Abstract:In this issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology, Saltz et al report the results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 89803, a prospective randomized phase III trial of adjuvant therapy for patients with stage III colon cancer. In this study, patients with resected stage III adenocarcinoma of the colon were assigned to treatment with fluorouracil (FU) plus leucovorin (LV; weekly 6, every 8 weeks for four cycles) or FU plus LV plus irinotecan (CPT-11; weekly 4, every 6 weeks for five cycles). This welldesigned and well-conducted clinical trial by the publicly funded National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD) cooperative group system clearly demonstrated that CPT-11 plus FU plus LV failed to improve disease-free, recurrence-free, or overall survival compared with FU plus LV. These results were unexpected. After all, CPT-11 had previously shown clear activity in patients with metastatic cancer—the accepted proving ground for subsequent adjuvant therapies. In 1996, CPT-11 was granted accelerated US Food and Drug Administration approval based on phase II single-agent activity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to FU. Full approval was granted approximately 2 years later based on randomized phase III trials that demonstrated a modest (2 to 3 months) survival benefit from CPT-11 compared with best supportive care, or to infusional FU in patients who had previously received bolus FU. Subsequent phase III studies showed that CPT-11 improved survival when added to FU plus LV compared with FU plus LV in the initial management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. One of these CPT-11 regimens, CPT-11 plus FU plus LV, was selected as the experimental arm of CALGB 89803. We may consider several potential explanations for the negative results of CALGB 89803. One might initially question whether the weekly bolus CPT-11 plus FU plus LV regimen was an optimal choice for the experimental arm. At the time that CALGB 89803 was designed, the CPT-11 plus FU plus LV regimen was the standard in North America FU plus LV plus CPT-11 regimen in North America. During the study, toxicity concerns surfaced, including an excess of toxic deaths on the experimental arm. It would be useful to know whether there was a substantial imbalance in scheduled therapy delivered between the study conditions that might help explain the outcomes. In fact, Saltz et al note that nearly twice as many patients withdrew consent or discontinued treatment on the CPT-11 plus FU plus LV arm than in the control group. Subsequent to this trial, data emerged to suggest that infusional FU delivery has a superior therapeutic index in combination with CPT-11. However, preliminary results of two additional adjuvant studies comparing infusional FU plus LV to infusional FU plus LV plus CPT-11 also failed to demonstrate superiority of the CPT-11– containing arms. Therefore, a demonstrable lack of activity for CPT-11 in the adjuvant setting has been consistently observed. These data must be interpreted in the context of other studies that demonstrated improved recurrence-free survival when oxaliplatin is added to a FU plus LV backbone as adjuvant therapy. The benefit of CPT-11 in patients with metastatic disease in terms of response rate and progression is similar to that observed with oxaliplatin. In addition, two studies comparing infusional FU plus oxaliplatin to infusional FU plus CPT-11 as initial therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer showed equivalent response rates, time to progression, and overall survival between the study arms. Thus, one may have reasonably expected similar results in the adjuvant setting. However, these advanced disease studies comparing oxaliplatin and CPT-11 were of moderate size and were not powered to demonstrate equivalency. The trial reported by Tournigand et al included 220 patients and was designed to have 80% power to detect a 20% difference in the proportion of patients without progression at 15 months. Similarly, Colucci et al enrolled 336 patients with response rate as the primary objective, with statistical power to demonstrate a 15% difference between the arms. Thus, it is plausible that there are subtle differences in the clinical activity of CPT-11 and oxaliplatin that were not observed in underpowered trials in patients with metastatic disease, but became manifest in much larger trials in the adjuvant setting. Furthermore, patient preferences and tolerance of specific toxicities that differ between regimens (such as alopecia or hospitalization rate) might become more apparent in the adjuvant setting where premature treatment discontinuation could affect long-term outcomes. Underlying successful application of adjuvant therapy is the hypothesis that microscopic metastatic disease exists and can be eradicated with systemic treatment. Another possible explanation for the findings of CALGB 89803, and other adjuvant studies of CPT-11 in combination with FU plus LV, is that mechanisms of CPT-11 resistance might be expressed in micrometastases to a greater extent than in macrometastatic colon cancer. The primary mechanism of action for CPT-11 is interference with JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY E D I T O R I A L VOLUME 25 NUMBER 23 AUGUST 1

Primary optic pathways in the echidna, Tachyglossus aculeatus: An experimental degeneration study

A renewed call for equipoise.

Effects of the Aging Period and Method on the Physicochemical, Microbiological and Rheological Characteristics of Two Cuts of Charolais Beef

Effects of Feeding Regimes and Postmortem Aging on Meat Quality, Fatty Acid Composition, and Volatile Flavor of Longissimus Thoracis Muscle in Sunit Sheep

Effect of Aging Time on Physicochemical Meat Quality and Sensory Property of Hanwoo Bull Beef

Impact of sampling location and aging on the Longissimus thoracis et lumborum muscle proteome of dry-aged beef

Sirolimus-induced drug fever and ciclosporin-induced leukencephalopathia with seizures in one liver transplant recipient.

Effect of accelerated aging on shelf-stability, product loss, sensory and biochemical characteristics in 2 lower quality beef cuts

Microbial, Physicochemical Profile and Sensory Perception of Dry-Aged Beef Quality: A Preliminary Portuguese Contribution to the Validation of the Dry Aging Process

[EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON AN ALLERGY OF THE DELAYED TYPE AFTER BURNS AND ITS HOMOLOGOUS TRANSMISSION].

Changes in Physical Meat Traits, Protein Solubility, and the Microstructure of Different Beef Muscles during Post-Mortem Aging

Variations in the Metabolome of Unaged and Aged Beef from Black-and-White Cows and Heifers by 1H NMR Spectroscopy

Automated sample preparation in a microfluidic culture device for cellular metabolomics.

BIG-SKY-EARTH: Reinforcing the bridge between astro- and geo-informatics

THE RELATION TO INVASION OF GLYCOSIDASES IN MOUSE TUMOURS.

Beef Carcasses Aged at Mild Temperature to Improve Sustainability of Meat Production

Feeding, Muscle and Packaging Effects on Lipid Oxidation and Color of Avileña Negra-Ibérica Beef

Evaluation of the postmortem ageing process of beef M. semitendinosus based on ultrasound-assisted l-histidine treatment

Comparison of Muscle Amino Acid and Fatty Acid Composition of Castrated and Uncastrated Male Pigs at Different Slaughter Ages

Physico-chemical and sensory characteristics of young dairy bull beef derived from two breed types across five production systems employing two first season feeding regimes

The effect of aging on beef taste, aroma and texture, and the role of microorganisms: a review