92 research outputs found
Abstract IA11: Chemoprevention in hereditary GI cancer syndromes
Abstract
Chemoprevention offers an attractive option to prevent the occurrence of cancer in high risk cancer syndromes, such as familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and Lynch syndrome. However, data, especially from clinical trials, is sparse. This presentation will review the state of art concepts of chemoprevention in regards to these hereditary GI cancer syndromes.
Lynch Syndrome: In the randomized CAPP2 trial, 861 participants with Lynch syndrome took either daily aspirin (600 mg) or placebo for up to 4 years; the primary endpoint was the development of CRC (1). After a mean follow-up of 55.7 months, participants taking daily aspirin for at least 2 years had a 63% reduction in the incidence of CRC (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18–0.78; P = .008). These participants also saw a reduced risk from all Lynch syndrome cancers (IRR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25–0.72; P = .001). Risk of colorectal neoplasia was unaffected, and there was no protection seen for participants who completed <2 years of the intervention. Subgroup analyses from this trial showed that the association between obesity and CRC in patients with Lynch syndrome may be attenuated by taking daily aspirin (2). However, limitations of the CAPP2 trial highlight the need for larger and long-term randomized trials in this area (3, 4). Similar findings have been reported in an observational study from the Colon Cancer Family Registry. In 1,858 patients who have Lynch syndrome, aspirin use was associated with reduced risk of CRC, for both patients who took aspirin for 5 or more years (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.10—0.62; P = .003) and between 1 month and 4.9 years (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27—0.90; P = .02), compared to those who took aspirin for less than 1 month (5)
Based on the limited evidence above, we suggest that aspirin may be used to prevent cancer in patients with Lynch syndrome, but it is emphasized that the optimal dose is currently unknown. This is consistent with the stance of the American Gastroenterological Association (6). In contrast, the American College of Gastroenterology does not recommend standard use of aspirin for chemoprevention (7). Many expert clinics advise their patients with LS to use either 81 mg or 300 mg per day of Aspirin, which may provide a chemopreventive benefit while reducing the likelihood of side effects (ie. peptic ulcer disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke)—but again this dosing has yet to be shown to be effective in clinical trials. The CAPP3 trial which is currently enrolling participants in Europe will involve a double blind dose non-inferiority trial comparing 100, 300 or 600 mg daily in 3,000 Lynch syndrome gene carriers and will provide much needed clarity, however not for at least 5 years.
Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: FAP has always been first and foremost a surgical disease, whose treatment with colectomy has long been known to reduce the risk of premature death. Because prophylactic colectomy carries appreciable short and long-term complications, there has always been a desire to reduce polyp burden and potentially delay surgical intervention through the use of medication. However, most of the clinical trials efforts to date have dealt with patients who have already undergone prophylactic colectomy and in whom recurrent adenomas in the retained rectum are being managed. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents have been the most commonly employed chemopreventive agents, with sulindac being the most extensively studied and clinically used. Review of all the historical clinical trials is beyond the scope of this paper but we will selectively highlight the most significant. The most influential and often cited study supporting the use of sulindac is a relatively small but controlled trial by Giardiello et al. 22 FAP patients (18 of whom had not yet undergone colectomy) were treated for 9 months with sulindac at a dose of 150 mg twice a day and assessed at intervals of 3 months (8). A 56% reduction in adenoma count and 65% reduction in average adenoma diameter were observed. However, no complete adenoma regression was observed and regrowth occurred by 3 months following discontinuation of sulindac, implying the need for continuous therapy. Similar findings have been shown in a number of other studies, varying the dose of the sulindac or route of delivery and length of follow-up (9-11). There is concern that sulindac therapy changes the morphology of adenomas from protruding to flat lesions and that such lesions continue to serve as precursors for CRC development but are more difficult to visualize and remove with optic colonoscopy (12, 13). Celecoxib, a selective Cox-2 inhibitor which potentially has the advantage of reduced gastrointestinal side effects, was found to have an adenoma regression effect only at higher doses of 400 mg twice a day. However, the Food and Drug Administration indication of FAP for Celebrex was withdrawn recently due to a failure to perform a postmarketing study intended to verify clinical benefit.
Sulindac, though not available in all countries, is used in the US at a dose of 150 mg twice daily primarily for the control of polyposis in the retained rectum of patients with FAP who have already undergone a colectomy with an IRA or an IPAA with a rectal cuff. It is imperative that these patients continue to undergo annual surveillance due to the risk of subsequent cancers.
Patients with FAP are also at greatly increased risk for duodenal neoplasia, with duodenal adenomas eventually forming in >50% of patients and duodenal adenocarcinoma occurring in up to 12% (14, 15). Following colectomy, duodenal adenocarcinoma is the leading cause of cancer death in these patients, and prevention of duodenal adenocarcinomas by endoscopic surveillance with polyp resection, duodenectomy, Whipple surgical procedure, and ampullectomy are often challenging and suboptimal (16). NSAIDs have much less efficacy in duodenal adenomas (17, 18). A recent trial involving 92 FAP patients randomized to therapy with dual COX and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition, with sulindac 150 mg twice daily and erlotinib 75 mg daily respectively, reported a 71% decrease in duodenal polyp burden after 6 months of therapy (19). However, the frequency of side effects, primarily an acne-like rash, may limit the use of these medications at the doses used in this study. Follow-up clinical trials with EGFR inhibition are now underway to explore reduced dosing options to mitigate these side effects while retaining chemopreventive efficacy.
References
1. Burn J, Mathers JC, Bishop DT. Chemoprevention in Lynch syndrome. Familial cancer. 2013;12(4):707-18. Epub 2013/07/25.
2. Movahedi M, Bishop DT, Macrae F, Mecklin JP, Moeslein G, Olschwang S, et al. Obesity, Aspirin, and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in Carriers of Hereditary Colorectal Cancer: A Prospective Investigation in the CAPP2 Study. J Clin Oncol. 2015. Epub 2015/08/19.
3. Cleland JG. Does aspirin really reduce the risk of colon cancer? Lancet. 2012;379(9826):1586; author reply 7. Epub 2012/05/01.
4. Jankowski J, Barr H, Moayyedi P. Does aspirin really reduce the risk of colon cancer? Lancet. 2012;379(9826):1586-7; author reply 7. Epub 2012/05/01.
5. Ait Ouakrim D, Dashti SG, Chau R, Buchanan DD, Clendenning M, Rosty C, et al. Aspirin, Ibuprofen, and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer in Lynch Syndrome. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2015;107(9). Epub 2015/06/26.
6. Rubenstein JH, Enns R, Heidelbaugh J, Barkun A. American Gastroenterological Association Institute Guideline on the Diagnosis and Management of Lynch Syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(3):777-82; quiz e16-7. Epub 2015/08/01.
7. Syngal S, Brand RE, Church JM, Giardiello FM, Hampel HL, Burt RW. ACG clinical guideline: Genetic testing and management of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(2):223-62; quiz 63. Epub 2015/02/04.
8. Giardiello FM, Hamilton SR, Krush AJ, Piantadosi S, Hylind LM, Celano P, et al. Treatment of colonic and rectal adenomas with sulindac in familial adenomatous polyposis. The New England journal of medicine. 1993;328(18):1313-6.
9. Winde G, Gumbinger HG, Osswald H, Kemper F, Bunte H. The NSAID sulindac reverses rectal adenomas in colectomized patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: clinical results of a dose-finding study on rectal sulindac administration. International journal of colorectal disease. 1993;8(1):13-7. Epub 1993/03/01.
10. Winde G, Schmid KW, Schlegel W, Fischer R, Osswald H, Bunte H. Complete reversion and prevention of rectal adenomas in colectomized patients with familial adenomatous polyposis by rectal low-dose sulindac maintenance treatment. Advantages of a low-dose nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug regimen in reversing adenomas exceeding 33 months. Diseases of the colon and rectum. 1995;38(8):813-30. Epub 1995/08/01.
11. Cruz-Correa M, Hylind LM, Romans KE, Booker SV, Giardiello FM. Long-term treatment with sulindac in familial adenomatous polyposis: a prospective cohort study. Gastroenterology. 2002;122(3):641-5. Epub 2002/03/05.
12. Lynch HT, Thorson AG, Smyrk T. Rectal cancer after prolonged sulindac chemoprevention. A case report. Cancer. 1995;75(4):936-8. Epub 1995/02/15.
13. Matsumoto T, Nakamura S, Esaki M, Yao T, Iida M. Effect of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug sulindac on colorectal adenomas of uncolectomized familial adenomatous polyposis. Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology. 2006;21(1 Pt 2):251-7. Epub 2006/02/08.
14. Jasperson KW, Tuohy TM, Neklason DW, Burt RW. Hereditary and familial colon cancer. Gastroenterology. 2010;138(6):2044-58. Epub 2010/04/28.
15. Biasco G, Pantaleo MA, Di Febo G, Calabrese C, Brandi G, Bulow S. Risk of duodenal cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut. 2004;53(10):1547; author reply Epub 2004/09/14.
16. Conio M, Gostout CJ. Management of duodenal adenomas in 98 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2001;53(2):265-6. Epub 2001/03/30.
17. Debinski HS, Trojan J, Nugent KP, Spigelman AD, Phillips RK. Effect of sulindac on small polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis. Lancet. 1995;345(8953):855-6. Epub 1995/04/01.
18. Nugent KP, Farmer KC, Spigelman AD, Williams CB, Phillips RK. Randomized controlled trial of the effect of sulindac on duodenal and rectal polyposis and cell proliferation in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. The British journal of surgery. 1993;80(12):1618-9. Epub 1993/12/01.
19. Samadder NJ, Neklason DW, Boucher KM, Byrne KR, Kanth P, Samowitz W, et al. Effect of Sulindac and Erlotinib vs Placebo on Duodenal Neoplasia in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 2016;315(12):1266-75. Epub 2016/03/24.
Citation Format: N. Jewel Samadder. Chemoprevention in hereditary GI cancer syndromes. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Colorectal Cancer: From Initiation to Outcomes; 2016 Sep 17-20; Tampa, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(3 Suppl):Abstract nr IA11.</jats:p
The Impact of Family History on the Risk of Colorectal Neoplasia and Screening Practices
Duodenal adenomas in sporadic and familial adenomatous polyposis patients: Birds of a feather?
Misclassification of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma in Patients With Lynch Syndrome—Reply
Efficacy and safety of eflornithine (CPP-1X)/sulindac combination therapy versus each as monotherapy in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP): design and rationale of a randomized, double-blind, Phase III trial
Molecular studies suggest inhibition of colorectal mucosal polyamines (PAs) may be a promising approach to prevent colorectal cancer (CRC). Inhibition of ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) using low-dose eflornithine (DFMO, CPP-1X), combined with maximal PA export using low-dose sulindac, results in greatly reduced levels of normal mucosal PAs. In a clinical trial, this combination (compared with placebo) reduced the 3-year incidence of subsequent high-risk adenomas by >90 %. Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) is characterized by marked up-regulation of ODC in normal intestinal epithelial and adenoma tissue, and therefore PA reduction might be a potential strategy to control progression of FAP-related intestinal polyposis. CPP FAP-310, a randomized, double-blind, Phase III trial was designed to examine the safety and efficacy of sulindac and DFMO (alone or in combination) for preventing a clinically relevant FAP-related progression event in individuals with FAP. Eligible adults with FAP will be randomized to: CPP-1X 750 mg and sulindac 150 mg, CPP-1X placebo and sulindac 150 mg, or CPP-1X 750 mg and sulindac placebo once daily for 24 months. Patients will be stratified based on time-to-event prognosis into one of the three treatment arms: best (ie, longest time to first FAP-related event [rectal/pouch polyposis]), intermediate (duodenal polyposis) and worst (pre-colectomy). Stage-specific, "delayed time to" FAP-related events are the primary endpoints. Change in polyp burden (upper and/or lower intestine) is a key secondary endpoint. The trial is ongoing. As of February 1, 2016, 214 individuals have been screened; 138 eligible subjects have been randomized to three treatment groups at 15 North American sites and 6 European sites. By disease strata, 26, 80 and 32 patients are included for assessment of polyp burden in the rectum/pouch, duodenal polyposis and pre-colectomy groups, respectively. Median age is 40 years; 59 % are men. The most common reasons for screening failure include minimal polyp burden (n = 22), withdrawal of consent (n = 9) and extensive polyposis requiring immediate surgical intervention (n = 9). Enrollment is ongoing. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01483144 ; November 21, 2011) and the EU Clinical Trials Register( EudraCT 2012-000427-41 ; May 15, 2014
Abstract 2706: <i>KRT16</i> germline mutation associated with familial syndrome of tylosis with esophageal cancer (TOC)
Abstract
Tylosis (palmoplantar keratoderma) with esophageal cancer (TOC) also known as Howel-Evans syndrome has been associated with pathogenic mutations in RHBDF2. A potential TOC family was referred for clinical evaluation at the Family Cancer Assessment Clinic (FCAC) at Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah. Multiple relatives of the proband had hyperkeratosis on the areas of skin associated with pressure and friction, especially the feet, as well as oral leukoplakia. The proband’s father, paternal aunt, paternal grandfather, and paternal great grandfather had been diagnosed with esophageal cancer. Clinical testing was unable to identify a germline mutation in RHBDFR2 that explained the observed phenotype and inheritance pattern. As part of Heritage 1K Project (University of Utah), Pediatric & Adult Cancer Section, we performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) on 5 family members, 4 that were affected with the hyperkeratosis, and 1 unaffected family member, to identify other potential genetic causes for the observed TOC phenotype. We prioritized variants via VAAST (Variant Annotation, Analysis and Search Tool). Reducing our genes of interest to those involved in palmoplantar keratoderma with PHEVOR (Phenotype Driven Variant Ontological Re-ranking Tool), we identified a pathogenic mutation: KRT16 c.379C&gt;T p.Arg127Cys. This mutation is reported in a large palmoplantar keratoderma family (without esophageal cancer) and is listed as pathogenic in Clinvar (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar). KRT16 c.379C&gt;T p.Arg127Cys was present in each of the affected family members, but not in the unaffected relative. Our analysis is the first of its kind to suggest carriers of pathogenic variants in KRT16 are at-risk for esophageal cancer, and may benefit from esophageal surveillance. Additionally, patients presenting with a family history of esophageal cancer should be considered for germline testing for KRT16 mutations along with RHBDF2 mutations.
Citation Format: Erin L. Young, Lance Pflieger, Luke Maese, Trent Fowler, Kinley Garfield, N. Jewel Samadder, Bella Johnson, Clinton C. Mason, Barry Moore, Shawn Ryanearson, Mark Yandell, Wendy Kohlmann, Joshua D. Schiffman. KRT16 germline mutation associated with familial syndrome of tylosis with esophageal cancer (TOC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2706. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-2706</jats:p
Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Racially Diverse Population Served by a Safety-Net Clinic
- …
