|
1
|
Soler-González G, Sastre-Valera J, Viana-Alonso A, Aparicio-Urtasun J, García-Escobar I, Gómez-España MA, Guillén-Ponce C, Molina-Garrido MJ, Gironés-Sarrió R. Update on the management of elderly patients with colorectal cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2024; 26:69-84. [PMID: 37498507 PMCID: PMC10761480 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-023-03243-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 05/31/2023] [Indexed: 07/28/2023]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common tumours worldwide, and 70% of CRC patients are over 65 years of age. However, the scientific evidence available for these patients is poor, as they are underrepresented in clinical trials. Therefore, a group of experts from the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours, (TTD) and the Multidisciplinary Spanish Group of Digestive Cancer (GEMCAD) have reviewed the scientific evidence available in older patients with CRC. This group of experts recommends a multidisciplinary approach and geriatric assessment (GA) before making a therapeutic decision because GA predicts the risk of toxicity and survival and helps to individualize treatment. In addition, elderly patients with localized CRC should undergo standard cancer resection, preferably laparoscopically. The indication for adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) should be considered based on the potential benefit, the risk of recurrence, the life expectancy and patient comorbidities. When the disease is metastatic, the possibility of radical treatment with surgery, radiofrequency (RF) or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) should be considered. The efficacy of palliative CT is similar to that seen in younger patients, but elderly patients are at increased risk of toxicity. Clinical trials should be conducted with the elderly population and include GAs and specific treatment plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gemma Soler-González
- Departamento de Oncología Médica, Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, Institut Català d'Oncologia (ICO) L'Hospitalet, Avinguda de la Granvia de l'Hospitalet 199-203, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08908, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Javier Sastre-Valera
- Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD), Clinico San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - Antonio Viana-Alonso
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, Nuestra Señora del Prado General University Hospital, Talavera de la Reina, Spain
| | - Jorge Aparicio-Urtasun
- Multidisciplinary Spanish Group of Digestive Cancer (GEMCAD), Polytechnic la Fe University Hospital, Valencia, Spain
| | - Ignacio García-Escobar
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, General University Hospital of Toledo, Toledo, Spain
| | - María Auxiliadora Gómez-España
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, Reina Sofía University Hospital. Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC), Córdoba, Spain
| | - Carmen Guillén-Ponce
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - María José Molina-Garrido
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, Virgen de la Luz Hospital, Cuenca, Spain
| | - Regina Gironés-Sarrió
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) Oncogeriatrics Section, Polytechnic la Fe University Hospital, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Emerging Therapeutic Agents for Colorectal Cancer. Molecules 2021; 26:molecules26247463. [PMID: 34946546 PMCID: PMC8707340 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26247463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2021] [Revised: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 12/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
There are promising new therapeutic agents for CRC patients, including novel small-molecule inhibitors and immune checkpoint blockers. We focused on emerging CRC’s therapeutic agents that have shown the potential for progress in clinical practice. This review provides an overview of tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting VEGF and KIT, BRAF and MEK inhibitors, TLR9 agonist, STAT3 inhibitors, and immune checkpoint blockers (PD1/PDL-1 inhibitors), for which recent advances have been reported. These new agents have the potential to provide benefits to CRC patients with unmet medical needs.
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Tuca A, Gallego R, Ghanem I, Gil-Raga M, Feliu J. Chemotherapy and Targeted Agents in the Treatment of Elderly Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Med 2020; 9:E4015. [PMID: 33322567 PMCID: PMC7764481 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9124015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Revised: 12/04/2020] [Accepted: 12/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the main causes of cancer death in the elderly. The older patients constitute a heterogeneous group in terms of functional status, comorbidities, and aging-related conditions. Therefore, therapeutic decisions need to be individualized. Additionally, a higher toxicity risk comes from the fact that pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the drugs as well as the tissue tolerance can be altered with aging. Although the chemotherapy efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is similar for older and young patients, more toxicity is presented in the elderly. While the mono-chemotherapy provides the same benefit for young and older patients, doublets front-line chemotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) in the elderly. Furthermore, the benefit of the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in older patients has been shown in several clinical trials, while the clinical data for the benefit of anti-epidermal growth factor antibodies are scarcer. Immunocheckpoint inhibitors could be an appropriate option for patients with microsatellite instability (MSI) tumors. A prior geriatric assessment is required before deciding the type of treatment in order to offer the best therapeutic option.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Albert Tuca
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clinic, 08036 Barcelona, Spain;
| | - Rosa Gallego
- Department of Medical Oncology, General Hospital of Granollers, 08402 Granollers, Spain;
| | - Ismael Ghanem
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, CIBERONC, 28046 Madrid, Spain;
| | - Mireia Gil-Raga
- Department of Medical Oncology, University General Hospital of Valencia, CIBERONC, 46014 Valencia, Spain;
| | - Jaime Feliu
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, CIBERONC, 28046 Madrid, Spain;
- Cátedra UAM-AMGEN, 28049 Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Lai E, Liscia N, Donisi C, Mariani S, Tolu S, Pretta A, Persano M, Pinna G, Balconi F, Pireddu A, Impera V, Dubois M, Migliari M, Spanu D, Saba G, Camera S, Musio F, Ziranu P, Puzzoni M, Demurtas L, Pusceddu V, Dettori M, Massa E, Atzori F, Dessì M, Astara G, Madeddu C, Scartozzi M. Molecular-Biology-Driven Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:E1214. [PMID: 32413973 PMCID: PMC7281737 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12051214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2020] [Revised: 05/03/2020] [Accepted: 05/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Metastatic CRC (mCRC) is a molecular heterogeneous disease. The aim of this review is to give an overview of molecular-driven treatment of mCRC patients. METHODS A review of clinical trials, retrospective studies and case reports was performed regarding molecular biomarkers with therapeutic implications. RESULTS RAS wild-type status was confirmed as being crucial for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies and for rechallenge strategy. Antiangiogenic therapies improve survival in first- and second-line settings, irrespective of RAS status, while tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remain promising in refractory mCRC. Promising results emerged from anti-HER2 drugs trials in HER2-positive mCRC. Target inhibitors were successful for BRAFV600E mutant mCRC patients, while immunotherapy was successful for microsatellite instability-high/defective mismatch repair (MSI-H/dMMR) or DNA polymerase epsilon catalytic subunit (POLE-1) mutant patients. Data are still lacking on NTRK, RET, MGMT, and TGF-β, which require further research. CONCLUSION Several molecular biomarkers have been identified for the tailored treatment of mCRC patients and multiple efforts are currently ongoing to increase the therapeutic options. In the era of precision medicine, molecular-biology-driven treatment is the key to impro patient selection and patient outcomes. Further research and large phase III trials are required to ameliorate the therapeutic management of these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eleonora Lai
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Nicole Liscia
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
- Medical Oncology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Clelia Donisi
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Stefano Mariani
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Simona Tolu
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
- Medical Oncology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Pretta
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
- Medical Oncology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Mara Persano
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Giovanna Pinna
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Francesca Balconi
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Annagrazia Pireddu
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
- Medical Oncology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Valentino Impera
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
- Medical Oncology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Dubois
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Marco Migliari
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Dario Spanu
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Giorgio Saba
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Silvia Camera
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
- Medical Oncology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Musio
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Pina Ziranu
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Marco Puzzoni
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Laura Demurtas
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Valeria Pusceddu
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Manuela Dettori
- Medical Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Brotzu, Ospedale Businco, 09134 Cagliari, Italy
| | - Elena Massa
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Francesco Atzori
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Mariele Dessì
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Giorgio Astara
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Clelia Madeddu
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| | - Mario Scartozzi
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital and University of Cagliari, 09042 Cagliari, Italy; (E.L.); (N.L.); (C.D.); (S.M.); (S.T.); (A.P.); (M.P.); (G.P.); (F.B.); (A.P.); (V.I.); (M.D.); (M.M.); (D.S.); (G.S.); (S.C.); (F.M.); (P.Z.); (M.P.); (L.D.); (V.P.); (E.M.); (F.A.); (M.D.); (G.A.); (C.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Van Cutsem E, Yoshino T, Lenz HJ, Lonardi S, Falcone A, Limón ML, Saunders M, Sobrero A, Park YS, Ferreiro R, Hong YS, Tomasek J, Taniguchi H, Ciardiello F, Stoehr J, Oum'Hamed Z, Vlassak S, Studeny M, Argiles G. Nintedanib for the treatment of patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (LUME-Colon 1): a phase III, international, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Ann Oncol 2019; 29:1955-1963. [PMID: 30010751 PMCID: PMC6158765 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Angiogenesis is critical to colorectal cancer (CRC) growth and metastasis. Phase I/II studies have demonstrated the efficacy of nintedanib, a triple angiokinase inhibitor, in patients with metastatic CRC. This global, randomized, phase III study investigated the efficacy and safety of nintedanib in patients with refractory CRC after failure of standard therapies. Patients and methods Eligible patients (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1, with histologically/cytologically confirmed metastatic/locally advanced CRC adenocarcinoma unamenable to surgery and/or radiotherapy) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or placebo (twice daily), until disease progression or undue toxicity. Patients were stratified by previous regorafenib, time from onset of metastatic disease to randomization, and region. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by central review. Secondary end points included objective tumor response and disease control by central review. Results From October 2014 to January 2016, 768 patients were randomized; 765 were treated (nintedanib n = 384; placebo n = 381). Median follow-up was 13.4 months (interquartile range 11.1–15.7). OS was not improved [median OS 6.4 months with nintedanib versus 6.0 months with placebo; hazard ratio (HR), 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.86–1.19; P = 0.8659]. There was a significant but modest increase in PFS with nintedanib versus placebo (median PFS 1.5 versus 1.4 months, respectively; HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.49–0.69; P < 0.0001). There were no complete or partial responses. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 97% of 384 nintedanib-treated patients and 93% of 381 placebo-treated patients. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were liver-related AEs (nintedanib 16%; placebo 8%) and fatigue (nintedanib 9%; placebo 6%). Conclusions The study failed to meet both co-primary end points. Nintedanib did not improve OS and was associated with a significant but modest increase in PFS versus placebo. Nintedanib was well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02149108 (LUME-Colon 1).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Van Cutsem
- Division of Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Gasthuisberg Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - T Yoshino
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Chiba, Japan
| | - H J Lenz
- Division of Medical Oncology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - S Lonardi
- Medical Oncology Unit 1, Department of Clinical and Experimental Oncology, Istituto Oncologico Veneto - IRCCS, Padua
| | - A Falcone
- Department of Translational Research on New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - M L Limón
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, Seville, Spain
| | - M Saunders
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - A Sobrero
- Department of Medical Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliera San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | - Y S Park
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - R Ferreiro
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Ramón y Cajal Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - Y S Hong
- Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - J Tomasek
- Department of Complex Oncology Care, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Brno, Czech Republic
| | - H Taniguchi
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan
| | - F Ciardiello
- Oncologia Medica, Seconda Università deli Studi di Napoli, Naples, Italy
| | - J Stoehr
- Boehringer Ingelheim, Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Biberach, Germany
| | - Z Oum'Hamed
- Boehringer Ingelheim France S.A.S, Reims, France
| | - S Vlassak
- SCS Boehringer Ingelheim Comm.V, Brussels, Belgium
| | - M Studeny
- Division of Medicine/Clinical Development Department, Boehringer Ingelheim, Vienna, Austria
| | - G Argiles
- Medical Oncology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, CIBERONC, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Arnold D, Prager GW, Quintela A, Stein A, Moreno Vera S, Mounedji N, Taieb J. Beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol 2018; 29:835-856. [PMID: 29452346 PMCID: PMC5913602 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The optimal chemotherapeutic regimen for use beyond the second line for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains unclear. Materials and methods We systematically searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE and Medline for records published between January 2002 and May 2017, and cancer congress databases for records published between January 2014 and June 2017. Eligible studies evaluated the efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes of monotherapies or combination therapies at any dose and number of treatment cycles for use beyond the second line in patients with mCRC. Studies were assessed for design and quality, and a qualitative data synthesis was conducted to understand the impact of treatment on overall survival and other relevant cancer-related outcomes. Results The search yielded 938 references of which 68 were included for qualitative synthesis. There was limited evidence to support rechallenge with chemotherapy, targeted therapy or both. Compared with placebo, an overall survival benefit for trifluridine/tipiracil (also known as TAS-102) or regorafenib has been shown for patients previously treated with conventional chemotherapy and targeted therapy. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in efficacy between these treatments. Patient choice and quality of life at this stage of treatment should also be considered when choosing an appropriate therapy. Conclusions These findings support the introduction of an approved agent such as trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib beyond the second line before any rechallenge in patients with mCRC who have failed second-line treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Arnold
- Instituto CUF de Oncologia, Lisbon, Portugal; Asklepios Tumorzentrum Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
| | - G W Prager
- Medical University Vienna, Department of Medicine I and Comprehensive Cancer Centre Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - A Quintela
- Instituto CUF de Oncologia, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - A Stein
- University Hamburg, Hubertus Wald Tumor Center and Department for Hematology and Oncology, Hamburg, Germany
| | - S Moreno Vera
- Servier Global Medical Affairs, Oncology, Suresnes, France
| | - N Mounedji
- Servier Global Medical Affairs, Oncology, Suresnes, France
| | - J Taieb
- Georges Pompidou European Hospita, Paris Descartes University, Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
de la Fouchardière C. Regorafenib in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Future Oncol 2018; 14:2239-2246. [PMID: 29569472 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2017-0512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Regorafenib is an orally available multikinase inhibitor, currently approved in metastatic chemorefractory colorectal cancer patients. The results of two large randomized Phase III trials are available, providing significant results in overall and progression-free survival in this situation. Its use requires a special attention regarding patient selection, dosing schedule and management of adverse events. Identifying patients who will tolerate and have benefit from regorafenib is a challenge for clinicians. Therapeutic monitoring (especially cfDNA), predictive biomarkers and specific perfusion-based imaging techniques will may be result in optimizing regorafenib treatment.
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Yee K. Redefining Later-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. EUROPEAN MEDICAL JOURNAL 2017. [DOI: 10.33590/emj/10311880] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed malignancy and the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the world, accounting for approximately 1.4 million new cases and almost 700,000 deaths in 2012.1 The objective of the symposium was to provide an overview of the current treatment landscape in terms of later-line therapy in metastatic CRC (mCRC) and to discuss the evidence for the various options available, including rechallenge and therapies such as trifluridine (FTD)/tipiracil (TPI) (Lonsurf®; also known as TAS-102) and regorafenib (Stivarga®). The symposium started by examining the clinical value of third-line treatment in patients with mCRC and providing an insight into the mechanism of action of FTD/TPI, and a comparison with that of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). The safety and efficacy of FTD/ TPI was then discussed together with the practical management of patients on treatment. The speakers tackled the issue of rechallenge and reintroduction as an option in the third-line, reviewing the pros and cons, and the available studies providing information on the safety and efficacy of the different options in later lines, concluding that there is a lack of robust evidence for rechallenge as a clinical decision. This was followed by a review of the compelling evidence for the use of treatments such as FTD/TPI and regorafenib in the third-line, with documented evidence for efficacy.
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Loree JM, Kopetz S. Recent developments in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2017; 9:551-564. [PMID: 28794806 PMCID: PMC5524248 DOI: 10.1177/1758834017714997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2017] [Accepted: 05/23/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the past decade there have been significant advances in the molecular characterization of colorectal cancer (CRC) that are driving treatment decisions. Expanded RAS testing beyond KRAS exon 2 was established as crucial for identifying patients who will respond to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapies and low-frequency mutations in RAS/tumor heterogeneity are gaining recognition as potential mechanisms of resistance. Despite this progress, the fact that we do not understand why left-sided but not right-sided tumors have improved outcomes following anti-EGFR therapy highlights our superficial understanding of this disease. Even with few new targeted agents receiving approval in CRC, the incorporation of next-generation sequencing into clinical decision making represents an important step forward. Biomarkers such as BRAF mutations, microsatellite instability, and HER2 amplification represent promising molecular aberrations with therapies in various stages of development, and highlight the importance of companion diagnostics in supporting targeted agents. In this review, we will discuss the importance of incorporating biomarkers into clinical decision making and regimen selection in CRC. We will particularly focus on the recent evidence suggesting an important role for tumor location in selecting first-line therapy, the importance of recent advances in biomarker development and molecular subtyping, as well as recently approved agents (regorafenib and TAS-102) and promising targeted agents that have the potential to change the standard of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan M. Loree
- Division of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Scott Kopetz
- Division of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Unit 426, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Targeted Therapies in Elderly Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Review of the Evidence. Drugs Aging 2017; 34:173-189. [PMID: 28197947 DOI: 10.1007/s40266-017-0439-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is the third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. As the population of the western world ages, the incidence of colorectal tumours among elderly patients is increasing and consequently so is the demand for treatments for elderly patients. Unfortunately, elderly patients (≥65 years) often go untreated and they are also under-represented in clinical trials. Yet there is some evidence suggesting that 'fit' elderly patients have similar outcomes and tolerance to chemotherapy treatment to their younger counterparts (although the definition of fitness in the elderly population is still a matter of debate). The evidence supporting the administration of new targeted therapies in patients older than 65 years is scarce and more research is needed. In this paper, we review all the available data concerning the use of targeted therapies for mCRC in patients older than 65 years of age and discuss the differences between this age subgroup and younger patients.
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Treatment decisions in metastatic colorectal cancer - Beyond first and second line combination therapies. Cancer Treat Rev 2017; 59:54-60. [PMID: 28738235 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.04.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2016] [Revised: 04/24/2017] [Accepted: 04/25/2017] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Median overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has reached up to 30months in recent clinical trials of first line therapies. Following disease progression after the standard in both, 1st and 2nd line, combination chemotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, many patients maintain a good performance status and a significant proportion is motivated to undergo further therapy. Choices of treatment beyond the second line setting for mCRC are therefore becoming increasingly important. New options have entered the therapeutic field recently: Regorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor approved for mCRC patients who have progressed on chemotherapy (including fluoropyrimidines, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin), plus VEGF inhibitor(s) and - if RAS wild-type - an anti-EGFR inhibitor. Regorafenib significantly improved OS, compared to placebo, in two phase III trials (CORRECT and CONCUR) in mCRC patients. Trifluridine/Tipiracil, an oral fluoropyrimidine, also resulted in significantly improved OS when compared to placebo in the phase III RECOURSE trial, which was conducted in a similar patient population to CORRECT. Reintroduction of previously administered therapy is another valid and commonly used approach, especially for those regimens which were discontinued before progression, e.g. if associated with cumulative toxicities, such as peripheral neuropathy or due to treatment breaks. Re-challenge of drugs to which patients developed resistance is also feasible although evidence for this strategy is limited.
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Off-target effects and clinical outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving regorafenib: The TRIBUTE analysis. Sci Rep 2017; 7:45703. [PMID: 28378839 PMCID: PMC5380985 DOI: 10.1038/srep45703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2016] [Accepted: 02/28/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Regorafenib is an orally administered multikinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients with good performance status, albeit less than 50% treated patients achieve disease stabilisation or better at the first radiological evaluation. In addition to that a particularly broad spectrum of toxicities (experienced as G3 or more NCI CTCAE graded by 50% of patients treated) have led to reconsider its widespread use in the majority of patients. We retrospectively collected data about the magnitude of off-target effects experienced during the first 8-weeks of regorafenib monotherapy and analysed their correlation with overall survival, progression free survival and disease control rate. Our findings suggest that skin rash (Exp (B): 0.52, p = 0.0133) or hypothyroidism (Exp (B): 0.11, p = 0.0349) were significantly correlated with improved overall survival at multivariate regression analysis. It was also demonstrated a statistically significant role of diarrhea as predictor of improved survival but its independent prognostic role was lost at multivariate analysis (Exp (B): 0.63, p = 0.162). This is the first analysis showing a potential correlation between the onset of these forms of side effects and regorafenib efficacy, however sample size limitations and the retrospective nature of our analysis prevent us from drawing definitive conclusions.
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Lam KO, Lee KC, Chiu J, Lee VHF, Leung R, Choy TS, Yau T. The real-world use of regorafenib for metastatic colorectal cancer: multicentre analysis of treatment pattern and outcomes in Hong Kong. Postgrad Med J 2016; 93:395-400. [PMID: 27836933 DOI: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2016-134547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2016] [Revised: 10/21/2016] [Accepted: 10/24/2016] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY To evaluate the benefits and tolerability of regorafenib in the real-world setting, we performed a multicentre analysis in Hong Kong. STUDY DESIGN Individual patient data were retrieved from three leading oncology centres in Hong Kong for analyses. All patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with regorafenib after failure of all standard systemic options were included. RESULTS From July 2013 to December 2015, 45 consecutive patients treated with regorafenib for mCRC were analysed. The median age was 63. Twenty patients were started at 160 mg, while the other 25 patients were started at a lower dose. The median progression-free survival was 15.6 weeks (95% CI 13.1 to 18.1 weeks) and the median overall survival was 30.4 weeks (95% CI 16.6 to 44.3 weeks). Among the 31 evaluable patients, only 1 patient (3.2%) achieved partial response and another 10 patients (32.3%) had stable disease. The commonest grade 3 non-haematological adverse event (AE) was hand-foot skin reaction (26.7%) and the commonest grade 3 or 4 haematological AE was anaemia (8.9%). Notably, patients who were started on a lower dose of regorafenib had significantly lower risk of grade 3 treatment-emergent AEs. Overall, 78.3% of the patients had dose reduction during the first and second cycles. Patients older than 65 years were more likely to experience cycle suspension and require dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS Our study confirmed the efficacy and tolerability of regorafenib in the real-world setting. It also suggested that individualised dosing of regorafenib in patients with mCRC might result in better clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ka-On Lam
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Kin-Chung Lee
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Joanne Chiu
- Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Victor Ho-Fun Lee
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Roland Leung
- Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - T S Choy
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Thomas Yau
- Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Legg E. Regorafenib in Advanced and Refractory Gastrointestinal Cancers. EUROPEAN MEDICAL JOURNAL 2016. [DOI: 10.33590/emj/10311556] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/23/2023] Open
Abstract
The European Society for Medical Oncology’s (ESMO) 18th World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer (WCGI) was held in Barcelona from 28th June–2nd July 2016. Presentations covered gastrointestinal (GI) cancers of every aetiology and site within the GI tract, as well as the major aspects of cancer management from screening to novel therapeutic options. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), with their ability to block key mechanisms required for tumour growth, featured heavily in this year’s presentations at WCGI. Data on the oral TKI regorafenib featured prominently in both poster discussion tours and oral presentations, emphasising the continuing interest in the evolution of this therapy within the clinical arsenal of physicians tackling GI cancers.
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Abstract
Increasingly prolonged survival in metastatic colorectal cancer has paralleled the approval of new agents alone and in combination. Most recently, several new agents have sought approval in the heavily pretreated setting, after treatment with standard chemotherapies, alone and in combination, and with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (for patients with RAS wild-type tumors). These agents have included the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), regorafenib, and the novel antimetabolite combination, TAS-102. Both of these showed improvement in progression-free survival and overall survival compared with placebo controls and were approved in the United States and the rest of the world. Benefits of treatment and toxicities are discussed. Nintedanib, another multitargeted TKI, is already approved by the European Medicines Evaluation Agency for non-small cell lung cancer and has been studied in a similar phase III trial. Results are pending. The risks and benefits of each agent are discussed.
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Angiogenesis genotyping and clinical outcome during regorafenib treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Sci Rep 2016; 6:25195. [PMID: 27117754 PMCID: PMC4846860 DOI: 10.1038/srep25195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2016] [Accepted: 04/07/2016] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Regorafenib monotherapy is a potential option for metastatic colorectal cancer patients. However, the lack of predictive factors and the severe toxicities related to treatment have made its use in clinical practice challenging. Polymorphisms of VEGF and its receptor (VEGFR) genes might regulate angiogenesis and thus potentially influence outcome during anti-angiogenesis treatment such as regorafenib. Aim of our study was to evaluate the role of VEGF and VEGFR genotyping in determining clinical outcome for colorectal cancer patients receiving regorafenib. We retrospectively collected clinical data and samples (tumour or blood) of 138 metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib. We analysed the correlation of different VEGF-A, VEGF-C and VEGFR-1,2,3 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with patients’ progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results from angiogenesis genotyping showed that only VEGF-A rs2010963 maintained an independent correlation with PFS and OS. Among clinical factors only ECOG PS was independently correlated with OS, whereas no correlation with PFS was evident. Grouping together those results allowed further patients stratification into 3 prognostic groups: favourable, intermediate and unfavourable. VEGF-A rs2010963 genotyping may represent an important tool for a more accurate selection of optimal candidates for regorafenib therapy.
Collapse
|
|
17
|
García-Alfonso P, Feliú J, García-Carbonero R, Grávalos C, Guillén-Ponce C, Sastre J, García-Foncillas J. Is regorafenib providing clinically meaningful benefits to pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer? Clin Transl Oncol 2016; 18:1072-1081. [PMID: 27037815 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-016-1499-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2016] [Accepted: 03/03/2016] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
Treatment with regorafenib has demonstrated statistically significant improvements in terms of overall survival, progression-free survival and disease control when compared with placebo in pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in two placebo-controlled, randomized, phase III trials (CORRECT and CONCUR). Similar results were observed in two open-label, single-arm studies (REBECCA and CONSIGN) performed in the real-world setting. But several authors have suggested that the benefit provided by regorafenib may not be clinically meaningful for these patients. Moreover, it has been suggested that not all subgroups of patients might benefit from regorafenib. The intention of this review is to provide an overview of the existing evidence for regorafenib in terms of efficacy, tolerability and quality of life in different subpopulations according to clinical and biological characteristics. Additionally, the magnitude of the clinical benefit provided by regorafenib to these patients has been explored and whether there are poorer outcomes in certain subpopulations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P García-Alfonso
- Medical Oncology Department, Gregorio Marañón University Hospital (Center Affiliated to the Red Tematica de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer [RTICC], Instituto Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), Madrid, Spain.
| | - J Feliú
- Medical Oncology Department, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - R García-Carbonero
- Medical Oncology Department, Doce de Octubre University Hospital (Center Affiliated to the Red Tematica de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer [RTICC], Instituto Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), Madrid, Spain
| | - C Grávalos
- Medical Oncology Department, Doce de Octubre University Hospital (Center Affiliated to the Red Tematica de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer [RTICC], Instituto Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), Madrid, Spain
| | - C Guillén-Ponce
- Medical Oncology Department, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital (Center Affiliated to the Red Tematica de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer [RTICC], Instituto Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), Madrid, Spain
| | - J Sastre
- Medical Oncology Department, Clinic San Carlos University Hospital (Center Affiliated to the Red Tematica de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer [RTICC], Instituto Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), Madrid, Spain
| | - J García-Foncillas
- Oncology Department, Cancer Institute University Hospital (Fundacion Jimenez Diaz), Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
Majithia N, Grothey A. Regorafenib in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2015; 17:137-45. [DOI: 10.1517/14656566.2016.1118054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
|