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 regorafenib as beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an adjusted indirect meta-analysis and systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592094093
Author(s):  
Yinying Wu ◽  
Yangwei Fan ◽  
Danfeng Dong ◽  
Xuyuan Dong ◽  
Yuan Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Third Line Therapy ◽  
Third Line

Background: The evidence base for optimum third-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is not conclusive. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of regorafenib as third-line therapy in mCRC. This indirect meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of regorafenib with other available third-line therapies for mCRC. Methods: A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, regorafenib, TAS-102, and nintedanib as third-line therapies in patients with mCRC. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary outcomes, while objective response rate (ORR) and safety were the secondary outcomes. Hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR) with their respective 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for analysis of survival, clinical response, and safety data. An adjusted indirect meta-analysis with placebo as the common comparator was performed. Results: We identified eight RCTs comparing regorafenib (two studies), fruquintinib (two studies), TAS-102 (three studies), and nintedanib (one study) against placebo. The OS with regorafenib was significantly better when compared with nintedanib (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.95, p = 0.02) but was similar to that of fruquintinib (HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.67, 1.52, p = 0.94) and TAS-102 (HR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68, 1.38, p = 0.88). The PFS and ORR for regorafenib were slightly better than those of TAS-102 (PFS: HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.54, 1.37, p = 0.5; ORR: RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.11, 11.05, p = 0.92) and nintedanib (PFS: HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.42, 1.10, p = 0.12; ORR: not reported) but were lower than those for fruquintinib (PFS: HR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.93, 2.52, p = 0.08; ORR: RR = 0.68269, 95% CI: 0.045, 10.32, p = 0.79). Safety analysis showed that the RR of adverse events (AEs) was lesser in patients treated with regorafenib in comparison with that in patients treated with fruquintinib, but was similar to that in patients treated with nintedanib and TAS-102. Conclusion: Regorafenib has efficacy similar to that of TAS-102 and better safety when compared with fruquintinib. Considering the mechanism of action of regorafenib, which targets multiple factors in the angiogenic pathway, it could be an ideal option for treatment in the beyond second-line setting.

Efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 immune checkpoint inhibitors in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunhui Jin ◽  
Xiaodan Zhu ◽  
Xiaona Huang ◽  
Tingjie Gong ◽  
Zhipeng Wei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Mismatch Repair ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Adverse Event Rate ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Deficient Mismatch Repair

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 and/or CTLA-4 inhibitors in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) by meta-analysis. Methods: Electronic databases were searched. Eligible studies included investigations of efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 or anti-CTLA-4 agents in patients with CRC. Corresponding indicators were calculated. Results: A total of 15 articles were included. The pooled objective response rate, overall survival rate, progression-free survival rate and adverse event rate were 33, 56, 46 and 59%, respectively. The objective response rates for CRC with deficient mismatch repair and CRC with proficient mismatch repair were 43 and 3%, respectively, in patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors. Conclusion: The authors' study indicates that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors manifest promising clinical responses in the treatment of CRC with deficient mismatch repair with acceptable treatment-related adverse events.

scholarly journals A comparison of FOLFIRI (Folinic Acid, Fluorouracil and Irinotecan) Plus Bevacizumab and FLOLFIRI Plus Aflibercept as Second-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min-Sang Lee ◽  
Yong-Pyo Lee ◽  
Hongsik Kim ◽  
Jung Yong Hong ◽  
Jeeyun Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Folinic Acid ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients

Abstract Background: To date, there are few clinical studies comparing the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab or aflibercept in metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC) pretreated with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Methods: We analyzed the treatment outcomes of patients receiving FOLFIRI in combination with bevacizumab or aflibercept as second-line treatment for mCRC between October 2017 and March 2020. This analysis included 67 patients receiving FOLFIRI plus aflibercept and 83 receiving FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. Results: The overall response rate (ORR) was 13.6% (95% CI: 4.85-22.34) in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group and 14.7% (95% CI: 6.68-22.71) in the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab group. This difference in ORR was not statistically significant. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 8.6 months in the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab group and 8.5 months in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group (P = 0.752) (Fig. 1). Patients in the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab group showed a median overall survival (OS) of 12.4 months, while patients in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group had a median OS of 13.7 months (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in survival between the two treatment groups. The adverse events were also largely similar between the two groups. However, hypertension of grade 3 or more was more frequent in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group. Conclusion: FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and FOLFIRI plus aflibercept had similar anti-tumor activities and toxicity profiles when used as second-line therapy in mCRC patients. Based on these data, both aflibercept and bevacizumab are suitable anti-angiogenic agents when used in combination with FOLFIRI for mCRC.

scholarly journals A meta-analysis comparing regorafenib with TAS-102 for treating refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 030006052092640
Author(s):  
Guan-Li Su ◽  
Yuan-Yuan Wang ◽  
Jin-Cheng Wang ◽  
Hao Liu
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome

Objective We performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and toxicity of regorafenib and TAS-102. Methods Electronic databases were searched to identify studies comparing the efficacy and safety of regorafenib and TAS-102 in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer using pooled analyses. Results Three clinical trials were included in this analysis. Regarding the reasons for treatment discontinuation, regorafenib was significantly associated with disease progression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.21–0.50) and adverse events (OR = 4.38, 95% CI = 2.69–7.13). However, overall (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.81–1.17) and progression-free survival (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.86–1.18) did not significantly differ between the groups. The most common treatment-related adverse events in the regorafenib group were neutropenia (OR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.03–0.11), hand–foot syndrome (OR = 50.34, 95% CI = 10.44–242.84), and liver dysfunction (OR = 34.51, 95% CI = 8.30–143.43). Conversely, the incidence of thrombocytopenia did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions Regorafenib and TAS-102 have similar efficacy but different adverse event profiles. Differences in the toxicity profiles of the two drugs will help guide treatment selection.

The efficacy and safety of CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy with a planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A multi-center, single-arm, phase II study (CCOG-0902 study).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 795-795
Author(s):  
Yuuki Sunakawa ◽  
Goro Nakayama ◽  
Kiyoshi Ishigure ◽  
Hiroyuki Yokoyama ◽  
Keisuke Uehara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Stop And Go ◽  
Grade 3

795 Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CapeOX plus bevacizumab with a planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy in Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: Patients with untreated mCRC were treated with 4 cycles of CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy, followed by capecitabine plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy. Reintroduction of oxaliplatin was scheduled after 8 cycles of maintenance therapy or upon tumor progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate to each treatment, reintroduction rate of oxaliplatin, frequency of peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN), and safety. Results: The 52 patients who received the protocol treatment were included in the evaluation of efficacy and safety. Median PFS and OS were 12.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0–14.8) and 30.6 months (95% CI, 27.6–33.5), respectively. The objective response rates were 55.8% for the initial CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy, 17.8% for capecitabine plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy, and 31.0% for reintroduced CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy. The frequency of PSN was 63.5%, including 3.8% of patients with grade 3 PSN. No patients required treatment discontinuation because of PSN during the induction or maintenance therapy. Conclusions: CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy with a planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy is a feasible first-line treatment for Japanese patients with mCRC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006478.

The efficacy and safety of XELOX plus bevacizumab with oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy in first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: CCOG 0902 study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 564-564
Author(s):  
Takuya Watanabe ◽  
Goro Nakayama ◽  
Kiyoshi Ishigure ◽  
Naomi Hayashi ◽  
Toyohisa Yaguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
Stop And Go ◽  
First Line Treatment

564 Background: XELOX plus bevacizumab (BEV) is an established first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin often requires therapy to be discontinued while the patient is still responding. The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of XELOX plus BEV with oxaliplatin stop and go strategy. Methods: Fifty four patients with unresectable mCRC were enrolled as first-line treatment. They were treated with four cycles of XELOX plus BEV, followed by maintenance therapy with capecitabine (Cape) plus BEV. Reintroduction of oxaliplatin was scheduled after eight cycles of Cape plus BEV or upon tumor progression. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Results: Forty nine patients (90%) achieved to the maintenance therapy and thirty one patients (59%) were reintroducted oxaliplatin. The response rates and disease control rates were 57% and 96% in the initial XELOX plus BEV, 6.1% and 73% in Cape plus BEV maintenance therapy. Median PFS in initial XELOX plus BEV was 11.0 months (95%CI: 7.8-14.1). One year survival rate was 86%. Conclusions: XELOX plus BEV was feasible as a first line treatment with mCRC. The most cases achieved disease control during Cape plus BEV maintenance therapy. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006478.

A phase II trial of panitumumab with irinotecan and S-1 (IRIS) as second-line treatment in patients with wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 732-732
Author(s):  
Rai Shimoyama ◽  
Tetsuo Kimura ◽  
Toshi Takaoka ◽  
Kazuki Sakamoto ◽  
Shunji Kawamoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

732 Background: Panitumumab with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in second-line chemotherapy increased objective response rate and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus FOLFIRI alone in patients with wild-type (WT) KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) (Peeters et al, J Clin Oncol 2010). This trial (UMIN000004659) evaluated tolerability and efficacy of combination therapy with irinotecan and S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine (IRIS) plus panitumumab as second-line chemotherapy in patients with WT KRASmCRC. Methods: Main inclusion criteria were: patients with WT KRAS mCRC refractory to one prior chemotherapy regimen for mCRC, ECOG PS 0-2, and age ≥20 years. Patients received panitumumab (6 mg/m2) and irinotecan (100 mg/m2) on days 1 and 15 and S-1 (40-60 mg according to body surface area) twice daily for 2 weeks, repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was completion rate of protocol therapy (CRT). The secondary endpoints were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled in 9 centers. The overall CRT was 62.2% (23/37). Most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were: skin rash (24%), diarrhea (16%), and appetite loss (11%). The overall RR was 32.4% (12/37). Of these, four patients underwent conversion surgery. Median PFS and OS were 9.5 months (95% CI: 3.5-15.4 months) and 20.1 months (95% CI: 16.7-23.2 months), respectively. Conclusions: IRIS plus panitumumab has acceptable toxicity profile and promising efficacy in patients with previously treated WT KRAS mCRC. This regimen can be an additional treatment option for second-line chemotherapy in WT KRAS mCRC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000004659.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document