scholarly journals EFFECTIVENESS OF MAINTENANCE THERAPY AFTER THE END OF THE FIRST LINE OF TREATMENT FOR PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER – THE RESULTS OF A POPULATION-BASED STUDY

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 57-67
Author(s):  
M. Yu. Fedyanin ◽  
Sh. A. Aliyeva ◽  
L. Y. Vladimirova ◽  
A. N. Ivanov ◽  
A. A. Katkov ◽  
...  

Aim.To evaluate the effectiveness of different regimens of maintenance chemotherapy after the first line of treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.Materials and methods.We performed retrospective analyses of the data from 432 patients from 17 clinics in 14 regions of the Russian Federation who started systemic therapy for metastatic cancer in 2013. The main inclusion criterion was objective response or stabilization after the first 16 weeks of first-line therapy. Four groups of patients were compared, depending on the nature of maintenance therapy: those receiving fluoropyrimidines, a combination of fluoropyrimidines with bevacizumab, monotherapy of bevacizumab and monotherapy of anti-EGFR antibodies. The main criteria for assesment of the effectiveness of treatment were progression-free survival and overall survival. The statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS 20.0 sof tware package.Results.Maintenance therapy after completion of the first 16 weeks of the 1st line of chemotherapy was administered in 126 patients, most of them were treated with fluoropyrimidines (53.1 %). The median overall survival in the maintenance group was 27 versus 21 months in the observation group, p=0.01, HR=0.78 (95 % CI 0.6–1.02) Median progression-free survival in the maintenance group was 11 vs 7 months in the observation group (p<0.001, HR=0.6, 95 % CI 0.5–0.8). The worst results of progression-free survival were observed in the group with monotherapy of bevacizumab – median was 10 months versus 12 months in the fluoropyrimidine monotherapy group, 10 months for the combination of fluoropyrimidine with bevacizumab and 14 months for monotherapy of the anti-EGFR (p=0,9, HR=1.0, 95 % CI 0.9–1.2).Conclusions.There were no statistical differences in survival with different regimens of maintenance therapy. Monotherapy of bevacizumab in maintenance treatment was associated with the worst sur vival rates.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 588-588
Author(s):  
M. Suenaga ◽  
N. Mizunuma ◽  
S. Matsusaka ◽  
E. Shinozaki ◽  
M. Ogura ◽  
...  

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.


2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. 47-53
Author(s):  
S Whyte ◽  
A Pandor ◽  
M Stevenson ◽  
A Rees

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.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 610-610 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitsukuni Suenaga ◽  
Satoshi Matsusaka ◽  
Nobuyuki Mizunuma ◽  
Eiji Shinozaki ◽  
Mariko Ogura ◽  
...  

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Shi ◽  
Aimery de Gramont ◽  
Axel Grothey ◽  
John Zalcberg ◽  
Benoist Chibaudel ◽  
...  

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 117955491882544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Aljubran ◽  
Mahmoud A Elshenawy ◽  
Magdy Kandil ◽  
Muhammed N Zahir ◽  
Ahmed Shaheen ◽  
...  

Background: Regorafenib is a multi-kinase inhibitor approved for treatment of refractory advanced colorectal cancer. It was found in the clinical trials to have a modest benefit and significant toxicity. Our aim was to assess the outcome in our local clinic practice. Patients and methods: Records of patients with confirmed colorectal cancer treated with regorafenib were reviewed. Clinical, pathological, and molecular data were collected. Efficacy and factors of possible prognostic significance were analyzed. Results: A total of 78 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were treated with regorafenib from February 2014 to February 2016 in 4 different institutions (median age: 50.5 years; male: 40 [51.3%]; KRAS mutant: 41 [52%]; right colonic primary: 18 [23%]). A total of 52 patients (66.7%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status of 0 to 1, whereas in 25 patients (32.1%) it was >1. In total, 58 patients (74%) had dose reduction. No patient achieved objective response, 15 patients (19%) achieved stable disease, and 56 patients (72%) had progressive disease. With a median follow-up of 6.5 months, the median progression-free survival was 2.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.3) and overall survival was 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.2-9.7). Only performance status of ⩽1 had a statistically significant impact on progression-free survival and overall survival in both univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions: Regorafenib in our clinical practice has equal efficacy to reported data from pivotal registration trials. Our data suggest that performance status is the most important prognostic factor in patients treated with regorafenib, suggesting a careful selection of patients.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3527-3527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fen Wang ◽  
Shubin Wang ◽  
Xia Yuan ◽  
Jun Jia ◽  
Xiaoxia Bi ◽  
...  

3527 Background: Apatinib is an oral highly-selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that blocks vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR-2). This exploratory study evaluated the efficacy and safety of apatinib monotherapy in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: In this multicenter, single-arm, prospective study, 48 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had failed at least two lines standard chemotherapies including fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan were recruited from 14 centers in Guangdong, China. Apatinib at a 500mg dose was administered daily continuously. Each cycle was 4 weeks (28 days). The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), quality of life (QoL) and toxicity. Results: A total of 48 patients was enrolled in the study from September 3, 2015 to June9, 2017. Four patients achieved a partial response, and 22 achieved stable disease, representing a response rate of 8.3% and a disease control rate of 60.4%. Median follow-up time was 10.3 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of evaluable patients (n=41) were 4.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7-5.9) and 9.7 months (95% CI 5.9-13.6). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AE) were hypertension (12.5%), hand-foot syndrome (10.4%), thrombocytopenia (10.4%), proteinuria (8.3%) and mucositis oral (6.3%). Conclusions: Apatinib monotherapy shows promising efficacy and manageable toxicities in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Further phase 3 trial is warranted. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR1900020503.


2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 2013-2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard B. Saltz ◽  
Stephen Clarke ◽  
Eduardo Díaz-Rubio ◽  
Werner Scheithauer ◽  
Arie Figer ◽  
...  

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC).Patients and MethodsPatients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsA total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials.ConclusionThe addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 735-735
Author(s):  
Ana Beatriz Kinupe Abrahao ◽  
Yoo-Joung Ko ◽  
Kelvin K. Chan ◽  
Scott R. Berry

735 Background: Recent studies have shown regorafenib and TAS-102 (TAS) to be superior to placebo (P) in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, no studies have directly compared both drugs. Giving the lack of therapeutic options for these patients,, a systematic review to compare the efficacy and safety of regorafenib compared with TAS was performed, using indirect comparison methods. Methods: A systematic review using PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane database to identify published and unpublished studies up to November 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, involving regorafenib or TAS was performed. Data including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity were extracted. Pairwise direct meta-analyses (regorafenib versus placebo and TAS versus placebo) and indirect comparison (regorafenib versus TAS) using network meta-analyses methods (R package “netmeta”) to preserve randomization were performed using random effects. Results: 914 citations were initially identified among which 3 RCTs fulfilled eligibility criteria (CORRECT, CONCUR and RECOURSE trials) involving 1.764 patients (regorafenib: 641, TAS: 534, Placebo: 589). Subgroups of patients (1.659) who had not received prior regorafenib or TAS-102 were used to performed meta-analyses for efficacy. In indirect comparison, there were no statically differences observed between regorafenib and TAS-102 in overall survival (HR 0.96 95% CI 0.56-1.55 p = 0.082) and progression-free survival (HR HR 0.85 95% CI 0.40-1.80 p = 0.0182). In addition, there were no differences in objective response rate and disease control between both drugs. However, regorafenib has statistically more all grade toxicity (risk difference (RD) 0.31 CI 0.25-0.38 p = 0.001) and toxicity grade 3-5 (RD 0.22 CI 0.13-0.31 p < 0.001) compared to TAS. Conclusions: In this indirect comparison, regorafenib and TAS appeared to have similar efficacy. However, regorafenib has more toxicity compared to TAS. Post-approval real world data focusing on the comparative toxicity of regorafenib and TAS is warranted.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document