Palliative chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: do we know how it should be used?

The changing face of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

Introduction: Since late 1990's therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients has changed considerable, and the combination of doublet or triplet chemotherapy and a targeted agent are now routinely used. With the introduction of more intensified regimens, it has become even more important to identify patients that will benefit from and can tolerate therapy. Furthermore, the increasing understanding of the biology of mCRC has led to the discovery of new potential targets. Therefore, therapy of patients with mCRC has undergone considerable change from 'one strategy fits all' towards a more personalized therapy. Areas covered: We present an overview of the recent literature on approved systemic treatment of mCRC however with focus on how the treatment strategy has changed based on clinical and molecular parameters that presently are used routinely in the clinical situation. Expert commentary: The face of treatment of mCRC has changed from 'one strategy fits all' to a personalized approach in which both clinical, molecular parameters and the aim of therapy have to be taking into account when planning the optimal treatment strategy for the individual mCRC patient.

Randomized study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 followed by irinotecan) and reduced dose combination therapy (S-1/oxaliplatin followed by S-1/irinotecan) as initial therapy for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: NORDIC 9

Background

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a disease of older age, but there is a relative lack of knowledge about effects of chemotherapy in older patients as they are under-represented in clinical trials. Little data can guide whether the strategy in older mCRC patients should be a sequential full-dose monotherapy chemotherapy approach or a dose-reduced combination chemotherapy approach. The oral 5FU prodrug S-1 seems to have less side effects than capecitabine and should be an optimal drug for older patients, but few data are available. Improved geriatric assessments are needed to select which older patients should receive therapy.

Methods

The NORDIC 9 trial is a Nordic multicenter randomized phase II study comparing full dose monotherapy (S-1 30 mg/m² twice daily days 1–14 every 3 weeks, followed by second line irinotecan 250–350 mg/m² iv day 1 every 3 weeks or 180–250 mg/m² iv day 1 every 2 weeks) with reduced dose combination therapy (S-1 20 mg/m² days 1–14 + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² iv day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by second line S-1 20 mg/m² days 1–14 + irinotecan 180 mg/m² day 1 every 3 week) for older patients (≥70 years) with mCRC who are not candidates for full-dose standard combination therapy. Additional bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) is optional in first-line. Blood samples and tumor tissue will be collected to investigate predictive markers. Geriatric screening tools (G-8, VES-13, Timed-Up-and-Go and Handgrip strength), Charlson Comorbidty Index and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) will be evaluated as predictors of efficacy and toxicity. The target sample size is 150 patients.

The primary endpoint is progression-free survival and secondary endpoints are time-to-failure of strategy, overall survival, response rate, toxicity, and correlations between biomarkers, pre-treatment characteristics and geriatric assessments.

Discussion

The study will add knowledge on how to treat older mCRC patients who are not candidates for standard combination therapy. Furthermore it may provide understanding of efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in older cancer patients and thus offer a better chance for tailored treatment strategies in these patients.

Trial registration

EU Clinical Trial Register, EudraCT no. 2014–000394-39. Registered 05 May 2014.

Palliative pelvic radiotherapy for symptomatic rectal cancer - a prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Palliative pelvic radiotherapy (PPRT) is used to treat locally advanced rectal cancer (RC) although symptomatic effects and toxicities are poorly documented. Aims were to evaluate symptom severity, quality of life (QOL) and toxicity after PPRT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty-one patients with symptomatic primary or recurrent RC prescribed PPRT with fractions of 3 Gy to 30-39 Gy were included. Primary outcome was severity of target symptoms (TS) 12 weeks after PPRT. Pelvic symptom burden, toxicity, and QOL were assessed. Response was defined as patient-reported TS improvement or resolution.

RESULTS

Pain (n = 24), rectal dysfunction (n = 16), and hematochezia (n = 9) were the most common TSs. Overall response rate among evaluable patients 12 weeks after PPRT was 28/33 (85%). Eighteen patients did not complete the study follow-up, 16 due to deteriorating health. TS responses were 10/13 (77%) for pain, 9/10 (90%) for rectal dysfunction, and 8/8 for hematochezia. Non-target pelvic symptom severity decreased and median QOL scores remained stable. There was no grade 4 toxicity. Median survival was nine months.

CONCLUSIONS

In the majority of patients with symptomatic primary or recurrent RC, PPRT with 30-39 Gy contributes to pelvic symptom relief, with little toxicity. Patients prescribed PPRT of RC have limited life expectancy. Future studies should investigate simplification of PPRT.

Experience with S-1 in older Caucasian patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Findings from an observational chart review

BACKGROUND

An aging population will increase the number of older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, there is limited knowledge about treatment in older patients as they are under-represented in clinical trials. The oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 is associated with a lower rate of adverse events than capecitabine and may therefore be a suitable drug for elderly. However, data on the use of S-1 in Caucasian mCRC patients are lacking/scarce.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the present study we evaluated safety and the efficacy of S-1 alone or in combination with oxaliplatin (SOx) or irinotecan (IRIS) in older mCRC patients. Patients who received at least one cycle of S-1 (first-line therapy), SOx (mainly first-line therapy) or IRIS (second-line therapy) were included.

RESULTS

From June 2012 to December 2014, 71 older patients received ≥1 cycle of either S-1 (n = 9), SOx (n = 44) or IRIS (n = 18) for mCRC. Median age was 76 years and most patients had a WHO performance status of 0 (32%) or 1 (56%). All patients were evaluable for response and safety. In the SOx group, 18 (41%) and 20 patients (45%) had partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD), respectively (disease control rate 86%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.5 months and median overall survival (OS) was 18.5 months. In the S-1 group (median age 82 years), PR was 22%, median PFS 6.4 months and median OS 15.8 months. In the IRIS group, PR was 28%, median PFS 7.8 months and the median OS 16.5 months. In general, therapy was well tolerated; main non-hematological toxicities were fatigue and diarrhea.

CONCLUSION

S-1 monotherapy, SOx and IRIS were well tolerated for older patients with mCRC and could become alternative regimens in older mCRC patients. These regimens are now further evaluated in the randomized ongoing NORDIC9 trial.

Can we predict toxicity and efficacy in older patients with cancer? Older patients with colorectal cancer as an example

Colorectal cancer is a disease of the elderly. As older and frail patients are under-represented in clinical trials, most of the evidence available on treatment of older metastatic colorectal patients with cancer originates from pooled analyses of the older patients included in large prospective clinical trials and from community-based studies. The aging process is highly individual and cannot be based on the chronological age alone. It is characterised by a decline in organ function with an increased risk of comorbidity and polypharmacy. These issues can result in an increased susceptibility to the complications of both the disease and treatment. Therefore, evaluation of performance status and the chronological age alone is not sufficient, and additionally assessment must be included in the treatment decision process. In the present review, we will focus on clinical aspects of treating older and frail metastatic colorectal patients with cancer, but also on the present knowledge on how to select and tailor therapy for this particular group of patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT 2014-000394-39, pre-results.