+C-mab.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Nishizawa Y et al. BMC Cancer. 2021 Aug 23. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08690-y.

Key clinical point: The combination of S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX) with bevacizumab (B-mab) or cetuximab (C-mab) had almost similar efficacy and safety as first-line chemotherapy for previously untreated recurrent advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) with wild-type KRAS.

Major finding: The overall response rates in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab arms were 59.1% and 43.5% (P = .29) and disease control rates were 90.9% and 91.3% (P = .96), respectively. The median overall survival (25.3 months vs 15.5 months; P = .167) and median progression-free survival (11.7 months vs 5.5 months; P = .077) were similar for SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups. Grade 3 or more adverse events were reported by 45.6% and 47.8% of patients in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups, respectively.

Study details: This was a randomized, phase 2 trial including 45 patients with previously untreated, locally advanced, or metastatic CRC with wild-type KRAS randomly assigned to SOX+B-mab or SOX+C-mab.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Nishizawa Y et al. BMC Cancer. 2021 Aug 23. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08690-y.

Key clinical point: The combination of S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX) with bevacizumab (B-mab) or cetuximab (C-mab) had almost similar efficacy and safety as first-line chemotherapy for previously untreated recurrent advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) with wild-type KRAS.

Major finding: The overall response rates in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab arms were 59.1% and 43.5% (P = .29) and disease control rates were 90.9% and 91.3% (P = .96), respectively. The median overall survival (25.3 months vs 15.5 months; P = .167) and median progression-free survival (11.7 months vs 5.5 months; P = .077) were similar for SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups. Grade 3 or more adverse events were reported by 45.6% and 47.8% of patients in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups, respectively.

Study details: This was a randomized, phase 2 trial including 45 patients with previously untreated, locally advanced, or metastatic CRC with wild-type KRAS randomly assigned to SOX+B-mab or SOX+C-mab.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies. The authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Nishizawa Y et al. BMC Cancer. 2021 Aug 23. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08690-y.