Background: Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) is a highly heterogeneous cancer with poor survival. Standard curative treatment is chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy. Genomic heterogeneity is a feature of OAC and has been linked to treatment resistance. Methods: Whole-genome sequencing data from 59 treatment-naïve and 18 post-treatment samples from 29 OAC patients was analysed. Twenty-seven of these were enrolled in the DOCTOR trial, sponsored by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group. Two biopsies from each treatment-naïve tumour were assessed to define 'shared' (between both samples) and 'private' (present in one sample) mutations. Results: Mutational signatures SBS2/13 (APOBEC) and SBS3 (BRCA) were almost exclusively detected in private mutation populations of treatment-naïve tumours. Patients presenting these signatures had significantly worse disease specific survival. Furthermore, mutational signatures associated with platinum-based chemotherapy treatment as well as high platinum enrichment scores were only detected in post-treatment samples. Additionally, clones with high putative neoantigen binding scores were detected in some treatment-naïve samples suggesting immunoediting of clones. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the high intra-tumour heterogeneity in OAC, as well as indicators for treatment-induced changes during tumour evolution. Intra-tumour heterogeneity remains a problem for successful treatment strategies in OAC.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma is a poor prognosis cancer and the molecular features underpinning response to treatment remain unclear. We investigate whole genome, transcriptomic and methylation data from 115 oesophageal adenocarcinoma patients mostly from the DOCTOR phase II clinical trial (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry-ACTRN12609000665235), with exploratory analysis pre-specified in the study protocol of the trial. We report genomic features associated with poorer overall survival, such as the APOBEC mutational and RS3-like rearrangement signatures. We also show that positron emission tomography non-responders have more sub-clonal genomic copy number alterations. Transcriptomic analysis categorises patients into four immune clusters correlated with survival. The immune suppressed cluster is associated with worse survival, enriched with myeloid-derived cells, and an epithelial-mesenchymal transition signature. The immune hot cluster is associated with better survival, enriched with lymphocytes, myeloid-derived cells, and an immune signature including CCL5, CD8A, and NKG7. The immune clusters highlight patients who may respond to immunotherapy and thus may guide future clinical trials.

Background: AGITG DOCTOR was a randomised phase 2 trial of pre-operative cisplatin, 5 fluorouracil (CF) followed by docetaxel (D) with or without radiotherapy (RT) based on poor early response to CF, detected via PET, for resectable oesophageal adenocarcinoma. This study describes PROs over 2 years. Methods: Participants (N¿= 116) completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and oesophageal module (QLQ-OES18) before chemotherapy (baseline), before surgery, six and 12 weeks post-surgery and three-monthly until 2 years. We plotted PROs over time and calculated the percentage of participants per treatment group whose post-surgery score was within 10 points (threshold for clinically relevant change) of their baseline score, for each PRO scale. We examined the relationship between Grade 3+ adverse events (AEs) and PROs. This analysis included four groups: CF responders, non-responders randomised to DCF, non-responders randomised to DCF + RT, and "others" who were not randomised. Results: Global QOL was clinically similar between groups from 6 weeks post-surgery. All groups had poorer functional and higher symptom scores during active treatment and shortly after surgery, particularly the DCF and DCF + RT groups. DCF + RT reported a clinically significant difference (-13points) in mean overall health/QOL between baseline and pre-surgery. Similar proportions of patients across groups scored +/- 10 points of baseline scores within 2 years for most PRO domains. Instance of grade 3+ AEs were not related to PROs at baseline or 2 years. Conclusions: By 2 years, similar proportions of patients scored within 10 points of baseline for most PRO domains, with the exception of pain and insomnia for the DCF + RT group. Non-responders randomised to DCF or DCF + RT experienced additional short-term burden compared to CF responders, reflecting the longer duration of neoadjuvant treatment and additional toxicity. This should be weighed against clinical benefits reported in AGITG DOCTOR. This data will inform communication of the trajectory of treatment options for early CF non-responders. Trial registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12609000665235. Registered 31 July 2009.

Background: Patients with oesophageal/gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (EAC) not showing early metabolic response (EMR) to chemotherapy have poorer survival and histological response rates <5%. We investigated whether tailoring neoadjuvant therapy can improve outcomes in these patients. Patients and methods: Patients with resectable EAC were enrolled and randomised into two single-arm, multicentre phase II trials. After induction cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF), all were assessed by day 15 positron emission tomography (PET). Patients with an EMR [maximum standardised uptake values (SUVmax) =35% reduction from baseline to day 15 PET] received a second CF cycle then oesophagectomy. Non-responders were randomised 1: 1 to two cycles of CF and docetaxel (DCF, n = 31) or DCF + 45 Gy radiotherapy (DCFRT, n = 35) then oesophagectomy. The primary end point was major histological response (<10% residual tumour) in the oesophagectomy specimen; secondary end points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and locoregional recurrence (LR). Results: Of 124 patients recruited, major histological response was achieved in 3/45 (7%) with EMR, 6/30 (20%) DCF, and 22/35 (63%) DCFRT patients. Grade 3/4 toxicities occurred in 12/45 (27%) EMR (CF), 13/31 (42%) DCF, and 25/35 (71%) DCFRT patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. LR by 3 years was seen in 5/45 (11%) EMR, 10/31 (32%) DCF, and 4/35 (11%) DCFRT patients. PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)] at 36 months was 47% (31% to 61%) for EMR, 29% (15% to 45%) for DCF, and 46% (29% to 61%) for DCFRT patients. OS (95% CI) at 60 months was 53% (37% to 67%) for EMR, 31% (16% to 48%) for DCF, and 46% (29% to 61%) for DCFRT patients. Conclusions: EMR is associated with favourable OS, PFS, and low LR. For non-responders, the addition of docetaxel augmented histological response rates, but OS, PFS, and LR remained inferior compared with responders. DCFRT improved histological response and PFS/LR outcomes, matching the EMR group. Early PET/CT has the potential to tailor therapy for patients not showing an early response to chemotherapy. Trial registration: ACTRN12609000665235.

Purpose: The separate impacts of dose and dose intensity of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer remain uncertain. The primary objective of this trial was to compare a short, high-dose, intensive course of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) with a longer conventional dose regimen delivering the same total dose of chemotherapy. Methods: This open label trial randomised 235 women with metastatic breast cancer to receive either high-dose epirubicin 150¿mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 1500¿mg/m2 with filgrastim support every 3 weeks for 3 cycles (HDEC) or standard dose epirubicin 75¿mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 750¿mg/m2 every 3 weeks for 6 cycles (SDEC). Primary outcomes were time to progression, overall survival and quality of life. Results: In 118 patients allocated HDEC 90% of the planned dose was delivered, compared to 96% in the 117 participants allocated SDEC. There were no significant differences in the time to disease progression (5.7 vs. 5.8 months, P = 0.19) or overall survival (14.5 vs. 16.5 months, P = 0.29) between HDEC and SDEC, respectively. Patients on HDEC reported worse quality of life during therapy, but scores improved after completion to approximate those reported by patients allocated SDEC. Objective tumour response was recorded in 33 (28%) on HDEC and 42 patients (36%) on SDEC. HDEC produced more haematologic toxicity. Conclusion: For women with metastatic breast cancer, disease progression, survival or quality of life were no better with high-dose intensity compared to standard dose EC chemotherapy. Australian Clinical Trials Registry registration number ACTRN12605000478617.

Background: The combination of aflibercept with FOLFIRI has been shown to significantly prolong overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after progression on oxaliplatin-based therapy. This trial evaluated the addition of aflibercept to oxaliplatin-based first-line treatment of patients with mCRC. Patients and methods: Patients with mCRC were randomized to receive first-line therapy with mFOLFOX6 plus aflibercept (4 mg/kg) or mFOLFOX6 alone. The primary end point of this phase II study was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 months in each arm. The analysis of efficacy between the arms was a pre-planned secondary analysis. Results: Of 236 randomized patients, 227 and 235 patients were evaluable for the primary efficacy analysis and safety, respectively. The probabilities of being progression-free at 12 months were 25.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 17.2- 34.4] for the aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 arm and 21.2% (95% CI 12.2-30.3) for the mFOLFOX6 arm. The median PFS was 8.48 months (95% CI 7.89-9.92) for the aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 arm and 8.77 months (95% CI 7.62-9.27) for the mFOLFOX6 arm; the hazard ratio of aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 versus mFOLFOX6 was 1.00 (95% CI 0.74-1.36). The response rates were 49.1% (95% CI 39.7-58.6) and 45.9% (95% CI 36.4-55.7) for patients treated with and without aflibercept, respectively. The most frequent treatment-emergent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) excluding laboratory abnormalities reported for aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 versus mFOLFOX6 were neuropathy (16.8% versus 17.2%) and diarrhea (13.4% versus 5.2%). Neutropenia grade 3/4 occurred in 36.1% versus 29.3%. The most common vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition class-effect grade 3/4 AEs for aflibercept/mFOLFOX6 versus mFOLFOX6 were hypertension (35.3% versus 1.7%), proteinuria (9.2% versus 0%), deep vein thrombosis (5.9% versus 0.9%) and pulmonary embolism (5.9% versus 5.2%). Conclusion: No difference in PFS rate was observed between treatment groups. Adding aflibercept to first-line mFOLFOX6 did not increase efficacy but was associated with higher toxicity.

Purpose To assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients participating in a randomised trial of neoadjuvant short course radiation (SC) or long course chemoradiation (LC) for operable rectal cancer. Patients and methods Eligible patients with T3N0-2M0 rectal cancer completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the colorectal cancer specific module (QLQ C38) at randomisation and 1, 2, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months later. Results Of 326 patients randomised, 297 (SC 143, LC 154) were eligible for completion of HRQOL questionnaires. Baseline scores were comparable across the SC and LC groups. Patients reported low scores on sexual functioning and sexual enjoyment. Defaecation problems were the worst of the symptoms at baseline. Surgery had the most profoundly negative effect on HRQOL, seen in both the SC and LC treatment groups to the same extent. The most severely affected domains were physical function and role function and the most severely affected symptoms were fatigue, pain, appetite, weight loss and male sexual problems. Most domains and symptoms returned to baseline levels by 12 months apart from body image, sexual enjoyment and male sexual problems. Future perspective was better than prior to treatment. Conclusion There is no overall difference in HRQOL between SC and LC neoadjuvant treatment strategies, in the first 12 months, after surgery. In the immediate postoperative period HRQOL was adversely affected in both groups but for the most part was temporary. Some residual sexual functioning concerns persisted at 12 months.

Inositol polyphosphate 4-phosphatase type II (INPP4B) negatively regulates phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling and is a tumor suppressor in some types of cancers. However, we have found that it is frequently upregulated in human colon cancer cells. Here we show that silencing of INPP4B blocks activation of Akt and serum-and glucocorticoid-regulated kinase 3 (SGK3), inhibits colon cancer cell proliferation and retards colon cancer xenograft growth. Conversely, overexpression of INPP4B increases proliferation and triggers anchorage-independent growth of normal colon epithelial cells. Moreover, we demonstrate that the effect of INPP4B on Akt and SGK3 is associated with inactivation of phosphate and tensin homolog through its protein phosphatase activity and that the increase in INPP4B is due to Ets-1-mediated transcriptional upregulation in colon cancer cells. Collectively, these results suggest that INPP4B may function as an oncogenic driver in colon cancer, with potential implications for targeting INPP4B as a novel approach to treat this disease.

Newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme with unmethylated MGMT promoter has a poor prognosis, with a median survival of 12¿months. This phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of combining the selective integrin inhibitor cilengitide with a combination of metronomic temozolomide and procarbazine for these patients. Eligible patients (newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed supratentorial glioblastoma with unmethylated MGMT promoter) were entered into this multicentre study. Cilengitide (2000¿mg IV twice weekly) was commenced 1¿week prior to radiotherapy combined with daily temozolomide (60¿mg/m2) and procarbazine (50 or 100¿mg) and, after 4¿weeks' break, followed by six adjuvant cycles of temozolomide (50¿60¿mg/m2) and procarbazine (50 or 100¿mg) on days 1¿20, every 28¿days. Cilengitide was continued for up to 12¿months or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint for efficacy was a 12-month overall survival rate of 65¿%. Twenty-nine patients completed study treatment. Sixteen patients survived for 12¿months or more, an overall survival rate of 55¿%.¿The median overall survival was 14.5¿months (95¿% CI 11.1¿19.6) and the median progression-free survival was 7.4¿months (95¿% CI 6.1¿8). Cilengitide combined with metronomic temozolomide and procarbazine in MGMT-promoter unmethylated glioblastoma did not improve survival compared with historical data and does not warrant further investigation.

Major advances in the medical treatment of gastrointestinal tumors (GISTs) have improved survival for both patients with advanced disease and those diagnosed with high-risk primary tumors. The Consensus approaches to best practice management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors, published in this journal in 2008, provided guidance for the management of GIST to both clinicians and regulatory authorities. Since then, clinical trials have demonstrated the benefit of adjuvant imatinib in high-risk patients, and mature data from advanced GIST studies suggest that a small but significant proportion of patients with advanced disease can achieve long-term benefit with ongoing imatinib treatment. Other evolving management strategies include the controversial use of palliative or debulking surgery to improve outcomes in advanced GIST and the development of promising new multikinase inhibitors, such as regorafenib, which has established benefit in the third-line setting. This review provides an update of recent developments in GIST management and discusses new controversies that these advances have generated. © 2014 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.