The best strategy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients in second-line treatment: A network meta-analysis

A multi-center effectiveness comparison study of fruquintinib with constructed external control cohort of other targeted kinase inhibitors using real-world data in third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess the comparative efficacy in third-line setting for metastatic CRC (mCRC) patients using matched population of FRESCO trial with fruquintinib and real-world data with other TKIs.

Materials and methods

The arm of fruquintinib from the FRESCO phase III trial (NCT02314819) included the data of patients with metastatic CRC that progressed after at least two lines of chemotherapy and received fruquintinib treatment. An external control arm was constructed using real-world data (RWD) of patients who received other TKIs based on key eligibility criteria of FRESCO. The baseline characteristics of two arms was balanced by propensity score matching (PSM). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate progression free survival (PFS) and to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), respectively.

Results

Overall, 128 patients were successfully matched by PSM in each, fruquintinib and other TKIs group. The patients in fruquintinib group showed significant increase in median PFS than other TKIs (3.71 vs. 2.49 months, HR = 0.67, 95%CI, 0.48-0.94, p = 0.019). In the subgroup analysis, fruquintinib showed a significant benefit in PFS compared with other TKIs among patients undergoing two or three previous chemotherapy regimens (HR 0.58, 95%CI 0.40-0.84; p=0.004), with rectum as primary disease site (HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.31-0.87; p=0.013), with left sided primary tumor location (HR 0.62, 95%CI 0.42-0.90; p=0.011), with multiple metastasis sites (HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.48-0.97; p=0.034) and with lung metastasis (HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.43-0.98; p=0.042).

Conclusion

With the approach of establishing the external control arm from RWD, this study has demonstrated that treatment with fruquintinib significantly prolonged PFS as compared to other TKIs in patients as third-line mCRC treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Apatinib in the Treatment of Chemotherapy-Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the current evidence on apatinib and offer a better understanding of its safety and efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who have not responded to standard chemotherapies. This systematic review was conducted using research from the last 10 years (May 30, 2012, to May 30, 2022) and was obtained from the following databases: PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. After removing duplicates, screening titles and abstracts, and applying eligibility criteria and quality appraisal, 11 articles were left for this systematic review (one meta-analysis, eight non-randomized studies, and two traditional reviews). Out of the 11 studies, six were on apatinib monotherapy, while three were on apatinib combination therapy. Apatinib has demonstrated efficacy in the monotherapy and combination therapy trials and has exhibited an acceptable safety profile as the adverse events were predominantly graded 1-2 and could be easily managed. Therefore, apatinib is an encouraging candidate for third-line therapy in chemotherapy-refractory mCRC patients. This conclusion should be confirmed and validated by studies with larger, randomized clinical trials to gain better insight and to directly compare the efficacy and safety of apatinib with all current third-line therapies together so that clinicians can easily assess which treatment modality is superior for chemotherapy-refractory mCRC patients.

Efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness analysis of aflibercept in metastatic colorectal cancer: A rapid health technology assessment

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) imposes a heavy tumor burden worldwide due to limited availability of therapeutic drugs. Aflibercept, a kind of recombinant protein of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family, has been approved in clinical application among mCRC patients since 2012. A comprehensive analysis of the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of aflibercept in mCRC treatment is necessary.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of aflibercept for the treatment of mCRC in order to provide a decision-making reference for the selection of targeted drugs for second-line treatment of mCRC in Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan regions of China and the selection of new drugs for medical institutions in these regions.

Methods: A systematic retrieve on databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and Weipu, as well as relevant websites and databases of health technology assessment including the National Institute of Health and Clinical Optimization, Centre for Evaluation and Communication at the University of York, and the Canadian Agency for Medicines and Health Technology, was conducted. The literature was screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were extracted and analyzed by two authors, while the quality of the literature was assessed.

Results: Finally, we included two HTA reports, 11 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and two cost-effectiveness studies in the rapid health technology assessment. For mCRC patients receiving second-line treatment, aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI significantly increased progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and the objective response rate (ORR) also improved, compared with folinic acid + fluorouracil + irinotecan (FOLFIRI). In terms of safety, mCRC patients who received aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI therapy had a higher incidence of grade 3–4 adverse events than those who received FOLFIRI alone, including anti-VEGF–related adverse events (hypertension, hemorrhagic events, and proteinuria) and chemotherapy-related adverse events (diarrhea, weakness, stomatitis, hand-foot syndrome, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia). In terms of cost-effectiveness, two economic studies conducted in the United Kingdom and Japan, respectively, found that compared with FOLFIRI, aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI had no cost-effectiveness advantage in mCRC patients receiving second-line treatment.

Conclusion: Compared with FOLFIRI treatment, aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI for the second-line treatment of mCRC patients has better efficacy, worse safety, and is not cost-effective. More high-quality clinical studies are required for further exploration of aflibercept’s clinical value. Medical institutions in Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan regions of China should be cautious when using or introducing aflibercept plus FOLFIRI as a mCRC treatment.

Treatment Response, Survival Benefit and Safety Profile of PD-1 Inhibitor Plus Apatinib Versus Apatinib Monotherapy in Advanced Colorectal Cancer Patients

Purpose

Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus apatinib is reported to be a promising strategy for advanced cancers. Moreover, a PD-1 inhibitor or apatinib exerts a certain efficacy in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), whereas their synergistic effect is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the treatment efficacy and safety of a PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib in advanced CRC patients.

Methods

In total, 45 advanced CRC patients who received a PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib (PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib group, N=20) or apatinib monotherapy (apatinib group, N=25) as third-line therapies were enrolled in the current study.

Results

The objective response rate (20.0% vs. 8.0%) (P=0.383) and disease control rate (70.0% vs. 52.0%) (P=0.221) were numerically increased in the PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib group, respectively, compared with the apatinib group, but no statistical significance was observed. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.5 versus 4.8 months; the 1-year PFS rate was 32.5% versus 9.9%; the median overall survival (OS) was 12.3 versus 8.7 months; and the 1-year OS rate was 50.7% versus 27.0% in the PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib group versus the apatinib group, respectively. PFS (P=0.038) and OS (P=0.048) were prolonged in the PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib group compared with the apatinib group. PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib (versus apatinib) was independently associated with longer PFS (P=0.012) and OS (P=0.009). The majority of the adverse events were of grade 1-2, wherein the incidence was similar between groups, except for the fact that the incidence of capillary proliferation was elevated in the PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib group compared with the apatinib group (25.5% versus 0.0%) (P=0.013).

Conclusion

PD-1 inhibitor plus apatinib presents a potential improvement in efficacy and survival benefit compared with apatinib monotherapy, with tolerable safety in advanced CRC patients.

Efficacy and safety of aflibercept plus chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and PRISMA-Compliant single-arm Meta-Analysis of noncomparative clinical studies and randomized controlled trials

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Aflibercept, a recombinant protein designed to suppress the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signalling pathway, has been used in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted the first meta-analysis to systematically review the efficacy and safety of aflibercept in mCRC.

METHODS

PubMed Central/Medline, Embase and cochrane library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials and single-arm clinical trials on aflibercept plus chemotherapy for the treatment of mCRC through 9 September 2021.

RESULTS

Ten studies comprising 2049 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate rates were 16.0% for 12mPFS, 64.4% for 12mOS, 32.5% for ORR, 83.5% for DCR, while the rates of III/IV AEs rate were 80.2% respectively. The pooled estimate rates were 16.8% for III/IV diarrhoea, 22.3% for III/IV hypertension, 29.5% for III/IV neutropenia, 7.3% for III/IV proteinuria and 8.6% for III/IV oral mucositis.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of data from randomized controlled trials(RCT) and single-arm clinical trials confirmed the good efficacy of aflibercept plus chemotherapy in mCRC, while the safety of the treatment is concerning.

Angioprevention of Urologic Cancers by Plant-Derived Foods

The number of cancer cases worldwide keeps growing unstoppably, despite the undeniable advances achieved by basic research and clinical practice. Urologic tumors, including some as prevalent as prostate, bladder or kidney tumors, are no exceptions to this rule. Moreover, the fact that many of these tumors are detected in early stages lengthens the duration of their treatment, with a significant increase in health care costs. In this scenario, prevention offers the most cost-effective long-term strategy for the global control of these diseases. Although specialized diets are not the only way to decrease the chances to develop cancer, epidemiological evidence support the role of certain plant-derived foods in the prevention of urologic cancer. In many cases, these plants are rich in antiangiogenic phytochemicals, which could be responsible for their protective or angiopreventive properties. Angiogenesis inhibition may contribute to slow down the progression of the tumor at very different stages and, for this reason, angiopreventive strategies could be implemented at different levels of chemoprevention, depending on the targeted population. In this review, epidemiological evidence supporting the role of certain plant-derived foods in urologic cancer prevention are presented, with particular emphasis on their content in bioactive phytochemicals that could be used in the angioprevention of cancer.