Irinotecan combined with infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid or capecitabine plus celecoxib or placebo in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. EORTC study 40015

Wnt/β-catenin signalling, epithelial-mesenchymal transition and crosslink signalling in colorectal cancer cells

Colorectal cancer (CRC), with its significant incidence and metastatic rates, profoundly affects human health. A common oncogenic event in CRC is the aberrant activation of the Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway, which drives both the initiation and progression of the disease. Persistent Wnt/β-catenin signalling facilitates the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), which accelerates CRC invasion and metastasis. This review provides a summary of recent molecular studies on the role of the Wnt/β-catenin signalling axis in regulating EMT in CRC cells, which triggers metastatic pathogenesis. We present a comprehensive examination of the EMT process and its transcriptional controllers, with an emphasis on the crucial functions of β-catenin, EMT transcription factors (EMT-TFs). We also review recent evidences showing that hyperactive Wnt/β-catenin signalling triggers EMT and metastatic phenotypes in CRC via "Destruction complex" of β-catenin mechanisms. Potential therapeutic and challenges approache to suppress EMT and prevent CRC cells metastasis by targeting Wnt/β-catenin signalling are also discussed. These include direct β-catenin inhibitors and novel targets of the Wnt pathway, and finally highlight novel potential combinational treatment options based on the inhibition of the Wnt pathway.

Cardiovascular/anti-inflammatory drugs repurposed for treating or preventing cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including "aspirin," "NSAID," "statin" (including specific statin drug names), "metformin," "ACE inhibitors," and "ARBs" (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with "cancer." Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.

The effective combination therapies with irinotecan for colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer worldwide and has become one of the major human disease burdens. In clinical practice, the treatment of colorectal cancer has been closely related to the use of irinotecan. Irinotecan combines with many other anticancer drugs and has a broader range of drug combinations. Combination therapy is one of the most important means of improving anti-tumor efficacy and overcoming drug resistance. Reasonable combination therapy can lead to better patient treatment options, and inappropriate combination therapy will increase patient risk. For the colorectal therapeutic field, the significance of combination therapy is to improve the efficacy, reduce the adverse effects, and improve the ease of treatment. Therefore, we explored the clinical advantages of its combination therapy based on mechanism or metabolism and reviewed the rationale basis and its limitations in conducting exploratory clinical trials on irinotecan combination therapy, including the results of clinical trials on the combination potentiation of cytotoxic drugs, targeted agents, and herbal medicine. We hope that these can evoke more efforts to conduct irinotecan in the laboratory for further studies and evaluations, as well as the possibility of more in-depth development in future clinical trials.

Selective COX-2 inhibitors do not increase gastrointestinal reactions after colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of selective COX-2 inhibitors in preventing colorectal cancer recurrence has been demonstrated, however it is unknown how safe and successful they will be over the long term. As a result, we looked at the efficacy, safety, and consequences of adding COX-2 inhibitors to the treatment plan afterward.

METHODS

In patients with advanced colorectal cancer, we compared the efficacy of celecoxib at two different doses (200 mg twice day and 400 mg twice daily) with placebo. To evaluate the impacts of post-treatment, several datasets from inception to June 2022 were searched. Response rate, illness control rate, and 3-year survival were the main results. And evaluated several safety outcomes, particularly those that were susceptible to adverse events.

RESULTS

The study comprised a total of 9 randomized controlled trials (3206 participants). Celecoxib and rofecoxib doidn't significantly improved the 1-3 year remission rate (OR, 1.57 [95% CI: 0.95-2.57]) and disease control rate (OR, 1.08 [95% CI: 0.99-1.17]). Subgroup analysis of different doses showed that 400 mg of celecoxib significantly improved the response rate (OR, 2.82 [95%CI: 1.20-6.61]). 200 mg celecoxib was not significant (OR, 1.28 [95% CI: 0.66-2.49]). Rofecoxib also did not fully improve disease response rates. Celecoxib at any dose improved 3-year survival (OR, 1.21 [95% CI: 1.02-1.45]). It is important to note that COX-2 inhibitors did not significantly enhance the likelihood of adverse events including gastrointestinal or cardiovascular side effects at any dose.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with advanced colorectal cancer, a reasonable chemoprevention regimen can include celecoxib 400 mg twice daily.

Effectiveness and safety of capecitabine, irinotecan and panitumumab in advanced colorectal cancer

Introduction

Capecitabine, irinotecan, and panitumumab (CAPIRI-P) is a controversial regimen for metastatic colorectal cancer, with concerns regarding the efficacy and toxicity. However, its toxicity profile has been improved with dose reduction, and concerns regarding efficacy have been extrapolated from other trials. This retrospective study reports the real-world effectiveness and safety of modified CAPIRI-P (mCAPIRI-P).

Material and methods

Advanced colorectal cancer patients receiving mCAPIPI-P in the first-line setting between July 2019 and December 2021 were analyzed. The progression-free survival on treatment (PFSOT) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the association with clinical and disease factors was analyzed using the Cox regression model. Serial changes in carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level and treatment toxicity were also evaluated.

Results

A total of 106 patients were included, of whom 97 (92%) and 31 (29%) had left-sided primary and unresectable liver-only disease, respectively. The median PFSOT and OS were 15.4 (95% CI 12.5-18.3) and 25.5 (95% CI 17.6-33.4) months, respectively. Sixteen (51.6%) and 10 (32.3%) liver-only disease patients underwent secondary liver treatment and R0 resection, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression, CEA responders (PFSOT: HR 0.53) and CEA normalization (PFSOT: HR 0.27; OS: HR 0.28) were independent favorable prognostic factors for PFSOT and OS. Grade ≥3 toxicity rate was 43%, mainly related to uncomplicated hematological toxicities.

Conclusion

The real-world data show that mCAPIRI-P is safe and effective as the first-line treatment regimen for RAS wild-type advanced colorectal cancer and warrants further study.

Chemotherapy-induced hand foot syndrome: comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological prophylaxis - systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is one of the most common toxicities experienced by patients receiving systemic chemotherapy agents such as capecitabine and multikinase inhibitors such as sorafenib. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy and safety of prophylactic agents such as pyridoxine, celecoxib, urea cream and cystine/theanine in managing HFS. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated data from high-quality trials to provide strong evidence in forming recommendations to prevent systemic cancer therapy-induced HFS.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing systemic chemotherapy-induced HFS in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and clinical trial registry for RCTs of interventions for preventing HFS. Bayesian NMA was performed to estimate the OR with 95% credible intervals (CrI) from both direct and indirect evidence. The outcome measures were the incidence of HFS (grade ≥1) and moderate to severe HFS (grade ≥2). Adverse drug reactions were discussed descriptively.

RESULTS

A total of 15 RCTs with 2715 patients with 12 prophylactic strategies were included. The analysis showed only celecoxib could significantly prevent the incidence of moderate to severe HFS (grade ≥2) (OR 0.29, 95% CrI 0.13 to 0.68). But none of the preventive interventions could prevent the incidence of HFS (grade ≥1).

CONCLUSION

Only celecoxib (200 mg two times per day) showed significant prevention of the incidence of moderate to severe HFS. Pyridoxine (400 mg once daily) and urea cream (10%) have to be evaluated further in larger randomised trials.

Biweekly cetuximab in combination with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) or irinotecan (XELIRI) in the first-line and second-line treatment of patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

Oral capecitabine in combination with intravenous oxaliplatin (XELOX) or irinotecan (XELIRI) are acceptable substitutions to fully intravenous regimens. Biweekly (as opposed to weekly) cetuximab is more convenient when combined with biweekly chemotherapy. Here, we report the tolerability and efficacy of biweekly cetuximab in combination with biweekly XELOX or XELIRI in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (RAS-WT mCRC).

Methods

Clinical data of consecutive patients with mCRC who received biweekly cetuximab (500 mg/m²) in combination with XELOX or XELIRI between January 2009 and May 2019 in the first- or second-line settings was extracted. Dosage of XEL (Capecitabine/XELODA) was 1,000 mg/m² twice daily for 9 days, plus on day 1 oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² or irinotecan 180 mg/m². Treatment dose reduction and delay for ≥7 days was analysed as surrogates for toxicity. Extended RAS testing was performed in the context of this study for patients who received treatment based on limited KRAS-WT genotype.

Results

Sixty one patients with RAS-WT mCRC fulfilled the eligibility criteria. XELOX was administered to 26 (42.6%) and XELIRI to 35 (57.4%) of patients. For all patients in the first-line setting, the objective response rate (ORR), median progression free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 54%, 8 months and 25 months, respectively. The corresponding outcomes for the subgroup of patients who received first-line XELOX were 68%, 10 months and not reached, respectively. For all patients in the second-line setting, the ORR, PFS and OS were 50%, 7 months and 20 months, respectively. Chemotherapy components dose reduction and delays were observed in 18 (29.5%) and 25 (41%) patients, respectively. The corresponding frequencies for cetuximab were 3 (5%) and 31 (50.8%).

Conclusion

Biweekly cetuximab in combination with XELOX or XELIRI is tolerable and effective. The addition of cetuximab to capecitabine and oxaliplatin is associated with favourable outcome.

The Efficacy and Safety of Celecoxib in Addition to Standard Cancer Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, in addition to standard anticancer therapy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of celecoxib-combined cancer therapy were systematically searched in PubMed and Embase databases. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), pathological complete response (pCR), and adverse events (AEs). The results of 30 RCTs containing 9655 patients showed limited benefits in celecoxib-combined cancer therapy. However, celecoxib-combined palliative therapy prolonged PFS in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type patients (HR = 0.57, 95%CI = 0.35–0.94). Moreover, despite a slight increase in thrombocytopenia (RR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.08–1.69), there was no increase in other toxicities. Celecoxib combined with adjuvant therapy indicated a better OS (HR = 0.850, 95%CI = 0.725–0.996). Furthermore, celecoxib plus neoadjuvant therapy improved the ORR in standard cancer therapy, especially neoadjuvant therapy (overall: RR = 1.13, 95%CI = 1.03–1.23; neoadjuvant therapy: RR = 1.25, 95%CI = 1.09–1.44), but not pCR. Our study indicated that adding celecoxib to palliative therapy prolongs the PFS of EGFR wild-type patients, with good safety profiles. Celecoxib combined with adjuvant therapy prolongs OS, and celecoxib plus neoadjuvant therapy improves the ORR. Thus, celecoxib-combined cancer therapy may be a promising therapy strategy.

Prophylactic strategies for hand-foot syndrome/skin reaction associated with systemic cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) and hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) are common toxicities of several systemic cancer treatments. Multikinase inhibitor-induced HFSR is distinguished from chemotherapy-induced HFS in terms of pathogenesis, symptomatology, and treatment. Multiple trials have investigated the efficacy of preventive strategies such as COX-inhibitors, pyridoxine, and urea cream; however, no consensus has been made. This meta-analysis evaluated data from high-quality trials to provide strong evidence in forming recommendations to prevent systemic cancer therapy-induced HFS/HFSR.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, clinical trials databases, and hand searching were utilized to identify randomized trials (RCTs) investigating prophylactic strategies for HFS/HFSR in cancer patients receiving systemic treatment. Trials published until August 2021 were included. Using the random effects model, pooled odds ratios were calculated for rates of all-grade and severe HFS/HFSR. Subgroup analysis based on type of cancer treatment given was done.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs were included (N=2814). For all-grade HFS/HFSR, celecoxib (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32-0.85, p=0.009) and urea cream (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39-0.60, p<0.00001) both showed statistically significant risk reduction. Celecoxib was effective in preventing HFS in patients who received capecitabine (50.5% vs 65%, p=0.05), while urea cream was effective in both capecitabine HFS (22.3% vs 39.5%, p=0.02) and sorafenib-induced HFSR (54.9% vs 71.4%, p<0.00001). Pyridoxine at higher doses showed a trend towards benefit in preventing all grade HFS (69.6% vs 74.1%, p=0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Urea cream and celecoxib are both effective in preventing HFS/HFSR in patients receiving systemic cancer treatment. Particularly, celecoxib is more effective in preventing all-grade capecitabine-induced HFS, while urea cream shows more benefit in preventing moderate to severe sorafenib-induced HFSR. Studies investigating optimal dosing for celecoxib and urea cream are recommended. There is inadequate evidence to make recommendations regarding pyridoxine.

Management of chemotherapy dose intensity for metastatic colorectal cancer (Review)

Chemotherapy dose intensity is a momentous parameter of antitumor clinical medication. In certain clinical trials, the actual application dose of the chemotherapeutic drugs is frequently different from the prescribed dose. The chemotherapy dose intensity completed in different trials is also variable, which has an impact on the treatment efficacy, disease prognosis and patient safety. When these agents are tested in the population, chemotherapy reduction and delay or failure to complete the planned cycle constantly occur due to age, performance status, adverse reactions and other reasons, resulting in the modification of the chemotherapy dose intensity. The present review analyzed the correlation between the chemotherapy dose intensity and the incidence of adverse reactions, the treatment efficacy and disease prognosis in clinical trials of metastatic colorectal cancer. Moreover, the clinical applications of chemotherapy dose intensity were discussed. Based on individual differences, the present review analyzed the clinical trials that examined the efficacy of the chemotherapy dose intensity in different patient populations. The conclusions suggested that different populations require a specific dose intensity to reduce treatment toxicity without affecting the curative effect.

Biweekly Raltitrexed Combined With Irinotecan as Second-Line Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase II Trial

Objective

Irinotecan-based doublet chemotherapy strategy was standard second-line backbone for patients with oxaliplatin-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate tolerability and efficacy of raltitrexed combined with irinotecan biweekly administered as the second-line therapy for mCRC patients.

Methods

The study was a prospective, single-center, non-randomized, open-label phase II clinical trial. Patients with mCRC after failure with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine or its derivatives were enrolled. Irinotecan (180 mg/m²) and raltitrexed (2.5 mg/m²) were given intravenously on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs).

Results

Between December 2012 and October 2016, 33 and 35 patients enrolled were assessed for response and safety, respectively. The ORR was 8.6%, and the DCR was 71.4%. The median PFS was 4.5 months (95% CI 3.8-5.2). The median OS was 12.0 months (95% CI 8.5-15.5). Four patients received conversion therapy to no evidence of disease (NED), and 2 patients were still alive with beyond 24 months survival. The most common grade 3/4 AEs were anorexia (14.3%), vomiting (14.3%), nausea (11.4%), fatigue (8.6%), and leukopenia (8.6%). No one died from treatment-related events. The incidence and severity of toxicity were irrelevant to UGT1A1 status.

Conclusions

The combination of irinotecan with raltitrexed is an efficient, convenient, and acceptable toxic regimen for second-line treatment for mCRC patients.

Selection of Oral Therapeutics in China for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Intravenous administration of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has been the backbone of treatment in colorectal cancer (CRC) for decades. The availability of oral capecitabine has improved the tolerability and simplified combination schedules. In addition to capecitabine, several other oral drugs have proven efficacy, particularly in palliative treatment lines. Clinical guidelines describe several available third-line treatment options for metastatic CRC (mCRC), but few insights are provided to guide the selection and sequence. In this review, we describe the available evidence and most recent data concerning oral drugs with proven efficacy in CRC, including antiangiogenetic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR TKIs), inhibitors blocking EGFR/Raf/MEK/ERK signaling pathway and modified fluoropyrimidine, and share recommendations and insights on selecting third-line oral therapies for mCRC in China. In general, third-line treatment options for mCRC are mainly regorafenib, fruquintinib, and chemo/targeted therapy reintroduction, while FTD/TPI was rarely used in China probably due to poor accessibility. Fruquintinib is preferred in patients with poor performance status (PS), elder age, and severe organ dysfunction, compared to regorafenib. New drugs of clinical trials were more recommended for the patients with BRAF mutant tumor, and those with good previous treatment efficacy tended to be recommended for chemo/targeted therapy reintroduction. The management of mCRC is evolving, and it must be emphasized that the consideration and recommendations presented here reflect current treatment practices in China and thus might change according to new clinical data as well as the availability of new oral drugs.

Performance of capecitabine in novel combination therapies in colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers throughout the world, and no definitive cure has ever been found. Perhaps a new insight into the effectiveness of chemotherapy drugs could help better treat patients. Targeted therapies have significantly improved the median overall survival of colorectal cancer patients. One of the standard chemotherapy regimens used for colorectal cancer is capecitabine, which is important in monotherapy and combination therapies. Capecitabine, with other chemotherapeutic agents (irinotecan, oxaliplatin, perifosine, 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin, aspirin, celecoxib, statins, quinacrine, inositol hexaphosphate and inositol, cystine/theanine, curcumin, and isorhamnetin), and biological ones (antibodies) plays an important role in the inhibition of some signaling pathways, increasing survival, reducing tumor growth and side effects of capecitabine. However, some drugs, such as proton pump inhibitors, are negatively related to capecitabine; therefore, the purpose of this work is to review and discuss the performance of capecitabine combination therapies in colorectal cancer.

Preparation of a novel EGFR specific immunotoxin and its efficacy of anti-colorectal cancer in vitro and in vivo

OBJECTIVES

Epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR), as a malignancy marker, is overly expressed in multiple solid tumors including colorectal neoplasms, one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide. The main objective of this study is to enhance the efficacy of anti-tumor therapy targeting EGFR by constructing a novel EGFR-specific immunotoxin (C-CUS_245C) based on Cetuximab and recombinant Cucurmosin (CUS_245C).

METHODS

E. coli BL21 (DE3) PlysS (E. coli) was used to express CUS_245C with a cysteine residue inserting to the C-terminus of Cucurmosin. Then immobilized metal ion affinity chromatography (IMAC) was used to purify CUS_245C. The chemical conjugation method was used for the preparation of C-CUS_245C. Then dialysis and IMAC were used to purify C-CUS_245C. Western blot as well as SDS-PAGE was carried out to characterize the formation of C-CUS_245C. At last the anti-colorectal cancer activity of C-CUS_245C was investigated in vitro and in vivo.

RESULTS

CUS_245C with high purity could be obtained from the prokaryotic system. C-CUS_245C was successfully constructed and highly purified. The cytotoxicity assays in vitro showed a significant proliferation inhibition of C-CUS_245C on EGFR-positive cells for 120 h with IC₅₀ values less than 0.1 pM. Besides, the anti-tumor efficacy of C-CUS_245C was remarkably more potent than that of Cetuximab, CUS_245C, and C + CUS_245C (P < 0.001). Whereas the cytotoxicity of C-CUS_245C could hardly be detected on EGFR-null cell line. Our results also showed that C-CUS_245C had efficacy of anti-colorectal cancer in mouse xenograft model, indicating the therapeutic potential of C-CUS_245C for the targeted therapy of colorectal neoplasms.

CONCLUSIONS

C-CUS_245C exhibits potent and EGFR-specific cytotoxicity. Insertional mutagenesis technique is worthy to be adopted in the preparation of immunotoxin. Immunotoxin can be highly purified through dialysis followed by IMAC.

Dermatologic conditions in women receiving systemic cancer therapy

As advances in cancer therapies have improved cancer-related survival, novel therapeutics have also introduced a variety of dermatologic toxicities, and an increased number of patients are living with these sequalae. Women with cancer in particular experience a spectrum of dermatologic conditions that affect their skin, hair, nail, and mucosal surfaces. Studies have shown that these toxic effects can significantly affect quality of life and alter a woman's self-image, cultural identity, femininity, sexuality, and mental health. In severe instances, dermatologic toxicities may even disrupt cancer therapy and can therefore affect overall survival and treatment response. In this article, we review the dermatologic adverse effects from traditional chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and endocrine therapy that disproportionately affect women. The timely diagnosis and management of these dermatologic conditions is crucial in the multidisciplinary care of women with cancer.

5-fluorouracil and other fluoropyrimidines in colorectal cancer: Past, present and future

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is an essential component of systemic chemotherapy for colorectal cancer (CRC) in the palliative and adjuvant settings. Over the past four decades, several modulation strategies including the implementation of 5-FU-based combination regimens and 5-FU pro-drugs have been developed and tested to increase the anti-tumor activity of 5-FU and to overcome the clinical resistance. Despite the encouraging progress in CRC therapy to date, the patients' response rates to therapy continue to remain low and the patients' benefit from 5-FU-based therapy is frequently compromised by the development of chemoresistance. Inter-individual differences in the treatment response in CRC patients may originate in the unique genetic and epigenetic make-up of each individual. The critical element in the current trend of personalized medicine is the proper comprehension of causes and mechanisms contributing to the low or lack of sensitivity of tumor tissue to 5-FU-based therapy. The identification and validation of predictive biomarkers for existing 5-FU-based and new targeted therapies for CRC treatment will likely improve patients' outcomes in the future. Herein we present a comprehensive review summarizing options of CRC treatment and the mechanisms of 5-FU action at the molecular level, including both anabolic and catabolic ways. The main part of this review comprises the currently known molecular mechanisms underlying the chemoresistance in CRC patients. We also focus on various 5-FU pro-drugs developed to increase the amount of circulating 5-FU and to limit toxicity. Finally, we propose future directions of personalized CRC therapy according to the latest published evidence.

A Phase II Study of Celecoxib With Irinotecan, 5-Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in Patients With Previously Untreated Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) overexpression is associated with increased tumor invasiveness and proliferation in CRC, and COX-2 inhibition has demonstrated chemopreventive activity. This study investigated the addition of celecoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, to the irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL) regimen for patients with previously untreated metastatic CRC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-seven patients enrolled in this single-arm phase II study received celecoxib at 400 mg orally twice daily in combination with weekly irinotecan (125 mg/m(2)), 5-fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), and leucovorin (20 mg/m(2)) for 4 weeks every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was response rate (RR) as measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. The protocol was amended midway to additionally exclude patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 2 and require all patients with specific cardiovascular risk factors to take daily aspirin (81 mg).

RESULTS

The objective RR was 31.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19%-47%). Median progression-free survival was 8.7 months (95% CI, 5.8-10.6), and the median overall survival was 19.7 months (95% CI, 15.4-22.8). All cardiac events were observed before protocol modification. The median overall survival before and after protocol modification was 11.4 versus 24.2 months, respectively (P<0.0001); tumor RR and progression-free survival were not statistically different before or after protocol modification. The trial was halted after an interim analysis demonstrated that the primary endpoint would not be met.

CONCLUSIONS

Celecoxib plus IFL chemotherapy for patients with metastatic CRC is tolerable, but does not appear to increase the efficacy of IFL.

Multicenter phase II study of biweekly CAPIRI plus bevacizumab as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (JSWOG-C3 study)

Background

Triweekly capecitabine plus irinotecan (CAPIRI) was not a replacement for fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) because of the potential for greater toxicity. Recently, it has reported that mCAPIRI is well tolerated and non-inferior to FOLFIRI. In this study, we conducted a multicenter phase II trial to assess the efficacy and safety of biweekly CAPIRI plus bevacizumab as second-line chemotherapy for mCRC with reduced toxicity and preserved efficacy.

Methods

Patients with mCRC who had received prior chemotherapy, including oxaliplatin-based regimens, were eligible for this study. The treatment protocol administered capecitabine at 1000 mg/m² twice daily from the evening of day 1 to the morning of day 8, intravenous irinotecan at 150 mg/m² on day 1, and bevacizumab at 10 mg/kg on day 1 every 2 weeks. Primary endpoints for this study were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure, response rate (RR), and disease control rate (DCR).

Results

Fifty-one patients were enrolled in this study. Median PFS was 5.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.23–7.40 months], and median OS was 13.5 months (95% CI 11.57–20.23 months). The RR was 14.6% (95% CI 6.5–28.4%), and the DCR was 66.7% (95% CI 51.5–79.2%). Hypertension was the most common Grade 3 adverse event (27.5%), followed by neutropenia (17.6%). Only two patients suffered from grade 3 hand–foot syndrome.

Conclusions

In mCRC patients, biweekly CAPIRI + bevacizumab appears effective and feasible as a second-line chemotherapy with relatively low toxicities, and has potential as a useful substitute for FOLFIRI + bevacizumab.

Perioperative systemic therapy and cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC versus upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study (CAIRO6)

Background

Upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in the Netherlands. This study investigates whether addition of perioperative systemic therapy to CRS-HIPEC improves oncological outcomes.

Methods

This open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study is performed in nine Dutch tertiary referral centres. Eligible patients are adults who have a good performance status, histologically or cytologically proven resectable PM of a colorectal adenocarcinoma, no systemic colorectal metastases, no systemic therapy for colorectal cancer within six months prior to enrolment, and no previous CRS-HIPEC. Eligible patients are randomised (1:1) to perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC (experimental arm) or upfront CRS-HIPEC alone (control arm) by using central randomisation software with minimisation stratified by a peritoneal cancer index of 0–10 or 11–20, metachronous or synchronous PM, previous systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin or mitomycin C. At the treating physician’s discretion, perioperative systemic therapy consists of either four 3-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), six 2-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or six 2-weekly neoadjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by four 3-weekly (capecitabine) or six 2-weekly (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin) adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Bevacizumab is added to the first three (CAPOX) or four (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. The first 80 patients are enrolled in a phase II study to explore the feasibility of accrual and the feasibility, safety, and tolerance of perioperative systemic therapy. If predefined criteria of feasibility and safety are met, the study continues as a phase III study with 3-year overall survival as primary endpoint. A total of 358 patients is needed to detect the hypothesised 15% increase in 3-year overall survival (control arm 50%; experimental arm 65%). Secondary endpoints are surgical characteristics, major postoperative morbidity, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, health-related quality of life, costs, major systemic therapy related toxicity, and objective radiological and histopathological response rates.

Discussion

This is the first randomised study that prospectively compares oncological outcomes of perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC with upfront CRS-HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal PM.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov/NCT02758951, NTR/NTR6301, ISRCTN/ISRCTN15977568, EudraCT/2016–001865-99.

Celecoxib With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer Might Worsen Outcomes Differentially by COX-2 Expression and ER Status: Exploratory Analysis of the REMAGUS02 Trial

PURPOSE

The overexpression of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) gene, also known as prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase 2 ( PTGS2), occurs in breast cancer, but whether it affects response to anticox drugs remains unclear. We investigated the relationships between PTGS2 expression, celecoxib use during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and both event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed a cohort of 156 patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 -negative breast cancer from the REMAGUS02 (ISRCTN Registry No. 10059974) trial with pretreatment PTGS2 expression data. Patients were treated by sequential NAC (epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel with or without celecoxib). Experimental validation was performed on breast cancer cell lines. The Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 30801 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01041781) trial that tested chemotherapy with or without celecoxib in patients with lung cancer served as an independent validation cohort.

RESULTS

After 94.5 months of follow-up, EFS was significantly lower in the celecoxib group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1 to 2.88; P = .046). A significant interaction between PTGS2 expression and celecoxib use was detected ( P_interaction = .01). In the PTGS2-low group (n = 100), EFS was lower in the celecoxib arm (HR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.45 to 6.24; P = .002) than in the standard treatment arm. Celecoxib use was an independent predictor of poor EFS, distant relapse-free survival, and OS. Celecoxib in addition to docetaxel enhanced cell viability in PTGS2-low cell lines but not in PTGS2-high cell lines. In CALGB 30801, a trend toward poorer progression-free survival was observed in the patients with low urinary metabolite of prostaglandin E2 who received celecoxib (HR = 1.57; 95% CI, 0.87 to 2.84; P = .13).

CONCLUSION

Celecoxib use during chemotherapy adversely affected survival in patients with breast cancer, and the effect was more marked in PTGS2-low and/or estrogen receptor-negative tumors. COX-2 inhibitors should preferably be avoided during docetaxel use in patients with breast cancer who are undergoing NAC.

Capecitabine Versus Continuous Infusion Fluorouracil for the Treatment of Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: a Meta-analysis

OPINION STATEMENT

Nowadays, systemic chemotherapy with intravenous (IV) 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) remains the most commonly prescribed treatment for metastatic colorectal cancers (CRC), in combination with other cytotoxic drugs. 5-FU can be administered through a bolus injection or continuous infusion (cIV), with the latter becoming the preferred administration method and standard of care in recent years. Oral fluoropyrimidines were developed to overcome challenges associated with the IV administration of 5-FU, among which capecitabine has become the most widely used one. However, although capecitabine and other oral fluoropyrimidine-based regimens are more convenient to administer, their efficacy and safety in comparison with IV 5-FU are not well understood. Results from recent randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses have been inconsistent. Safety, in particular, remains controversial. Our review, a first comprehensive meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of cIV 5-FU with capecitabine, the two most widely used fluorouracil modalities in CRC, showed that cIV 5-FU-based regimens are associated with greater response rates compared with capecitabine-based regimens, with no difference in progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, overall survival, or disease-free survival between the two. Furthermore, cIV 5-FU-based regimens showed an improved safety profile compared with capecitabine-based regimens. Our findings suggest that cIV 5-FU remains a more effective and safer modality of fluorouracil administration than capecitabine, thus providing supporting evidence to guide clinical practice in the management of colorectal cancer.

Design and analysis of a 3-arm noninferiority trial with a prespecified margin for the hazard ratio

A 3-arm trial design that includes an experimental treatment, an active reference treatment, and a placebo is useful for assessing the noninferiority of an experimental treatment. The inclusion of a placebo arm enables the assessment of assay sensitivity and internal validation, in addition to the testing of the noninferiority of the experimental treatment compared with the reference treatment. In 3-arm noninferiority trials, various statistical test procedures have been considered to evaluate the following 3 hypotheses: (i) superiority of the experimental treatment over the placebo, (ii) superiority of the reference treatment over the placebo, and (iii) noninferiority of the experimental treatment compared with the reference treatment. However, hypothesis (ii) can be insufficient and may not accurately assess the assay sensitivity for the noninferiority of the experimental treatment compared with the reference treatment. Thus, demonstrating that the superiority of the reference treatment over the placebo is greater than the noninferiority margin (the nonsuperiority of the reference treatment compared with the placebo) can be necessary. Here, we propose log-rank statistical procedures for evaluating data obtained from 3-arm noninferiority trials to assess assay sensitivity with a prespecified margin Δ. In addition, we derive the approximate sample size and optimal allocation required to minimize the total sample size and that of the placebo treatment sample size, hierarchically.

Phase I study of combined indomethacin and platinum-based chemotherapy to reduce platinum-induced fatty acids

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-resistance remains a major obstacle to effective anti-cancer treatment. We previously showed that platinum analogs cause the release of two fatty acids. These platinum-induced fatty acids (PIFAs) induced complete chemoresistance in mice, whereas co-administration of a COX-1 inhibitor, indomethacin, prevented PIFA release and significantly enhanced chemosensitivity. To assess the safety of combining indomethacin with platinum-based chemotherapy, and to explore its efficacy and associated PIFA levels, a multi-center phase I trial was conducted.

METHODS

The study was comprised of two arms: oxaliplatin plus capecitabine (CAPOX, arm I) and cisplatin plus gemcitabine, capecitabine or 5FU (arm II) in patients for whom these regimens were indicated as standard care. Indomethacin was escalated from 25 to 75 mg TID, using a standard 3 × 3 design per arm, and was administered orally 8 days around chemo-infusion from cycle two onwards. PIFA levels were measured before and after treatment initiation, with and without indomethacin.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients were enrolled, of which ten were evaluable for safety analyses. In arm I, no dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and all indomethacin dose levels were well-tolerated. Partial responses were observed in three patients (30%). Indomethacin lowered plasma levels of 12-S-hydroxy-5,8,10-heptadecatrienoic acid (12-S-HHT), whereas 4,7,10,13-hexadecatetraenoic acid (16:4(n-3)) levels were not affected. Only one patient was included in arm II; renal toxicity led to closure of this cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined indomethacin and CAPOX treatment is safe and reduces the concentrations of 12-S-HHT, which may be associated with improved chemosensitivity. The recommended phase II dose is 75 mg indomethacin TID given 8 days surrounding standard dosed CAPOX.

Modified XELIRI (capecitabine plus irinotecan) versus FOLFIRI (leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan), both either with or without bevacizumab, as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (AXEPT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Studies of a modified XELIRI (mXELIRI; capecitabine plus irinotecan) regimen suggest promising efficacy and tolerability profiles in the first-line and second-line settings. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the mXELIRI regimen with that of standard FOLFIRI (leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan), with or without bevacizumab in both regimens, as a second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients from 98 hospitals in Japan, China, and South Korea who were aged 20 years or older with histologically confirmed and unresectable colorectal adenocarcinoma, and who had withdrawn from first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive either mXELIRI with or without bevacizumab (irinotecan 200 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 plus oral capecitabine 800 mg/m² twice daily on days 1-14, repeated every 21 days, with or without bevacizumab 7·5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1) or FOLFIRI with or without bevacizumab (irinotecan 180 mg/m² intravenously on day 1, leucovorin 200 mg/m² intravenously on day 1, fluorouracil 400 mg/m² intravenously on day 1, and a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion of fluorouracil [2400 mg/m²], repeated every 14 days, with or without the addition of bevacizumab 5 mg/kg intravenously on day 1) via a centralised electronic system. We used the minimisation method to stratify randomisation by country, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, number of metastatic sites, previous oxaliplatin treatment, and concomitant bevacizumab treatment. Patients and clinicians were not masked to the allocated treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival analysed on an intention-to-treat basis with a non-inferiority upper margin of 1·30 for the hazard ratio (HR). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01996306, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 2, 2013, and Aug 13, 2015, 650 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive mXELIRI with or without bevacizumab (n=326) or FOLFIRI with or without bevacizumab (n=324). After a median follow-up of 15·8 months (IQR 8·7-24·9), a total of 490 patients had died (242 in the mXELIRI with or without bevacizumab group and 248 in the FOLFIRI with or without bevacizumab group) and the median overall survival was 16·8 months (95% CI 15·3-19·1) in the mXELIRI group and 15·4 months (13·0-17·7) in the FOLFIRI group (HR 0·85, 95% CI 0·71-1·02; p_{non-inferiority}<0·0001). In the per-protocol safety population, the most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (affecting 52 [17%] of 310 patients in the mXELIRI group and 133 [43%] of 310 in the FOLFIRI group). Incidences of grade 3-4 diarrhoea were higher in the mXELIRI group (22 [7%]) than in the FOLFIRI group (ten [3%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 46 (15%) of 310 patients in the mXELIRI group and 63 (20%) of 310 in the FOLFIRI group. Two treatment-related deaths (one pneumonitis and one lung infection) were observed in the mXELIRI group and there was one treatment-related death (lung infection) in the FOLFIRI group.

INTERPRETATION

mXELIRI with or without bevacizumab is well tolerated and non-inferior to FOLFIRI with or without bevacizumab in terms of overall survival. mXELIRI could be an alternative to FOLFIRI as a standard second-line backbone treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer, at least for Asian patient populations.

FUNDING

Chugai Pharmaceutical and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

A network meta-analysis on the efficacy of sixteen targeted drugs in combination with chemotherapy for treatment of advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

A network meta-analysis was conducted comparing the short-term efficacies of 16 targeted drugs in combination with chemotherapy for treatment of advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven RCTs were ultimately incorporated into this network meta-analysis. Compared with chemotherapy alone, bevacizumab + chemotherapy, panitumumab + chemotherapy and conatumumab + chemotherapy had higher PR rate. Bevacizumab + chemotherapy, cetuximab + chemotherapy, panitumumab + chemotherapy, trebananib + chemotherapy and conatumumab + chemotherapy had higher ORR rate in comparison to chemotherapy alone. Furthermore, bevacizumab + chemotherapy had higher DCR rate than chemotherapy alone. The results of our cluster analysis showed that chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab, cetuximab, panitumumab, conatumumab, ganitumab, or brivanib + cetuximab had better efficacies for the treatment of advanced/metastatic CRC in comparison to chemotherapy alone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases were comprehensively searched for potential and related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Direct and indirect evidence were incorporated for evaluation of stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), disease control rate (DCR) and overall response ratio (ORR) by calculating odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicated that bevacizumab + chemotherapy, panitumumab + chemotherapy, conatumumab + chemotherapy and brivanib + cetuximab + chemotherapy may have better efficacies for the treatment of advanced/metastatic CRC.

Oral fluoropyrimidine versus intravenous 5-fluorouracil for the treatment of advanced gastric and colorectal cancer: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

5-Fluorouracil (5-Fu) is one of the most commonly prescribed antineoplastic agents against gastric and colorectal cancers. Continuous infusion would be the optimal way of its administration, however, may usually cause thrombosis, infection, and prolonged hospital stay. Oral fluoropyrimidines would be an attractive alternative, but their efficiency and toxicities for the treatment of gastric and colorectal cancer are still obscure as compared with infusion 5-Fu.

METHODS

Literature retrieval, trials selection and assessment, data collection, and statistic analysis were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook. The outcome measures were tumor response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials, comprising totally 15 154 patients, were included. Meta-analysis showed similar overall outcome in terms of response rate (1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-1.12), progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.00; 95%CI, 0.94-1.06), and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.96; 95%CI, 0.92-1.01) between oral fluoropyrimidine-based and intravenous 5-Fu-based regimens in gastric and colorectal cancer patients. The risk of grade 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and stomatitis was more prominent in intravenous 5-Fu-based regimens; while more frequent grade 3/4 hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, and anorexia were detected in oral fluoropyrimidine-based regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral-fluoropyrimidines showed equivalent response and similar survival outcomes, but different toxicity profiles, as compared with intravenous 5-Fu. Thus, it would be a more convenient and adjustable alternative in treatment of advanced gastric and colorectal cancer.

The addition of celecoxib improves the antitumor effect of cetuximab in colorectal cancer: role of EGFR-RAS-FOXM1-β- catenin signaling axis

Here we showed that the addition of the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib improved the antitumor efficacy in colorectal cancer (CRC) of the monoclonal anti-EGFR antibody cetuximab. The addition of celecoxib augmented the efficacy of cetuximab to inhibit cell proliferation and to induce apoptosis in CRC cells. Moreover, the combination of celecoxib and cetuximab was more effective than either treatment alone in reducing the tumor volume in a mouse xenograft model. The combined treatment enhanced the inhibition of EGFR signaling and altered the subcellular distribution of β-catenin. Moreover, knockdown of FOXM1 showed that this transcription factor participates in this enhanced antitumoral response. Besides, the combined treatment decreased β-catenin/FOXM1 interaction and reduced the cancer stem cell subpopulation in CRC cells, as indicated their diminished capacity to form colonospheres. Notably, the inmunodetection of FOXM1 in the nuclei of tumor cells in human colorectal adenocarcinomas was significantly associated with response of patients to cetuximab. In summary, our study shows that the addition of celecoxib enhances the antitumor efficacy of cetuximab in CRC due to impairment of EGFR-RAS-FOXM1-β-catenin signaling axis. Results also support that FOXM1 could be a predictive marker of response of mCRC patients to cetuximab therapy.

An Update on Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma

There have been remarkable advances in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer over the past 20 years, chiefly achieved by development of new active drugs and establishment of effective systemic therapy regimens. Multidisciplinary care of resectable liver disease with use of perioperative systemic therapy and superior liver resection has resulted in prolonged survival of select patients. Median overall survival has significantly improved with the modern multiagent regimens. This article reviews recent high-quality randomized clinical trials that were conducted to address optimal treatment of advanced and metastatic colorectal carcinoma, mainly focused on initially inoperable metastatic disease.

Oral versus intravenous fluoropyrimidines for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients prefer oral to intravenous (IV) palliative chemotherapy, provided that oral therapy is not less effective. We compared the efficacy and safety of oral and IV fluoropyrimidines for treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of oral and IV fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy in patients treated with curative or palliative intent for CRC.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 5), along with OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, and Web of Science databases, in June 2016. We also searched five clinical trials registers, several conference proceedings, and reference lists from study reports and systematic reviews. We contacted pharmaceutical companies to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral and IV fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy in patients treated with curative or palliative intent for CRC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias independently. We assessed the seven domains in the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and three additional domains: schedules of outcome assessment and/or follow-up; use of intention-to-treat analysis; and baseline comparability of treatment arms.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs (total of 10,918 participants) that examined treatment with curative intent for CRC with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy. We included 35 RCTs (total of 12,592 participants) that examined treatment with palliative intent for inoperable advanced or metastatic CRC with chemotherapy (31 first-line studies, two second-line studies, and two studies of first- or second-line chemotherapy). All studies included male and female participants, and no studies included participants younger than 18 years of age. Patients treated with curative intent for CRC with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy • Disease-free survival (DFS): DFS did not differ between participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines (hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.00; seven studies, 8903 participants; moderate-quality evidence).• Overall survival (OS): OS did not differ between participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.00; seven studies, 8902 participants analysed; high-quality evidence).• Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs): Participants treated with oral fluoropyrimidines experienced less grade ≥ 3 neutropenia/granulocytopenia (odds ratio (OR) 0.14, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.16; seven studies, 8087 participants; moderate-quality evidence), stomatitis (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.30; five studies, 4212 participants; low-quality evidence), and any grade ≥ 3 AEs (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90; five studies, 7741 participants; low-quality evidence). There was more grade ≥ 3 hand foot syndrome (OR 4.59, 95% CI 2.97 to 7.10; five studies, 5731 participants; low-quality evidence) in patients treated with oral fluoropyrimidines. There were no differences between participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines in occurrence of grade ≥ 3 diarrhoea (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.25; nine studies, 9551 participants; very low-quality evidence), febrile neutropenia (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.90; four studies, 2925 participants; low-quality evidence), vomiting (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.34; eight studies, 9385 participants; low-quality evidence), nausea (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.51; seven studies, 9233 participants; low-quality evidence), mucositis (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.62; four studies, 2233 participants; very low-quality evidence), and hyperbilirubinaemia (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 5.38; three studies, 2757 participants; very low-quality evidence). Patients treated with palliative intent for inoperable advanced or metastatic CRC with chemotherapy • Progression-free survival (PFS): Overall, PFS was inferior in participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11; 23 studies, 9927 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Whilst PFS was worse in participants treated with oral compared with IV fluoropyrimidines when UFT/Ftorafur or eniluracil with oral 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) was used, PFS did not differ between individuals treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines when capecitabine, doxifluridine, or S-1 was used.• OS: Overall, OS did not differ between participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.05; 29 studies, 12,079 participants; high-quality evidence). OS was inferior in participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines when eniluracil with oral 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) was used.• Time to progression (TTP): TTP was inferior in participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.14; six studies, 1970 participants; moderate-quality evidence).• Objective response rate (ORR): ORR did not differ between participants treated with oral versus IV fluoropyrimidines (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.06; 32 studies, 11,115 participants; moderate-quality evidence).• Grade ≥ 3 AEs: Participants treated with oral fluoropyrimidines experienced less grade ≥ 3 neutropenia/granulocytopenia (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.18; 29 studies, 11,794 participants; low-quality evidence), febrile neutropenia (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.36; 19 studies, 9407 participants; moderate-quality evidence), stomatitis (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.33; 21 studies, 8718 participants; low-quality evidence), mucositis (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.24; 12 studies, 4962 participants; low-quality evidence), and any grade ≥ 3 AEs (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.94; 14 studies, 5436 participants; low-quality evidence). There was more grade ≥ 3 diarrhoea (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.50 to 1.84; 30 studies, 11,997 participants; low-quality evidence) and hand foot syndrome (OR 3.92, 95% CI 2.84 to 5.43; 18 studies, 6481 participants; moderate-quality evidence) in the oral fluoropyrimidine arm. There were no differences between oral and IV fluoropyrimidine arms in terms of grade ≥ 3 vomiting (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.40; 23 studies, 9528 participants; low-quality evidence), nausea (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.36; 25 studies, 9796 participants; low-quality evidence), and hyperbilirubinaemia (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.64; nine studies, 2699 participants; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results of this review should provide confidence that treatment for CRC with most of the oral fluoropyrimidines commonly used in current clinical practice is similarly efficacious to treatment with IV fluoropyrimidines. Treatment with eniluracil with oral 5-FU was associated with inferior PFS and OS among participants treated with palliative intent for CRC, and eniluracil is no longer being developed. Oral and IV fluoropyrimidines have different patterns of side effects; future research may focus on determining the basis for these differences.

Underlying Mechanisms for Distant Metastasis - Molecular Biology

BACKGROUND

The formation of distant metastases constitutes a complex process with a variety of different genes and pathways involved. To improve patient survival, it is necessary to understand the underlying mechanisms of metastasis to allow for targeted intervention.

METHODS

This review provides an overview of the general concepts of metastasis, focusing on the most important genes and pathways involved and on interventional strategies.

RESULTS

Cancer cells undergo different steps to form metastasis: most prominently, local invasion, intravasation, survival in the circulation, arrest at a distant organ site and extravasation, micrometastasis formation, and metastatic colonization. In order to pass these steps, different molecular pathways are of major importance: EGF/RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK, PI3K/Akt/mTOR, HGF/Met, Wnt/β-catenin, and VEGF signaling. The HGF/Met regulator MACC1 and the Wnt signaling target S100A4 have been shown to play a major role in the metastatic process. Each gene and pathway provides an opportunity for therapeutic intervention.

CONCLUSION

Since metastasis represents a highly limiting factor in cancer therapy causing 90% of cancer deaths, it is imperative to reveal the underlying mechanisms. This is fundamental for uncovering prognostic markers and new targeted therapy options.

Celecoxib treatment of fibrous dysplasia (FD) in a human FD cell line and FD-like lesions in mice with protein kinase A (PKA) defects

Osteochondromyxomas (OMX) in the context of Carney complex (CNC) and fibrous dysplasia (FD)-like lesions (FDLL) in mice, as well as isolated myxomas in humans may be caused by inactivation of PRKAR1A, the gene coding for the type 1a regulatory subunit (R1α) of cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA). OMXs and FDLL in mice lacking Prkar1a grow from abnormal proliferation of adult bone stromal cells (aBSCs). Prkar1a and Prkaca (coding for Cα) haploinsufficiency leads to COX2 activation and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) production that, in turn, activates proliferation of aBSCs. Celecoxib is a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) inhibitor. We hypothesized that COX-2 inhibition may have an effect in FD and FDLL. In vitro treatment of a human cell line prepared from a FD patient with Celecoxib resulted in decreased PGE2 and cell proliferation. Treatment of mice haploinsufficient for R1α and Cα with 1500 mg/kg Celecoxib led to decreased PGE2 and proliferation and increased apoptosis, with a corresponding gene expression profile, resulting in dramatic reduction of tumor growth. Furthermore, the treatment improved the organization of cortical bone that was adjacent to the tumor. We conclude that, in vitro and in vivo, Celecoxib had an inhibitory effect on FD cell proliferation and in mouse FDLL structure, respectively. We speculate that COX-2 inhibitors offer an attractive alternative to current treatments for benign tumors such as OMX and FD that, apart from tumor suppression, may mechanically stabilize affected bones.

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.

Multikinase Inhibitor-Induced Hand-Foot Skin Reaction: A Review of Clinical Presentation, Pathogenesis, and Management

Multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) are targeted cancer therapies designed to inhibit multiple tyrosine kinase pathways responsible for tumor proliferation, growth, and survival. These agents are more able to target cancer cells and possess better safety profiles than conventional chemotherapies. However, MKIs can produce significant cutaneous adverse events, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) being the most clinically significant. Although not life threatening, HFSR can lead to MKI dose modification, interruption, or termination, potentially limiting the anti-tumor effect. This article summarizes the current knowledge concerning the epidemiology, clinical presentation, pathogenesis, histopathology, prognostic implication, and current evidence-based prophylactic and reactive treatment options for MKI-induced HFSR. Its high incidence and significant impact on the quality of life emphasizes the great need to understand the pathogenesis and improve management of this condition.

Panitumumab in combination with irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) is the only oral fluoropyrimidine-based regimen reported to be non-inferior to FOLFIRI and widely used in clinical practice for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, the combination of IRIS plus an anti-EGFR agent has not been evaluated previously. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of IRIS with panitumumab as second-line therapy for wild-type KRAS mCRC.

METHODS

Main inclusion criteria were patients with wild-type KRAS mCRC refractory to one prior chemotherapy regimen for mCRC, ECOG PS 0-2, and age ≥20 years. Patients received panitumumab (6 mg/kg) and irinotecan (100 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 the feasibility of the therapy. The secondary endpoints were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients received protocol treatment in eight centers. Of these, 23 patients (63.9 %) completed protocol treatment, demonstrating achievement of the primary endpoint. The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were diarrhea (16.7 %), acne-like rash (13.9 %), and neutropenia (11.1 %). The overall RR was 33.3 % (12/36). Of these patients, five underwent conversion surgery. Median PFS and OS were 9.5 months (95 % CI 3.5-15.4 months) and 20.1 months (95 % CI 16.7-23.2 months), respectively.

CONCLUSION

IRIS plus panitumumab has an acceptable toxicity profile and a promising efficacy in patients with previously treated wild-type KRAS mCRC. Accordingly, this regimen can be an additional treatment option for second-line chemotherapy in wild-type KRAS mCRC.

Inside the biochemical pathways of thymidylate synthase perturbed by anticancer drugs: Novel strategies to overcome cancer chemoresistance

Our current understanding of the mechanisms of action of antitumor agents and the precise mechanisms underlying drug resistance is that these two processes are directly linked. Moreover, it is often possible to delineate chemoresistance mechanisms based on the specific mechanism of action of a given anticancer drug. A more holistic approach to the chemoresistance problem suggests that entire metabolic pathways, rather than single enzyme targets may better explain and educate us about the complexity of the cellular responses upon cytotoxic drug administration. Drugs, which target thymidylate synthase and folate-dependent enzymes, represent an important therapeutic arm in the treatment of various human malignancies. However, prolonged patient treatment often provokes drug resistance phenomena that render the chemotherapeutic treatment highly ineffective. Hence, strategies to overcome drug resistance are primarily designed to achieve either enhanced intracellular drug accumulation, to avoid the upregulation of folate-dependent enzymes, and to circumvent the impairment of DNA repair enzymes which are also responsible for cross-resistance to various anticancer drugs. The current clinical practice based on drug combination therapeutic regimens represents the most effective approach to counteract drug resistance. In the current paper, we review the molecular aspects of the activity of TS-targeting drugs and describe how such mechanisms are related to the emergence of clinical drug resistance. We also discuss the current possibilities to overcome drug resistance by using a molecular mechanistic approach based on medicinal chemistry methods focusing on rational structural modifications of novel antitumor agents. This paper also focuses on the importance of the modulation of metabolic pathways upon drug administration, their analysis and the assessment of their putative roles in the networks involved using a meta-analysis approach. The present review describes the main pathways that are modulated by TS-targeting anticancer drugs starting from the description of the normal functioning of the folate metabolic pathway, through the protein modulation occurring upon drug delivery to cultured tumor cells as well as cancer patients, finally describing how the pathways are modulated by drug resistance development. The data collected are then analyzed using network/netwire connecting methods in order to provide a wider view of the pathways involved and of the importance of such information in identifying additional proteins that could serve as novel druggable targets for efficacious cancer therapy.

Cantharidin combined with chemotherapy for Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This systematic analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cantharidin combined with chemotherapy in treating Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Clinical studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of cantharidin combined with chemotherapy on response and safety for Chinese patients with colorectal cancer were identified using a predefined search strategy. Pooled response rate (RR) of treatment were calculated.

RESULTS

When cantharidin combined with chemotherapy, 4 clinical studies which included 155 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were considered eligible for inclusion. The systematic analysis suggested that, in all patients, pooled RR was 46.5% (72/155) in cantharidin combined regimens. Major adverse effects were neutropenia, leukopenia, fatigue, and anemia with cantharidin combined treatment; no treatment related deaths occurred.

CONCLUSION

This systematic analysis suggests that cantharidin combined regimens are associated with high response rate and accepted toxicity in treating Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer suggesting that randomized clinical trials are now warranted.

Phase I/II trial of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab in first line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Phase III studies have demonstrated the efficacy of FOLFOXIRI regimens (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, oxaliplatin, irinotecan) with/without bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Capecitabine is an orally administered fluoropyrimidine that may be used instead of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin. We evaluated a triple-chemotherapy regimen of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan, plus bevacizumab in 53 patients with mCRC. A Phase I study identified the maximum tolerated dose of irinotecan as 150 mg/m². Median follow-up in a subsequent Phase II study using this dose was 28 months (74% progressed). For all patients, a complete response was achieved in 4% and a partial response in 60%; median progression-free survival (PFS) was 16 months and median overall survival (OS) was 28 months. Median PFS was longer for patients with an early treatment response (28 vs. 9 months for others; P = 0.024), or early tumor shrinkage (25 vs. 9 months for others; P = 0.006), or for patients suitable for surgical removal of metastases with curative intent (median not reached vs. 9 months for others; P = 0.001). Median OS was longer for patients with early tumor shrinkage (median not reached vs. 22 months for others; P = 0.006) or surgery (median not reached vs. 22 months for others, P = 0.002). K-ras mutations status did not influence PFS (P = 0.88) or OS (P = 0.82). Considerable Grade 3/4 toxicity was encountered (36% for diarrhea, 21% for vomiting and 17% for fatigue). In conclusion, the 3-weekly triple-chemotherapy regimen of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan, plus bevacizumab, was active in the first-line treatment of mCRC, although at the expense of a high level of toxicity.

Is more not better?: combination therapies in colorectal cancer treatment

The treatment of colorectal cancer has evolved dramatically in recent years with the availability of new chemotherapeutic agents and inhibitors of the vascular endothelial growth factor- and epidermal growth factor-signaling pathways. The incremental benefit of each individual line of therapy for advanced disease is relatively small. Advances in our ability to select patients should improve the cost-effectiveness of our treatment strategies (avoiding unnecessary toxicity in the patients who are unlikely to benefit and accepting the potential for adverse events in the patients who stand to benefit the most from a given regimen).

DPD and UGT1A1 deficiency in colorectal cancer patients receiving triplet chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan

AIMS

Triplet chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan is a standard therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in DPYD and UGT1A1 influence fluoropyrimdines and irinotecan adverse events (AEs). Low frequency DPYD variants (c.1905 + 1G > A, c.1679 T > G, c.2846A > T) are validated but more frequent ones (c.496A > G, c.1129-5923C > G and c.1896 T > C) are not. rs895819 T > C polymorphism in hsa-mir-27a is associated with reduced DPD activity. In this study, we evaluated the clinical usefulness of a pharmacogenetic panel for patients receiving triplet combinations.

METHODS

Germline DNA was available from 64 CRC patients enrolled between 2008 and 2013 in two phase II trials of capecitabine, oxaliplatin and irinotecan plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. SNPs were determined by Real-Time PCR. We evaluated the functional variants in DPYD (rare: c.1905 + 1G > A, c.1679 T > G, c.2846A > T; most common: c.496A > G, c.1129-5923C > G, c.1896 T > C), hsa-mir-27a (rs895819) and UGT1A1 (*28) genes to assess their association with grade 3-4 AEs.

RESULTS

None of the patients carried rare DPYD variants. We found DPYD c.496A > G, c.1129-5923C > G, c.1896 T > C in heterozygosity in 19%, 5% and 8%, respectively, homozygous rs895819 in hsa-mir-27a in 9% and homozygous UGT1A1*28 in 8%. Grade 3-4 AEs were observed in 36% patients and were associated with DPYD c.496A > G (odds ratio (OR) 4.93, 95% CI 1.29, 18.87; P = 0.021) and homozygous rs895819 in hsa-mir-27a (OR 11.11, 95% CI 1.21, 102.09; P = 0.020). Carriers of DPYD c.1896 T > C and homozygous UGT1A1*28 showed an OR of 8.42 (95% CI 0.88, 80.56; P = 0.052). Multivariate analysis confirmed an independent value for DPYD c.496A > G and c.1896 T > C.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant assessment of DPYD variants and the UGT1A1*28 allele is a promising strategy needing further validation for dose personalization.

Capecitabine and irinotecan with bevacizumab 2-weekly for metastatic colorectal cancer: the phase II AVAXIRI study

Background

The optimal sequence of chemotherapeutic agents is not firmly established for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This phase II multi-centre study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of a standard capecitabine plus irinotecan (XELIRI) regimen with bevacizumab in previously untreated patients with mCRC.

Methods

Patients received intravenous irinotecan 175 mg/m² on day 1 and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m² (800 mg/m² for patients >65 years of age) twice daily on days 2–8, followed by a 1-week rest, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg as an intravenous infusion on day 1 every 2 weeks.

Results

Seventy-seven patients were included in the intention-to-treat and safety populations. Progression-free survival at 9 months was 61%. The overall response and disease control rates were 51% and 84%, respectively. Median progression-free and overall survival times were 11.9 and 24.8 months, respectively. 48 patients (62%) had at least one grade 3/4 adverse event, the most common being asthenia, diarrhoea and neutropenia. Quality of life varied little over the study period with mean visual analogue scale general health scores ranging from 71 to 76 over cycles 1–11.

Conclusion

Our study found irinotecan and capecitabine administered fortnightly with bevacizumab in patients with mCRC to be an effective and tolerable regimen.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00875771. Trial registration date: 04/02/2009.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-015-1293-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Potency of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in chemotherapy

Cancer cell resistance, particularly multidrug resistance (MDR), is the leading cause of chemotherapy failure. A number of mechanisms involved in the development of MDR have been described, including the overexpression of ATP-dependent membrane-bound transport proteins. The enhanced expression of these proteins, referred to as ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, results in an increased cellular efflux of the cytotoxic drug, thereby reducing its intracellular concentration to an ineffective level. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most frequently consumed drugs worldwide. NSAIDs are mainly used to treat pain, fever and inflammation. Numerous studies suggest that NSAIDs also show promise as anticancer drugs. NSAIDs have been shown to reduce cancer cell proliferation, motility, angiogenesis and invasiveness. In addition to these effects, NSAIDs have been shown to induce apoptosis in a wide variety of cancer types. Moreover, several studies have indicated that NSAIDs may sensitise cancer cells to the antiproliferative effects of cytotoxic drugs by modulating ABC transporter activity. Therefore, combining specific NSAIDs with chemotherapeutic drugs may have clinical applications. Such treatments may allow for the use of a lower dose of cytotoxic drugs and may also enhance the effectiveness of therapy. The objective of this review was to discuss the possible role of NSAIDs in the modulation of antitumour drug cytotoxicity. We particularly emphasised on the use of COX-2 inhibitors in combination with chemotherapy and the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying the alterations in outcome that occur in response to this combination therapy.

Meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment regimens, capecitabine plus irinotecan (CAPIRI) and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI)

The relative efficacy and safety of first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment regimens, capecitabine with irinotecan (CAPIRI) and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI), are not well defined. We identified and subsequently examined seven independent, randomized controlled clinical trials, performing a meta-analysis to compare these two treatment regimens. Using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting to search available literature until February 2014, we identified seven studies comparing safety and efficacy of CAPIRI and FOLFIRI in mCRC patients. These studies were pooled and evaluated for rates of progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and diarrhea. CAPIRI and FOLFIRI demonstrated similar efficacy outcomes, though CAPIRI was associated with a higher incidence of diarrhea. CAPIRI and FOLFIRI are equally effective options for first-line treatment of mCRC.

Phase II study of weekly irinotecan and capecitabine treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Background

The purpose of this phase II study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of weekly irinotecan and capecitabine (wXELIRI) treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, specifically the rate of severe diarrhea.

Methods

Patients with unresectable histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer with measurable disease received weekly irinotecan 90 mg/m² on day 1 and capecitabine 1200 mg/m² twice daily on days 1–5. Patients naïve to systemic chemotherapy for metastatic disease or who had failed FOLFOX (infusional 5-fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or XELOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) as first-line treatment were eligible. The primary endpoint was the rate of grade 3/4 diarrhea. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

Results

A total of 52 patients were enrolled, 30 of whom received wXELIRI as first-line treatment and 22 as second-line treatment. Grade 4 diarrhea was observed in one patient and the rate of grade 3/4 diarrhea was 7.7%. The other common grade 3/4 toxicities included leukopenia (9.6%), neutropenia (17.3%), nausea (3.8%), vomiting (3.8%), fatigue (1.9%), and hand-foot syndrome (1.9%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival for the 30 patients treated in the first-line setting was 8.5 and 16.3 months, while those for the 22 patients treated in the second-line setting was 5.0 and 10.7 months, respectively.

Conclusions

The wXELIRI regimen resulted in a low rate of severe diarrhea with an acceptable toxicity profile. This study provides a basis for a subsequent randomized controlled study of wXELIRI versus FOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5-FU, and folinic acid) to further explore the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01322152.

Incidence and relative risk of grade 3 and 4 diarrhoea in patients treated with capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil: a meta-analysis of published trials

AIM

Capecitabine is an oral fluoropyrimidine that can effectively replace infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for treatment of colorectal, gastric and breast cancer. This study aims to analyze the incidence and the relative risk of grade 3 and 4 diarrhoea in patients treated with capecitabine or 5-FU in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were reviewed for RCTs that compared capecitabine with 5-FU for treatment of solid malignancies. The incidence and relative risk (RR) of grade 3/4 diarrhoea were estimated for each arm in the overall population and in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies and 15,761 patients were included. Among these 8303 and 7458 patients received capecitabine or 5-FU based therapies, respectively. In the overall populations severe diarrhoea was reported in 16.6% (95% CI 15.8, 17.4) and in 12.7% (95% CI 11.9, 13.4) of patients treated with capecitabine or 5-FU-based therapies, respectively. The RR was 1.39 (95% CI 1.14, 1.69, P = 0.0010). In 14,899 CRC patients, the incidence of severe diarrhoea was 17.0% (95% CI 16.2, 17.9) and 12.9% (95% CI 12.1, 13.7), respectively, with a RR of 1.46 (95% CI 1.18, 1.81, P < 0.0001). In CRC patients treated with combined chemotherapy, the RR was 1.40 (95% CI 1.07, 1.82; P = 0.01) for patients receiving oxaliplatin and 2.35 (95% CI 1.76, 3.13; P < 0.0001) for patients receiving irinotecan.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with capecitabine is characterized by an increased risk of severe diarrhoea, mainly in patients affected by CRC and treated with polichemotherapy. Combination treatment with irinotecan doubles the risk over 5-FU.

Efficacy and safety profile of celecoxib for treating advanced cancers: a meta-analysis of 11 randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

Evidence on the benefits of combining celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, in treating advanced cancer is still controversial. This study aimed to establish the efficacy and safety profile of celecoxib in treating advanced cancers.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology were searched for reports dated up to January 31, 2014, to find relevant randomized clinical trials. The outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), 1-year mortality, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicities. Fixed-effects meta-analytical models were used when indicated, and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to cancer type, treatment pattern, and treatment line.

FINDINGS

A total of 11 randomized clinical trials consisting of 2570 patients with advanced cancer were included in the final meta-analysis. Addition of celecoxib to the treatment regimen significantly increased the ORR (pooled risk ratio [RR] = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36; P = 0.005) but had no effect on 1-year mortality (RR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92-1.13; P = 0.68). Subgroup analysis found that the ORR results were significant with non-small cell lung cancer (RR = 1.29; 95% CI, 1.08-1.54; P = 0.005), colorectal cancer (RR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02-1.72; P = 0.037), chemotherapy treatment (RR = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.07-1.39; P = 0.003), and first-line treatment (RR = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.07-1.38; P = 0.003). However, celecoxib increased the risk of cardiovascular events (RR = 1.78; 95% CI, 1.30-2.43; P < 0.001) and anemia (RR = 1.88; 95% CI, 0.95-3.74; P = 0.071).

IMPLICATIONS

Celecoxib is beneficial in the treatment of advanced cancers but with increased risk of cardiovascular events. Benefit versus harm needs to be carefully considered when celecoxib is recommended in patients with advanced cancers.

Palliative treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: what is the optimal approach?

Worldwide, colorectal cancer (CRC) is responsible for over 600,000 deaths annually and remains a significant public health concern. Because of therapeutic advancements over the past two decades, patients with metastatic CRC are living longer with an improved quality of life. This review will highlight recent trial evidence that improves outcomes for patients with metastatic disease. Topics will include the optimal use of first-line combination chemotherapy, bevacizumab in patients with advanced age or comorbidities, maintenance chemotherapy, first-line use of anti-EGFR therapies, first-line cetuximab versus bevacizumab, anti-angiogenic therapies past progression, and management of treatment-refractory disease. Clinical trial evidence will be presented, along with guidance on how to integrate recent evidence into clinical practice. Finally, this review will examine innovative drug development strategies, and will discuss potentially actionable targets identified by molecular testing.