
Neoadjuvant vs Adjuvant Immunotherapy in Colon Cancer
Adjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy has yet to square off against neoadjuvant immunotherapy in a head-to-head trial. Even if that trial doesn't happen, post hoc analyses of ATOMIC and the neoadjuvant NICHE-2 studies may clarify whether a one-size-fits-all approach is appropriate and help determine which patients benefit more from one approach over the other, according to Christopher Lieu, MD, an investigator in the ATOMIC study.
The ATOMIC study showed that adding adjuvant immunotherapy to standard-of-care chemotherapy following resection reduced the risk for disease recurrence or death by 50% compared with chemotherapy alone in the 355 patients with stage III colon cancer with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR), who received adjuvant atezolizumab along with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy, providing those in the pro-adjuvant camp with important data. In addition, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 86.4% with the combination compared with 76.6% with chemotherapy alone. The results of this trial were presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2025.
'These data established this combination as a new standard treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer and deficient mismatch repair,' said study author Frank A. Sinicrope, MD, during a press conference at the meeting. 'We regard this as a highly impactful study that will change clinical practice, and it actually represents the first immunotherapy adjuvant study in colon cancer.'
In NICHE-2, patients were given neoadjuvant ipilimumab or nivolumab followed by surgical resection. At 3 years, 100% of all 111 patients treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab prior to surgery were recurrence-free, according to a presentation at last year's annual meeting of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The DFS beat the prespecified success threshold of 93%.
Adding Immunotherapy
The standard treatment for stage III colon cancer, regardless of dMMR status, is surgical resection followed by FOLFOX chemotherapy. However, about 15% of patients with stage III colon cancer have dMMR and display resistance to chemotherapy, providing a rationale for adding immunotherapies to standard treatment.
'These tumors are unable to repair their DNA and therefore accumulate mutations that trigger an immune response that is ineffective due to immune checkpoint proteins. Therefore, the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is very attractive in this setting,' Sinicrope said during the press briefing. Sinicrope is professor of medicine and oncology, and coleader of the Gastrointestinal Cancer Program at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
Adjuvant Immunotherapy
The ATOMIC trial is significant because it demonstrates improved DFS with the addition of immunotherapy to standard chemotherapy treatment, improving outcomes for patients with this type of locally advanced cancer over standard care. There are several rationales for adding immunotherapy following surgical resection. For example, staging relies on tumor appearance on CT scan, said Lieu, who is the codirector of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology at the University of Colorado Cancer Center in Aurora, Colorado.
There are patients with dMMR or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) colon cancer that appear to have stage I or II disease on their CT scan. 'In those patients, starting with immunotherapy first may not be the best idea because after a stage I or II colon cancer is resected, they don't require any further therapy because of the low risk of recurrence,' he said.
'If you think it is an early-stage cancer based of radiographic findings, you could cut out the cancer and then only offer chemotherapy and immunotherapy if it is unexpectedly stage III. I think that there's certainly rationale for that,' he continued.
Other arguments for adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors, like atezolizumab, with chemotherapy include synergy between cytotoxic and immune mechanisms and systemic insurance against micrometastatic spread. It also avoids the potential for rare immune complications from upfront immunotherapy that could delay surgery.
'I don't think that [giving all patients neoadjuvant treatment] is the answer. If you think that they have stage I or stage II colon cancer at the beginning, then you might end up hurting them with upfront immunotherapy,' said Lieu.
Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy
The standard treatment for stage III colon cancer, regardless of dMMR status, is surgical resection followed by chemotherapy, FOLFOX and capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) are two of the most common regimens. However, chemotherapy can be hard on patients, making neoadjuvant immunotherapy that can reduce or eliminate the need for post-surgical chemotherapy very attractive.
The data from the NICHE-2 trial support the efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy.
'The data strongly suggest that neoadjuvant immunotherapy is better than adjuvant immunotherapy and that chemotherapy for dMMR colorectal cancer has limited activity,' said Michael J. Overman, MD, Associate Vice President of Research for the MD Anderson Cancer Network in Houston, in an interview. 'Thus, I am a believer that neoadjuvant is the preferred approach for dMMR localized cancers.'
Lieu said neoadjuvant immunotherapy might be more appropriate for more aggressive disease.
'What we discuss in our multidisciplinary clinic is that if these patients are diagnosed prior to surgery and particularly if they have aggressive features…those are some of the patients that I really would consider for neoadjuvant therapy,' he said. 'While it's high-risk disease, there could be some benefit to down-staging the patient, so that there isn't a positive margin. If there's pathologic complete response…and you don't have to give adjuvant chemotherapy, most people would consider that to be a win.'
Overman noted that 'a big open area relates to whether the goal of neoadjuvant therapy should be operation or no operation. Likely both approaches can be done and that would be up to patient and physician.' However, 'with a nonoperative approach, we still have unknowns regarding disease assessment and surveillance for neoadjuvant therapy.'
Patient-Specific Care
In the absence of data from a head-to-head trial of the two approaches, a patient-specific approach may be the appropriate strategy, Lieu suggested.
'If I had a take home message, it's just that it's clear that these patients really require multidisciplinary discussion before an operation,' he said.
Molecular testing has an important role to play as well, said Lieu. 'It speaks to the importance of doing biomarker testing for MMR, MSI, or both. Alarm bells should be ringing as soon as [either or both come] back positive; it should make everyone think for a second and make sure we have the right plan for the right patients.'
Sinicrope reported several relationships, including with Eli Lilly, Guardant Health, Roche Holdings AG, Ventana Medical Systems, and Woven Health Collective.
Lieu reported relationships with Amgen and Genentech.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NFL bans smelling salts for 2025, and George Kittle is 'distraught'
The NFL has banned the use of smelling salts and ammonia packets ahead of the 2025 NFL season. For George Kittle, this is very disappointing news. The San Francisco 49ers tight end broke the news on NFL Network Tuesday. He then shared that the ban has left him "distraught." Kittle did so while crashing the set of an NFL Network hit at 49ers training camp during an interview with his teammate Fred Warner. [Join or create a Yahoo Fantasy Football league for the 2025 NFL season] "I honestly just came up here to air a grievance," Kittle said after being handed a microphone. "Our team got a memo today that smelling salts and ammonia packets were made illegal in the NFL, and I've been distraught all day." Kittle then joked that he was contemplating extreme measures in response to the rule change. "I considered retirement," he said, with a smile. "We've got to come up with a middle ground here guys. Somebody help me out. Somebody come up with a good idea." So why is Kittle so "distraught?" "I'm an every drive guy," Kittle said regarding his smelling salts use. "I'm an every drive guy." Kittle drew the line on using smelling salts for each play, declaring that's "too much." So why the ban? NFL Network's Mike Garafolo later shared the memo that got Kittle so worked up. It appears that Kittle's use of smelling salts on "every drive" might not be a good idea. Citing a 2024 memo from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the NFL explained its reasoning for banning ammonia inhalants (AIs), an umbrella term that includes smelling salts. From the memo: "The FDA noted potential negative effects from AI use," the memo states. "AIs also have the potential to mask certain neurologic signs and symptoms, including some potential signs of concussion. "As a result, the NFL head, neck and spine committee recommended prohibiting the use of AIs for any purpose during play in the NFL." The memo clarified that the AI category encompasses 'any form of 'smelling salts'' and prohibits any member of a team from administering or providing AIs to players at any point during a game. The FDA memo that the NFL referenced detailed reported adverse effects of using unapproved AIs that include "shortness of breath, seizures, migraines, vomiting, diarrhea, and fainting from consumers after using these types of products, possibly purchased through various websites." Smelling salts are traditionally used to treat fainting victims, but have apparently become popular among athletes — particularly football and hockey players — as a perceived energy boost. This appears to be Kittle's preferred use. The NFL isn't the first sports organization to ban the use of smelling salts. Hockey Quebec, a branch of Hockey Canada that oversees amateur hockey in the province, banned smelling salts in February, citing concern over their use by youth players.


New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
Kennedy Cancels Nearly $500 Million in mRNA Vaccine Contracts
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has canceled nearly $500 million of grants and contracts for developing mRNA vaccines, the Department of Health and Human Services announced on Tuesday. It is the latest blow to research on this technology. In May, the Department of Health and Human Services revoked a nearly $600 million contract to the drugmaker Moderna to develop a vaccine against bird flu. The new cancellations dismayed scientists, many of whom regard mRNA shots as the best option for protecting Americans in a pandemic. 'This is a bad day for science,' said Scott Hensley, an immunologist at the University of Pennsylvania who has been working to develop an mRNA vaccine against influenza. The health department said in its release that the cancellations affected 22 projects managed by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, or BARDA. With this move, the department is 'undermining our ability to rapidly counter future biological threats,' said Rick Bright, a flu expert who was ousted as chief of BARDA during the first Trump administration and resigned from a lesser position in protest. 'We're weakening our frontline defense against fast‑moving pathogens — a huge strategic failure that will be measured in lives lost during times of crisis,' he added. First used during the Covid-19 pandemic by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, mRNA shots instruct the body to produce a fragment of a virus, which then sets off the body's immune response. Unlike traditional vaccines, which can take years to develop and test, mRNA shots can be made within months and quickly altered as the virus changes. Mr. Kennedy has been sharply critical of the technology. In a video posted on social media on Tuesday, he claimed incorrectly that mRNA vaccines do not protect against respiratory illnesses like Covid and the flu, that they drive viruses to evolve and that a single mutation in a virus renders the vaccine ineffective. 'As the pandemic showed us, mRNA vaccines don't perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract,' he says in the video. 'By issuing this wildly incorrect statement, the secretary is demonstrating his commitment to his long-held goal of sowing doubts about all vaccines,' said Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center at the Brown University School of Public Health. 'Had we not used these lifesaving mRNA vaccines to protect against severe illness, we would have had millions of more Covid deaths,' she said. The health department said it will favor other types of shots over those using mRNA, like whole-cell vaccines. That technology is more than 100 years old. The United States has not used a whole-cell vaccine for whooping cough since the 1990s because it was potent but harsh, often setting off high fevers and seizures. Mr. Kennedy himself assailed the leading international vaccine organization, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, for continuing to use the whole-cell vaccine in low-income countries, citing it as the reason he was pulling funding from the organization.


New York Times
8 minutes ago
- New York Times
What to Know: Why 2 Quakes Jolted New York and New Jersey Recently
A 2.7- magnitude earthquake hit northern New Jersey on Tuesday, just days after a 3.0-magnitude quake struck the same area on Saturday, shaking parts of the state and New York City. The recent temblors were classified as 'weak,' according to the U.S. Geological Survey's Mercalli Intensity Scale. Still, they were a shock to New Yorkers and New Jerseyans generally unused to the earth shaking beneath them. But several experts consulted by The New York Times all agreed: The two quakes were not out of ordinary for the area. And a bigger one is not out of the question. Since 1900, there have been 355 earthquakes in the New Jersey area with a magnitude of 1.0 and above, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. In those 125 years, only 20 earthquakes have had a magnitude of 3.0 and above that people can actually feel. But the two recent quakes are not surprising, given a larger 4.8- magnitude earthquake last year that jolted New York and New Jersey and sent tremors from Philadelphia to Boston. Andrew Lloyd, an assistant research professor at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University, said that the two earthquakes could be aftershocks from that bigger one. And it's likely, researchers say, that the earthquake that occurred Tuesday was triggered by Saturday's event. 'I'm not concerned because I'm an expert,' said Folarin Kolawole, an assistant professor of geology at Columbia University. 'But I understand the disturbance that earthquakes like this create for common people.' Residents of New York and New Jersey can expect to feel a slight rumble from minor earthquakes in the future, according to Dr. Lloyd. He explained that California is at a tectonic plate boundary, where earthquakes occur more frequently as plates collide and slide past each other. The New York region is not, but New Jersey and New York are at an intraplate setting — at or near the center of a tectonic plate, where earthquakes are still possible. 'They should expect similar-sized earthquakes going forward,' he said. But Dr. Kolawole said major earthquakes — defined as those with a magnitude of 5.0 or above — could happen in the New Jersey and New York area, and he stressed the importance of monitoring. 'We have ancient faults in the New York/New Jersey region that are active and can sleep,' he said. 'There's a potential for a greater than magnitude 5 earthquake.'