Survival outcome of bevacizumab followed by cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 529-529
Author(s):  
Kozo Kataoka ◽  
Akiyoshi Kanazawa ◽  
Akio Nakajima ◽  
Hisahiro Hosogi ◽  
Seiitirou Kanaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
First Line ◽  
Group A ◽  
Molecular Targeted Agents ◽  
Group B

529 Background: The molecular targeted agents, such as bevacizumab and cetuximab have been shown to improve overall survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, we still do not know what sequence is best to use the molecular targeted agents for mCRC especially in K-ras wild case. In this analysis, we evaluate the benefits of using bevacizumab followed by cetuximab for mCRC patients retrospectively. Methods: From July 2006 to September 2010, 60 chemotherapy-naive patients who were diagnosed as mCRC, received oxaliplatin based regimen for first line, did not respond to bevacizumab containing regimen used for first line or second line, and received cetuximab or continued bevacizumab, were eligible for this analysis. 28 patients received cetuximab as third line or fourth line chemotherapy due to K-ras wild type (Group A). And 32 patients continued bevacizumab-containing regimen in spite of disease progression (Group B). Results: The median number of cycles of bevacizumab containing regimen were 9 (range, 2-30) in group A and 8 (range, 2-27) in group B, and cetuximab 12(range, 3-32) in group A. The difference of the rate of serious adverse effects was not significant between two groups. Median overall survival was significantly higher in Group A than Group B (31.2 months (95%CI: 23.2-39.3 months) and 27.0 month (95%CI: 17.2-37.6), respectively) (P<0.001). Partial response rate of cetuximab was 18%(5/28) in group A. Median progression free survival of cetuximab in group A was 4.3 months (95%CI: 2.62- 6.06). Conclusions: Using cetuximab after progression with bevacizumab might be effective sequence to improve the overall survival of K-ras wild mCRC patients. But we need further prospective study to look for the best sequence in chemotherapy for mCRC patients.

Initial experience of TAS-102 chemotherapy in Australian patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 71-71
Author(s):  
Azim Jalali ◽  
Hui-Li Wong ◽  
Rachel Wong ◽  
Margaret Lee ◽  
Lucy Gately ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Number Of Patients

71 Background: For patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment with Trifluridine/Tipiracil, also known as TAS-102, improves overall survival. In Australia, TAS-102 was initially made available locally through patients self-funding, later via an industry sponsored Medicine Access Program (MAP) and then via the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in real world Australian population. Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry was undertaken. The characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving TAS-102 were assessed and compared to all TRACC patients and those enrolled in the registration study (RECOURSE). Results: Across 13 sites, 107 patients were treated with TAS-102 (non-PBS n = 27, PBS n = 80), The median number of patients per site was 7 (range: 1-17). The median age was 60 years (range: 31-83), compared to 67 for all TRACC patients and 63 for RECOURSE. Comparing registry TAS-102 and RECOURSE patients, 75% vs 100% were ECOG performance status 0-1, 74% vs 79% had initiated treatment more than 18 months from diagnosis of metastatic disease and 39% vs 49% were RAS wild type. Median time on treatment was 10.4 weeks (range: 1.7-32). Median clinician assessed progression-free survival was 3.3 compared to RECIST defined PFS of 2 months in RECOURSE study, while median overall survival was the same at 7.1 months. Two patients (2.3%) had febrile neutropenia and there were no treatment-related deaths in the real-world series, where TAS102 dose at treatment initiation was at clinician discretion. In the RECOURSE study there was a 4% febrile neutropenia rate and one treatment-related death. Conclusions: TRACC registry patients treated with TAS102 were younger than both TRACC patients overall and those from the RECOURSE trial. Less strict application of RECIST criteria and less frequent imaging may have contributed to an apparently longer PFS. However overall survival outcomes achieved with TAS102 in real world patients were comparable to findings from this pivotal trial with an acceptable rate of major adverse events.

Effect of the addition of bevacizumab to first-line FOLFOX on efficacy, including response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 588-588
Author(s):  
M. Suenaga ◽  
N. Mizunuma ◽  
S. Matsusaka ◽  
E. Shinozaki ◽  
M. Ogura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Treatment

588 Background: Bevacizumab (BV) is a recombinant, humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor. Used in combination with chemotherapy, BV has been shown to improve survival in both first- and second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it was reported that addition of BV to FOLFOX conferred only little survival benefit (Saltz et al. JCO2008). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of addition of BV to FOLFOX in first-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Methods: Bevacizumab was approved for mCRC in July 2007 in Japan. This study was conducted at a single institution and comprised 217 consecutive patients receiving first-line treatment for mCRC between 2005 and 2009. The primary objective was to compare survival benefit in patients treated with FOLFOX4 (FF) between 2005 and 2007 with that in patients receiving FOLFOX4+BV 5 mg/kg (FF+BV) between 2007 and 2009. Results: Total number of patients in the FF and FF+BV groups was 132 and 85, respectively. Characteristics of patients were as follows (FF vs. FF+B): median age, 62 yrs (range 28-76 yrs) vs. 60 yrs (range16-74 yrs); ECOG PS0, 98.8% vs. 81.8%; and median follow-up time, 20.8 months vs. 24.4 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) in the FF and FF+BV groups was 10 months (95% CI, 8.7-11.3) and 17 months (95% CI, 10.2-14.1), while median overall survival (OS) was 21 months (95% CI, 17.9-24.1) and not reached, respectively. Response rate was 46% (95% CI, 37- 54) in FF, and 62% (95% CI, 51-73) in FF+BV. Addition of BV to FOLFOX4 significantly improved PFS (p=0.002) and OS (p<0.001). Conclusions: The additive effect of BV for first-line FOLFOX was reconfirmed. These data indicate potential survival benefits from the addition of BV to FOLFOX in first-line treatment of mCRC. In addition, PFS may be a sensitive indicator of outcome prior to post-treatment. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Effect of first-line molecular targeted agents on the efficacy of second-line bevacizumab-containing regimen for metastatic colorectal cancer.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 748-748
Author(s):  
Hiroko Hasegawa ◽  
Hiroya Taniguchi ◽  
Seiichiro Mitani ◽  
Azusa Komori ◽  
Toshiki Masuishi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Multivariate Analyses ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
First Line ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Prior Use ◽  
Baseline Characteristics ◽  
Molecular Targeted Agents

748 Background: Bevacizumab (BV)-containing regimen is a standard second-line chemotherapy(CTX) for patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) regardless of the prior use of BV in the first-line CTX. However, little is known about the efficacy of the second-line BV-containing regimen after first-line CTX with anti-EGFR agents. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of a BV-containing regimen as the second-line CTX for mCRC. The eligibility criteria for the pts included in the study were as follows: ECOG PS 0–2, KRAS wild-type tumors, and refractory to first-line CTX with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin or irinotecan from March 2007 to March 2015. The Kaplan–Meier method with a log-rank test and Cox regression analysis were performed to evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) of the pts. Results: A total of 123 pts were eligible. The pts’ characteristics were as follows: males/females 73/50, median age 59 years, PS 0-1/2 118/5, LDH levels < 400IU/l / ≥ 400IU/l 91/32, second-line CTX regimen FOLFIRI+BV/FOLFOX+BV 111/12. The patients were categorized into the following 3 cohorts according to the prior use of molecular targeted agents: anti EGFR agents (cohort E, 35 pts), BV (cohort B, 58 pts), no molecular targeted agents (cohort C, 30 pts). There was hardly any difference in the baseline characteristics of the 3 cohorts; however, LDH levels in cohort E were higher than those in the other cohorts. Treatment efficacies were as follows (cohort E/B/C): response rate, 30%/10%/20%, with a significant difference between cohort E and B (OR = 1.50, p = 0.035) and median PFS, 8.6/5.9/6.9 months, with a significant difference between cohort E and B (p = 0.025). Multivariate analyses for PFS were adjusted for baseline characteristics such as histology, PS, chemotherapy regimen, presence of peritoneal metastasis, LDH levels, and duration of PFS in the first-line CTX. The PFS of cohort E was better than that of cohort B (HR = 2.180, p = 0.0025) and was not much different from that of cohort C (HR = 1.682, p = 0.64)in multivariate analyses. Conclusions: The second-line BV-containing regimen is effective regardless of the prior use of anti-EGFR agents.

scholarly journals Bevacizumab in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. 47-53
Author(s):  
S Whyte ◽  
A Pandor ◽  
M Stevenson ◽  
A Rees
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Open Label Study ◽  
Free Survival

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer based on the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. Evidence was available in the form of one phase III, multicentre, multinational, randomised, open-label study (NO16966 trial). This two-arm study was originally designed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of oral capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) compared with 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)-4 in adult patients with histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer who had not previously been treated. Following randomisation of 634 patients, the open-label study was amended to include a 2 × 2 factorial randomised (partially blinded for bevacizumab) phase III trial with the coprimary objective of demonstrating superiority of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone. Measured outcomes included overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, adverse effects of treatment and health-related quality of life. The manufacturer’s primary pooled analysis of superiority (using the intention-to-treat population) showed that after a median follow-up of 28 months, the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared with chemotherapy alone in adult patients with histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer who were not previously treated [median progression-free survival 9.4 vs 7.7 months (absolute difference 1.7 months); hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 97.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.87; p = 0.0001; median overall survival 21.2 vs 18.9 months (absolute difference 2.3 months); HR 0.83, 97.5% CI 0.74 to 0.93; p = 0.0019]. The NO16966 trial was of reasonable methodological quality and demonstrated a significant improvement in both progression-free survival and overall survival when bevacizumab was added to XELOX or FOLFOX. However, the size of the actual treatment effect of bevacizumab is uncertain. The ERG believed that the modelling structure employed was appropriate, but highlighted several key issues and areas of uncertainty. At the time of writing, NICE was yet to issue the guidance for this appraisal.

Addition of bevacizumab to first-line FOLFOX4 and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 610-610 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitsukuni Suenaga ◽  
Satoshi Matsusaka ◽  
Nobuyuki Mizunuma ◽  
Eiji Shinozaki ◽  
Mariko Ogura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Treatment

610 Background: In our previous report, addition of bevacizumab (BV) to the FOLFOX4 regimen appeared to significantly improve response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) (Suenaga M, et al. ASCO-GI 2011 [abstr 588]). Update results met median overall survival, and statistical analysis of survival was performed. Methods: An observational cohort study was carried out on all eligible patients scheduled to receive FOLFOX4 (n = 128) or FOLFOX4+BV (n = 85) between 2005 and 2007, 2007 and 2009, with a median follow-up time of 20.4 months vs. 30.2 months, respectively. Predefined efficacy endpoints were treatment characteristics, response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival in the periods of time observed. Results: Median progression-free survival was 9.9 months (95% CI, 8.4-11.4) in the FOLFOX4- and 17 months (95% CI, 11.8-22.3) in the FOLFOX4+BV-treated patients (p=0.002). Median overall survival times were 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.9-24) and 38.8 months (95% CI, 32.9-44.8) in the two groups, respectively (p<0.001). In the ECOG PS 0 population, progression-free survival in the FOLFOX4 and FOLFOX4+BV groups was 11 months and 17 months with a hazard ratio of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.44-0.89) in favour of FOLFOX4+BV, similarly in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.53 (95% CI, 0.36-0.77). Subgroup population received 5-FU plus leucovorin (FL) as maintenance during oxaliplatin discontinuation due to adverse events had longer PFS or OS in both groups, though no significance. PFS were 14.7 and 21.6 months, and OS were 29 and 45.9 months, respectively. Secondary resection was performed more in FOLFOX4+BV (11.8%) than FOLFOX4 (3.9%) patients. Conclusions: These data indicate potential survival benefits from the addition of BV to the FOLFOX4 regimen as first-line treatment for mCRC. Maintenance using FL after discontinuation of oxaliplatin due to adverse events appeared to be an essential factor for better survival.

Association of bevacizumab-free interval with efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 610-610
Author(s):  
Azusa Komori ◽  
Hiroya Taniguchi ◽  
Yukiya Narita ◽  
Shiori Uegaki ◽  
Sohhei Nitta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Short Interval ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Free Interval ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

610 Background: Both bevacizumab (Bev) and anti-EGFR agents are sequentially used for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Some basic studies reported the interaction between Bev and anti-EGFR agents in vivo. Therefore we hypothesized the shorter Bev-free interval may lead to poor outcome of anti-EGFR therapy. The aim of this study is to examine the association of the interval between last Bev administration and initial anti-EGFR agents with efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive mCRC patients who underwent combination therapy of anti-EGFR agents and irinotecan after failure of fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and Bev at a single institution. We divided patients in two groups (group A: the interval between Bev and anti-EGFR agents <6M, group B: ≥6M). Results: A total of 114 patients constituted the cohort of analysis. The median age was 63; 78 (68%) patients were male. Most patients (N=100, 88%) were treated with cetuximab, and 14 patients were panitumumab. Seventy-four patients were group A and 40 patients group B, respectively. There was no significant difference in patient characteristics. Response rate was 24.7% in group A, and 50.0% in group B (p=0.0072). The patients in group B have significantly longer progression free survival (4.2 vs. 6.6 M, HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43- 0.98, p=0.042) and longer overall survival (11.6 vs. 14.3 M, HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39- 0.97, p=0.038). Conclusions: The short interval (<6M) between last Bev and anti-EGFR agents may interfere with the efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy.

A randomized phase II factorial design trial of CPT-11 versus PTX versus each combination with S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to S-1: Final results of OGSG0701.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 117-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuhiro Nishikawa ◽  
Hiroshi Imamura ◽  
Tomono Kawase ◽  
Masahiro Gotoh ◽  
Yutaka Kimura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Correct Selection ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

117 Background: S1 + platinum (SP) is recognized as standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer(AGC), and S1 monotherapy is suggested for frail AGC patients or adjuvant setting in Japan. However, taxane or CPT-11 were often employed as second-line treatment for the patients who were resistant to S1-containing regimen. A retrospective analysis has reported that S1 combination chemotherapy extended overall survival as second-line treatment for AGC. Methods: Patients with AGC who confirmed disease progression by imaging after the first-line therapy with S1 or SP were randomized in four groups; CPT-11 150 mg/m2, day1, q2w (Group A), PTX 80 mg/m2, day1, 8,15, q4w (Group B), CPT-11 80 mg/m2, day1, 15, S-1 80 mg/m2, day1-21, q5w (Group C1), PTX 50 mg/m2,day1, 8, S1 80 mg/m2, day1-14, q3w (Group C2). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Sample size was set at 100 to 120 to achieve 2 months improvement of OS by using CPT-11 or by adding S1 with approximately 80% probability of the correct selection. Results: From July 2008 to March 2012, 127 patients were enrolled. The OS was 11.3/11.3/14.6/10.5 months(M) (Group A/B/C1/C2), 11.8M in Group A+C1 and 11.1M in Group B+C2 (p=0.922, HR: 0.981 [0.679-1.419]), 11.3M in Group A+B and 11.1M in Group C1+C2 (p=0.808, HR: 0.952 [0.643-1.412]), respectively. The PFS was 3.0/4.4/3.8/3.5M (Group A/B/C1/C2), 3.6M in Group A+C1 and 4.1M in Group B+C2 (p=0.035, HR:0.674 [0.468-0.972]) 3.7M in Group A+B and 3.7M in Group C1+C2 (p=0.931, HR: 1.017 [0.643-1.412]). The ORR was 7.1/16.3/4.5/5.0% (Group A/B/C1/C2), 4.7%[1.7-15.2] in Group A+C1 and 12.7%[5.6-23.5] in Group B+C2 (p=0.241), 11.8%[5.8-20.6] in Group A+B and 4.6%[0.6-16.2] in Group C1+C2 (p=0.572).Major Grade 3/4 toxicity (Group A/B/C1/C2, %), was leukopenia (12/7/5/0), neutropenia (29/16/24/24), nausea (7/2/10/5), diarrhea (5/0/10/0), and fatigue (5/2/10/5). Conclusions: From our results, we do not recommend consecutive use of S1 but CPT-11 or PTX monotherapy as second-line treatment in AGC refractory to S1 or SP. Clinical trial information: 000000677.

scholarly journals Individual Patient Data Analysis of Progression-Free Survival Versus Overall Survival As a First-Line End Point for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Modern Randomized Trials: Findings From the Analysis and Research in Cancers of the Digestive System Database

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Shi ◽  
Aimery de Gramont ◽  
Axel Grothey ◽  
John Zalcberg ◽  
Benoist Chibaudel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Patient Data ◽  
Biologic Agents ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
End Point

Purpose Progression-free survival (PFS) has previously been established as a surrogate for overall survival (OS) for first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Because mCRC treatment has advanced in the last decade with extended OS, this surrogacy requires re-examination. Methods Individual patient data from 16,762 patients were available from 22 first-line mCRC studies conducted from 1997 to 2006; 12 of those studies tested antiangiogenic and/or anti–epidermal growth factor receptor agents. The relationship between PFS (first event of progression or death) and OS was evaluated by using R2 statistics (the closer the value is to 1, the stronger the correlation) from weighted least squares regression of trial-specific hazard ratios estimated by using Cox and Copula models. Results Forty-four percent of patients received a regimen that included biologic agents. Median first-line PFS was 8.3 months, and median OS was 18.2 months. The correlation between PFS and OS was modest (R2, 0.45 to 0.69). Analyses limited to trials that tested treatments with biologic agents, nonstrategy trials, or superiority trials did not improve surrogacy. Conclusion In modern mCRC trials, in which survival after the first progression exceeds time to first progression, a positive but modest correlation was observed between OS and PFS at both the patient and trial levels. This finding demonstrates the substantial variability in OS introduced by the number of lines of therapy and types of effective subsequent treatments and the associated challenge to the use of OS as an end point to assess the benefit attributable to a single line of therapy. PFS remains an appropriate primary end point for first-line mCRC trials to detect the direct treatment effect of new agents.

scholarly journals Metabolic Parameters as Predictors for Progression Free and Overall Survival of Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 2683-2691
Author(s):  
Zsuzsanna Nemeth ◽  
Wouter Wijker ◽  
Zsolt Lengyel ◽  
Erika Hitre ◽  
Katalin Borbely
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metabolic Activity ◽  
Fdg Pet ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Metabolic Parameters ◽  
First Line ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Fdg Pet Ct

AbstractWe tested the prognostic relevance of metabolic parameters and their relative changes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with monoclonal antibody and chemotherapy. SUVmax (standardized uptake volume), SAM (standardized added metabolic activity) and TLG (total lesion glycolysis) are assessed with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) to evaluate total metabolic activity of malignant processes. Our purpose was to investigate the change of glucose metabolism in relation to PFS (progression free survival) and OS (overall survival). Fifty-three patients with mCRC with at least one measurable liver metastasis were included in this prospective, multi-center, early exploratory study. All patients were treated with first-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Metabolic parameters, like SUVmax, SAM, normalized SAM (NSAM) and TLG were assessed by FDG-PET/CT, carried out at baseline (scan-1) and after two therapeutic cycle (scan-2). Our results suggested neither SUVmax nor TLG have such prognostic value as NSAM in liver metastases of colorectal cancer. The parameters after the two cycles of chemotherapy proved to be better predictors of the clinical outcome. NSAM after two cycles of treatment has a statistically significant predictive value on OS, while SAM was predictive to the PFS. The follow up normalized SAM after 2 cycles of first line oncotherapy was demonstrated to be useful as prognostic biomarkers for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer. We should introduce this measurement in metastatic colorectal cancer if there is at least one metastasis in the liver.

Randomized strategical trial of chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (FFCD 2000–05): Preliminary results

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4069-4069 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Bouché ◽  
M. Castaing ◽  
P. L. Etienne ◽  
P. Texereau ◽  
D. Auby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
First Line ◽  
Number Range ◽  
Preliminary Results ◽  
Grade 3

4069 Background: The survival benefit of using a combination therapy instead of keeping it for a second line (L2) has not been demonstrated in metastatic colorectal cancer. The purpose of this trial was to compare the efficacy of simplified LV5FU2 (s) followed by FOLFOX6 (arm A) to FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B) on progression-free survival after two lines of chemotherapy. We present here preliminary results relating to toxicity, observance and overall survival. Methods: Inclusion criteria: a) non resectable metastases of histologically proven colorectal adenocarcinoma , b) evaluable disease (WHO criteria), c) absence of previous chemotherapy other than adjuvant. Treatment was as follows: LV5FU2s = at day 1, folinic acid 400 mg/m2, 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2 and continuous infusion over 46 hours 2,400 mg/m2/2 weeks; FOLFOX6 = LV5FU2s + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 at day 1; FOLFIRI = LV5FU2s + irinotecan 180 mg/m2 at day 1. Results: 410 pts out of 570 initially planned (early stopping due to slow accrual and new treatments) were included from 02/2002 to 02/2006 (205 in each arm). Median follow-up was 25 months. The median number (range) of cycles (28 days) in first line (L1) was respectively 5 (1–24) and 6 (1–24) in the arms A and B (p=0.01), and for L2 (152 and 144 pts in the arms A/B): 5 (1–17) and 3 (1–33) (NS). In the arms A and B, 74% and 70% of pts had L2. L1 was stopped for toxicity for 1% and 16% of the pts in arms A and B (p<0.0001); L2 respectively for 15% and 2% pts (p<0.0001). The percentages of pts presenting at least a grade 3–4 hematologic toxicity (mainly neutropenia) by arm were: 6% versus 37% (p<0.0001) for L1 and 30% versus 27% (NS) for L2; grade 3–4 non hematological toxicity (grade 2–4 neurotoxicity): 26% (1%) versus 56% (64%)(p<0.0001; p<0.0001) for L1 and 54% (60%) versus 46% (40%) of the pts for L2 (NS; p<0.01). No toxic death was observed in the arm A against 5 in the arm B: 3 in L1 and 2 in L2. Overall survival medians were 17 and 16 months in arms A/B (logrank p=0.64) (preliminary results, 291 observed deaths). Conclusions: This trial does not show any substantial difference in treatment duration and overall survival between both arms and shows a more important toxicity in the arm with first line combined chemotherapy. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document