scholarly journals Brain metastasis in advanced colorectal cancer: results from the South Australian metastatic colorectal cancer (SAmCRC) registry

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tapia Rico Gonzalo ◽  
J. Price Timothy ◽  
Karapetis Christos ◽  
Piantadosi Cynthia ◽  
Padbury Rob ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Brain Metastasis ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
The South

scholarly journals Brain metastasis in advanced colorectal cancer: Results from the South Australian metastatic colorectal cancer (SAmCRC) registry

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. vi160
Author(s):  
T.J. Price ◽  
C. Karapetis ◽  
C. Piantadosi ◽  
G. Tapia Rico ◽  
R. Padbury ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Brain Metastasis ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
The South

The JPJDF has Synergistic Effect with Fluoropyrimidine in the Maintenance Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-269
Author(s):  
Xiaoling Fu ◽  
Yanbo Zhang ◽  
Lisheng Chang ◽  
Dengcheng Hui ◽  
Ru Jia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Synergistic Effect ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Treated Group ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
Chemotherapeutic Regimen ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Maintenance chemotherapeutic regimen with low toxicity is needed for metastatic colorectal cancer. A recent patent has been issued on the spleen-strengthening and detoxification prescription (JPJDF), a traditional Chinese herbal medicinal formula with anti-angiogenesis effect. The clinical effect of JPJDF on the maintenance treatment of advanced colorectal cancer has not been evaluated. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of JPJDF in combination with fluoropyrimidine compared to fluoropyrimidine alone as maintenance therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: We applied a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, single center clinical study design. A total of 137 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were recruited. Patients received either Fluoropyrimidine (Flu-treated group, n = 68), or Fluoropyrimidine plus JPJDF (Flu-F-treated group, n = 69) as maintenance treatment after 6-cycle of FOLFOX4 or FOLFORI induction treatment. The primary endpoints were Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were safety, Performance Status (PS) score and other symptoms. Results: The endpoint of disease progression was observed in 91.7% of patients. The PFS was 5.0 months and 3.0 months in the Flu-F-treated and Flu-treated groups, respectively. The OS was 15.0 months and 9.0 months in the Flu-F-treated and Flu-treated groups, respectively. Some common symptoms, such as hypodynamia, anepithymia, dizziness and tinnitus and shortness of breath, were improved in the Flu-F-treated group. There was no significant difference in the common adverse reactions between the two groups. Conclusion: JPJDF and fluoropyrimidine have synergistic effect in the maintenance treatment of mCRC.

Phase II study of irinotecan in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer in chemotherapy-naive patients and patients pretreated with fluorouracil-based chemotherapy.

1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 251-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Rougier ◽  
R Bugat ◽  
J Y Douillard ◽  
S Culine ◽  
E Suc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
World Health ◽  
Who Grade ◽  
Pretreated Patients ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE To assess the efficacy of irinotecan (CPT-11) in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer in both chemotherapy-naive and pretreated patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred thirteen patients (aged 18 to 75 years) with metastatic colorectal cancer, World Health Organization (WHO) performance status < or = 2, and life expectancy > or = 3 months were treated with CPT-11 350 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. All 178 patients eligible for efficacy analysis had not received more than one prior fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy regimen (adjuvant or palliative) and had adequate hematologic, renal, and hepatic function. RESULTS Primary tumor sites were the colon (71%) and rectum (28%). Sixty-six percent of the patients had > or = two metastatic sites. Ninety-eight percent of the patients had undergone previous surgery, and 77.5% had received prior chemotherapy. Thirty-two of 178 eligible patients achieved on objective response (four complete responses [CRs] and 28 partial responses [PRs]; response rate, 18%; 95% confidence interval, 12.6% to 24.4%), 65 were stable, and 59 progressed. The response rate was 17.7% in the pretreated group and 18.8% in the chemotherapy-naive group. Within the former subgroup, response rates of 16.1% were reported in patients who were progressive on prior 5-FU chemotherapy and 19.1% in patients who were progressive off such treatment. The median duration of objective response (9.1 months) and median time to achievement of a response (9.3 weeks) did not differ between chemotherapy-naive and pretreated patients. The most frequent adverse events were neutropenia, which developed in 80% of the patients, delayed diarrhea (87%), alopecia (88%), fatigue (81%), and nausea/vomiting (77%). All these adverse events were manageable. Severe (WHO grade 3 or 4) neutropenia was only observed in 18% of the cycles, leukopenia in 11%, delayed diarrhea in 11%, and nausea and vomiting in 3%. Development of simultaneous grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and delayed diarrhea during 4% of the cycles was the safety issue of greatest concern. CONCLUSION CPT-11 has definite activity in the treatment of advanced metastatic colorectal cancer both in chemotherapy-naive and in pretreated patients who experienced disease progression on 5-FU, which suggests a lack of cross-resistance between CPT-11 and 5-FU. Diarrhea and neutropenia, the major toxicities of CPT-11, contribute to the risk to develop febrile neutropenic sepsis.

First-line single-agent cetuximab in patients with advanced colorectal cancer

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3553-3553 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Pessino ◽  
S. Artale ◽  
A. Guglielmi ◽  
S. Sciallero ◽  
G. Fornarini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Great Majority ◽  
Skin Toxicity ◽  
Common Adverse Event ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Grade 3

3553 Background: The most relevant recent advance in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer is the fact that cure is still possible under very selected conditions. However the goal of chemotherapy remains palliative in the great majority of patients, justifying less toxic innovative approaches in so- called “window of opportunity trials”. We have pursued this idea in a phase II study of cetuximab monotherapy in chemo-naive patients with advanced colorectal cancer beyond any possibility of curative resection. Methods: Patients with non-resectable metastatic colorectal cancer (at least two metastatic sites and/or otherwise inoperable metastatic disease) were treated with cetuximab (400 mg/m2 week 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly thereafter) until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end-point was objective response; secondary end-points were: stable disease, time to treatment failure and time to progression. According to Simon’s two-stage design, the number of responses/patients to stop the trial was 0/10 for stage 1 and 3/29 for stage 2. Results: Of the 44 patients screened, 42 (97%) had EGFR-expressing tumors. Thirty-nine patients (median age: 69) initiated the treatment. Two had grade 3 allergic reactions to cetuximab at the first administration leading to treatment discontinuation. The most common adverse event was skin toxicity, which occurred in 90% of the patients ( 31% grade 2, 10 % grade 3). We observed 1 complete response, 3 partial responses, 13 stable diseases (5 of which were minor responses), and 22 PD. The duration of the 4 responses were 12, 9, 9 and 6 months. Median time to progression was 2.0 months. Conclusions: The study is negative because the response rate is low. However, the duration of benefit in the few responding patients is such that it is imperative to find the molecular determinants of cetuximab activity in these cases. [Table: see text]

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Young Adults: A Study From the South Australian Population-Based Registry

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sina Vatandoust ◽  
Timothy J. Price ◽  
Shahid Ullah ◽  
Amitesh C. Roy ◽  
Carole Beeke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Population Based ◽  
The South ◽  
Australian Population ◽  
Population Based Registry

Maintenance treatment with cetuximab in a series of patients treated with standard chemotherapy and cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 624-624
Author(s):  
G. Quintero-Aldana ◽  
S. Varela ◽  
B. Campos ◽  
S. Vazquez-Estevez ◽  
O. Maseda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Standard Chemotherapy ◽  
Cutaneous Toxicity

624 Background: New strategies are needed to improve outcomes and reduced toxicities of currently treatments for patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Nowadays maintaining treatment until disease progression is the standard option for these patients. Cetuximab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that neutralizes epidermal growth factor receptor and it has shown benefit not only in combination with standard chemotherapy in first- and second-line treatment or as a single agent in progression to standard chemotherapy in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: This data describes patients who received standard chemotherapy with cetuximab every two weeks. For patients with response or stable disease, cetuximab was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results: Twelve patients are reported, nine were male (75%). The median age was 62 years (range, 46 to 78 years). All patients had stage IV, and liver was the most common location (75%). The majority of patients (75%) received FOLFOX VI as a first-line treatment in combination with cetuximab; only two patients were treated with FOLFIRI. Cetuximab was maintained after the first line of treatment in the 75% of patients. The median of cycles of chemotherapy and cetuximab was 12. Best response achieved in this setting was complete response (58.3%, 7/12). Median of monotherapy with cetuximab treatment was 7.5 cycles (range 3 to 12). At the moment of this analysis seven of twelve patients continued with the maintenance. In the rest of patients the treatment was followed until progression (33%, 3/12). No grade 3-4 toxicities were seen during maintenance cetuximab. The most common adverse effect during maintenance was cutaneous toxicity but the majority of patients had minor toxicity (50% grade 1). Conclusions: Cetuximab has significant antitumor activity not only as a single agent or in combination with standard chemotherapy but may also when it is used as maintenance therapy after a complete or partial response to first or second line based chemotherapy in mCRC. Maintenance cetuximab is feasible, safe, and worthy of future study in advanced colorectal cancer. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Survival improvement associated with access to biological agents: Updated results from the South Australian (SA) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) registry.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14576-e14576
Author(s):  
Yoko Tomita ◽  
Christos Stelios Karapetis ◽  
Shahid Ullah ◽  
Amanda Rose Townsend ◽  
Rob Padbury ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Biological Agents ◽  
The South
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document