A phase I/II study of S-1 and irinotecan (IRIS) combined with cetuximab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (KSCC1401)

Irinotecan- vs oxaliplatin-based regimens for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal liver metastasis patients: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) improves the survival outcomes of selected patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). The benefits of irinotecan-based regimens in these patients are still under debate.

AIM

To compare the benefits of irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-based regimens in patients with resectable CRLM.

METHODS

From September 2003 to August 2020, 554 patients received NC and underwent hepatectomy for CRLM. Based on a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) model, 175 patients who received irinotecan were matched to 175 patients who received oxaliplatin to obtain two balanced groups regarding demographic, therapeutic, and prognostic characteristics.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy was based on oxaliplatin in 353 (63.7%) patients and irinotecan in 201 (36.3%). After PSM, the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates with irinotecan were 18.0% and 49.7%, respectively, while the 5-year PFS and OS rates with oxaliplatin were 26.0% and 46.8%, respectively. Intraoperative blood loss, operating time, and postoperative complications differed significantly between the two groups. In the multivariable analysis, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, RAS mutation, response to NC, tumor size > 5 cm, and tumor number > 1 were independently associated with PFS.

CONCLUSION

In NC in patients with CRLM, irinotecan is similar to oxaliplatin in survival outcomes, but irinotecan is superior regarding operating time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications.

Systematic review and non-inferiority meta-analysis of randomised phase II/III trials on S-1-based therapy versus 5-fluorouracil- or capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine that is increasingly used in Western countries for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a non-inferiority meta-analysis on the efficacy of S-1-based therapy versus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)- or capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of patients with mCRC.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Opengrey were searched for randomised clinical trials until May 2021. Data were extracted for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events. Pooled effect estimates, stratified by treatment line, with corresponding 99% confidence intervals (CI) were presented. For PFS, a pre-defined non-inferiority margin (ΔNI) of 1.25 was selected.

RESULTS

Ten studies (n = 2117) were included, of which six studies reported PFS and OS data and 10 studies reported ORR data. S-1-based therapy was shown to be non-inferior to 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in terms of PFS (HRtotal 0.95, 99% CI 0.83-1.08) with its CI upper limit well below ΔNI, and at least as efficacious in terms of OS (HRtotal 0.93, 99% CI 0.81-1.07), and ORR (RRtotal 1.06, 99% CI 0.90-1.24).

CONCLUSIONS

S-1-based therapy is non-inferior to 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of mCRC regarding PFS and at least as efficacious as 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in terms of ORR and OS. These data support the use of S-1 in mCRC patients who are intolerant to 5-FU/capecitabine-based treatment.