UFT as maintenance therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer responsive to the FOLFOX4 regimen

Optimal Maintenance Strategy for First-Line Oxaliplatin-Containing Therapy with or without Bevacizumab in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Maintenance therapy after oxaliplatin withdrawal is useful in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study aimed to investigate the timing of discontinuation or reintroduction of oxaliplatin and the optimal maintenance therapy regimen for survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed and conference abstracts were searched to select phase II and III trials of first-line oxaliplatin-containing therapy with or without bevacizumab using maintenance therapy for mCRC. Correlations of median overall survival (OS) with induction therapy regimens, induction therapy duration, maintenance therapy regimens (fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab [FP+Bev], FP/Bev alone, and no treatment), and oxaliplatin reintroduction were investigated using correlation and weighted multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-two treatment arms were analyzed, including 2,581 patients. The maintenance therapy regimen FP+Bev showed the strongest correlation with a prolonged OS (Spearman's partial correlation coefficient=0.42), and the other three variables correlated weakly with the OS. The maintenance therapy regimen significantly interacted with the induction chemotherapy duration (p=0.019). The predicted OS for FP+Bev crossed the lines of FP/Bev alone at 18 weeks of induction therapy, and of no treatment at 23 weeks. The corresponding OS at 12 and 27 weeks of induction therapies were 28.6 and 24.2 months for FP+Bev, 25.9 and 28.8 months for FP/Bev alone, and 20.5 and 27.5 months for no treatment.

CONCLUSION

The optimal maintenance therapy regimen for the OS is a continuous induction therapy as long as possible followed by FP/Bev alone and switching to FP+Bev within approximately 4 months if induction therapy is discontinued.

Maintenance tegafur-uracil versus observation following an adjuvant oxaliplatin-based regimen in patients with stage III colon cancer after radical resection: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

We conducted a prospective randomized study of an adjuvant oxaliplatin-based regimen plus orally administered tegafur-uracil in patients with stage III colon cancer after radical resection to evaluate the feasibility of this drug combination in cancer clinical outcomes, acute toxicity, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) in Taiwan.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is an open-label, randomized, comparative, double-arm, multicenter, phase III study to assess DFS, OS, and safety profiles of the aforementioned drug combination as maintenance therapy for 1 year in patients with stage III colon cancer after radical resection in Taiwan. Following the completion of an adjuvant oxaliplatin-based regimen for 3 weeks with no evident disease recurrence, all eligible patients will be randomly assigned to either arm A (maintenance therapy) or arm B (observation arm) in a 2:1 ratio (364 and 182 patients in the tegafur-uracil and observation groups, respectively). Treatment in arm A will be started within 7 days of randomization. If the patients reported disease recurrence, intolerable toxicity, withdrew consent or the investigator determined that the patient should be withdrawn during the study period, they were withdrawn from the study. If a patient was discontinued from the study, the corresponding data were not reused, and the patient was not allowed to re-enter the study.

DISCUSSION

A unique characteristic of this intervention was that the adjuvant chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and tegafur-uracil was anticipated to be safe and has high treatment efficacy, with the advantage of yielding a favorable response rate and tolerable toxicity profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02836977 . Registered on 18 July 2016.

Maintenance therapy following first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: toxicity and efficacy-single-institution experience

A role of maintenance chemotherapy (mCT) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is still controversial. The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the toxicity and efficacy of mCT in pts with mCRC. There were 97/291 (33 %) pts with mCRC completed 18-20 weeks of first-line CT from 2007 to 2013 in our center. Then, pts who had no disease progression were non-randomly allocated to mCT with capecitabine ± bevacizumab (n = 35) or surveillance (n = 62). PFS was used as a primary endpoint and was calculated from the date of completion of first-line CT. Multivariate Cox stepwise regression analysis was performed to determine independent prognostic factors. Median follow-up time was 15 (range 5-60) months. Median PFS and OS were higher in pts with mCT: 7 versus 3 months (HR 0.5, 95 %CI 0.28-0.82, p = 0.007) and 29 vs 16 months (HR 0.6, 95 %CI 0.3-1.1, 0.04-Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon test). Following independent negative prognostic factors was significant on multivariate analysis: CEA level >2.5 ng/ml before start of first-line CT (p = 0.02), liver metastases (p = 0.03) and number of metastatic zones >2 (p = 0.008). MCT had an independent positive impact on PFS (HR 0.5, p = 0.003). MCT prolonged PFS in pts with at least one negative prognostic factors (7 vs. 3 months, p = 0.001, HR 0.38, 95 % CI 0.22-0.68). The mCT was most beneficial in pts with negative prognostic factors: CEA level >2.5 ng/ml before start of first-line CT and/or liver metastases and/or number of metastatic zones >2.

Drug development in advanced colorectal cancer: challenges and opportunities

Despite recent advances in treatment options, advanced colorectal cancer (ACC) remains a leading cause of cancer death worldwide, and new therapies are needed to improve the grim prognosis of this disease. Drug development in ACC faces the challenges of a constrained pipeline, a paucity of patients enrolled in clinical trials, and an outdated "one drug fits all" model of clinical research. This article discusses potential innovations in clinical trial design--including enrichment strategies, novel patient populations, and the use of randomization in the phase 2 setting--to optimize the testing of new therapies. It concludes with a selection of promising agents and pathways under investigation in ACC.

Phase II study of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) as first-line treatment and followed by maintenance of capecitabine in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) as first-line treatment in Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). Furthermore, we aimed to explore whether a maintenance therapy with oral capecitabine in patients who were non-progression to the XELOX regimen was able to improve the duration of disease control (DDC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred twenty-four patients with mCRC received a 3-weekly regimen of oxaliplatin plus capecitabine (XELOX) as first-line treatment. Patients without progressive disease after six cycles of XELOX could stop treatment or continue to receive oral capecitabine until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 637 cycles (median 6 cycles) of XELOX were given to 124 patients (males 58.1%, median age 52 years). The response rate was 49.1% (complete response in 11 patients and partial response in 50 patients). The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 20.0 and 8.0 months, respectively. Main drug-related grade 3-4 toxicities included neutrapenia (5.6%), nausea/vomiting (4%), thrombocytopenia (2.4%), diarrhea (2.4%) and hand-foot syndrome (2.4%). Among 62 patients achieving objective response or stable disease after at least 6 cycles of XELOX, there were 22 patients received oral capecitabine as maintenance therapy. The median DDC was significantly longer for maintenance therapy group than those of no maintenance group (14 vs. 9 months; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

XELOX is a highly effective first-line treatment for Chinese mCRC patients. The response rate, TTP, and overall survival of patients treated with this regimen are similar to those treated with FU/leucovorin/oxaliplatin. Furthermore, our preliminary data show maintenance therapy with capecitabine for those patients without progressive disease after at least six cycles of XELOX can significantly improve DDC; and further prospective randomized control trial is warranted.