Oxaliplatin rechallenge in metastatic colorectal cancer patients after prior oxaliplatin treatment

Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity in colorectal cancer patients: mechanisms, pharmacokinetics and strategies

Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is a standard treatment approach for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OIPN) is a severe dose-limiting clinical problem that might lead to treatment interruption. This neuropathy may be reversible after treatment discontinuation. Its complicated mechanisms are related to DNA damage, dysfunction of voltage-gated ion channels, neuroinflammation, transporters, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial dysfunction, etc. Several strategies have been proposed to diminish OIPN without compromising the efficacy of adjuvant therapy, namely, combination with chemoprotectants (such as glutathione, Ca/Mg, ibudilast, duloxetine, etc.), chronomodulated infusion, dose reduction, reintroduction of oxaliplatin and topical administration [hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC), and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)]. This article provides recent updates related to the potential mechanisms, therapeutic strategies in treatment of OIPN, and pharmacokinetics of several methods of oxaliplatin administration in clinical trials.

Real-World Results of Raltitrexed Combined with S-1 and Bevacizumab in Heavily Pretreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Purpose

Treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) are scarce. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of raltitrexed combined with S-1 and bevacizumab in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic CRC in a clinical real-world setting.

Patients and Methods

Records of patients with metastatic CRC refractory to standard therapies who initiated raltitrexed plus S-1 and bevacizumab from October 2017 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed at our institution. The study endpoints included median overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs).

Results

Forty-four patients with metastatic CRC, who had previously undergone standard chemotherapy received the regimen comprising raltitrexed plus S-1 and bevacizumab. As of March 2022, the median follow-up was 23.2 months (95% confidence interval 15.8-30.6). The median OS and median PFS were 13.5 (95% CI 9.9-17.1) and 4.7 months (95% CI 3.6-5.8), respectively, with a 16-week PFS rate of 60.9%. Among 43 patients with measurable lesions, the ORR and DCR were 7.0% (3/43) and 65.1% (28/43), respectively. Patients without peritoneal metastases (P = 0.003, hazard ratio 0.160, 95% CI 0.048-0.531), lower carcinoembryonic antigen level (≤42.8 ng/mL) (P = 0.039, HR 0.382, 95% CI 0.153-0.952), and no previous treatment with both vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGF) and S-1 (P = 0.020, HR 0.215, 95% CI 0.059-0.785) had better OS. The incidence of any grade of treatment-related AEs was 88.6%, most of which were mild to moderate, and no treatment-related deaths occurred.

Conclusion

Raltitrexed combined with S-1 and bevacizumab shows promising antitumor activity and safety and could be an alternative for patients with metastatic CRC who are refractory or intolerant to standard therapy.

Clinical Outcomes of Everolimus Rechallenge in Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms with No Other Treatment Options

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes of everolimus rechallenge in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs) are unknown. This study aimed to investigate the treatment outcomes and safety of everolimus rechallenge treatment with PNENs.

METHODS

Clinical data of everolimus-treated patients with PNENs at two institutions were collected. Patients who underwent everolimus rechallenge were included in the study. We analyzed the progression-free survival (PFS) and treatment response associated with everolimus rechallenge and the adverse events.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2020, 117 patients received initial treatment with everolimus, of which 14 patients received everolimus rechallenge. With regard to the grade of PNENs, there were 2 cases of G1, 11 cases of G2, and 1 case of G3. The median rechallenge PFS was 5.7 months. The objective response rate was 21.4%. the disease control rate was 71.4%. The only major grade 3 or 4 adverse event was neutropenia (n = 1, 7.1%). No other severe adverse event was observed.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes and safety of everolimus rechallenge were verified, and it was deemed an acceptable treatment. Everolimus rechallenge may provide a new drug therapy for patients with advanced PNENs for whom no other drug treatment option is available.

Efficacy of Retreatment with Oxaliplatin-Based Regimens in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: The RETROX-CRC Retrospective Study

Background: oxaliplatin with fluoropyrimidine is a “mainstay” regarding the upfront treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In contrast, the efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin-based regimens in late-care settings have been poorly reported. Methods: we identified a real-world mCRC patient cohort who were re-treated with oxaliplatin, and in which clinicopathological features were retrospectively analyzed to identify efficacy–predictive determinants (RETROX-CRC study). Results: of 2606 patients, 119 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Oxaliplatin retreatment response rate (RR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 21.6% (CI 14.4–31.0%), and 57.8% (CI 47.7–67.4). A trend towards better RR and DCR was observed among patients who had first oxaliplatin in an adjuvant setting; a poorer outcome was observed if two or more intervening treatments were delivered. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.1 months (95%CI 4.3–6.1), reducing to 4.0 months (95%CI 3.07–5.13) if oxaliplatin was readministered beyond third-line (HR 2.02; 1.25–3.25; p = 0.004). Safety data were retrieved in 65 patients (54.6%); 18.5% (12/65) and 7.7% (5/65) had G3–4 toxicities. Toxicities led to discontinuation in 34/119 (28.6%). Conclusions: oxaliplatin retreatment produced further RR in around one-fifth of patients and DCR 57.8%. Efficacy decreased in more pre-treated patients and around one-third of patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Translational studies improving patient selection are warranted.

Outcomes of Cytoreduction and Oxaliplatin-Based Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Patients With Peritoneal Carcinomatosis From Colorectal Cancer

Among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, 25% have isolated peritoneal carcinomatosis. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients undergoing hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy with oxaliplatin. Eleven studies were included in the final assessment. Pooled three- and five-year OS rates were 58.60% and 42.19%, respectively. The estimated pooled three- and five-year DFS rates were 23.47% and 14.26%, respectively.

Tumor growth rate during re-challenge chemotherapy with previously used agents as salvage treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice, the same chemotherapeutic agents are occasionally reused (re-challenge) after failure of all available standard chemotherapy options for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the benefits of re-challenge chemotherapy (Re-Cx) are unclear. This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of Re-Cx, focusing on the tumor growth rate (TGR).

METHODS

The study included mCRC patients with measurable lesions who received Re-Cx from November 2011 to October 2018 at National Cancer Center Hospital. Re-Cx was defined as re-administration of agents which had been used in prior lines of chemotherapy and discontinued due to disease progression. We compared the TGR immediately after initiating Re-Cx regimens with that observed at the time of disease progression during prior chemotherapy (Prior-Cx) immediately before Re-Cx.

RESULTS

Of the 25 patients who received Re-Cx, five patients received two Re-Cx regimens. Therefore, a total of 30 cases of Re-Cx were analyzed in this study. The regimens of Re-Cx were oxaliplatin based (19 cases), irinotecan based (8 cases), and others (3 cases). Although the objective response rate to Re-Cx was 0%, the disease control rate was 60% (18 cases), and 40% (12 cases) showed some tumor shrinkage. We compared the effects of Re-Cx and Prior-Cx by the TGR and found that the TGR of Re-Cx was slower than that recorded in Prior-Cx in 26 of 30 cases (87%). In particular, the ratio of% TGR <0, which indicates tumor shrinkage, was obtained in 13 of 30 cases (43.3%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival after Re-Cx were 3.8 and 6.57 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We found that Re-Cx may have some anti-tumor efficacy as salvage treatment for mCRC and these results also suggested the clinical benefits of Re-Cx.

Oxaliplatin rechallenge in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with clinically significant oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity

We investigated whether rechallenge with oxaliplatin (OXA) can worsen the pre-existing oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OXAIPN) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Patients previously treated with OXA, having clinically significant grade 1 or 2 OXAIPN were assessed, after receiving rechallenge with OXA, using the clinical version of the Total Neuropathy Score (TNSc). Peripheral neuropathy was assessed at the end of first OXA exposure and at completion of OXA rechallenge. The first line OXA-based chemotherapy was completed at least 9 months earlier (OXA-free interval). We studied 25 mCRC patients, 14 males and 11 females, with a median age of 63 (35-77) years. After their first exposure to OXA-based chemotherapy, 9 (36%) patients developed grade 1 OXAIPN and 16 patients grade 2 (64%) neurotoxicity. OXA reintroduction with a median of 10 (8-14) cycles led to grade 1 OXAIPN in two patients (8%), grade 2 in 19 patients (76%), and grade 3 neuropathy in 4 (16%) patients Worsening of pre-existing OXAIPN was documented in seven (28%) patients and was significantly associated with higher OXA delivered cumulative dose (P < .001). Median TNSc scores following treatment (10; range 4-18) were significantly increased (P < .001), when compared to the scores recorded at the end of first line treatment (8; range 2-12). Rechallenging OXA appears to relatively worsen the severity of existing OXAIPN. However, the majority of rechallenged patients developed a clinically significant (grade 2) OXAIPN, rather than treatment-emergent grade 3. As such, OXA rechallenge might be a feasible option in patients previously having OXAIPN.

Chemotherapy rechallenge in metastatic colon cancer: A case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in males and females in the United States. Approximately, 20%-22% of patients have metastatic disease at the time of presentation, and 50%-60% will develop metastasis over the course of their disease. Despite advances in systemic therapies, there remains a paucity of effective third- and later-line therapies for patients with ongoing disease progression. However, rechallenging chemo-resistant CRC tumors with previously administered therapies is an emerging concept that may be a life-prolonging option for heavily treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

CASE SUMMARY

A 41-year-old man with no previous medical history initially presented with worsening diffuse abdominal tenderness. Computed tomography was significant for a splenic flexure mass and hepatic lesions concerning for metastatic disease. He underwent a colectomy with anastomosis. Postoperative pathology was diagnostic for moderately to well-differentiated adenocarcinoma (T4bN1bM1a). He received adjuvant 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), but therapy was discontinued due to the development of atrial fibrillation. Additional workup indicated a carcinoembryonic antigen level of 508.2 ng/mL, and mutational analysis found that the tumor was microsatellite instability-high and KRAS/BRAF wild-type. He was started on irinotecan with oxaliplatin (IROX), and bevacizumab (14 cycles), developed disease progression, was transitioned to FOLFOX and cetuximab, and then eventually three cycles of pembrolizumab. Following disease progression, he was rechallenged with IROX therapy, as he previously responded well to oxaliplatin-based therapy. The IROX rechallenge provided this patient with a ten-month survival benefit, decreased metastatic burden, and marked improvement in his clinical condition.

CONCLUSION

Rechallenge of previous lines of well-tolerated systemic chemotherapy regimens may be a valuable therapeutic strategy in patients with heavily-treated mCRC.

Oxaliplatin retreatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: Systematic review and future research opportunities

BACKGROUND

Oxaliplatin represents a main component of cytotoxic treatment regimens in colorectal cancer (CRC). Given its efficacy, oxaliplatin is frequently re-administered in the context of the continuum of care in metastatic CRC (mCRC). However, efficacy and tolerability of this therapeutic strategy has not been comprehensively assessed.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature on September 19th 2020, according to PRISMA criteria 2009. The research was performed on PubMed, ASCO Meeting Library, ESMO library and ClinicalTrials.gov for citations or ongoing trials.

RESULTS

64 records were retrieved and 13 included in the systematic review: 8 full-text articles, 4 abstracts and 1 ongoing clinical trial. According to readministration timing, studies were classified as rechallenge/reintroduction (n = 8) or stop & go/intermittent therapeutic strategies (n = 4). The studies presented wide heterogeneity in terms of efficacy (Response Rate 6-31%; Disease Control Rate 39-79%; median Progression-Free Survival 3.1-7 months). Those patients who received retreatment after prior adjuvant oxaliplatin or exploiting a stop-&-go strategy appeared to achieve better outcomes. However, no formal comparisons on treatment outcomes were feasible. The most frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events were hematologic toxicities (5-27%), peripheral neuropathy (5-14%) and hypersensitivity reactions (5-20%).

CONCLUSIONS

Retreatment with oxaliplatin for mCRC is practiced based on scarce and heterogeneous data indicating efficacy and manageable toxicity. The best strategy to exploit this approach remains to be defined, and the most promising research avenue to improve therapeutic index of oxaliplatin is represented by selection of responder patients whose tumors harbor molecular defects in the DNA damage repair pathway.

Determinants of pain in advanced HCC patients recieving hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy

Purpose Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) is one of the options to treat unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The majority of HCC patients suffer great pain in the course of HAIC treatment. To improve the quality of life and the efficacy of HAIC treatment, the causes of pain, the choice of an analgesic regimen, and the relationship between pain and prognosis of HCC were analyzed. Methods A total of 376 HCC patients under HAIC in our hospital were recriuted between March 2017 and September 2019. Multivariate linear regression analysis (stepwise) was used to calculate the potential factors related to the severe pain in HCC patients under HAIC. Analgesics treatments were carried out based on the results of the visual analogue scale (VAS) score which was used to evaluate the pain. Results The mean value of the VAS score is 3.604, which indicates that the pain in most patients is mild and endurable. Intra-arterial lidocaine injection is an effective method in most patients (96%, 361 of 376), and the total score of VAS is reduced from 1355 to 195 following lidocaine injection. Multivariate analysis suggestes that oxaliplatin (OXA) preparation time, hepatic artery diameter and OXA manufacturers (R² = 0.859) are influential factors for pain scores. Conclusion This study demonstrates an effective way to systematically assess and ease pain in HCC patients with HAIC treatment. OXA preparation time, hepatic artery diameter, and OXA manufacturers are the potential influencing factors for pain. This work presented here will provide a detailed understanding of the clinical application of HAIC in advanced HCC patients.

Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma after Second Progression and the Role of Trifluridine-Tipiracil (TAS-102) in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) is one of the most prevalent types of cancer worldwide. After tumor progression with first- and second-line treatment, trifluridine (FTD) and tipiracil (TPI) has been shown to be a treatment option.

SUMMARY

Data from a pivotal phase 3 trial (RECOURSE) and an ongoing phase 3b trial (PRECONNECT) have shown that, in mCRC patients who experienced disease progression after 2 lines of standard therapy, treatment with FTD/TPI is safe and efficacious. Other third-line options include regorafenib, rechallenge with previous treatment lines or personalized approaches based on comprehensive molecular profiling. Randomized trials or sequential studies aiming for the right treatment sequence or predefined subtypes for FTD/TPI or regorafenib as well for rechallenge are missing. However, FTD/TPI as well as regorafenib are recommended by the current ESMO, German S3, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines in the same situation, thus offering physicians a number of alternatives for the treatment of mCRC patients after the second progression. Key Message: This narrative review summarizes published data and their impact for FTD/TPI as well for regorafenib and rechallenge chemotherapy in clinical practice settings of refractory situations of colorectal cancer.

Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

AIM

To investigate treatment patterns and outcomes of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients beyond second progression (PD2) since regorafenib and TAS-102 became available in Hong Kong.

METHODS

The clinical records of consecutive mCRC patients who were treated beyond PD2 at Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Mary Hospital between June 2013 and February 2018, were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 176 PD2 patients (76.7% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 and a median follow-up time of 6.6 [range, 0.4-37.2] months), 104 (59%) underwent palliative care only and 72 (41%) received active third-line (3L) treatment: regorafenib (n = 22), TAS-102 (n = 6), chemotherapy + antiepidermal growth factor receptor (n = 12), chemotherapy + antivascular endothelial growth factor (n = 28) or clinical trials (n = 4). Patients on active 3L treatment had significantly longer OS than those on palliative care only: 11.7 versus 5.5 months (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.41, 95% confidence interval: 0.28-0.61, P < 0.001). For those on active treatment, OS was significantly associated with the time from diagnosis of metastasis to PD2 (P < 0.001) and post-3L treatments (P = 0.009). When analyzing treatment eligibility according to trial criteria, half of the eligible patients (54/109) did not receive active treatment, but both eligible and ineligible patients achieved better OS when receiving active 3L treatment versus palliative care only (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002). No unexpected toxicity was reported.

CONCLUSION

Active 3L and beyond treatment significantly prolonged OS versus palliative care, even in selected "trial ineligible" patients. Given a high rate of palliation only care in eligible patients, improved patient access to medicine and counseling may be needed to maximize outcomes.