Upfront DPYD Genotype-Guided Treatment for Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced and Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Fluoropyrimidines are the most widely used chemotherapy drugs for advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Individuals with certain DPYD gene variants are exposed to an increased risk of severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicities. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preemptive DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC.

METHODS

Overall survival of DPYD wild-type patients who received a standard dose and variant carriers treated with a reduced dose were analyzed by parametric survival models. A decision tree and a partitioned survival analysis model with a lifetime horizon were designed, taking the Iranian healthcare perspective. Input parameters were extracted from the literature or expert opinion. To address parameter uncertainty, scenario and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, the genotype-guided treatment strategy was cost-saving ($41.7). Nevertheless, due to a possible reduction in the survival of patients receiving reduced-dose regimens, it was associated with fewer quality-adjusted life-years (9.45 vs 9.28). In sensitivity analyses, the prevalence of DPYD variants had the most significant impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The genotyping strategy would remain cost-saving, as long as the genotyping cost is < $49 per test. In a scenario in which we assumed equal efficacy for the 2 strategies, genotyping was the dominant strategy, associated with less costs (∼$1) and more quality-adjusted life-years (0.1292).

CONCLUSIONS

DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC is cost-saving from the perspective of the Iranian health system.

Review of Patents for Anticancer Agents Targeting Adenosine Monophosphate-Activated Protein Kinase

Cancer, caused by abnormal and excessive cellular proliferation, can invade and destroy surrounding tissues and organs through the spreading of cancer cells. A general strategy for developing anticancer agents is to identify biomarkers that, if targeted, can produce a robust cytotoxic effect with minimal side effects. Cell-cycle regulators, checkpoint regulatory genes, and apoptosis-related genes are well-known biomarkers that inhibit cancer cell proliferation. Several compounds that target such biomarkers have been patented and more are being developed as novel therapies. Recent additions to this list include anticancer drugs that target signaling pathway proteins, such as 5' adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK), which plays a vital role in cancer and normal cell metabolism. Herein, we have reviewed recent patents related to AMPK-targeting anticancer drugs and discussed the mechanisms of action of these drugs. We conclude that these recently published patents include several attractive compounds and methods for targeting AMPK. Further research and clinical trials are required to elucidate the comprehensive role of AMPK in cancer cell metabolism, identify its associated signal transduction systems, and develop novel activators that may find applications in cancer therapy. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT01904123.

A nanomedicine based on stoichiometric coordination of camptothecin and organoplatinum (II) for synergistic antitumor therapy

Precise combination therapy, involving multiple chemotherapeutics with pharmacologically synergistic antitumor effects, is a promising approach to address the challenge of monotherapy with insufficient activity towards their targets of interest. We employed Pt←pyridine coordination-driven assembly to construct a stoichiometric coordination complex of camptothecin and organoplatinum (II) (Pt-CPT). The Pt-CPT complex exhibited a remarkable synergistic effect toward several tumor cell lines, which is equal to the optimal synergistic effect of (PEt3)2Pt(OTf)2 (Pt) and CPT mixture at various ratios. An amphiphilic polymer with H2O2-responsiveness and glutathione (GSH)-depleting ability (PO) was used to encapsulate Pt-CPT complex to enable the nanomedicine (Pt-CPT@PO) with prolonged blood circulation and elevated tumor accumulation. The Pt-CPT@PO nanomedicine exhibited remarkable synergistic antitumor efficacy and antimetastatic effect on a mice orthotopic breast tumor model. This work demonstrated the potential of stoichiometric coordination-driven assembly of organic therapeutics with metal-based drugs in developing advanced nanomedicine with optimal synergistic antitumor activity. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: : In this study, for the first time, we employed Pt←pyridine coordination-driven assembly to construct a stoichiometric coordination complex of camptothecin and organoplatinum (II) (Pt-CPT), with an optimal synergistic effect at various ratios. Then it was encapsulated into an amphiphilic polymer with H2O2-responsiveness and glutathione (GSH)-depleting ability (PO) to enable the nanomedicine (Pt-CPT@PO) with prolonged blood circulation and elevated tumor accumulation. The Pt-CPT@PO nanomedicine exhibited remarkable synergistic antitumor efficacy and antimetastatic effect on a mice orthotopic breast tumor model.

Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Treatments Among Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Systemic treatments, namely, either monotherapy or combination therapy, are commonly administered to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to provide the complete efficacy and safety profiles and ranking of systemic therapies for the treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic CRC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until June 30, 2021, and also the bibliographies of relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing two or more treatments, namely, at least capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, cetuximab, oxaliplatin, or panitumumab were investigated. A network meta-analysis using the Bayesian approach was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of treatments. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated for the probability of each treatment as the most effective. The overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs) grade ≥3, and serious adverse events (SAEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred two publications with 36,147 participants were assigned to 39 different treatments. Among 11 treatments with full information on six outcomes, FOLFIRI/FOLFOX/FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab significantly improved both the ORR and DCR, compared to FOLFIRI. Although FOLFOX and FOLFIRI/FOLFOX + cetuximab significantly prolonged both OS and PFS, treatments were comparable in terms of AEs grade ≥3 and SAEs. The top highest SUCRA values were observed in the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab group for ORR (96%) and DCR (99%), FOLFIRI + bevacizumab + panitumumab group for OS (62%) and PFS (54%), and FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab group for AEs grade ≥3 (59%) and SAEs (59%) outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest an available range of systemic treatment therapies with different efficacy and safety profiles with patients. Further investigations of the side effects and mutation status are required to confirm our findings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42019127772.

Managing 5FU Cardiotoxicity in Colorectal Cancer Treatment

Fluorouracil (5FU) is the backbone chemotherapy agent in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). Cardiotoxicity represents an uncommon but serious side effect of treatment with 5FU. Here, we review the current literature on 5FU-cardiotoxicity in the setting of CRC specifically, with a focus on data from the modern era of combination chemotherapy. Despite decades of study, there is little consensus on risk factors and biomarkers for 5FU-cardiotoxicity, nor how patients with CRC should be managed following a cardiotoxicity event. Given the elevated risk of recurrent cardiotoxicity on rechallenge, the use of alternative regimens that do not contain 5FU is a critical aspect of management. Data on the cardiotoxicity risk and efficacy of non-5FU regimens in CRC are therefore reviewed in detail.

An appraisal of emerging second line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Despite a significant improvement in overall survival over the last 15 years, colorectal cancer remains a major public health problem worldwide. Much effort has been made to develop an optimal choice of first-line treatments, but after progression the therapeutic possibilities and the criteria for choice are different.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this literature review is to discuss the different possibilities of second-line treatment and to specify the criteria for choice. Biological subgroups requiring specific therapeutic decisions will be described. We conducted a systematic review for randomized controlled trials published since 1995. A non-exhaustive review of published phase II studies, cohort studies, and international guidelines was also given and future leads were discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Some choices of second-line treatments are a direct result of the option chosen in the first line. Others are necessary because of the biological specificity of the tumor: immunotherapy for tumors with microsatellite instability, or the combination encorafenib cetuximab for mutated BRAF-V600E tumors. In many other circumstances, there are several options that require extensive involvement of multidisciplinary boards and the patient in the final therapeutic decision.

Alternative Treatment Options in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Who Encounter Fluoropyrimidine-Induced Cardiotoxicity

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) remains to be the backbone of chemotherapy regimens approved for treatment of colorectal cancer and other gastrointestinal cancers and breast cancer. The incidence of cardiotoxicity associated with 5-FU ranges from 1.5-18%. Previous studies also concluded that rechallenging a patient with previous 5-FU cardiotoxicity with either lower dose or another mode of administration could result in repeat of cardiac complication in up to 45% of patients. Nearly 13% of patients died upon re-exposure to 5-FU. Clinical manifestations of cardiac complications of fluoropyrimidines including angina, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, hypotension, Tako-Tsubo syndrome, heart failure, cardiogenic shock, pericarditis, and even sudden death have been reported. Cardiotoxicity is unpredictable and no alternative chemotherapeutics have been defined so far. The author describes here treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have encountered fluoropyrimidine-induced cardiotoxicity, including switching to a different fluoropyrimidine, switching to a different schedule of intravenous 5-FU, or switching to a non-fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy regimen if one exists. Switching to a non-fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy regimen is usually the most feasible choice for patients with metastatic disease as data on adjuvant setting is usually a fluoropyrimidine or its combination with oxaliplatin at present.

Administration sequence for multi-agent oncolytic regimens

Purpose

The existence of a multitude of oncolytics regimens containing two or more agents (combination) outlines the need to define their most adequate sequence of administration. However, limited resources are currently available to specify a particular sequence, presenting challenges potentially impacting on patient safety, and Pharmacy & Infusion Nursing workflows.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was performed leading to the compilation of a document containing drug administration sequencing instructions for our Nursing, Pharmacy, and Oncology providers to follow. Regimens prioritized in our literature review represented regimens selected as part of our approved Clinical Pathways, regimens inquiries from Pharmacy or Nursing, as well as less frequently used regimens. We stratified the regimens by tumor type and arranged them alphabetically by indication.

Results

A table was compiled containing all the supporting literature for the recommended drug administration sequences. If, in certain instances, no literature support was identified outlining rationale such as enhanced management of adverse effects, a specific institutional decision was made by our enterprise Medical Oncology Committee with recommendations from Pharmacy experts. The primary guiding principles for outlining our recommendations were the following: administration of vesicant agents first; administration of biologic agents first; administration of taxanes prior to platinum agents; and duration of infusion (shorter infusions prioritized).

Conclusion

This guideline is not exhaustive. The compilation provided here is intended to be utilized as guidance for oncolytics administration sequence. We will continue to review and incorporate treatment sequencing recommendations for additional regimens.

Systemic treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer in the era of precision medicine

The treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer has evolved over the last two decades with the FDA approval of several cytotoxic, biological, and targeted agents. In this paper, we review the impact of sidedness, RAS, BRAF, HER-2, and other immune biomarkers on metastatic colorectal cancer treatment selection and sequencing in both the palliative and curative intent settings.

Randomized study of etirinotecan pegol versus irinotecan as second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Etirinotecan pegol (EP) is a long-acting topoisomerase-I inhibitor designed to provide sustained exposure to SN-38 (active metabolite of irinotecan). This phase II study compared EP versus irinotecan as second-line treatment for KRAS-mutant, irinotecan-naïve, metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Patients were randomized to EP 145 mg/m² or irinotecan 350 mg/m² Q21d until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) with response determined by central radiologic review (RECIST version 1.1).

RESULTS

The study was terminated before completing accrual due to evolving standards of care. Eighty-three patients were randomized. Median PFS was longer with EP versus irinotecan (4.0 versus 2.8 months, respectively; HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.40-1.04; P = 0.07). Six-month PFS rates were 32.8 and 15.4%, respectively. Median OS was 9.6 and 8.4 months in EP and irinotecan arms, respectively (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.56-1.49). ORRs were 10 and 5%, respectively (P = 0.676); median DOR was significantly longer in EP arm (7.9 versus 1.4 months; P = 0.018). The most common grade-3/4 adverse events for EP and irinotecan were diarrhea (21 vs 20%), neutropenia (10 vs 22%), abdominal pain (14 vs 5%), nausea (14 vs 2%), and vomiting (12 vs 7%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

EP is active and safe for second-line treatment of KRAS-mutant, irinotecan-naïve mCRC.

How health-related quality of life assessment should be used in advanced colorectal cancer clinical trials

Traditionally, the efficacy of cancer treatment in patients with advance or metastatic disease in clinical studies has been studied using overall survival and more recently tumor-based end points such as progression-free survival, measurements of response to treatment. However, these seem not to be the relevant clinical end points in current situation if such end points were no validated as surrogate of overall survival to demonstrate the clinical efficacy. Appropriate, meaningful, primary patient-oriented and patient-reported end points that adequately measure the effects of new therapeutic interventions are then crucial for the advancement of clinical research in metastatic colorectal cancer to complement the results of tumor-based end points. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is effectively an evaluation of quality of life and its relationship with health over time. HRQoL includes the patient report at least of the way a disease or its treatment affects its physical, emotional and social well-being. Over the past few years, several phase III trials in a variety of solid cancers have assessed the incremental value of HRQoL in addition to the traditional end points of tumor response and survival results. HRQoL could provide not only complementary clinical data to the primary outcomes, but also more precise predictive and prognostic value. This end point is useful for both clinicians and patients in order to achieve the dogma of precision medicine. The present article examines the use of HRQoL in phase III metastatic colorectal cancer clinical trials, outlines the importance of HRQoL assessment methods, analysis, and results presentation. Moreover, it discusses the relevance of including HRQoL as a primary/co-primary end point to support the progression-free survival results and to assess efficacy of treatment in the advanced disease setting.

Second-line systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic management of people with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) who did not respond to first-line treatment represents a formidable challenge.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and toxicity of second-line systemic therapy in people with metastatic CRC.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to May 2016), Ovid MEDLINE In-process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (1946 to May 2016) and Ovid Embase (1974 to May 2016). There were no language or date of publication restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy (survival, tumour response) and toxicity (incidence of severe adverse effects (SAEs)) of second-line systemic therapy (single or combined treatment with any anticancer drug, at any dose and number of cycles) in people with metastatic CRC that progressed, recurred or did not respond to first-line systemic therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Authors performed a descriptive analysis of each included RCT in terms of primary (survival) and secondary (tumour response, toxicity) endpoints. In the light of the variety of drug regimens tested in the included trials, we could carry out meta-analysis considering classes of (rather than single) anticancer regimens; to this aim, we applied the random-effects model to pool the data. We used hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios (RRs) to describe the strength of the association for survival (overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)) and dichotomous (overall response rate (ORR) and SAE rate) data, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four RCTs (enrolling 13,787 participants) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Available evidence enabled us to address multiple clinical issues regarding the survival effects of second-line systemic therapy of people with metastatic CRC.1. Chemotherapy (irinotecan) was more effective than best supportive care (HR for OS: 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80; 1 RCT; moderate-quality evidence); 2. modern chemotherapy (FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin), irinotecan) is more effective than outdated chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil) (HR for PFS: 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.73; 2 RCTs; high-quality evidence) (HR for OS: 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.94; 1 RCT; moderate-quality evidence); 3. irinotecan-based combinations were more effective than irinotecan alone (HR for PFS: 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.76; 6 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence); 4. targeted agents improved the efficacy of conventional chemotherapy both when considered together (HR for OS: 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 6 RCTs; high-quality evidence) and when bevacizumab was used alone (HR for PFS: 0.67, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.75; 4 RCTs; high-quality evidence).With regard to secondary endpoints, tumour response rates generally paralleled the survival results; moreover, higher anticancer efficacy was generally associated with worse treatment-related toxicity, with the important exception of bevacizumab-containing regimens, where the addition of the targeted agent to chemotherapy did not result in a significant increase in the rate of SAE. Finally, we found that oral (instead of intravenous) fluoropyrimidines significantly reduced the incidence of adverse effects (without compromising efficacy) in people treated with oxaliplatin-based regimens.We could not draw any conclusions on other debated aspects in this field of oncology, such as ranking of treatments (not all possible comparisons have been tested and many comparisons were based on single trials enrolling a small number of participants) and quality of life (virtually no data available).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Systemic therapy offers a survival benefit to people with metastatic CRC who did not respond to first-line treatment, especially when targeted agents are combined with conventional chemotherapeutic drugs. Further research is needed to define the optimal regimen and to identify people who most benefit from each treatment.

The efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus irrinotecan-based chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Panitumumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting epidermal growth factor receptor, is used in combination with chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the effects of panitumumab in combination with irrinotecan-based chemotherapy remain uncertain. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of combination treatment of panitumumab plus chemotherapy in the treatment of mCRC.

METHODS

By searching electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science), all clinical trials which assessed the effects of panitumumab plus irrinotecan-based chemotherapy in mCRC would be included. Main outcome measures included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and adverse events. Pooled estimates were calculated by a fixed-effects model or random-effects model, according to the heterogeneity among the included studies.

RESULTS

Eleven trials with a total number of 1338 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. The combination treatment of panitumumab and irrinotecan-based chemotherapy was associated with a median PFS of 5.83 months, OS of 11.15 months, and ORR of 33%. Subgroup analysis showed that, in the first-line and second-line treatment, the combination therapy for PFS was 9.27 and 5.01 months, for OS was 8.87 and 11.68 months, and for ORR was 61% and 26%, respectively. In the wild-type and mutant KRAS populations, the combination therapy for PFS was 5.76 and 5.27 months, for OS was 11.15 and 10.64 months, and for ORR was 37% and 18%, respectively. Moreover, combination therapy also induced an incidence of 56% treatment-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Panitumumab plus irrinotecan-based chemotherapy is effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of patients with mCRC, especially in those with wild-type KRAS tumors.

ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in Western countries. Over the last 20 years, and the last decade in particular, the clinical outcome for patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) has improved greatly due not only to an increase in the number of patients being referred for and undergoing surgical resection of their localised metastatic disease but also to a more strategic approach to the delivery of systemic therapy and an expansion in the use of ablative techniques. This reflects the increase in the number of patients that are being managed within a multidisciplinary team environment and specialist cancer centres, and the emergence over the same time period not only of improved imaging techniques but also prognostic and predictive molecular markers. Treatment decisions for patients with mCRC must be evidence-based. Thus, these ESMO consensus guidelines have been developed based on the current available evidence to provide a series of evidence-based recommendations to assist in the treatment and management of patients with mCRC in this rapidly evolving treatment setting.

Surrogate endpoints in second-line treatment for mCRC: a systematic literature-based analysis from 23 randomised trials

PURPOSE

To evaluate progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) as potential surrogate endpoints (SEP) for overall survival (OS) in second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

A systematic literature search of randomised trials of second-line chemotherapy for mCRC reported from January 2000 to July 2013 was performed. Correlation coefficients weighted by number of patients in the treatment arms between median PFS, ORR and DCR with median OS were estimated.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials reflecting 10 800 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median PFS and OS across all trials were 4.5 months and 11.5 months and median ORR and DCR were 11.4% and 65%, respectively. PFS showed moderate correlation with OS [RPFS = 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.82]. In contrast, ORR only weakly correlated with OS (RORR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.38-0.72, n = 22). Despite a small number of studies (n = 10) reporting on DCR, moderate correlation with OS was observed (RDCR = 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.86).

CONCLUSION

Based on the available trial-level data, PFS may serve as an appropriate SEP in second-line chemotherapy for mCRC. A small number of studies revealed moderate correlation of DCR with OS that justifies further investigation.

A candidate gene study of capecitabine-related toxicity in colorectal cancer identifies new toxicity variants at DPYD and a putative role for ENOSF1 rather than TYMS

OBJECTIVE

Capecitabine is an oral 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) pro-drug commonly used to treat colorectal carcinoma and other tumours. About 35% of patients experience dose-limiting toxicity. The few proven genetic biomarkers of 5-FU toxicity are rare variants and polymorphisms, respectively, at candidate loci dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) and thymidylate synthase (TYMS).

DESIGN

We investigated 1456 polymorphisms and rare coding variants near 25 candidate 5-FU pathway genes in 968 UK patients from the QUASAR2 clinical trial.

RESULTS

We identified the first common DPYD polymorphisms to be consistently associated with capecitabine toxicity, rs12132152 (toxicity allele frequency (TAF)=0.031, OR=3.83, p=4.31×10(-6)) and rs12022243 (TAF=0.196, OR=1.69, p=2.55×10(-5)). rs12132152 was particularly strongly associated with hand-foot syndrome (OR=6.1, p=3.6×10(-8)). The rs12132152 and rs12022243 associations were independent of each other and of previously reported DPYD toxicity variants. Next-generation sequencing additionally identified rare DPYD variant p.Ala551Thr in one patient with severe toxicity. Using functional predictions and published data, we assigned p.Ala551Thr as causal for toxicity. We found that polymorphism rs2612091, which lies within an intron of ENOSF1, was also associated with capecitabine toxicity (TAF=0.532, OR=1.59, p=5.28×10(-6)). ENSOF1 is adjacent to TYMS and there is a poorly characterised regulatory interaction between the two genes/proteins. Unexpectedly, rs2612091 fully explained the previously reported associations between capecitabine toxicity and the supposedly functional TYMS variants, 5'VNTR 2R/3R and 3'UTR 6 bp ins-del. rs2612091 genotypes were, moreover, consistently associated with ENOSF1 mRNA levels, but not with TYMS expression.

CONCLUSIONS

DPYD harbours rare and common capecitabine toxicity variants. The toxicity polymorphism in the TYMS region may actually act through ENOSF1.

A phase II, randomized, double blind trial of calcium aluminosilicate clay versus placebo for the prevention of diarrhea in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan

PURPOSE

Calcium aluminosilicate clay (CASAD) is a naturally occurring clay that serves as a cation exchange absorbent. We hypothesized that oral administration of CASAD would reduce the rate of grade 3/4 diarrhea associated with irinotecan use for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) by adsorbing the SN-38 metabolite.

METHODS

Patients receiving irinotecan-based chemotherapy were randomized equally between CASAD and placebo arms in this multicenter trial in order to assess differences in the proportions of patients with grade 3/4 diarrhea within 6 weeks. Additionally, we compared symptom severity between the two arms using the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory.

RESULTS

Between May 2009 and May 2012, 100 patients were enrolled. In evaluable patients, 7 of 43 (16 %) on the CASAD arm compared to 3 of 32 (9 %) on the placebo arm experienced grade 3/4 diarrhea (P = 0.70). The rate of any diarrhea among all patients was similar (CASAD arm, 64 % vs. placebo arm, 70 %). The rate of study dropout was 14 % in the CASAD arm and 38 % in the placebo arm (P = 0.01). No differences were found in symptom severity, individual symptom items, and in serious adverse events between the two arms.

CONCLUSION

Compared to placebo, CASAD use was safe but ineffective in preventing diarrhea in metastatic CRC patients treated with irinotecan-containing chemotherapy regimens. There were no distinct signals in terms of patient symptoms between arms, but there was significantly more patient dropout in the placebo arm. Future CASAD trials will focus on the active treatment of diarrhea.

Peritoneal surface disease with synchronous hepatic involvement treated with Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)

BACKGROUND

Patients with peritoneal surface disease (PSD) often present with synchronous hepatic involvement (HI). The impact of addressing the hepatic component during CRS/HIPEC on operative and survival outcomes is not clearly defined.

METHODS

A prospective database of 1,067 procedures was reviewed based on primary tumor, performance status, resection status, type of liver involvement (superficial or parenchymal) and hepatic resection, morbidity, mortality, and overall survival.

RESULTS

There were 108 (10 %) CRS/HIPEC procedures performed with synchronous liver debulking in 99 patients with PSD from 27 (33 %) appendiceal and 32 (39 %) colorectal primary lesions. Ninety percent of patients underwent subsegmental hepatic resection, whereas 22 % had disease with hepatic parenchymal involvement. Median intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay were 3.5 and 13.6 days, respectively. Clavien grade III/IV morbidity was similar for patients with or without resected HI (18.9 vs. 22.5 %; p = 0.39). The 30-day mortality rate was 6.5 and 2.8 % (p = 0.07) for patients with and without resected HI, respectively. The median survival for all patients with low-grade appendiceal cancer was 42.1 months with resected HI and 95.5 months without HI (p = 0.03). Median survival for colorectal cancer patients after complete cytoreduction was 21.2 months with HI versus 33.6 months without HI (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Synchronous resection of limited HI does not increase the morbidity or mortality of CRS/HIPEC procedures. The survival benefit, although still meaningful, was less for patients with HI. Resectable low volume HI in patients with PSD from colon and appendiceal primary lesions should not be considered a contraindication for CRS/HIPEC procedures.

Delayed Presentation of DPD Deficiency in Colorectal Cancer

Case Study 

Mr. D., a 55-year-old male, presented to the medical oncology service with a diagnosis of stage III adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon. He presented 7 weeks post sigmoid colectomy with lymph node resection and was initiated on adjuvant chemotherapy with CAPOX (capecitabine [Xeloda] and oxaliplatin [Eloxatin]). Standard dosing was used: oxaliplatin at 130 mg/m² on day 1 and capecitabine at approximately 2,000 mg/m²/day (rounded to the nearest 500-mg tablet size) for 14 days on and 7 days off (1 cycle = 21 days). A capped body surface area of 2.4 m2 was used, due to the patient’s body habitus.

Adverse Effects 

Mr. D. did not report any complications of therapy during cycle 1, days 1–7, other than grade 1 diarrhea, which was amenable to diphenoxylate/atropine when taken. The next week, he reported significant malaise and fatigue associated with persistent diarrhea occurring every 30 minutes for 5 days. Mr. D. was instructed to go to the emergency room for an immediate evaluation, but he refused.

Mr. D. presented to the clinic in poor condition on day 14 of cycle 1. His diarrhea had increased to grade 3 and was not controlled with either loperamide or diphenoxylate/atropine, though he was not taking his medications as directed. He had been instructed to take two 2-mg loperamide tablets after the first loose stool, followed by 1 tablet of diphenoxylate/atropine 2 hours later. He could then alternate this with loperamide every 2 hours as needed, not to exceed 8 tablets of loperamide per day. Instead, he had taken 2 tablets of loperamide after the first loose stool, but either waited 6 hours to take 1 tablet of diphenoxylate/atropine or otherwise chose not to alternate the medications at all despite continued diarrhea, depending on the day.

Mr. D.’s timing in taking his supportive medications was inconsistent, and his explanations of this timing were not exact. He also reported persistent grade 3 nausea with vomiting for 5 days, which did not improve with ondansetron and prochlorperazine, though he again did not take these consistently. He was advised to alternate ondansetron and prochlorperazine every 4 hours as needed, but only took one or the other medication approximately 3 times per day.

According to Mr. D., his adverse effects initially began on day 9 of cycle 1. He had lost approximately 14 kg (31 lb) during cycle 1. Clinically, he was found to have grade 2 mucositis and grade 1 hand-foot syndrome. At the time of this visit, his absolute neutrophil count was 3,000/ìL, his hemoglobin was 14.4 g/dL, his hematocrit 42.2%, and his platelet count was 139,000/ìL. His kidney function was within the normal range.

Mr. D. refused hospitalization despite the primary team’s recommendation. He also refused to undergo stool sampling for Clostridium difficile. He was given IV fluids along with adjustments in supportive medications, including a prescription for 10% tincture of opium. He was instructed to use 0.6 mL every 6 hours in addition to alternating loperamide with diphenoxylate/atropine as noted previously. He was advised to rinse his mouth with a baking soda solution for relief of his grade 1 mucositis, and alternation of antiemetics every 4 hours was reiterated. He was to return prior to initiation of cycle 2 for further evaluation.

Worsening Symptoms 

The next day, Mr. D.’s wife called the clinic to report that her husband’s diarrhea continued despite the use of tincture of opium and that it was associated with hematochezia. He was also experiencing a worsening of his mucositis, with an associated swelling of the tongue. He was instructed to present to the emergency center, which he did on day 16 of cycle 1. By then, he was found to be febrile at 39.5°C. He was tachycardic, with a heart rate of 126, and he was experiencing significant abdominal pain associated with the diarrhea. The mucositis was worsening, with new odynophagia.

At this time, Mr. D.’s absolute neutrophil count had dropped dramatically to 160/ìL, his hemoglobin was 13.1 g/dL, his hematocrit was 39.2%, and his platelet count was 68,000/ìL. He was admitted to the inpatient service and started on empiric antibiotics. His blood cultures remained negative during hospitalization, but stool cultures were positive for C. difficile. His antimicrobial regimen was deescalated to oral vancomycin once his stool volume decreased. He was treated with an institutional compounded mouthwash of diphenhydramine, aluminum/magnesium hydroxide, and viscous lidocaine for the mucositis, which also slowly improved. He was given a dose of growth factor. Neutropenia eventually resolved, with an absolute neutrophil count of 4,820/ìL on the day of discharge. He was discharged 26 days after initiating cycle 1, at which time his myelosuppression and mucositis were also resolved. Throughout his course, he did not report any neurotoxicity.

DPD Testing 

Due to his severe symptoms of neutropenia, mucositis, and diarrhea, Mr. D. was tested for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency. Testing confirmed a heterozygous IVS14+IG>A mutation. For this reason, all further adjuvant therapy was withheld, and he was followed on clinical surveillance only.

Irinotecan Plus S-1 Followed by Hepatectomy for a Patient with Initially Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases, Who Showed Severe Drug Rash with Oxaliplatin Plus 5-FU and Leucovorin (FOLFOX)

For unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), hepatic resection with or without chemotherapy is the only curative treatment that sufficiently achieves long-term survival. However, occasional severe allergic responses to anticancer drugs necessitate treatment discontinuation. A 45-year-old woman presented with metachronous unresectable colorectal liver metastases. Chemotherapy with oxaliplatin plus 5-FU and leucovorin (FOLFOX) was initiated, but severe allergic dermatitis developed after the second cycle. Although she reported no prior history of adverse reactions to tegafur-uracil, a drug lymphocyte stimulation test showed an allergic response to 5-FU. We subsequently replaced with Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) chemotherapy which was well tolerated and resulted in a partial response after 3 cycles. As a result, right trisectionectomy was successfully performed and no recurrence was detected in the following 3 years. A severe allergic reaction to intravenous 5-FU-containing drug regimens can be successfully alleviated by switching to S-1-containing regimens such as IRIS or S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX).

New developments in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: potential place in therapy

In this review article we discuss the evolution of second-line treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The benefits of second-line chemotherapy have been established for some time, but in the last decade a number of trials have evaluated combinations of irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy with molecular-targeted agents; e.g., vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeting agents (bevacizumab, aflibercept), epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies (cetuximab, panitumumab), and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (vatalanib). Recent developments include the availability of the new VEGF-targeted agent aflibercept and the new concept of continuing bevacizumab after failure of first-line bevacizumab, which is likely to become a new treatment option in the second-line setting. Choosing the most appropriate second-line treatment regimen for mCRC patients remains a complex issue. All of the currently available molecular-targeted agents seem to be active even after patients have received a bevacizumab-based first-line regimen. Overall, the selection of second-line treatment for mCRC depends on several variables and should be determined taking into account the patient's performance and disease status.

Differential prognosis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients post-progression to first-line triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, FIr-B/FOx, according to second-line treatment and KRAS genotype

Clinical outcome post-progression to first-line triplet chemotherapy (CT) plus bevacizumab (FIr-B/FOx) was evaluated in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) patients (pts). Second-line treatment was selected according to fitness, KRAS genotype, previous efficacy and safety. Efficacy was evaluated and compared according to treatment or KRAS genotype, using log-rank analysis. Among 54 pts, median overall survival (OS) post-progression was 12 months, significantly better in 40 (74.1%) treated compared to 14 (25.9%) who died without further treatment. Second-line surgical treatment, 4 pts (7.4%), medical treatment, 36 pts (66.7%): triplet CT plus targeted agent, 10 (18.5%); triplet regimens, 19 (35.2%); doublet/monotherapy, 7 (13%). At follow-up of 14 months, objective response rate (ORR) was 38%, metastasectomies 12.5%, progression-free survival (PFS) 10 months, OS 14 months. According to treatment, ORR, metastasectomies, PFS and OS were significantly favourable in triplet CT plus targeted agent compared to triplet, respectively: 80%, 40%, 13 months, not reached; 28%, 6%, 8 months, 11 months. PFS and OS were significantly worse in c.35 G>A mutant compared to wild-type and/or other mutant patients. Prognosis after progression to first‑line FIr-B/FOx may be significantly favourable in MCRC pts re-challenged with intensive regimens, and unfavourable in c.35 G>A KRAS mutant patients.

Fluoropyrimidine toxicity in patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase splice site variant: the need for further revision of dose and schedule

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is a key enzyme in the metabolic catabolism of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and its derivatives (capecitabine and tegafur). Complete or partial deficiency of DPD activity has been demonstrated to induce severe toxicities in cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidine therapy. We analyzed 180 individuals that were candidates for a treatment with 5-FU class drugs for the most common DPD mutation, IVS14+1G>A, and detected four heterozygous patients. We recorded the toxicities for all 180 individuals after the first two chemotherapy cycles and found that three of the four patients, although they were treated with a dose reduction in 50 % on the basis of the genetic analysis, all showed severe toxicities that resulted in hospitalization of patient and premature discontinuation of treatment. One patient with mutated DPD was not treated with chemotherapy upon the clinician's decision because of his DPD mutated genotype and the presence of microsatellite instability. Our data suggest that greater dose reductions or alternative therapies are needed for patients with DPD IVS14+1G>A mutations.

Oxaliplatin for colorectal cancer: recent evidence from clinical trials

SUMMARY Oxaliplatin, a second-generation platinum analog, has evolved as one of the most important therapeutic agents in the treatment of both metastatic colorectal cancer and stage II/III colon cancer. Moreover, oxaliplatin is currently being investigated in the perioperative treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer. Oxaliplatin can be safely combined with fluoropyrimidines, irinotecan, bevacizumab and EGF receptor antibodies, resulting in increased response rates and delayed progression. In combination with EGF receptor antibodies, fluoropyrimidine schedules need to be cautiously considered. Treatment strategies to limit oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity by discontinuous administration schedules (e.g., induction followed by maintenance, followed by reinduction or intermittent treatment) are available.

Alternative treatment options in colorectal cancer patients with 5-fluorouracil- or capecitabine-induced cardiotoxicity

Most chemotherapy regimens in colorectal cancer treatment are 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin or capecitabine-based. Cardiotoxicity is a less common but potentially lethal complication of 5-FU or capecitabine treatment, and some physicians might be unfamiliar with treatment alternatives. Rechallenging should be avoided because it carries a high risk of recurrence of the cardiac symptoms and prophylactic treatment is not always protective. Possible alternative treatment options to be considered are to replace the oral capecitabine or intravenous 5-FU by a 5-FU bolus regimen, by uracil-tegafur or tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil, both oral fluoropyrimidines combining a 5-FU prodrug with a dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) inhibitor, or by raltitrexed, a thymidilate synthase inhibitor whose metabolism is independent of DPD. Patients with advanced colorectal cancer and fluoropyrimidine-induced cardiotoxicity can be treated with other non-fluoropyrimidine related chemotherapy, either as a single agent, combined, or in combination with biological agents. In this report we discuss the different alternative treatment options.

Chemotherapy: which drug and when?

The treatment of advanced colorectal cancer has become very complex due to: (i) the relative efficacy of therapy, which has turned a rapidly fatal cancer into a more indolent disease in the last 10 years; (ii) the availability of four active chemotherapeutic agents and three biologics; (iii) the efficacy of several lines of therapy; (iv) the rare, but real, chance of curing stage IV patients through the combined use of chemotherapy and surgery. This article will concentrate on chemotherapy (leaving out the biologics) and will review the determinants of how aggressive the initial approach should be, the key factors of our initial treatment choices, when an intense treatment is better than just waiting or using single-agent chemotherapy; which chemotherapy is best for first, second and subsequent lines of treatment.

Outcome of second-line treatment after first-line chemotherapy with the GONO FOLFOXIRI regimen

PURPOSE

FOLFOXIRI demonstrated higher efficacy compared to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated the outcome of second-line treatments among 196 patients treated with first-line FOLFOXIRI in three consecutive trials conducted by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest group.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred seventy-two of 196 patients so far progressed and 136 (79%) received second-line therapies: 32 (24%) were rechallenged with FOLFOXIRI, 52 (38%) were treated with irinotecan- or oxaliplatin-based doublets, and 52 (38%) received fluoropyrimidine plus mytomicin C or single-agent chemotherapy. Only 10 patients received bevacizumab (3) or cetuximab (7) with chemotherapy. Activity and efficacy data were collected and subgroup analyses were performed according to the regimen administered.

RESULTS

Overall response rate (RR) was 23%; median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5.9 and 13.2 months, respectively. At an exploratory subgroup analysis, retreatment with FOLFOXIRI was associated with longer PFS (8.2 versus 6.3 months; P = .003, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61) and OS (19.3 versus 14.0 months; P = .02, HR = 0.57) compared with doublets; single-agent chemotherapy or fluoropyrimidine plus mytomicin C was significantly lower in terms of RR (8%), PFS (3.0 months), and OS (8.7 months) compared with FOLFOXIRI or doublets.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line FOLFOXIRI does not impair the efficacy of second-line treatments. In some patients rechallenge with FOLFOXIRI may represent a valid option, although potential imbalances in prognostic factors due to better patient selection should be considered.

Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the phase II BEVACOLOR study

BACKGROUND

This prospective phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy regimens commonly used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Patients with mCRC who progressed or relapsed after first-line oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based treatment received bevacizumab 2.5 mg/kg/week plus chemotherapy until disease progression. The primary endpoint was disease-control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients (66% men; median age, 62 years old) received second-line bevacizumab plus folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI; 57%), folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX; 26%), irinotecan (15%), or capecitabine plus irinotecan (XELIRI; 2%). The DCR was 87% (95% CI, 77%-97%); ORR was 32% (95% CI, 19%-46%). Median PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.8-7.8 months) and median OS 19.3 months, (95% CI, 14.2-25.1 months).The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (21%), diarrhea (15%), asthenia, and vomiting (9% each). Five patients (9%) had grade 3/4 targeted toxicities: grade 3 hypertension (n = 2), grade 3 venous thromboembolism (n = 2), and grade 4 arterial thromboembolism (n = 1). None of these events led to death during the study.

CONCLUSION

Bevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy is highly active in patients with mCRC and has an acceptable safety profile.

Single-agent irinotecan or FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer; results of a randomised phase II study (DaVINCI) and meta-analysis [corrected]

BACKGROUND

Second-line treatment with irinotecan for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs survival. It is uncertain whether irinotecan is better administered with 5-fluorouracil or alone in patients previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine. We compared toxicity (particularly diarrhoea), quality of life, and efficacy of combination chemotherapy and irinotecan in these patients.

METHODS

In DaVINCI, a randomised phase II trial, patients with advanced colorectal cancer were randomly allocated to: Combination therapy (FOLFIRI), irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) IV over 90 min, day 1), 5-fluorouracil (400mg/m(2) IV bolus and 2400 mg/m(2) by 46-hour infusion from day 1) and folinic acid (20mg/m(2) IV bolus, day 1), 2-weekly; or Single-agent, irinotecan (350 mg/m(2) IV over 90 min), 3-weekly. Toxicity was evaluated every treatment cycle; QOL and response 6-weekly. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial, amended from a larger factorial design, was terminated early due to slow recruitment. Results were also combined with other second-line irinotecan trials.

FINDINGS

We randomised 44 patients to combination and 45 to single agent. Eight patients in the irinotecan arm and 4 in the combination arm had grade 3/4 diarrhoea (P=0.24). Treatment groups did not differ significantly in overall QOL changes, response rate or progression free or overall-survival. In a systematic review of 29 trials of second-line irinotecan-based treatment, single-agent irinotecan was associated with more diarrhoea and alopecia than the combination but efficacy was similar.

INTERPRETATION

Combination treatment compared with single-agent irinotecan reduces alopecia and diarrhoea without compromising efficacy on clinical outcomes. Both regimens remain as reasonable treatment options.

FUNDING

Research grant (Pfizer).

Analysis for prognostic factors of 60-day mortality: evaluation of an irinotecan-based phase III trial performed in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Mortality rates in published irinotecan-based trials range between 1.7% and 5.0%. This analysis aimed to evaluate clinical and histopathologic factors associated with 60-day mortality in first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-day all-cause and disease-specific mortality rates from 479 patients who participated in a randomized phase III study comparing FUFIRI (5-fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin, irinotecan) (n = 238) vs. mIROX (modified irinotecan plus oxaliplatin (n = 241) were evaluated for association with prognostic factors such as platelet counts, alkaline phosphatase (AP) levels, white blood cell (WBC) counts, hemoglobin values, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, and several other baseline parameters using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses applied to patients combined from both treatment groups.

RESULTS

The all-cause 60-day mortality rate was 5.0% (24/479). Thirteen patients (5.5%) in the FUFIRI arm died within the first 60 days of treatment compared with 11 (4.6%) patients in the mIROX arm (P = .68). Among the 24 patients in both treatment arms, mortality was qualified as disease related in 15 (63%) patients and treatment related in 7 (29%) patients (P = .695). In multivariate analyses, high LDH levels (P = .010) and an elevated WBC count (P = .006) remained as significant independent prognostic factors. Low Karnofsky performance status (KPS) showed a strong trend but failed to reach statistical significance (P = .057) as did AP levels and the number of metastatic sites.

CONCLUSION

In this study 63% of the early deaths were disease related, whereas only 29% were possibly related to study medication. Independent prognostic factors for early mortality were LDH levels and WBC counts. KPS showed a strong trend in the multivariate analysis. Future investigation may consider LDH levels and WBC counts for exclusion criteria.

Reporting of myelotoxicity associated with emerging regimens for the treatment of selected solid tumors

In this article, we reviewed and quantified reporting of the risk of myelotoxicity, specifically febrile neutropenia (FN), and the related use of supportive care with colony-stimulating factor (CSF) or antibiotics in clinical trials published between January 2005 and June 2009, evaluating emerging regimens for the treatment of selected solid tumors. Our analysis showed that clinically significant neutropenia and neutropenia-related events were generally described in the studies evaluated (grade 3/4 neutropenia incidence, 72%; FN incidence, 53%). However, use of CSF and antibiotics was infrequently and inconsistently reported (trials reporting prophylactic CSF and antibiotics use: in the methods section, 38% and 10%, respectively; in the results section, 19% and 1%, respectively). These results highlight the need for a standardized approach to reporting neutropenic outcomes and use of supportive care measures. This can assist clinicians in prospectively managing relevant toxicities associated with these emerging regimens and thereby facilitate their safe and effective use in clinical practice.

Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) versus fluorouracil and folinic acid plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised phase 2/3 non-inferiority study (FIRIS study)

BACKGROUND

Fluorouracil and folinic acid with either oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or irinotecan (FOLFIRI) are widely used as first-line or second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, infusional fluorouracil-based regimens, requiring continuous infusion and implantation of an intravenous port system, are inconvenient. We therefore planned an open-label randomised controlled trial to verify the non-inferiority of irinotecan plus oral S-1 (a combination of tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine, and potassium oxonate; IRIS) to FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Between Jan 30, 2006, and Jan 29, 2008, 426 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer needing second-line chemotherapy from 40 institutions in Japan were randomly assigned by a computer-based minimisation method to receive either FOLFIRI (n=213) or IRIS (n=213). In the FOLFIRI group, patients received folinic acid (200 mg/m(2)) and irinotecan (150 mg/m(2)) and then a bolus injection of fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)) on day 1 and a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (2400 mg/m(2)) over 46 h, repeated every 2 weeks. In the IRIS group, patients received irinotecan (125 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 15 and S-1 (40-60 mg according to body surface area) twice daily for 2 weeks, repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, with a non-inferiority margin of 1.333. Statistical analysis was on the basis of initially randomised participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00284258.

FINDINGS

All randomised patients were included in the primary analysis. After a median follow-up of 12.9 months (IQR 11.5-18.2), median progression-free survival was 5.1 months in the FOLFIRI group and 5.8 months in the IRIS group (hazard ratio 1.077, 95% CI 0.879-1.319, non-inferiority test p=0.039). The most common grade three or four adverse drug reactions were neutropenia (110 [52.1%] of 211 patients in the FOLFIRI group and 76 [36.2%] of 210 patients in the IRIS group; p=0.0012), leucopenia (33 [15.6%] in the FOLFIRI group and 38 [18.1%] in the IRIS group; p=0.5178), and diarrhoea (ten [4.7%] in the FOLFIRI group and 43 [20.5%] in the IRIS group; p<0.0001). One treatment-related death from hypotension due to shock was reported in the FOLFIRI group within 28 days after the end of treatment; no treatment-related deaths were reported in the IRIS group.

INTERPRETATION

Progression-free survival with IRIS is not inferior to that with FOLFIRI in patients receiving second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Treatment with IRIS could be an additional therapeutic option for second-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

FUNDING

Taiho Pharmaceutical Co Ltd and Daiichi Sankyo Co Ltd.

Analysis of factors associated with outcome in patients undergoing isolated hepatic perfusion for unresectable liver metastases from colorectal center

AIM

To define the indications for hyperthermic isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) in patients with unresectable liver metastases (LM) from colorectal cancer (CRC) with particular focus on IHP's utility as a second-line option for patients whose tumors have progressed following combination systemic chemotherapy treatment.

METHODS

From June 1994 through July 2005, 120 patients with unresectable CRC LM underwent IHP with melphalan (n = 69), tumor necrosis factor (TNF) (n = 10) or both (n = 41). Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) with floxuridine started 6-8 weeks post IHP in 46 (38%). Patients were followed for toxicity, radiographic response, and overall survival (OS). Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare parameters by response category; survival and hepatic progression-free survival were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Of 79 males and 41 females, 96 (80%) received prior chemotherapy. There were five (4%) operative/treatment mortalities. There were 69 responses in 114 evaluable patients (61%). Total melphalan dose and combination melphalan/TNF were each associated with response; age, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), prior chemotherapy for established LM, tumor burden, and post-IHP HAI therapy were not. Median overall survival was 17.4 months and 2-year survival was 34%. Factors found to be independently related to survival were preoperative CEA <30 ng/mL and use of post-IHP HAI (P < 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

IHP results in marked tumor regression and prolonged survival in patients with CRC LM. Continued development of IHP in this clinical setting is warranted.