scholarly journals TheraSphere Yttrium-90 Glass Microspheres Combined With Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone in Second-Line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma of the Liver: Protocol for the EPOCH Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikhil Chauhan ◽  
Mary F Mulcahy ◽  
Riad Salem ◽  
Al B Benson III ◽  
Eveline Boucher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers and causes of cancer-related death. Up to approximately 70% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have metastases to the liver at initial diagnosis. Second-line systemic treatment in mCRC can prolong survival after development of disease progression during or after first-line treatment and in those who are intolerant to first-line treatment. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with TheraSphere yttrium-90 (90Y) glass microspheres combined with second-line therapy in patients with mCRC of the liver who had disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy. METHODS EPOCH is an open-label, prospective, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial being conducted at up to 100 sites in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia. Eligible patients have mCRC of the liver and disease progression after first-line chemotherapy with either an oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based regimen and are eligible for second-line chemotherapy with the alternate regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to the TARE group (chemotherapy with TARE in place of the second chemotherapy infusion and subsequent resumption of chemotherapy) or the control group (chemotherapy alone). The addition of targeted agents is permitted. The primary end points are progression-free survival and hepatic progression-free survival. The study objective will be considered achieved if at least one primary end point is statistically significant. Secondary end points are overall survival, time to symptomatic progression defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 2 or higher, objective response rate, disease control rate, quality-of-life assessment by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Cancer questionnaire, and adverse events. The study is an adaptive trial, comprising a group sequential design with 2 interim analyses with a planned maximum of 420 patients. The study is designed to detect a 2.5-month increase in median progression-free survival, from 6 months in the control group to 8.5 months in the TARE group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71), and a 3.5-month increase in median hepatic progression-free survival time, from 6.5 months in the control group to 10 months in the TARE group (HR 0.65). On the basis of simulations, the power to detect the target difference in either progression-free survival or hepatic progression-free survival is >90%, and the power to detect the target difference in each end point alone is >80%. RESULTS Patient enrollment ended in October 2018. The first interim analysis in June 2018 resulted in continuation of the study without any changes. CONCLUSIONS The EPOCH study may contribute toward the establishment of the role of combination therapy with TARE and oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of mCRC of the liver. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01483027; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01483027 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/734A6PAYW) INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPOR RR1-10.2196/11545

Phase 3 clinical Trial Evaluating 90y glass microspheres in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma of the liver who have failed first-line chemotherapy.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 474-474
Author(s):  
Maria Angela Karpf
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Glass Microspheres ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

474 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the US. Half of pts diagnosed with CRC develop liver disease. Unresectable liver metastases are responsible for morbidity/mortality. Typically, pts with metastatic CRC receive an oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based regimen as first-line chemotherapy, +/- bevacizumab. On progression, pts are treated with the regimen they did not receive during first-line chemo. A study to evaluate yttrium 90 glass microspheres (TheraSphere; 90Y) in pts with unresectable mCRC of the liver showed that pts with good performance status, no extrahepatic metastases, and ≤ 25% tumor may benefit most from 90Y. 90Y glass microspheres are approved by FDA under a Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE). This study will evaluate outcomes in this patient subset when 90Y is added to second-line SOC chemo. The objective is to evaluate efficacy/safety of 90Y in patients with liver mCRC that has progressed after first-line chemo. Methods: Open-label, multi-center, randomized study to evaluate 90Y treatment in ~340 eligible pts, in whom SOC 2nd-line chemo with either an oxaliplatin or irinotecan-based regimen is planned. Eligible pts will be randomized 1:1 to control or treatment. Treatment pts will receive a first cycle of second-line chemo within 21 days of randomization and at least 14 days after the last dose of first-line agents including VEGF inhibitors. 90Y will be administered in place of the second chemotherapy cycle. Control pts will receive planned SOC second-line chemo. Primary endpoint is progression-free survival. Secondary: overall survival, hepatic progression-free survival, time to symptomatic progression, tumor response rate, and adverse events. Pts will have regular study visits as long as they participate, at which time safety/efficacy data will be collected and recorded. Results: NA Conclusions: Given the potential benefit to mCRC pts, this Phase 3 study will evaluate 90Y in the second-line setting in patients who have progressed following SOC first-line chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01483027.

Phase II trial of irinotecan, S-1, and bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) combination chemotherapy as second line for advanced colorectal cancer (NCCSG04).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 496-496
Author(s):  
Yasumasa Takii ◽  
Kouichi Hurukawa ◽  
Satoshi Maruyama ◽  
Toshiyuki Yamazaki ◽  
Jun Nishimura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Therapy

496 Background: The FIRIS study (Muro K et al. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:853-860) previously demonstrated the non-inferiority of Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) to FOLFIRI for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), with progression-free survival as the primary endpoint. IRIS plus bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) was reported an active and generally well-tolerated first-line treatment for mCRC (Yuki et al. ASCO 2012 #3593). We planned a Phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IRIS/Bev as second-line therapy for patients with mCRC. Methods: The study design was multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase II study. Eligible patients had to have mCRC with confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, history of oxaliplatin containing regimen as first-line therapy, an age from 20 to 80 years, ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1. S-1 65 mg/m2 daily p.o. was given on days 1-14 and Irinotecan 75mg/m2 and Bevacizumab 10mg/kg i.v. were given on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included overall response rate (OR), overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF) and safety. Results: From 08/12 until 11/06, 35 patients were enrolled. One patient did not start therapy. Thirty-four patients were investigated. Median age was 63 years (range, 38 to 82). Twenty-five patients were male. The mean of relative dose intensity of TS-1/Irinotecan/Bev were respectively 92.1%/87.0%/86.2%. The OR was 21.1% (7/33) and disease control rate was 84.8% (28/33). Median PFS was 9.3 months, median TTF was 8.2 month and median survival time 23.1 month. On safety analysis, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions were as follows: neutropenia, 14.7%; fatigue, 14.7%; white blood cell decreased, 11.8%; anorexia, 8.8%; anemia, 8.8%; diarrhea, 2.9%; proteinuria, 5.9%; thromboembolic event, 2.9%. Conclusions: IRIS/Bev is an active and well-tollarated second-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000001631.

Impact of first-line cisplatin versus non-cisplatin based chemotherapy on progression-free survival in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma previously treated with perioperative cisplatin based chemotherapy.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 335-335
Author(s):  
Jennifer A Locke ◽  
Gregory Russell Pond ◽  
Guru Sonpavde ◽  
Andrea Necchi ◽  
Patrizia Giannatempo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Line Chemotherapy ◽  
First Line Treatment

335 Background: Perioperative cisplatin based chemotherapy (PCBC) is a standard of care in the management of muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma (UC). Cisplatin based (C) therapy also represents the historical first line treatment of metastatic disease. There is however no data to guide the optimal choice of first line chemotherapy regimen – C re-treatment vs other second-line or non cisplatin regimens (NC) –in UC patients who relapse after receiving PCBC. This multicenter retrospective study compares C vs NC first line treatment on progression-free survival (PFS) for patients (pts) with advanced UC after PCBC and cystectomy. Methods: Data were collected for patients who received various first-line chemotherapies for advanced UC following previous PCBC therapy. Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate the prognostic ability of type of peri-operative / first-line chemotherapy, visceral metastasis, ECOG status, time from prior chemotherapy (TFPC), anemia, leukocytosis and albumin on PFS. Results: Data were available for 145 pts from 12 centers. The mean age was 62 years, 113 (77.9%) were men and ECOG-PS was 0 or >0 in 74 (51.0%) and 61 (42.0%) patients. Ninety-one (62.8%) pts received C first line, the median number of cycles was 4 (range 1-17) and the median TFPC was 6.2 months (range 1-154). Median overall survival was 86 weeks (95% CI 70-106) and median PFS was 24 (95% CI 18-27) weeks. Time from perioperative chemotherapy (TFPC) (>52 weeks vs ≤52 weeks; HR 0.63 p=0.027) and ECOG-PS at first line (1+ vs 0; HR 1.73 p=0.010), were prognostic of PFS. No significant effect was noted for C vs NC first line (p=0.70); however, among patients with TFPC >52 weeks, patients with NC had worse PFS (median 4.6 months, 95% CI 1.8-12.2) than those who received C (median 8.1, 95% CI 3.2-16.3). Conclusions: There is no evidence to suggest overall superiority of C vs NC based first line chemotherapy or a second-line regimen in patients with advanced UC who received prior PCBC. However, those with TFPC >52 weeks should probably receive C first line chemotherapy given better PFS with C.

Is gemcitabine effective for pancreatic cancer after progression to FOLFIRINOX?

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 489-489
Author(s):  
Bruno Melo Fernandes ◽  
Rafael Caparica Bitton ◽  
Jorge Sabbaga ◽  
Paulo Marcelo Hoff
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Line Chemotherapy ◽  
First Line Treatment

489 Background: Cytotoxic chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX (5-Fluoracil + Irinotecan + Oxaliplatin) is considered the standard treatment for fit patients (pts) with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Disease progression after FOLFIRINOX invariably occurs, and there is no definition on the optimal strategy for the second-line treatment of these pts. Gemcitabine is effective for advanced pancreatic cancer as first-line treatment, but its role after FOLFIRINROX progression is unknown. The present study aims to assess the efficacy of gemcitabine for treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer after progression to FOLFIRINOX. Methods: Single-institution, retrospective analysis of all pts consecutively diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer between January/2010, and October/2015, who received Gemcitabine as second line chemotherapy after progression to first line chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX. Tumor responses were assessed through RECIST 1.1. PFS and OS were calculated using Kaplan Meier method. Results: 28 pts were included in our analysis. Median age was 55 years (38-75), and 19 pts (67%) were male. The median ECOG was 1 (0-2). Pts received a median of 9 cycles of FOLFIRINOX as first line treatment (1-27), with an objective (ORR) response rate of 39%. The median number of second-line Gemcitabine cycles was 3 (1-8), with an ORR of 3%, and a 17% rate of disease control (stable disease + partial response). Five patients (18%) discontinued second line Gemcitabine due to toxicities and the remaining 23 (82%) due to disease progression. Median overall survival was 5.6 months (0,36-11,5) and median progression-free survival was 2 months (0.2-7.7). Grade ≥ 3 toxicities with Gemcitabine were experienced by 18% of the patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusions: Gemcitabine after progression to FOLFIRINOX presented a modest activity on the present study, with prospective trials being necessary to further assess this issue. Due to the palliative goal of the treatment, with the objective of improving patient´s quality of life, the significant risk of treatment-related adverse events and the low efficacy of Gemcitabine should be considered before prescribing Gemcitabine routinely as a second-line treatment for pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Partnering bevacizumab with irinotecan as first line-therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer improves progression free survival-A retrospective analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0248922
Author(s):  
Calin Cainap ◽  
Rodica Ana Ungur ◽  
Ovidiu-Vasile Bochis ◽  
Patriciu Achimas ◽  
Catalin Vlad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Time To Treatment ◽  
Time To Treatment Failure

Colorectal cancer remains one of the most frequent malignancies (third place at both genders) worldwide in the last decade, owing to significant changes in modern dietary habits. Approximately half of the patients develop metastases during the course of their disease. The available therapeutic armamentarium is constantly evolving, raising questions regarding the best approach for improving survival. Bevacizumab remains one of the most widely used therapies for treating metastatic colorectal cancer and can be used after progression. This study aimed to identify the best chemotherapy partner for bevacizumab after progression. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated with bevacizumab as first- and second-line chemotherapy. Data were collected for 151 patients, 40 of whom were treated with double-dose bevacizumab after the first progression. The two standard chemotherapy regimens combined with bevacizumab were FOLFIRI/CAPIRI and FOLFOX4/CAPEOX. The initiation of first-line treatment with irinotecan-based chemotherapy improved progression-free survival and time to treatment failure but not overall survival. After the first progression, retreatment with the same regimen as that used in the induction phase was the best approach for improving overall survival (median overall survival: 46.5 vs. 27.0 months for the same vs. switched strategy, respectively). No correlations were observed between the dose intensity of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, or bevacizumab and the overall survival, progression-free survival in the first-/second-line treatment, and time to treatment failure. Interaction between an irinotecan-based regimen as a second-line treatment and double-dose bevacizumab after progression was associated with an improved overall survival (p = 0.06). Initiating systemic treatment with an irinotecan-based regimen in combination with bevacizumab improved the progression-free survival in the first-line treatment and time to treatment failure. In terms of overall survival, bevacizumab treatment after the first progression is better partnered with the same regimen as that used in the induction phase.

scholarly journals Second-line chemotherapy after early disease progression during first-line chemotherapy containing bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shun Yamamoto ◽  
Kengo Nagashima ◽  
Takeshi Kawakami ◽  
Seiichiro Mitani ◽  
Masato Komoda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Early Disease ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Abstract Background The ML18174 study, which showed benefits of bevacizumab (BEV) continuation beyond progression (BBP) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), excluded patients with first-line progression-free survival (PFS) shorter than 3 months. The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after early disease progression during first-line chemotherapy containing bevacizumab. Methods The subjects of this study were mCRC patients who experienced disease progression < 100 days from commencement of first-line chemotherapy containing BEV initiated between Apr 2007 and Dec 2016. Second-line chemotherapy regimens were classified into two groups with and without BEV/other anti-angiogenic agents (BBP and non-BBP) and efficacy and safety were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis. Results Sixty-one patients were identified as subjects of this study. Baseline characteristics were numerically different between BBP (n = 37) and non-BBP (n = 25) groups, such as performance status (0–1/> 2/unknown: 89/8/3 and 56/40/4%), RAS status (wild/mutant/unknown: 32/54/16 and 76/16/8%). Response rate was 8.6% in BBP group and 9.1% in non-BBP group (p = 1.00). Median PFS was 3.9 months in BBP group and 2.8 months in non-BBP group (HR [95%CI]: 0.79 [0.46–1.34], p = 0.373, adjusted HR: 0.87 [0.41–1.82], p = 0.707). Median overall survival was 8.5 months in BBP group and 5.4 months in non-BBP group (HR 0.66 [0.38–1.12], p = 0.125, adjusted HR 0.53 [0.27–1.07], p = 0.078). Conclusion In mCRC patients who experienced early progression in first-line chemotherapy, second-line chemotherapy showed poor clinical outcomes regardless use of anti-angiogenic agents.

Efficacy and prognostic significance of triflurodine/tipiracil beyond oxaliplatin and irinotecan based chemotherapy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: An observational multicenter study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15586-e15586
Author(s):  
Mohamed Alghamdi ◽  
Shouki Bazarbashi ◽  
Elsamany Shereef ◽  
Mervat Mahrous ◽  
Omar Al shaer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Neutrophil Count ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
P Value ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

e15586 Background: In Saudi Arabia, the incidence of colorectal cancer has been increased over the past few years. The optimal treatment beyond the second line is not fully understood. To the best of our knowledge, the efficacy and disease outcomes of triflurodine/tipiracil in Saudi patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC) has not been studied yet. Our study is a real-life practice evaluation of the efficacy of triflurodine/tipiracil in patients with refractory mCRC. Moreover, the prognosis and the prognostic significance of the different clinical variables have been analyzed. Methods: A retrospective, multi-centers ( 5 centers representative of Saudi Arabia )observational study in patients with mCRC who have received triflurodine/tipiracil beyond oxaliplatin & Irinotecan-based chemotherapy between December 2018-December 2020.We aimed to assess the response to triflurodine/tipiracil, to evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS ), the overall survival (OS), and the associated factors of prognostic significance. Results:The data of 100 patients with refractory mCRC who has received triflurodine/tipiracil have been analyzed. The mean age was 55.2 +11.8 years. Forty-two patients were (42%) females and 58 (58%) were male patients. Sigmoid was the most common primary site of cancer in 35 (35%) patients, followed by rectum 29 (29%). Peritoneal metastasis was present in 17 (23.3%) patients ,liver in 51(56.6%) and lung in 39 (50.7%). Metastatic sites were ≥ 2 in 45 (45%) patients. Metastatic lesions were ≥ 5 in 65 (65%) patients. Xelox chemotherapy regimen was the most commonly used first-line chemotherapy which represents 43%, while Folfiri or Xeliri combination was the most used second line in 57 (60%). For the third line, Folfox or Xelox was used in 81 (83.5%) patients. The fourth line was given to 49 (67.1%). For first-line biological agents, Cetuximab was used most frequently 31 (46.3%).Evaluation of the response to treatment with triflurodine/tipiracil revealed one patient (1%) with a complete response,3 patients (3%) with partial response, 28 (28%) patients with stable disease, and 66 (66%) showed progressive disease. The estimated median progression-free survival was 5 months ( 3.839 - 6.161) and the median overall survival was 12 months (9.732-14.268). The log-rank analysis showed that the baseline neutrophils ≤ 75 % ( P-value= 0.0092) and low hemoglobin level (P-value= 0.0245) were strongly associated with a higher survival. By multivariate Cox regression analysis, the neutrophil count ≤ 75 % was the only independent predictor for survival. Conclusions: Trifluridine/tipiracil is effective in patients with refractory mCRC. The low neutrophil count might predict a better overall survival.

scholarly journals Protocol of the EFFORT study: a prospective study of FOLFIRI plus aflibercept as second-line treatment after progression on FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab or during maintenance treatment in patients with unresectable/metastatic colorectal cancer

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironaga Satake ◽  
Koji Ando ◽  
Eiji Oki ◽  
Mototsugu Shimokawa ◽  
Akitaka Makiyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is used as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. However, there are no clear recommendations for second-line therapy after FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab combination. Here, we describe our planning for the EFFORT study to investigate whether FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for mCRC. Methods EFFORT is an open-label, multicenter, single arm phase II study to evaluate whether a FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for mCRC. Patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer who received FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as a first-line therapy will receive aflibercept and FOLFIRI (aflibercept 4 mg/kg, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 IV over 90 min, with levofolinate 200 mg/m2 IV over 2 h, followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion over 46 h) every 2 weeks on day 1 of each cycle. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). To achieve 80% power to show a significant response benefit with a one-sided alpha level of 0.10, assuming a threshold progression-free survival of 3 months and an expected value of at least 5.4 months, we estimated that 32 patients are necessary. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, overall response rate, safety, and exploratory biomarker analysis for differentiating anti-VEGF drug in 2nd-line chemotherapy for unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. Discussion This is the first study to investigate whether FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. Switching to a different type of anti-VEGF drug in second-line therapy after FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab appears to be an attractive treatment strategy when considering survival benefit. It is expected that this phase II study will prove the efficacy of this strategy and that a biomarker for drug selection will be discovered. Trial registration Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs071190003. Registered April 18, 2019.

Irinotecan in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: Clinical Overview

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 1501-1518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Udo Vanhoefer ◽  
Andreas Harstrick ◽  
Wolf Achterrath ◽  
Shousong Cao ◽  
Siegfried Seeber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Topoisomerase I ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

PURPOSE AND METHODS: For more than three decades, the therapeutic options for patients with advanced colorectal cancer have almost exclusively been based on fluoropyrimidines. With the recognition that topoisomerase-I (TOP-I) is an important therapeutic target in cancer therapy, irinotecan, a semisynthetic TOP-I–interactive camptothecin derivative, has been clinically established in the treatment of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: Irinotecan was investigated as second-line chemotherapy after prior treatment with fluorouracil (FU)-based regimens in two large randomized phase III trials comparing irinotecan with either best supportive care or an infusional FU/leucovorin (LV) regimen. The outcomes of these trials established irinotecan as the standard therapy in the second-line treatment of colorectal cancer. The therapeutic value of irinotecan in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer was investigated in two large randomized phase III trials comparing the combination of irinotecan and FU/LV with FU/LV alone. Both trials demonstrated significant superior efficacy for the combination of irinotecan and FU/LV in terms of response rate, median time to disease progression, and median survival time. Consequently, the combination of irinotecan and FU/LV has been approved as first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and constitutes the reference therapy against which other treatment options must be tested in the future. CONCLUSION: In this review, the clinical rationale and update of the present clinical status of irinotecan in the treatment of colorectal cancer and future prospects of irinotecan-based combinations are discussed.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document