3545 POSTER Long-term results of the phase II study on radiotherapy combined with nedaplatin and 5-FU for postoperative locoregional recurrent esophageal cancer

719 Background: Previously, single anti-CEA-radioimmunotherapy (RAIT) with 131iodine(I)-labetuzumab after complete (R0) resection of CEA-positive CLM was well tolerated and improved overall survival (OS) compared to a control group without RAIT. In this phase II study, we examined safety, feasibility, and long-term efficacy of repeated RAIT in the same setting. Methods: After R0-resection of CEA-positive CLM, 63 pts (42 m, 21 f; median age, 64.5 yrs) with synchronous (n=33) or metachronous (n=30) CLM received RAIT with 40-50 mCi/m2 per dose. 45 pts were intermediate/high risk for early metastatic relapse according to the Fong score. Restaging with CT/MRI and FDG-PET was performed prior to each RAIT. Pts with persistent elevated serum CEA-levels or inconclusive lesions during post-operative restaging received RAIT, but were classified as “non-adjuvant.” Toxicity was classified according to NCI-CTC v2.0. Time to progression (TTP), OS and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were calculated. The median follow-up was 54 (range 6-127) mos. Results: After the first cycle of RAIT 14 of 63 pts experienced grade 4 hematological toxicity. Nineteen pts did not receive the second cycle of RAIT due to prolonged toxicity, impaired performance status (n=6), or metastatic relapse (n=13). The latter were further treated by resection (n=3) or systemic chemotherapy (n=10). Forty-four pts received the planned second cycle of RAIT. Of these, 4 pts newly experienced grade 4 hematological toxicity. For all 63 pts, the median TTP, OS and CSS were 13, 57 and 92 months, respectively. The truly “adjuvant” pts (n=39) had a an improved median TTP (26 vs. 6.6 mos, p<0.0001), OS (76 vs. 42 mos, p=0.03) and CSS (not reached vs. 42 mos, p=0.003) in comparison to “non-adjuvant” pts (n=24). Conclusions: Repeated anti-CEA-RAIT with 131I-labetuzumab is safe, feasible, and well-tolerated (100% compliance), with expected hematological toxicity. The long-term survival after RAIT is very encouraging, in particular for pts deemed truly “adjuvant” post-salvage resection of CLM at restaging prior to RAIT.

Download Full-text

Long term results and patterns of recurrence from SCOPE 1: A phase II/III randomised trial of definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) plus or minus cetuximab (dCRT+C) in esophageal cancer.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2016.34.4_suppl.118 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽

pp. 118-118 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Somnath Mukherjee ◽

Chris Hurt ◽

Stephen Falk ◽

Simon Gollins ◽

John Staffurth ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Esophageal Cancer ◽

Phase Ii ◽

Randomised Trial ◽

Multivariable Analysis ◽

Dose Intensity ◽

Long Term Results ◽

Full Dose ◽

Number Of Patients ◽

Patterns Of Recurrence

118 Background: One of the largest trials in dCRT for localised oesophageal cancer, SCOPE 1 tested the role of adding cetuximab to conventional dCRT, and showed that this was associated with greater toxicity and worse survival. Here we present the long-term outcomes. Methods: Phase II/III trial. Randomisation: cisplatin 60mg/m2 D1 and capecitabine 625mg/m2 daily D1-21 for 4 cycles with/without Cetuximab 400mg/m2 D1 followed by 250mg/m2weekly. RT: 50Gy in 25 fractions given concurrent with cycles 3 and 4. Recruitment: Feb 2008 - Feb 2012, when the IDMC recommended trial closure on the basis of futility. Results: 258 patients (dCRT = 129; dCRT+C = 129) were recruited from 36 centres. Median follow-up (IQR): 46.7 (36.0-49.0) months for all surviving pts. 65.1% (dCRT arm) and 69.8% (dCRT+C arm) of patients had died. Esophageal cancer was the cause in 82.1% and 86.7% of deaths respectively (p = 0.41). Median OS months (95% CI) was 34.5 (24.7-42.3) in dCRT and 24.7 (18.6-31.3) in dCRT+C (HR 1.25, p = 0.137); corresponding 3-year OS (95% CI) was 47.2% (38.2%-55.7%) and 37.6% (29.1%-46.0%). Median PFS (95% CI): 24.1 (15.3-29.9) and 15.9 (10.7-20.8) months respectively (HR1.28, p = 0.114). There was some evidence that local PFS (within RT field) was lower in the dCRT+C arm (HR1.38, p = 0.051). On multivariable analysis including treatment arm, Stage I-II ds (vs Stage III), full-dose RT and higher cisplatin dose intensity ( ≥ 75% vs < 75%) were associated with improved OS and PFS. Patterns of recurrence (n [%]) were similar in both arms (see table). In dCRT arm, 31/38 pts (81.6%) with local relapse within the RT field compared to 40/48 (83.3%) in the dCRT+C arm (p = 0.8). Conclusions: The mature analysis shows unprecedented survival in dCRT arm, comparable to surgical trials (e.g. 3-year OS % [95% CIs] in OE05: CF 39 [35, 44] and ECX 42 [37, 46], in OE02: 31 [27, 36]). OS inferiority of dCRT+C is no longer statistically significant. The lower PFS (within RT field) in the dCRT+C arm was consistent with the lower number of patients receiving full dose of RT in the dCRT+C arm. Clinical trial information: 47718479. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text