scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of chronomodulated irinotecan, oxaliplatin, 5‐fluorouracil and leucovorin combination as first‐ or second‐line treatment against metastatic colorectal cancer: Results from the International EORTC 05011 Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pasquale F. Innominato ◽  
Abdoulaye Karaboué ◽  
Christian Focan ◽  
Philippe Chollet ◽  
Sylvie Giacchetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in combination with chemotherapy as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A network meta-analysis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 115-115
Author(s):  
Xiaoyu Xie ◽  
Jianwei Zhang ◽  
Huabin Hu ◽  
Yue Cai ◽  
Zehua Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Biological Agents ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
R Software

115 Background: Recent studies have shown efficacy of chemotherapy (CTX) in combination with different biological agents including regorafenib (REG) in second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). As there is no evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of REG as compared to other biological agents in combination with CTX, we evaluated the same in this network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy and safety of biological agents + CTX against CTX alone as second-line treatment of mCRC were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Progression free survival (PFS) was the primary outcome, while objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and safety were secondary outcomes. Outcomes were compared by random/mixed-effects NMA using Bayesian (R software, Gemtc package) and frequentist (R software, netmeta package) approaches. Results: Twelve RCTs comparing 9 different treatment regimens with a total of 6805 patients were included for analysis. Hazard ratios (HR)/ odds ratio (OR)/ relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for PFS, ORR and grade> 3 adverse events (AE) of selected comparisons from the results of the NMA are shown in table. Conclusions: REG combined with CTX might be a potential alternative to conventional therapeutic options and could be considered as the best option for treating KRAS and BRAF mutated mCRC patients. Future RCTs are needed to confirm our results. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI/aflibercept in second‐line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in a real‐world population: Prognostic and predictive markers

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 882-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Fernández Montes ◽  
Nieves Martínez Lago ◽  
Marta Covela Rúa ◽  
Juan de la Cámara Gómez ◽  
Paula González Villaroel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Predictive Markers ◽  
World Population ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Prognostic And Predictive Markers

Efficacy and Toxicity of Addition of Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 718-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Cong Ruan ◽  
Yue-Ping Che ◽  
Li Ding ◽  
Hai-Feng Li
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Clinical Prognosis ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Pre-treated patients with first-line treatment can be offered a second treatment with the aim of improving their poor clinical prognosis. The therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who did not respond to first-line therapy has limited treatment options. Recently, many studies have paid much attention to the efficacy of bevacizumab as an adjuvant treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with bevacizumab-naive based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in people with metastatic CRC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies updated to March 2018. Randomized-controlled trials comparing addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy without bevacizumab in MCRC patients were included, of which, the main interesting results were the efficacy and safety profiles of the addition of bevacizumab in patients with MCRC as second-line therapy. Result: Five trials were eligible in the meta-analysis. Patients who received the combined bevacizumab and chemotherapy treatment in MCRC as second-line therapy showed a longer overall survival (OS) (OR=0.80,95%CI=0.72-0.89, P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR=0.69,95%CI=0.61-0.77, P<0.00001). In addition, there was no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.36,95%CI=0.82-2.24, P=0.23) or severe adverse event (SAE) (RR=1.02,95%CI=0.88-1.19, P=0.78) between bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and bevacizumabnaive based chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to the chemotherapy therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as second-line therapy and without increasing the risk of an adverse event.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Second-Line Treatment in RAS Wild-Type/Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the Precision Medicine Era

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (14) ◽  
pp. 7717
Author(s):  
Guido Giordano ◽  
Pietro Parcesepe ◽  
Giuseppina Bruno ◽  
Annamaria Piscazzi ◽  
Vincenzo Lizzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
First Line Treatment

Target-oriented agents improve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) survival in combination with chemotherapy. However, the majority of patients experience disease progression after first-line treatment and are eligible for second-line approaches. In such a context, antiangiogenic and anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) agents as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors have been approved as second-line options, and RAS and BRAF mutations and microsatellite status represent the molecular drivers that guide therapeutic choices. Patients harboring K- and N-RAS mutations are not eligible for anti-EGFR treatments, and bevacizumab is the only antiangiogenic agent that improves survival in combination with chemotherapy in first-line, regardless of RAS mutational status. Thus, the choice of an appropriate therapy after the progression to a bevacizumab or an EGFR-based first-line treatment should be evaluated according to the patient and disease characteristics and treatment aims. The continuation of bevacizumab beyond progression or its substitution with another anti-angiogenic agents has been shown to increase survival, whereas anti-EGFR monoclonals represent an option in RAS wild-type patients. In addition, specific molecular subgroups, such as BRAF-mutated and Microsatellite Instability-High (MSI-H) mCRCs represent aggressive malignancies that are poorly responsive to standard therapies and deserve targeted approaches. This review provides a critical overview about the state of the art in mCRC second-line treatment and discusses sequential strategies according to key molecular biomarkers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document