Meta-Analysis of Regorafenib-Associated Adverse Events and Their Management in Colorectal and Gastrointestinal Stromal Cancers

Real-world effectiveness of regorafenib in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective, observational study

AIM

To evaluate the real-world usage pattern and factors associated with the effectiveness of regorafenib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed data for 209 patients with mCRC treated with regorafenib as third or later line of therapy. TheKaplan-Meier method was used to draw the survival curves. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to analyze the prognostic value for overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of 209 patients, 156 (75%) were treated with regorafenib, and 53 (25%) were given regorafenib combined with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors. About 182 (87%) patients had a dose record of regorafenib. The initial daily doses of regorafenib were 160, 120, 80, and 40 mg, accounting for 29%, 17%, 48%, and 6% of patients, respectively. The median follow-up time was 11.3 months, and the median OS was 12.0 months (95% CI: 9.7-14.3). Patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors plus regorafenib had a longer OS than the non-PD-1 group (13.5 vs. 10.1 months, hazard ratio [HR] = .534, 95% CI: .325-.879; p = .014). A total of 49 patients with microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient genotype treated with PD-1 inhibitors plus regorafenib had a longer OS than the non-PD-1 group (13.5 vs. 9.7 months; HR = .563, p = .027). The median OS of patients continuing treatment with regorafenib after progression (n = 19, with five patients receiving additional immunotherapy) was marginally longer than patients discontinuing regorafenib after progression (12.7 vs. 11.9 months, p = .425) observed in a smaller cohort.

CONCLUSION

In real-world practice, patients with mCRC in whom standard regimens had failed have a good survival benefit with regorafenib. Combination with PD-1 inhibitor may further prolong survival of the patients.

Health-Related Quality of Life and Side Effects in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST) Patients Treated with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has revolutionized the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), resulting in a substantial gain in median overall survival. Subsequently, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has become more relevant. Here, we systematically review the available literature on HRQoL issues and side effects of different TKIs registered for the treatment of GIST.

METHODS

A search through five databases was performed. Full reports in English describing HRQoL outcomes and/or side effects in GIST patients on TKI therapy were included.

RESULTS

A total of 104 papers were included; 13 studies addressed HRQoL, and 96 studies investigated adverse events. HRQoL in patients treated with imatinib, regorafenib, and ripretinib remained stable, whereas most sunitinib-treated patients reported a decrease in HRQoL. Severe fatigue and fear of recurrence or progression were specifically assessed as HRQoL issues and had a negative impact on overall HRQoL as well as psychological and physical well-being. The majority of studies focused on physician-reported side effects. Nearly all GIST patients treated with a TKI experienced at least one adverse event, mostly mild to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the fact that almost all patients treated with a TKI experienced side effects, this did not seem to affect overall HRQoL during TKI therapy. In daily practice, it are the side effects that hamper a patient's HRQoL resulting in treatment adjustments, suggesting that the reported side effects were underestimated by physicians, or the measures used to assess HRQoL do not capture all relevant issues that determine a GIST patient's HRQoL.

Genotyping guided ripretinib directly after the progression of first-line imatinib therapy in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a case report

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is the most common mesenchymal tumor of the gastrointestinal tract. Surgery and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy are the main choices of treatment. However, the long-term use of TKIs is prone to drug resistance. Herein, we report the case of a 47-year-old female with primary gastric GIST with liver metastases since June 2015. The patient achieved disease control under imatinib therapy and underwent primary lesion resection. She took postoperative imatinib maintenance therapy, but discontinued imatinib for 10 months about 2 years after surgery. The patient suffered from disease progression in May 2019, with recurrence of liver metastases and new abdominal metastases. From then on, imatinib was resumed and partial response (PR) persisted for another 2 years. The patient subsequently experienced tumor progression due to secondary KIT exon 17 mutation confirmed by tissue biopsy and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection. After multidisciplinary team discussion, the patient received ripretinib as a second-line therapy, and ctDNA monitoring demonstrated that the KIT mutations turned negative. After disease control from ripretinib for 2+ months, she underwent cytoreductive surgery (R0/1) and received ripretinib maintenance treatment postoperatively. We believe that this case provides a reference value for individualized ripretinib precise therapy according to mutational analysis after the progression of first-line GIST treatment, and ctDNA can predict effectiveness to guide treatment.

Standard versus personalized schedule of regorafenib in metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a retrospective, multicenter, real-world study

Background

Despite its proven activity as third-line treatment in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), regorafenib can present a poor tolerability profile which often leads to treatment modifications and transient or permanent discontinuation; thus, in clinical practice physicians usually adopt various dosing and interval schedules to counteract regorafenib-related adverse events and avoid treatment interruption. The aim of this real-world study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of personalized schedules of regorafenib in patients with metastatic GIST, in comparison with the standard schedule (160 mg daily, 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off).

Patients and methods

Institutional registries across seven Italian reference centers were retrospectively reviewed and data of interest retrieved to identify patients with GIST who had received regorafenib from February 2013 to January 2021. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate survival and the log-rank test to make comparisons.

Results

Of a total of 152 patients with GIST, 49 were treated with standard dose, while 103 received personalized schedules. At a median follow-up of 36.5 months, median progression-free survival was 5.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.73-11.0 months] versus 9.7 months (95% CI 7.9-14.5 months) in the standard-dose and the personalized schedule groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.51; 95% CI 0.34-0.75; P = 0.00052]. Median overall survival was 16.6 months (95% CI 14.1-21.8 months) versus 20.5 months (95% CI 15.0-25.4 months), respectively (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.49-1.22; P = 0.16).

Conclusions

Regorafenib-personalized schedules are commonly adopted in daily clinical practice of high-volume GIST expert centers and correlate with significant improvement of therapeutic outcomes. Therefore, regorafenib treatment optimization in patients with GIST may represent the best strategy to maximize long-term therapy.

•

Regorafenib-personalized schedules are commonly adopted in daily clinical practice.

•

Regorafenib-personalized schedules correlate with statistically significant improvement of therapeutic outcomes.

•

A prompt personalization of regorafenib could help clinicians avoid early treatment discontinuation due to adverse events.

•

A patient-tailored approach could be applied to other metastatic solid tumors treated with regorafenib.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an adjusted indirect meta-analysis and systematic review

Background:

The evidence base for optimum third-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is not conclusive. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of regorafenib as third-line therapy in mCRC. This indirect meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of regorafenib with other available third-line therapies for mCRC.

Methods:

A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, regorafenib, TAS-102, and nintedanib as third-line therapies in patients with mCRC. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary outcomes, while objective response rate (ORR) and safety were the secondary outcomes. Hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR) with their respective 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for analysis of survival, clinical response, and safety data. An adjusted indirect meta-analysis with placebo as the common comparator was performed.

Results:

We identified eight RCTs comparing regorafenib (two studies), fruquintinib (two studies), TAS-102 (three studies), and nintedanib (one study) against placebo. The OS with regorafenib was significantly better when compared with nintedanib (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.95, p = 0.02) but was similar to that of fruquintinib (HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.67, 1.52, p = 0.94) and TAS-102 (HR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68, 1.38, p = 0.88). The PFS and ORR for regorafenib were slightly better than those of TAS-102 (PFS: HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.54, 1.37, p = 0.5; ORR: RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.11, 11.05, p = 0.92) and nintedanib (PFS: HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.42, 1.10, p = 0.12; ORR: not reported) but were lower than those for fruquintinib (PFS: HR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.93, 2.52, p = 0.08; ORR: RR = 0.68269, 95% CI: 0.045, 10.32, p = 0.79). Safety analysis showed that the RR of adverse events (AEs) was lesser in patients treated with regorafenib in comparison with that in patients treated with fruquintinib, but was similar to that in patients treated with nintedanib and TAS-102.

Conclusion:

Regorafenib has efficacy similar to that of TAS-102 and better safety when compared with fruquintinib. Considering the mechanism of action of regorafenib, which targets multiple factors in the angiogenic pathway, it could be an ideal option for treatment in the beyond second-line setting.

Dose reduction and discontinuation of standard-dose regorafenib associated with adverse drug events in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Regorafenib (REG) is an oral multikinase inhibitor used in colorectal cancer, gastrointestinal stromal tumour and hepatocellular carcinoma. Several adverse events (AEs) are commonly reported during REG administration, and strategies for managing AEs in everyday clinical practice include supportive care, dose modifications and, when necessary, treatment withdrawal. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the schedule treatment modifications of REG associated with AEs across randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs).

Methods

Eligible studies included RCTs assessing standard dose REG versus placebo. Outcomes of interest included: AE-related permanent discontinuation, dose interruptions and dose reductions.

Results

We retrieved all the relevant RCTs through PubMed/Med, Cochrane library and EMBASE: 7 eligible studies involving a total of 2099 patients (Regorafenib: 1362; placebo: 737) were included in our analysis. The use of REG was associated with higher incidence and risk of all outcomes of interest when compared with placebo. The incidences of permanent discontinuation, dose interruptions and dose reductions in patients receiving REG were 9.7%, 57.2% and 47%, respectively, versus 3.3%, 16.7% and 7.7% of placebo group; compared with placebo, the summary relative risks (RRs) of permanent discontinuation, dose interruptions and dose reductions in REG arm were 2.80 (95% CI 1.85-4.22), 3.21 (95% CI 2.59-3.99) and 6.02 (95% CI 3.28-11.03), respectively.

Conclusions

Treatment with REG at the standard dose of 160 mg is associated with a significant increase in AE-related permanent discontinuation, dose interruptions and dose reductions. Prompt identification and management of AEs seem mandatory to obtain maximal benefit from REG treatment. In the current landscape, dose personalization of REG may have the potential to improve quality of life, minimize treatment discontinuation and maximize patient outcomes.