S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab versus mFOLFOX6 or CapeOX plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRICOLORE): a randomized, open-label, phase III, noninferiority trial

Detailed analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who developed cardiotoxicity on another fluoropyrimidine and switched to S-1 treatment (subgroup analysis of the CardioSwitch-study)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The CardioSwitch-study demonstrated that patients with solid tumors who develop cardiotoxicity on capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) treatment can be safely switched to S-1, an alternative fluoropyrimidine (FP). In light of the European Medicines Agency approval of S-1 in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), this analysis provides more detailed safety and efficacy information, and data regarding metastasectomy and/or local ablative therapy (LAT), on the mCRC patients from the original study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 12 European centers. The primary endpoint was recurrence of cardiotoxicity after switch. For this analysis, safety data are reported for 78 mCRC patients from the CardioSwitch cohort (N = 200). Detailed efficacy and outcomes data were available for 66 mCRC patients.

RESULTS

Data for the safety of S-1 in mCRC patients were similar to the original CardioSwitch cohort and that expected for FP-based treatment, with no new concerns. Recurrent cardiotoxicity (all grade 1) with S-1-based treatment occurred in 4/78 (5%) mCRC patients; all were able to complete FP treatment. Median progression-free survival from initiation of S-1-based treatment was 9.0 months and median overall survival 26.7 months. Metastasectomy and/or LAT was performed in 33/66 (50%) patients, and S-1 was successfully used in recommended neoadjuvant/conversion or adjuvant-like combination regimens and schedules as for standard FPs.

INTERPRETATION

S-1 is a safe and effective FP alternative when mCRC patients are forced to discontinue 5-FU or capecitabine due to cardiotoxicity and can be safely used in the standard recommended regimens, settings, and schedules.

Targeting Methionine Addiction Combined With Low-dose Irinotecan Arrested Colon Cancer in Contrast to High-dose Irinotecan Alone, Which Was Ineffective, in a Nude-mouse Model

BACKGROUND/AIM

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third-leading cause of death in the world. Although the prognosis has improved due to improvement of chemotherapy, metastatic CRC is still a recalcitrant disease, with a 5-year survival of only 13%. Irinotecan (IRN) is used as first-line chemotherapy for patients with unresectable CRC. However, there are severe side effects, such as neutropenia and diarrhea, which are dose-limiting. We have previously shown that methionine restriction (MR), effected by recombinant methioninase (rMETase), lowered the effective dose of IRN of colon-cancer cells in vitro. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of low-dose IRN and MR on colon-cancer in nude mice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

HCT-116 colon-cancer cells were cultured and subcutaneously injected into the flank of nude mice. After the tumor size reached approximately 100 mm3, 18 mice were randomized into three groups; Group 1: untreated control on a normal diet; Group 2: high-dose IRN on a normal diet (2 mg/kg, i.p.); Group 3: low-dose IRN (1 mg/kg i.p.) on MR effected by a methionine-depleted diet.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the control mice and the mice treated with high-dose IRN, without MR. However, low-dose IRN combined with MR was significantly more effective than the control and arrested colon-cancer growth (p=0.03). Body weight loss was reversible in the mice treated by low-dose IRN combined with MR.

CONCLUSION

The combination of low-dose IRN and MR acted synergistically in arresting HCT-116 colon-cancer grown in nude mice. The present study indicates the MR has the potential to reduce the effective dose of IRN in the clinic.

Multimodal Treatment of Metastatic Rectal Cancer in a Young Patient: Case Report and Literature Review

Metastatic colorectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary and individualized approach. Herein, we reported the case of a young woman diagnosed with metastatic rectal cancer who received an individualized multimodal treatment strategy that resulted in a remarkable survival. There were several particular aspects of this case, such as the early onset of the disease, the successful use of conversion therapy, the application of liquid biopsy to guide treatment, and the specific nature of the bone metastasis. To offer more insights for navigating such challenges in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, we have conducted a literature review to find more data related to the particularities of this case. The incidence of early onset colorectal cancer is on the rise. Data suggests that it differs from older-onset colorectal cancer in terms of its pathological, epidemiological, anatomical, metabolic, and biological characteristics. Conversion therapy and surgical intervention provide an opportunity for cure and improve outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer. It is important to approach each case individually, as every patient with limited liver disease should be considered as a candidate for secondary resection. Moreover, liquid biopsy has an important role in the individualized management of metastatic colorectal cancer patients, as it offers additional information for treatment decisions.

Clinical outcomes of intensive versus less intensive first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

Aims: Physicians determine the treatment regimen for metastatic colorectal cancer on a case-by-case bases, according to the individual disease characteristics. We retrospectively compared the baseline characteristics and efficacies of first-line treatment among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who received intensive therapy involving fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan, potentially with molecularly targeted agents as well, versus less intensive fluoropyrimidine and/or bevacizumab therapy. Materials & methods: Data were collected from a medical claims database. The efficacy outcomes were: time to treatment failure, time to first subsequent therapy and overall survival. Results: The less intensive therapy group (n = 633) had higher median age, lower daily activity levels and shorter time to treatment failure, time to first subsequent therapy and overall survival than the intensive therapy group (n = 3829). Combination therapy with molecularly targeted agents and bevacizumab improved treatment efficacy outcomes in the intensive and less intensive groups, respectively. Conclusion: Patient age and daily activity levels were important factors for determining treatment intensity.

TP53 Gain-of-Function Mutation is a Poor Prognostic Factor in High-Methylated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Neither TP53 mutation nor DNA methylation status has been established as a biomarker alone of metastatic colorectal cancer. We analyzed the association between TP53 mutation functional subtypes and genome-wide DNA methylation status (GWMS) as combined prognostic markers.

METHODS

Patient clinical data were obtained from the TRICOLORE study, a randomized phase III trial. The TP53 mutations were classified into wild-type, gain-of-function (GOF) mutations, and non-gain-of-function (non-GOF) mutations. GWMS of the tumor tissues classified them into high-methylated colorectal cancer (HMCC) and low-methylated colorectal cancer (LMCC). Overall survival (OS) was compared based on these subgroups.

RESULTS

Of the 209 patients, 60 (28.7%) were HMCC and 149 (71.3%) were LMCC, 35 (16.7%) were TP53 wild-type and 174 (83.3%) were TP53 mutants including 79 (45.4%) GOF mutations and 95 (54.6%) non-GOF mutations. The OS of the HMCC group was shorter than that of the LMCC group (median 25.3 vs. 40.3 months, P < .001, hazard ratio 1.87) in the total cohort. The combined subgroup analyses of GWMS and TP53 mutation subtypes showed that the HMCC/GOF group had significantly shorter OS than the HMCC/non-GOF group, the LMCC/GOF group, and the LMCC/non-GOF group (median 17.7; 35.3, 40.3, and 41.2 months, P = .007, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively), regardless of the primary tumor location. By the multivariate analysis, only HMCC (P = .009) was a poor prognostic factor in the GOF mutation group.

CONCLUSIONS

TP53 GOF with HMCC is a newly identified poorest prognostic molecular subset in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Rapid Reduction of CEA and Stable Metastasis in an NRAS-mutant Rectal-Cancer Patient Treated With FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab Combined With Oral Recombinant Methioninase and a Low-Methionine Diet Upon Metastatic Recurrence After FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab Treatment Alone

BACKGROUND/AIM

The choice of chemotherapy agents for RAS-mutant colorectal cancer is limited, and prognosis is poor compared to RAS-wild-type colorectal cancer. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of methionine restriction combined with chemotherapy in a patient with NRAS-mutant rectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A 59-year-old female was diagnosed with lung-metastatic recurrence of NRAS-mutant rectal cancer two and a half years after resection of the primary tumor. She started chemotherapy, which consisted of fluorouracil, irinotecan (FOLFIRI), and bevacizumab, in October 2020. Eight months later, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) was performed to treat the lung metastases. She stopped chemotherapy at this point and had blood tests and computed tomography (CT) scans regularly. Her CEA level increased to 139.91 ng/ml and her lung metastasis became larger by September 2022. Therefore, she was reintroduced to FOLFIRI and bevacizumab in October 2022, and also started a low-methionine diet and oral recombinant methioninase (o-rMETase) as a supplement.

RESULTS

After starting the combination therapy with o-rMETase, a low-methionine diet, FOLFIRI, and bevacizumab, blood CEA levels very rapidly decreased and were almost within the normal limits five months later. CT findings showed the lung metastasis did not grow.

CONCLUSION

Methionine restriction comprising o-rMETase and a low-methionine diet combined with first-line chemotherapy was effective in a patient with NRAS-mutant rectal cancer in which metastasis had re-occurred after first-line chemotherapy alone.

Real-World Treatment Sequencing in Vulnerable Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Data regarding treatment sequence for vulnerable patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a real-world setting are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess treatment outcomes in second-line or later chemotherapy for vulnerable patients with mCRC in a real-world setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Vulnerable patients with mCRC who received less intensive treatment ('vulnerable') regimens, i.e. fluoropyrimidines with or without biologics (FP), reduced-dose doublet regimens with or without biologics (Doublet), and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monotherapy (Anti-EGFR), as first-line therapy between June 2015 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 210 patients from 15 hospitals were analyzed. The median age was 78 years (range 28-90), and 44 patients (21%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score of 2. In the entire population, the median time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were 7.6 and 21.4 months, respectively. Following the failure of first-line therapy in 195 patients, 74 (38%), 24 (12%), and 13 (7%) patients received vulnerable regimens, full-dose doublet regimens with or without biologics, and other regimens, respectively, whereas 84 (43%) received best supportive care (BSC). In patients receiving vulnerable regimens as second-line therapy, the median TTF and OS were 4.4 and 13.7 months, respectively, while response rate and disease control rate were 18% and 62%, respectively. In 84 patients who received BSC, the median OS was 3.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-line chemotherapy for vulnerable patients with mCRC showed clinically meaningful outcomes; however, few patients received second-line therapy, and survival among patients who received BSC was dismal.

Long-term Survival after Treatment of Synchronous Isolated Right External Iliac Lymph Node Metastasis from Ascending Colon Cancer: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Synchronous isolated external iliac lymph node metastasis of ascending colon cancer is extremely rare, and its treatment strategy has not been established. In this report, we present a case of long-term survival after surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy for ascending colon cancer with synchronous isolated right external iliac lymph node metastasis.

CLINICAL CASE

A 65-year-old woman with anorexia and anemia was referred to our hospital. Colonoscopy and computed tomography revealed a three-quarter circumferential type 2 tumor from the cecum to the ascending colon, along with regional and right external iliac lymph node swelling. We diagnosed ascending colon cancer with right external iliac artery lymph node metastasis. An open right hemicolectomy with D3 and right external iliac lymph node dissections were performed. Results of histopathological examination showed that both lymph nodes were metastasized from ascending colon cancer. The patient received eight courses of capecitabine and oxaliplatin therapy as adjuvant chemotherapy. At 60 months after surgery, the woman has not had a recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy may be an effective treatment strategy for synchronous isolated right external iliac lymph node metastases from ascending colon cancer.

Treatment outcome comparisons of first-line targeted therapy in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: A nationwide database study

BACKGROUND

The first-line systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a combination of one targeted therapy agent and a chemotherapy doublet. Whether bevacizumab or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (mAb) is the more effective addition to a chemotherapy doublet as the first-line treatment for inoperable KRAS wild-type mCRC remains controversial in prior clinical trials. Moreover, the association between the sidedness of primary tumors and the efficacy of anti-EGFR mAb needs to be addressed.

METHODS

We established a cohort of patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC who were treated with first-line targeted therapy plus doublet chemotherapy between 2013 and 2018 using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Secondary surgery was defined as either resection of primary tumors, liver metastases, lung metastases, or radiofrequency ablation.

RESULTS

A total of 6482 patients were included; bevacizumab and anti-EGFR mAb were the first-line targeted therapies in 3334 (51.4%) and 3148 (48.6%) patients, respectively. Compared with those who received bevacizumab, patients who received anti-EGFR mAb exhibited significantly longer overall survival (OS; median, 23.1 vs. 20.2 months, p = 0.012) and time to treatment failure (TTF; median, 11.3 vs. 10 months, p < 0.001). Among left-sided primary tumors, the OS and TTF benefits of anti-EGFR mAb remained. Among right-sided primary tumors, the OS and TTF were similar regardless of the type of targeted therapy. In multivariate analyses, first-line anti-EGFR mAb therapy remained an independent predictor of longer OS and TTF for left-sided primary tumors. Patients who received anti-EGFR mAb were more likely to receive secondary surgery (29.6% vs. 22.6%, p < 0.0001) than patients who received bevacizumab.

CONCLUSION

For patients who received first-line doublet chemotherapy for KRAS wild-type mCRC, adding anti-EGFR mAb was associated with significantly longer OS and TTF, especially for left-sided primary tumors.

Panitumumab vs Bevacizumab Added to Standard First-line Chemotherapy and Overall Survival Among Patients With RAS Wild-type, Left-Sided Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

For patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, adding anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) monoclonal antibodies to first-line doublet chemotherapy is routine, but the optimal targeted therapy has not been defined.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of adding panitumumab (an anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody) vs bevacizumab (an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody) to standard first-line chemotherapy for treatment of RAS wild-type, left-sided, metastatic colorectal cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized, open-label, phase 3 clinical trial at 197 sites in Japan in May 2015-January 2022 among 823 patients with chemotherapy-naive RAS wild-type, unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (final follow-up, January 14, 2022).

Interventions

Panitumumab (n = 411) or bevacizumab (n = 412) plus modified fluorouracil, l-leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) every 14 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point, overall survival, was tested first in participants with left-sided tumors, then in the overall population. Secondary end points were progression-free survival, response rate, duration of response, and curative (defined as R0 status) resection rate.

Results

In the as-treated population (n = 802; median age, 66 years; 282 [35.2%] women), 604 (75.3%) had left-sided tumors. Median follow-up was 61 months. Median overall survival was 37.9 months with panitumumab vs 34.3 months with bevacizumab in participants with left-sided tumors (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.82; 95.798% CI, 0.68-0.99; P = .03) and 36.2 vs 31.3 months, respectively, in the overall population (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.98; P = .03). Median progression-free survival for panitumumab vs bevacizumab was 13.1 vs 11.9 months, respectively, for those with left-sided tumors (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.20) and 12.2 vs 11.4 months overall (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.24). Response rates with panitumumab vs bevacizumab were 80.2% vs 68.6%, respectively, for left-sided tumors (difference, 11.2%; 95% CI, 4.4%-17.9%) and 74.9% vs 67.3% overall (difference, 7.7%; 95% CI, 1.5%-13.8%). Median duration of response with panitumumab vs bevacizumab was 13.1 vs 11.2 months for left-sided tumors (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.10) and 11.9 vs 10.7 months overall (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.06). Curative resection rates with panitumumab vs bevacizumab were 18.3% vs 11.6% for left-sided tumors; (difference, 6.6%; 95% CI, 1.0%-12.3%) and 16.5% vs 10.9% overall (difference, 5.6%; 95% CI, 1.0%-10.3%). Common treatment-emergent adverse events were acneiform rash (panitumumab: 74.8%; bevacizumab: 3.2%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (panitumumab: 70.8%; bevacizumab: 73.7%), and stomatitis (panitumumab: 61.6%; bevacizumab: 40.5%).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, adding panitumumab, compared with bevacizumab, to standard first-line chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival in those with left-sided tumors and in the overall population.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02394795.

Trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (BEV) vs. fluoropyrimidine-irinotecan+BEV as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised noninferiority trial

BACKGROUND

This open-label, multicentre, phase II/III trial assessed the noninferiority of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) plus bevacizumab vs. fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (control) as second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive FTD/TPI (35 mg/m² twice daily, days 1-5 and days 8-12, 28-day cycle) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg, days 1 and 15) or control. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The noninferiority margin of the hazard ratio (HR) was set to 1.33.

RESULTS

Overall, 397 patients were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Median OS was 14.8 vs. 18.1 months (FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab vs. control; HR 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.93; P_{noninferiority} = 0.5920). In patients with a baseline sum of the diameter of target lesions of <60 mm (n = 216, post hoc analyses), the adjusted median OS was similar between groups (FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab vs. control, 21.4 vs. 20.7 months; HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.55-1.55). Grade ≥3 adverse events (FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab vs. control) included neutropenia (65.8% vs. 41.6%) and diarrhoea (1.5% vs. 7.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab did not demonstrate noninferiority to fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan plus bevacizumab as second-line treatment for mCRC.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

JapicCTI-173618, jRCTs031180122.

Regorafenib is suitable for advanced colorectal cancer patients who have previously received trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab

Regorafenib is a standard salvage line therapy used for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). Recently, trifluridine/tipiracil (TFTD) plus bevacizumab also showed promising efficacy as a salvage line therapy for advanced CRC. However, the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with advanced CRC who have previously received TFTD plus bevacizumab is unclear. We retrospectively collected clinicopathologic data from patients with advanced CRC who received regorafenib after TFTD plus bevacizumab in multiple institutions between April 2017 and June 2020.Thirty-four advanced CRC patients who received regorafenib were analyzed. The median age was 66.5 (range 43-81 years), 11 patients were male, and all had an ECOG performance status(PS) of 0 or 1. Twenty-two patients had left-sided tumors, 18 patients had RAS mutants, and 1 patient had a BRAF V600E mutation. The response rate was 0%, and the disease control rate was 31%. The median progression-free survival was 70 days (95% CI: 56-91), and the overall survival was 233 days (95% CI: 188-324). Treatment was discontinued in 32 patients, and 28 (82%) discontinued treatment due to progressive disease. The major grade 3 and4 toxicities were proteinurea (29%), hypertension (26%), hand-foot syndrome(15%), and platelet decrease (6%). Regorafenib after TFTD plus bevacizumab showed efficacy similar to that of the previous study, and no new adverse events were observed.

Examination of the Effect of Proton Pump Inhibitors on the Anticancer Activity of Oxaliplatin

BACKGROUND/AIM

Oxaliplatin (L-OHP) is absorbed by cancer cells via organic cation transporter1-3 (OCT1-3). However, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) suppress the function of OCT1-3. This study investigated whether PPIs attenuate the antitumor effect of L-OHP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Colorectal cancer patients who received FOLFOX (L-OHP + 5-fluorouracil: 5-FU) + bevacizumab therapy at Nagasaki University Hospital from October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2019 were retrospectively investigated. Patients were categorized into two groups with or without PPIs use. Progression-free survival (PFS) between the two groups was compared using the log-rank test. L-OHP was added to the intestinal epithelial Caco-2 cell line with or without the PPI rabeprazole, and then cell viability was analyzed using the WST-8 cell proliferation assay.

RESULTS

The median PFS was 11.4 months in the group with PPIs and 9.7 months in the group without PPIs (p=0.736). No significant effect of 1-10 μM rabeprazole was observed on the antitumor effect of L-OHP. Plasma concentrations of rabeprazole at clinical doses are 1.0-1.3 μM.

CONCLUSION

Even if L-OHP interacts with PPIs, clinical doses of PPIs were considered to have minimal effect on the antitumor effect of L-OHP.

The Phase II Study of Panitumumab in Chemotherapy-Naïve Frail or Elderly Patients with RAS Wild-type Colorectal Cancer: OGSG 1602 Final Results

BACKGROUND

We previously reported the response rate of a phase II OGSG1602 study on panitumumab in chemotherapy-naive frail or elderly patients with RAS wild-type unresectable colorectal cancer (CRC) [Terazawa T, Kato T, Goto M, et al. Oncologist. 2021;26(1):17]. Herein, we report a survival analysis.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥65 years and considered unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy or aged ≥76 years were enrolled. Primary tumors located from the cecum to the transverse colon were considered right-sided tumors (RSTs); those located from the splenic flexure to the rectum were considered left-sided tumors (LSTs).

RESULTS

Among the 36 enrolled patients, 34 were included in the efficacy analysis, with 26 and 8 having LSTs and RSTs, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.0 [95% CI, 5.4-10.0] and 17.5 months (95% CI, 13.8-24.3), respectively. Although no significant differences existed in PFS between patients with LST and RST {6.6 (95% CI, 5.4-11.5) vs. 4.9 months [95% CI, 1.9-not available (NA), P = .120]}, there were significant differences in OS [19.3 (95% CI, 14.2-NA) vs.12.3 months (95% CI, 9.9-NA), P = .043].

CONCLUSION

Panitumumab showed favorable OS in frail or elderly patients with RAS wild-type CRC and no prior exposure to chemotherapy. Panitumumab may be optimal for patients with LSTs (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry Number UMIN000024528).

Evaluation of clinical validity of an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function using data of the SPIRITS and the G-SOX trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical validity of the S-1 dosage formula based on body surface area (BSA) and creatinine clearance (CLcr) to achieve the target area under the concentration-time curve of 5-FU, which we had developed and refined in each prospective pharmacokinetic study.

METHODS

The recommended dose determined by the refined formula was assessed using data of the SPIRITS (S-1 vs. S-1 plus cisplatin [SP]) and the G-SOX (SP vs. S-1 plus oxaliplatin [SOX]) trials. Nine hundred and thirty-eight patients in these trials were classified into three groups according to their actual S-1 starting doses compared with the recommended doses (under-dosed, <recommended dose; equal-dosed, =recommended dose; over-dosed, >recommended dose).

RESULTS

The patients in the under-dosed group in both trials showed similar tendencies: male, younger, higher BSA, and higher CLcr. The incidence of any grade neutropenia was significantly greater in the over-dosed group compared with the equal-dosed group in the S-1 and the SOX arms. The hazard ratios (HR) of overall survival (OS) (under-dosed vs. equal-dosed) were 1.361 (S-1 arm), 1.259 (SP arm) in the SPIRITS trial, and 1.381 (SOX arm), 0.999 (SP arm) in the G-SOX trial. Multivariate analysis in all the patients demonstrated that OS of the over-dosed group was equivalent (HR 1.002, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.850-1.182, p = 0.980) and that of the under-dosed group was inferior (HR 1.267, 95% CI 1.005-1.597, p = 0.045) to the equal-dosed group.

CONCLUSIONS

It is suggested that the refined S-1 dosage formula can recommend optimal dose in terms of safety and efficacy.

Study protocol of the HGCSG1803: a phase II multicentre, non-randomised, single-arm, prospective trial of combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin, irinotecan and S-1 (OX-IRIS) as first-line treatment for metastatic or relapsed pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) has become one of the standard treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer. However, the use of FOLFIRINOX requires prolonged infusion. Therefore, we planned to develop a new combination chemotherapy regimen with oxaliplatin, irinotecan and S-1 (OX-IRIS) for advanced pancreatic cancer. In the phase Ⅰ study that was conducted previously, the safety and recommended dose of OX-IRIS were assessed. In this study, we will evaluate the efficacy and safety of OX-IRIS.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The HGCSG1803 study started as a multicentre, non-randomised, single-arm, prospective, phase II study in December 2019. Eligible subjects were patients with untreated metastatic or relapsed pancreatic cancer. OX-IRIS is administered as follows: 30 min infusion of antiemetic; 2-hour infusion of oxaliplatin (65 mg/m2); 1.5-hour infusion of irinotecan (100 mg/m2) on day 1 and 15 of each 4-week cycle; and oral S-1 (40 mg/m2) twice daily from after dinner on day one to after breakfast on day 15, followed by a 14-day rest, to be repeated every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient refusal. The primary endpoint is response rate. The secondary endpoints are overall and progression-free survival, safety and dose for each drug. Using a binomial test, a sample size of 40 patients was set with a threshold value of 10% and expected value of 30%. Registration of 40 cases is planned from 18 institutions in Japan.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

All the procedures will be conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964 and its later versions. All the patients will receive written information about the trial and will provide informed consent before enrolment. This trial was approved by the Hokkaido University Certified Review Board (approval No: 018-037).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

jRCTs011190008.

Decision making for anti-VEGF inhibitor continuation: dip stick? or urine protein/creatinine ratio? (VERSiON UP study)

Background

Monitoring proteinuria is important for the management of patients with cancer treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors (VEGF/Ri). Here we investigated the difference between the urine protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR) and a qualitative value test (QV) on the decision making of treatment continuation and the usefulness of UPCR testing in patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with anti-VEGF/Ri.

Methods

From January 2017 to December 2018, a survey was conducted based on the medical records of patients with gastrointestinal cancer with a QV of ≥2+ during the use of anti-VEGF/Ri at seven Japanese institutions participating in the Onco-nephrology Consortium. The primary endpoint was the ratio of the worst UPCR < 2.0 (low UPCR) in cases with a QV2+ at the point of the first proteinuria onset. The secondary endpoints were a comparison of low UPCR and worst UPCR ≥2.0 (high UPCR), the concordance rate between UPCR and QV in the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading, and the differences in the decision making for anti-VEGF/Ri continuation.

Results

Among the 71 patients enrolled, the proportion of low UPCR in onset QV2+ (n = 53) was 66% (n = 35). In a comparison between low (n = 36) and high UPCR cases (n = 24), body weight (P = 0.036), onset QV status (P = 0.0134), and worst QV status (P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with UPCR levels. The concordance rate for CTCAE Grade 2 of both the QV and UPCR was 83%. Regarding the judgment of anti-VEGF/Ri continuation, treatment was continued in 42.4% of cases when the QV became 3+, whereas only 25% continued treatment when the UPCR value became high.

Conclusion

Urine dipstick test results may overestimate proteinuria, and the UPCR result tended to be more critical than the QV when deciding the treatment policy.

Trial registration

This study is a multiple institutional retrospectively registered observational trial. Clinical Trial number: University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (protocol ID UMIN000042545).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09611-3.

Systematic review and non-inferiority meta-analysis of randomised phase II/III trials on S-1-based therapy versus 5-fluorouracil- or capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine that is increasingly used in Western countries for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a non-inferiority meta-analysis on the efficacy of S-1-based therapy versus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)- or capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of patients with mCRC.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Opengrey were searched for randomised clinical trials until May 2021. Data were extracted for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events. Pooled effect estimates, stratified by treatment line, with corresponding 99% confidence intervals (CI) were presented. For PFS, a pre-defined non-inferiority margin (ΔNI) of 1.25 was selected.

RESULTS

Ten studies (n = 2117) were included, of which six studies reported PFS and OS data and 10 studies reported ORR data. S-1-based therapy was shown to be non-inferior to 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in terms of PFS (HRtotal 0.95, 99% CI 0.83-1.08) with its CI upper limit well below ΔNI, and at least as efficacious in terms of OS (HRtotal 0.93, 99% CI 0.81-1.07), and ORR (RRtotal 1.06, 99% CI 0.90-1.24).

CONCLUSIONS

S-1-based therapy is non-inferior to 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in the treatment of mCRC regarding PFS and at least as efficacious as 5-FU/capecitabine-based therapy in terms of ORR and OS. These data support the use of S-1 in mCRC patients who are intolerant to 5-FU/capecitabine-based treatment.

Direct Observation of Retinal Microvessels in Cancer Patients After Systemic Administration of Bevacizumab and Oxaliplatin

BACKGROUND/AIM

Antiangiogenic chemotherapy is the backbone of the various anticancer therapies. To date no practical biomarker predicting their antitumor effects and toxicity has been reported. We aimed to determine the feasibility of direct retinal observation as a practical biomarker in antiangiogenic chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

By direct retinal observation using a nonmydriatic retinal camera, we measured retinal microvessel diameters in 10 patients with colorectal cancer before and after intravenous infusion of bevacizumab and oxaliplatin. All patients also received oral capecitabine during their therapy.

RESULTS

Retinal microvessel diameters were decreased from baseline temporarily by 14.5±6.5% after infusion of bevacizumab and oxaliplatin in five patients who responded to treatment and 8.8±6.2% in the other five patients (p=0.008).

CONCLUSION

Measurement of retinal microvessel diameters by direct observation appears to be feasible in patients receiving systemic chemotherapy. The decrease of retinal microvessel diameters might indicate improved tumor response to treatment with bevacizumab-containing systemic chemotherapy.

Role of resection for extrahepatopulmonary metastases of colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Although surgical resection for liver or lung metastases of colorectal cancer has been widely accepted, the use of this approach for extrahepatopulmonary metastases remains debatable due to the systemic nature of the disease. The aim of this study was to clarify the utility of resection along with perioperative chemotherapy for patients with extrahepatopulmonary metastases of colon cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-arm study at a single institution. Forty-two patients with resectable extrahepatopulmonary metastases who underwent metastasectomy with curative intent between 2009 and 2018 at Nagoya University Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcomes measured were overall and relapse-free survival.

RESULTS

The most common metastatic site was the peritoneum (n = 31), followed by the distant lymph nodes (n = 10), ovary (n = 1) and spleen (n = 1), with overlaps. Preoperative and postoperative chemotherapies were administered to 22 and 8 patients, respectively; the remaining 14 patients received surgery alone. R0 resection was achieved in 36 patients (85.7%). The 5-year overall survival and 3-year relapse-free survival rates were 58.6% and 33.8%, respectively. In the univariate analysis, R1 resection was associated with a poor relapse-free survival rate (P = 0.02). In the multivariate analysis, the absence of perioperative chemotherapy was an independent risk factor for poor overall survival rates (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical resection benefited selected patients with extrahepatopulmonary metastases with favorable long-term survival outcomes. Surgery alone without systemic chemotherapy is likely to bring poor outcome; therefore, preoperative induction might be promising to keep up with chemotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose apatinib plus S-1 versus regorafenib and fruquintinib for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Background

At present, regorafenib and fruquintinib are the standard regimens for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients in China, but both options have limited efficacy. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose apatinib plus S-1 compared with regorafenib and fruquintinib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to standard therapies.

Methods

The records of 114 patients with refractory mCRC in our center from April 2016 to September 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Among these patients, 43 received apatinib 250 mg/day combined with S-1, 36 received regorafenib starting at 80 mg/day with weekly escalation, and 35 received fruquintinib 5 mg/day orally. Patients received radiographic examination every 1.5-2 months during the treatment period, progression-free survival time and overall survival time were analyzed and recorded.

Results

The baseline clinical characteristics of the patients were broadly similar among the three groups. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 3.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.5-5.3] in the apatinib plus S-1 group, 3.1 months (95% CI: 1.9-4.2) in the fruquintinib group, and 2.4 months (95% CI: 2.1-2.7) in the regorafenib group, the mPFS of apatinib plus S-1 was significantly longer than that of regorafenib (HR =0.49, P=0.003) and fruquintinib (HR =0.60, P=0.048). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 months (95% CI: 5.4-11.0) in the apatinib plus S-1 group, 7.8 months (95% CI: 5.3-10.3) in the fruquintinib group, and 7.5 months (95% CI: 4.2-10.7) in the regorafenib group, which was comparable among the 3 groups. There was no statistical difference in disease control rate (DCR) among the three groups. Patients in the apatinib plus S-1 group had a higher incidence of hematological toxicity including anemia (62.8%), neutropenia (30.2%), and thrombocytopenia (39.5%), and the hand-foot skin reaction (58.3%) was more prevalent in the regorafenib group, while the adverse reaction of hypertension (45.7%) in the fruquintinib group was very significant.

Conclusions

Low-dose apatinib plus S-1 prolonged PFS compared with regorafenib and fruquintinib, and is a potential alternative regimen for the treatment of refractory mCRC with tolerable and controlled toxicity.

The survival benefit of increasing the number of active drugs for metastatic colorectal cancer: A multicenter retrospective study

Background

The development of chemotherapy and treatment strategies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have provided patients with significant survival benefits. Currently, molecular targeting agents and late‐line treatment with regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) are available. However, the impact of this increase in drug availability on overall survival (OS) in mCRC remains a clinical question.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data on consecutive mCRC patients who were treated at three institutions in Japan. We divided the patients into three cohorts: patients who initiated first‐line treatment from Jan 2005 to Dec 2006 (cohort A: only cytotoxic drugs available), Jan 2007 to Dec 2011 (cohort B: molecular targeting drugs available), and Jan 2012 to Sep 2016 (cohort C: late‐line treatment available).

Results

A total of 1409 consecutive patients were analyzed. The median survival time (MST) in cohorts A, B, and C was 18.6, 25.4, and 26.4 months, respectively. The hazard ratio (HR) for cohort B versus A was 0.81 (95% CI 0.68–0.97), for cohort C versus A was 0.74 (95% CI 0.61–0.89), and for cohort C versus B was 0.92 (0.81–1.03). The median number of administered drugs (range) was 3 (1–5) in cohort A, 4 (1–7) in cohort B, and 4 (1–7) in cohort C. The increase in drug availability extended the MST from 15.5 months in patients treated with ≤3 drugs to 36.0–37.3 months in patients treated with six to seven drugs.

Conclusion

The development of chemotherapy including late‐line treatments could improve the prognosis of mCRC patients.

Comparison of safety and efficacy of fluorouracil + oxaliplatin + irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) and modified FOLFOXIRI with bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer: data from clinical practice

PURPOSE

The efficacy of fluorouracil + oxaliplatin + irinotecan with bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI + BV) has been verified for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In clinical practice, the original (O-FOLFOXIRI + BV) and modified dose settings (M-FOLFOXIRI + BV) are adopted for Asian patients. We aimed to compare the real-world efficacy and safety of these two regimens.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study reviewed clinical data of all consecutive mCRC patients treated with FOLFOXIRI + BV at a cancer centre in Japan. One hundred patients were divided into two groups: one that received O-FOLFOXIRI + BV (group O, n = 30) and another that received M-FOLFOXIRI + BV (group M, n = 70). Progression-free survival (PFS) was set as the primary endpoint, with overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

PFS was superior in group M (median PFS; 8.7 vs. 11.5 months, P = 0.098). The use of O-FOLFOXIRI + BV emerged as an independent risk factor of poor PFS (hazard ratio = 2.155, P = 0.012). Both ORR (43.3 vs. 65.7%, P = 0.047) and OS (median OS; 17.9 vs. 27.0 months, P = 0.127) were more favourable in group M. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were more frequently observed in group O (90 vs. 74.3%, P = 0.108), whereas dose intensity was higher in group M because a shorter duration was required for cytotoxic drug administration (2.9 vs. 2.6 weeks/course, P = 0.051) in the induction term.

CONCLUSION

We found that M-FOLFOXIRI + BV had more favourable efficacy and safety than O-FOLFOXIRI + BV, which may be a better fit for Asian patients and can be potentially used as an alternative for upfront chemotherapy for mCRC.

A modified MethyLight assay predicts the clinical outcomes of anti-EGFR treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer

DNA methylation status correlates with clinical outcomes of anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment. There is a strong need to develop a simple assay for measuring DNA methylation status for the clinical application of drug selection based on it. In this study, we collected data from 186 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had previously received anti‐EGFR treatment. We modified MethyLite to develop a novel assay to classify patients as having highly methylated colorectal cancer (HMCC) or low‐methylated colorectal cancer (LMCC) based on the methylation status of 16 CpG sites of tumor‐derived genomic DNA in the development cohort (n = 30). Clinical outcomes were then compared between the HMCC and LMCC groups in the validation cohort (n = 156). The results showed that HMCC had a significantly worse response rate (4.2% vs 33.3%; P = .004), progression‐free survival (median: 2.5 vs 6.6 mo, P < .001, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.22), and overall survival (median: 5.6 vs 15.5 mo, P < .001, HR = 0.23) than did LMCC in patients with RAS wild‐type mCRC who were refractory or intolerable to oxaliplatin‐ and irinotecan‐based chemotherapy (n = 101). The DNA methylation status was an independent predictive factor and a more accurate biomarker than was the primary site of anti‐EGFR treatment. In conclusion, our novel DNA methylation measurement assay based on MethyLight was simple and useful, suggesting its implementation as a complementary diagnostic tool in a clinical setting.

Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies

In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted.

Second-line chemotherapy after early disease progression during first-line chemotherapy containing bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

The ML18174 study, which showed benefits of bevacizumab (BEV) continuation beyond progression (BBP) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), excluded patients with first-line progression-free survival (PFS) shorter than 3 months. The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after early disease progression during first-line chemotherapy containing bevacizumab.

Methods

The subjects of this study were mCRC patients who experienced disease progression < 100 days from commencement of first-line chemotherapy containing BEV initiated between Apr 2007 and Dec 2016. Second-line chemotherapy regimens were classified into two groups with and without BEV/other anti-angiogenic agents (BBP and non-BBP) and efficacy and safety were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results

Sixty-one patients were identified as subjects of this study. Baseline characteristics were numerically different between BBP (n = 37) and non-BBP (n = 25) groups, such as performance status (0–1/> 2/unknown: 89/8/3 and 56/40/4%), RAS status (wild/mutant/unknown: 32/54/16 and 76/16/8%). Response rate was 8.6% in BBP group and 9.1% in non-BBP group (p = 1.00). Median PFS was 3.9 months in BBP group and 2.8 months in non-BBP group (HR [95%CI]: 0.79 [0.46–1.34], p = 0.373, adjusted HR: 0.87 [0.41–1.82], p = 0.707). Median overall survival was 8.5 months in BBP group and 5.4 months in non-BBP group (HR 0.66 [0.38–1.12], p = 0.125, adjusted HR 0.53 [0.27–1.07], p = 0.078).

Conclusion

In mCRC patients who experienced early progression in first-line chemotherapy, second-line chemotherapy showed poor clinical outcomes regardless use of anti-angiogenic agents.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08890-6.

Combination therapy of bevacizumab with either S-1 and irinotecan or mFOLFOX6/CapeOX as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (TRICOLORE): Exploratory analysis of RAS status and primary tumour location in a randomised, open-label, phase III, non-inferiority trial

AIM

The TRICOLORE trial previously demonstrated that S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab was non-inferior, based on progression-free survival (PFS), to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6)/capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOX) plus bevacizumab as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Overall survival (OS) data were immature at the time of the primary analysis.

METHODS

In total, 487 patients from 53 institutions with previously untreated mCRC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mFOLFOX6/CapeOX plus bevacizumab (control group) or S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (experimental group; 3- or 4-week regimen). The final OS data were analysed from follow-up data collected until 30th September 2017.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up period of 48.7 months, median survival times were 32.6 and 34.3 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-1.10, P = 0.293) and median PFS durations were 10.8 and 14.0 months in the control and experimental groups, respectively (HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71-1.04, P < 0.0001 for non-inferiority). In patients with left-sided RAS wild-type tumours, median PFS durations were 11.4 and 16.9 months in the control and experimental groups, respectively (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.48-0.96, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab resulted in comparable OS and non-inferior PFS with that of mFOLFOX6/CapeOX plus bevacizumab treatment as first-line chemotherapy for patients with mCRC. We recommend the use of S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab as a standard first-line regimen independent of tumour sidedness or RAS status in mCRC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR: 000007834.

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.

A Phase I Trial of Oxaliplatin, Irinotecan, and S-1 Combination Therapy (OX-IRIS) as Chemotherapy for Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer (HGCSG 1403)

LESSONS LEARNED

Because S-1 is orally administered, OX-IRIS does not necessitate the continuous infusion of 5-FU and is more convenient. The recommended dose of OX-IRIS was determined to be level -1 (oxaliplatin, 65 mg/m² ; irinotecan, 100 mg/m² ; S-1, 80 mg/m² ), which has manageable safety and promising anticancer activities.

BACKGROUND

OX-IRIS is a new combination therapy of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and S-1 for unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which may be beneficial because S-1 is administered orally and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is not needed.

METHODS

Patients who had not received prior therapy for unresectable PDAC were enrolled. Adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous histology was required. Oxaliplatin and irinotecan were administered on days 1 and 15; S-1 was administered orally twice a day on days 1-14, followed by 14 days of rest (one cycle). Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary endpoints were safety, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In level 0 (oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m² ; irinotecan, 100 mg/m² ; S-1, 80 mg/m² ), two of five patients experienced DLT. In level -1 (oxaliplatin, 65 mg/m² ; irinotecan, 100 mg/m² ; S-1, 80 mg/m² ), DLT could not be evaluated in two of eight patients because one cycle was not completed; one of the remaining six patients experienced DLT. Anemia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, nausea, anorexia, diarrhea, and peripheral sensory neuropathy were seen frequently in levels 0 and -1. ORR was 30% in levels 0 and -1. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 4.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.0-8.9 months) and 13.7 months (95% CI, 4.8-22.6 months), respectively.

CONCLUSION

MTD of OX-IRIS therapy was estimated to be level 0, and the recommended dose (RD) for future trial was level -1.

Oral drugs in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common forms of cancer, with an estimated 1.36 million new cases and almost 700,000 deaths annually. Approximately 21% of patients with CRC have metastatic disease at diagnosis. The objective of this article is to review the literature on the efficacy and safety of oral drugs available for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Several such drugs have been developed, and fluoropyrimidines are the backbone of chemotherapy in this indication. They exert their antitumour activity by disrupting the synthesis and function of DNA and RNA. Oral fluoropyrimidines include prodrugs capecitabine, tegafur, eniluracil/5-fluorouracil, tegafur/uracil, tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil and trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI). Oral drugs offer several advantages over injectable formulations, including convenience, flexibility, avoidance of injection-related adverse events (AEs) and, in some circumstances, lower costs. However, oral drugs may not be suitable for patients with gastrointestinal obstruction or malabsorption, they may result in reduced treatment adherence and should not be co-administered with drugs that interfere with absorption or hepatic metabolism. Oral fluoropyrimidines such as capecitabine, as monotherapy or in combination with oxaliplatin, irinotecan or bevacizumab, are as effective as intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in first-line treatment of mCRC. Other oral fluoropyrimidines, such as FTD/TPI, are effective in patients with mCRC who are refractory, intolerant or ineligible for 5-FU. In addition, oral fluoropyrimidines are used in adjuvant treatment of mCRC. Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor used in patients in whom several previous lines of therapy have failed. Frequent AEs associated with oral drugs used in the treatment of CRC include hand-foot syndrome and gastrointestinal and haematological toxicities.

Evaluation of the Expression Profile of Irinotecan-Induced Diarrhea in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Irinotecan (CPT-11) is widely used for the treatment of unresectable colorectal cancer in combination with fluoropyrimidines, such as 5-fluorouracil and S-1. Diarrhea is one of the adverse effects associated with CPT-11 and frequently reported by patients treated with CPT-11-containing regimens combined with oral fluoropyrimidines. However, the mechanisms involved in this process, as well as whether fluctuations in the frequency and differences in the onset time of diarrhea with each CPT-11-containing regimen are caused by drug interactions remain unclear. Therefore, we examined the incidence of diarrhea caused by each CPT-11-containing regimen in patients with colorectal cancer using data from the large voluntary reporting Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database. Firstly, we searched for suspected drugs related to the occurrence of diarrhea using reported odds ratio and calculated the signal score to assess drug–drug interactions. Subsequently, we conducted a time-to-onset analysis using Weibull distribution. The results showed that the combination of CPT-11 with S-1 increased the frequency of diarrhea due to a pharmacological interaction but delayed its onset. The present results may contribute to the appropriate management of drug-induced adverse effects by healthcare professionals.

Clinical efficacy and safety of second line and salvage aflibercept for advanced colorectal cancer in Akita prefecture

BACKGROUND

Angiogenesis inhibitors (AIs) combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy is a promising treatment for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Aflibercept (AFL) is an option for second-line treatment of CRC, according to the ‘VELOUR’ trial. Currently, we can choose from three AIs, including bevacizumab, ramucirumab, and AFL. Different AIs can be used in subsequent treatment because of their distinctive mechanisms of action. We addressed the uncertainty regarding AFL efficacy and safety in heavily-treated patients by comparing outcomes of survival treatment with second-line treatment.

AIM

To determine and compare the efficacy and safety profiles of AFL in the second-line and salvage therapy settings.

METHODS

Clinical data of 41 patients with advanced CRC who received intravenous AFL combined with the folinic acid-fluorouracil-irinotecan (FOLFIRI) regimen were collected retrospectively from six institutions in Japan, for the period from May 2017 to March 2019. Patient characteristics collected included age, sex, tumor location, RAS and RAF status, metastatic sites, number of previous treatment cycles, therapeutic response, adverse events, duration of previous AI treatment, and survival time. The end points were time to AFL treatment failure (aTTF) and median survival time post-AFL (aMST). Statistical analyses were performed to compare the efficacy and safety in the second-line setting with those of the salvage therapy setting, which was defined as the days since the end of second-line therapy.

RESULTS

All 41 patients who received AFL + FOLFIRI for advanced CRC had metastatic or unresectable cancer. Twenty-two patients received AFL in the second-line setting and nineteen in the salvage therapy setting. The patient characteristics were similar in the two groups, except for two factors. The median duration of the previous AI administration was shorter in the second-line patients compared with that in the salvage therapy patients (144 d vs 323 d, P = 0.006). In the second-line and salvage therapy groups, the objective response rates were 11% and 0%, respectively (P = 0.50), and the disease control rates were 53% and 50%, respectively (P = 1.00). In the second-line and salvage therapy groups, the aTTF (123 d vs 71 d, respectively), aMST (673 d vs 396 d, respectively), and incidence of adverse events of grade 3 [8 (36%) vs 9 (47%)] were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

AFL can be used to treat advanced CRC patients, with a similar safety and efficacy in the salvage therapy setting as in the second-line setting.

Efficacy of modified bevacizumab-XELOX therapy in Japanese patients with stage IV recurrent or non-resectable colorectal cancer

Background

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been conducted for patients with non-resectable colorectal cancer; however, few reports of a systematic approach to NAC exist. At our hospital, bevacizumab with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (B-mab XELOX) has been used as chemotherapy for Stage IV colorectal cancer since 2014. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NAC with a molecular-targeting agent for Stage IV colorectal cancer.

Methods

A retrospective, single-institute analysis was performed including 27 patients with advanced recurrent cancer following primary tumor resection and 43 patients with non-resectable tumors and remote metastasis. At the time of resection, 17 were receiving chemotherapy. All 70 patients received at least 3 cycles of B-mab XELOX (total: 920 cycles). We determined the 1-year progression-free survival (1Y-PFS), 1-year overall survival (1Y-OS), 3Y-PFS, 3Y-OS, and number of treatment cycles. The objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, and adverse events were assessed. The number of chemotherapy cycles, survival time, and R0 surgery rate were determined for patients who underwent RO conversion surgery.

Results

The 1Y-PFS was 28.5% [median survival time (MST): 7.4 months], 1Y-OS was 76.6% (MST not reached), 3Y-PFS was 5.5% (MST: 7.4 months), and 3Y-OS was 26.4% (MST: 25.2 months). The mean and median number of cycles of B-mab XELOX was 13.1 and 10.5, respectively. The objective response rate was 28.6%, and the clinical benefit rate was 58.6%. Grade 1 or Grade 2 adverse events occurred in 60 patients (85.7%); however, they all resolved without intervention. A single Grade 4 event (perforation of the primary tumor) occurred in 1 patient (1.4%). RO conversion surgery was performed in 7 patients (10.0%; primary + liver in 2 patients, primary + lung in 1 patient, liver in 3 patients, and primary in 1 patient). These patients received 3 to 10 cycles preoperatively (mean: 7.3; median: 6.5). R0 surgery was achieved in 5 of the 7 patients (71.4%). Postoperative survival ranged from 1 to 26 months (MST: 8 months).

Conclusions

This modified regimen was safe and effective in Japanese patients, and a high quality of life/quality-adjusted life-year was achieved. To further evaluate PFS and OS, more patients are being investigated.

Phase II study of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab by RAS mutation status in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard therapies: JFMC51-1702-C7

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) plus bevacizumab (BEV) against metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been demonstrated, little is known about its effectiveness upon disease stratification by RAS mutations. In this phase II study, we investigated the efficacy and safety profiles of FTD/TPI in mCRC according to RAS mutation status.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were mCRC refractory or intolerant to all standard therapies other than FTD/TPI and regorafenib. Patients received 4-week cycles of treatment with FTD/TPI (35 mg/m², twice daily, days 1-5 and 8-12) and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg, days 1 and 15). The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR). The null hypothesis of DCR in both RAS wild-type (WT) and mutant (MUT) cohorts was 44%, assuming a one-sided significance level of 5.0%. The necessary sample size was estimated to be 49 patients (target sample size: 50 patients) for each cohort.

RESULTS

Between January and September 2018, 102 patients were enrolled, and 97 patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria (48 in the RAS WT cohort and 49 in the RAS MUT cohort). DCRs in the RAS WT and MUT cohort were 66.7% [90% confidence interval (CI), 53.9%-77.8%, P = 0.0013] and 55.1% (90% CI, 42.4%-67.3%, P = 0.0780), respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.8 and 9.3 months, respectively, in the RAS WT cohort and 3.5 and 8.4 months, respectively, in the RAS MUT cohort. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse event in both cohorts was neutropenia (46% in the RAS WT cohort and 62% in the RAS MUT cohort), without unexpected safety signals.

CONCLUSIONS

FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab showed promising activity with an acceptable safety profile for pretreated mCRC, regardless of RAS mutation status, although the efficacy outcomes tended to be better in RAS WT.

Real-World Evidence on Second-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Using Fluoropyrimidine, Irinotecan, and Angiogenesis Inhibitor

BACKGROUND

Combination therapy comprised of fluoropyrimidine plus irinotecan with an angiogenesis inhibitor is widely used as a second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of fluorouracil and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus ramucirumab (RAM); FOLFIRI plus aflibercept (AFL); irinotecan and S-1 (IRIS) plus bevacizumab (BEV); and capecitabine and irinotecan (CAPIRI) plus BEV, with FOLFIRI plus BEV serving as the control among mCRC patients who failed treatment with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin plus BEV. Data were collected from a medical claim database provided by Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd. (Tokyo, Japan). The primary outcome was time to treatment failure (TTF). Secondary outcomes were time to first subsequent therapy (TFST), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Among 3,136 patients assessed, TTF was significantly shorter with FOLFIRI plus RAM (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-1.56; P < .001) and FOLFIRI plus AFL (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.09-1.66; P = .002), and significantly longer with IRIS plus BEV (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.92; P = .002). TFST was significantly shorter with FOLFIRI plus RAM (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17-1.49; P < .001); no significant difference in OS was observed. The incidences of neutropenia requiring granulocyte colony-stimulating factor were significantly lower with IRIS plus BEV and CAPIRI plus BEV.

CONCLUSION

Regarding TTF, BEV seemed to be a favorable option compared with RAM and AFL when combined with FOLFIRI, and IRIS might be preferable compared to FOLFIRI when combined with BEV for patients who failed to respond to fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and BEV.

A phase II study of S-1 and cisplatin with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy followed by durvalumab for unresectable, locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in Japan (SAMURAI study)

Background:

Based on the results of the PACIFIC study, chemoradiotherapy followed by 1-year consolidation therapy with durvalumab was established as the standard of care for unresectable, locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). However, some topics not foreseen in that design can be explored, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after the start of chemoradiotherapy, the proportion of patients who proceeded to consolidation therapy with durvalumab, and the optimal chemotherapeutic regimens. In Japan, the combination regimen of S-1 + cisplatin (SP), for which the results of multiple clinical studies have suggested a good balance of efficacy and tolerability, is frequently selected in clinical settings. However, the efficacy and safety of consolidation therapy with durvalumab following this SP regimen have not been evaluated. We therefore planned a multicenter, prospective, single-arm, phase II study.

Methods:

In treatment-naïve LA-NSCLC, two cycles of combination chemotherapy with S-1 (80–120 mg/body, Days 1–14) + cisplatin (60 mg/m², Day 1) will be administered at an interval of 4 weeks, with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy (60 Gy). Responders will then receive durvalumab every 2 weeks for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint is 1-year PFS rate.

Discussion:

Compared with the conventional standard regimen in Japan, the SP regimen is expected to be associated with lower incidences of pneumonitis, esophagitis, and febrile neutropenia, which complicate the initiation of consolidation therapy with durvalumab, and have higher antitumor efficacy during chemoradiotherapy. Therefore, SP-based chemoradiotherapy is expected to be successfully followed by consolidation therapy with durvalumab in more patients, resulting in prolonged PFS and OS. Toxicity and efficacy results of the SP regimen in this study will also provide information important to the future establishment of the concurrent combination of chemoradiotherapy and durvalumab.

Trial registration:

Japan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCTs031190127, registered 1 November 2019, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs031190127

Advanced colorectal cancer subtypes (aCRCS) help select oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based therapy for colorectal cancer

Oxaliplatin (OX) and irinotecan (IRI) are used as key drugs for the first‐line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, no biomarkers have been identified to decide which of the drugs is initially used. In this translational research (TR) of the TRICOLORE trial, the advanced colorectal cancer subtype (aCRCS) was analyzed as a potential biomarker for the selection of OX or IRI. We collected 335 (68.8%) formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) primary tumor specimens from 487 patients registered in the TRICOLORE trial and performed direct sequencing and immunohistochemical staining of CRC‐related genes, comprehensive gene‐expression analysis, and genome‐wide methylation analysis. The progression‐free survival (PFS) of the IRI group was significantly better compared with the OX group in BRAF wild‐type (WT), PTEN‐positive, and aCRCS A1 patients. Among the molecular factors, aCRCS were only associated with the PFS of OX and IRI groups. The PFS of the IRI group was significantly better compared with the OX group in aCRCS A1 + B1 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41‐0.82; P = .0023). In contrast, the OX group had better PFS compared with the IRI group in aCRCS B2, although this was not statistically significant (HR = 1.66; 95% CI = 0.94‐2.96; P = .083). Nearly half of patients with mCRC (46.8%, aCRCS A1 + B1) respond well to IRI, while only about 18.5% (aCRCS B2) of patients with mCRC responded well to OX. In conclusion, the aCRCS might be a predictive factor for the clinical outcomes of OX‐based and IRI‐based therapies.

Treatment sequences of patients with advanced colorectal cancer and use of second-line FOLFIRI with antiangiogenic drugs in Japan: A retrospective observational study using an administrative database

The objectives were to describe treatment sequences for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), use of second-line FOLFIRI (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan) plus antiangiogenic drug (bevacizumab, ramucirumab, aflibercept beta) therapy, and the factors associated with the duration of antitumor drug treatment from second-line antiangiogenic therapy in Japan. This retrospective observational study was conducted using a Japanese hospital-based administrative database. Patients were enrolled if they started adjuvant therapy (and presumably experienced early recurrence) or first-line treatment for advanced CRC between May 2016 and July 2019, and were analysed until September 2019. Factors associated with overall treatment duration from second-line treatment with FOLFIRI plus antiangiogenic drugs were explored with multivariate Cox regression analysis. The most common first-line treatments were FOLFOX (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine, oxaliplatin) with bevacizumab (presumed RAS-mutant CRC) and FOLFOX with panitumumab (presumed RAS-wild type CRC). The most common second-line treatments were FOLFIRI-based. Many patients did not transition to subsequent lines of therapy. For second-line treatment, antiangiogenic drugs were prescribed more often for patients with presumed RAS-mutant CRC, right-sided CRC, and independent activities of daily living (ADL). The median duration of second-line FOLFIRI plus antiangiogenic drug treatment was 4.5 months; 66.2% of patients transitioned to third-line therapy. Low body mass index and not fully independent ADL were significantly associated with shorter overall duration of antitumor drug treatment from second-line therapy. Left-sided CRC, presumed RAS-wild type CRC, previous use of oral fluoropyrimidines and use of proteinuria qualitative tests, antihypertensives, or anticholinergics during second-line therapy were significantly associated with longer treatment. Treatment of advanced CRC in Japan is consistent with both international and Japanese guidelines, but transition rates to subsequent therapies need improvement. In addition to antitumor drug treatment, better ADL, higher body mass index, management of hypertension, and proteinuria tests were associated with continuation of sequential therapy that included antiangiogenic drugs.

Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

Irinotecan (IRI) and oxaliplatin (Ox) are standard therapeutic agents of the first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that treatment with Ox-based compared with IRI-based regimens was associated with better overall survival (OS). However, these reports did not include trials of molecular targeting agents and did not take methods for the administration of concomitant drugs, such as bolus or continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil, into account. A systematic literature review was performed to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles between IRI- and Ox-based regimens as the first-line treatments for mCRC.

Methods

This meta-analysis used data from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and SCOPUS. The primary endpoint was OS, and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs).

Results

Nineteen trials involving 4571 patients were included in the analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of OS, PFS, and ORR. There was no significant heterogeneity. Regarding ≥ grade 3 AEs, IRI-based regimens were associated with a high incidence of leukopenia, febrile neutropenia, and diarrhea. Moreover, there was a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients who received Ox-based regimens. In a subgroup analysis, IRI combined with bevacizumab was correlated with a better PFS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.82–0.98, P = 0.02), but not with OS (pooled HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.80–1.03, P = 0.15).

Conclusion

Although the safety profiles of IRI- and Ox-based regimens varied, their efficacy did not significantly differ. The combination of anti-VEGF antibody and IRI was associated with better PFS compared with anti-VEGF antibody and Ox. Both regimens could be used as the first-line treatments for mCRC with consideration of the patients’ condition or toxicity profiles.

Prospective evaluation and refinement of an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function for clinical application

In patients with impaired renal function, S-1-related toxicities increase due to higher exposure of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Our previous pharmacokinetic study in 16 cancer patients with various renal functions developed an S-1 dosage formula based on individual creatinine clearance (CLcr) and body surface area (BSA). To evaluate and refine the formula, this prospective study was conducted. Thirty-three patients with various renal functions received S-1 for 4 weeks at doses determined by the nomogram derived from the previously developed formula. A series of blood samples were collected after the first dose to calculate the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of 5-FU. Thirty patients with BSA of 1.14-1.84 m² and CLcr of 23.8-96.4 mL/min were assessable for pharmacokinetics. The observed daily AUC ranged from 712.6 to 2868.7 ng·h/mL, and 18 patients achieved the target AUC (1447.8 ± 545.4 ng·h/mL). Three patients experienced S-1-related grade 3 adverse events during the first course. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis from the combined data of 46 patients in this study and the previous study, sex was identified as a statistically significant covariate for 5-FU clearance. Hence, the refined formula includes sex as an additional factor: Recommended daily dose = target AUC × (14.5 + 8.23 × SEX [0 for female and 1 for male] + 0.301 × CLcr) × BSA. Revised nomograms for recommended daily doses derived from the refined formula can be used in clinical practice to achieve the target AUC ensuring efficacy and safety of S-1.

Randomized phase II study comparing the efficacy and safety of SOX versus mFOLFOX6 as neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (KSCC1301)

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT), the current standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), is associated with many radiotherapy (RT)-related side effects. We aimed to evaluate whether S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX) or folinic acid, 5-FU, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) can be as effective as neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens for LARC without RT.

METHODS

Patients with untreated resectable LARC were randomly assigned to receive SOX or mFOLFOX6. The NAC protocol period was 3 months. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary endpoints included pathological effects, surgical completion rate, 3-year survival, and safety.

RESULTS

From September 2013 to October 2015, 56 and 54 patients were enrolled in the SOX and mFOLFOX6 arms, respectively. The 3-year DFS rates were 69.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 54.9-83.6) and 73.4% (95% CI 58.7-83.6) in the SOX and mFOLFOX6 arms, respectively; no significant differences were found between the arms (log-rank test; P = 0.5315, hazard ratio: 0.808, 95% CI 0.414-1.578). The 3-year survival rates were 92.3 and 91.8% in the SOX and mFOLFOX6 arms, respectively. The surgical completion rate was 98.1% overall, 100% in the SOX arm, and 96.0% in the mFOLFOX6 arm. The incidences of pathological response rates ≥grade 1b were 41.5 and 43.8% in the SOX and mFOLFOX6 arms, respectively. Both treatments were manageable and tolerable.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of SOX and mFOLFOX6, both of which may be new neoadjuvant treatment candidates in previously untreated LARC cases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Date of enrolment of the first participant to the trial: 3rd Oct 2013; This study was registered in the UMIN clinical trials registry on 14th Aug, 2013. (Prospectively registered, UMIN-CTR number UMIN000011486). https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr.cgi?function=brows&recptno=R000013441&language=J.

Efficacy and Safety of Bevacizumab Plus Oxaliplatin- or Irinotecan-Based Doublet Backbone Chemotherapy as the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Guidelines recommend combined doublet backbone chemotherapy based on 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (OX) or irinotecan (IR) as the first-line treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, it is still unknown which is better when combined with bevacizumab (BEV). This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare BEV-IR with BEV-OX regimens in terms of efficacy and safety.

METHODS

We searched studies from databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and conference papers. The outcomes were overall response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, and the incidence of the most common adverse events. The dichotomous data were reported as the risk ratio (RR) and the survival outcomes were extracted as the hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Eleven studies including 5632 patients were identified. No difference was found in overall survival or overall response rate between BEV-IR and BEV-OX regimens. The pooled progression-free survival was significantly longer in the BEV-IR group than the BEV-OX group (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, p = 0.08). Compared with the BEV-OX group, the BEV-IR group was related to a higher risk of bleeding events (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.98, p = 0.03), venous thromboembolism (RR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.46-0.79, p = 0.0002), and diarrhea (RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.80, p < 0.00001). Conversely, the BEV-OX group was related to a higher risk of thrombocytopenia (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67-3.42, p < 0.00001) and neuropathy (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.90-7.64, p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

The BEV-IR regimen was superior in improving progression-free survival as the first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. The two different doublet regimens combined with BEV had their specific features of adverse events.

Hypertriglyceridemia induced by S-1: A novel case report and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

S-1, a compounding agent of tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil potassium, is one of the most effective chemotherapeutic agents for colorectal cancer. In this case, following S-1 administration, we observed predominant elevation of serum triglyceride.

CASE REPORT

A 49-year-old man with stage IV transverse colon adenocarcinoma received S-1 + irinotecan + bevacizumab. At the end of the S-1 administration period in every course, his serum triglyceride level was found to be elevated. Finally, it reached grade 4, without any symptoms of acute pancreatitis in the fifth course, and fenofibrate 80 mg once a day was administered.Management & outcome: Interestingly, the elevation spontaneously normalized without any pharmacotherapy 14 days after S-1 withdrawal, and this elevation did not occur when S-1 was not administered. Further, fenofibrate administration attenuated the hypertriglyceridemia to grades 1-3, with no complications.

DISCUSSION

S-1 administration induced hypertriglyceridemia owing to the elevated serum triglyceride; however, a contrasting result was observed in the S-1 withdrawal period and during the S-1-cessation cycle. Since dietary intake was poorer during the S-1 administration period, it is considered that S-1 might have disturbed lipid metabolism. Further, we know that capecitabine, which is a prodrug of fluorouracil, also induces hypertriglyceridemia. As the end product of these medicines is fluorouracil, the presence of fluorouracil or its metabolizing enzymes, the genetic background of the patient might have affected the results. We have to be aware of the risk of asymptomatic and temporal occurrence of hypertriglyceridemia by S-1 administration for the early detection with appropriate pre-emptive treatment.

Impact of sex and histology on the therapeutic effects of fluoropyrimidines and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in the SOFT trial

Mechanisms accounting for sex differences in the incidence of adverse events caused by fluoropyrimidine treatments, and histologic differences in efficacy are insufficiently understood. We determined differences between the sexes in terms of the safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX)/bevacizumab-versus-l-leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)/bevacizumab, and the impact of histology on their therapeutic effects, in 512 unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients from the SOFT phase III study. Nausea (OR: 2.88, P < 0.001) and vomiting (OR: 3.04, P = 0.005) occurred more frequently in females than males treated with SOX/bevacizumab, while nausea (OR: 2.12, P = 0.006), vomiting (OR: 3.26, P = 0.004), leukopenia (OR: 2.61, P < 0.001), neutropenia (OR: 2.92, P < 0.001), and alopecia (OR: 4.13, P < 0.001) were higher in females on FOLFOX/bevacizumab. Mean relative dose intensities (RDIs) of S-1 during all cycles of SOX/bevacizumab were significantly lower in females (73.9%) than males (81.5%) (P < 0.001), while RDIs of continuous infusion of 5-FU in the FOLFOX/bevacizumab regimen were 75.0% in females and 80.5% in males (P = 0.005). No significant differences in efficacy with regard to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were identified between the sexes for either SOX/bevacizumab or FOLFOX/bevacizumab treatment. Patients with poorly-differentiated adenocarcinoma had significantly worse OS (HR: 2.72, 95% CI: 1.67-4.44, P < 0.0001) and PFS (HR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.18-3.02, P = 0.0079) than patients with well- or moderately-differentiated adenocarcinoma. Female patients experienced more frequent and severe adverse reactions to SOX/bevacizumab and FOLFOX/bevacizumab and a worse prognosis for poorly-differentiated adenocarcinoma were confirmed in this phase III study. This warrants further translational research to identify the responsible mechanisms.

A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy or combination therapy as first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety profile of S-1-based versus non-S-1-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in mCRC.

METHODS

Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and Ovid databases and the Cochrane library from database set up in May 2018. The RCTs of S-1-based monotherapy or combination therapy as first-line treatment were selected. The impact of S-1-based chemotherapy on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by pooling data via RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of 10 RCTs showed that S-1-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, P = 0.006). In subgroup analysis, there was a statistically significant increase in PFS when S-1-based chemotherapy was compared with 5-FU-based (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.00, P = 0.04) or capecitabine-based chemotherapy (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99, P = 0.04). The meta-analysis of OS (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.05, P = 0.36), overall response rate (ORR) (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84-1.17, P = 0.90), and disease control rate (DCR) (HR 1.61, 95% CI 0.87-3.00, P = 0.13) showed no statistical significance between S-1-based and non-S-1-based chemotherapy. The statistically significant differences in the meta-analysis indicated less incidence of graded 3-4 leucopenia (OR = 0.30, 95% CI 0.13-0.71, P = 0.006) and hand-foot syndrome (HFS) (OR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58, P = 0.001) in the S-1-based chemotherapy, and there was no statistically significant difference for other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

S-1-based chemotherapy in mono or combined therapy was an attractive alternative to standard first-line regimen for patients of mCRC.

Oral S-1 with 24-h Infusion of Irinotecan plus Bevacizumab versus FOLFIRI plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Open-Label Randomized Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab have been widely used as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics suggested a low dose of irinotecan given as a long-term infusion is expected to enhance antitumor activity. We conducted a randomized phase II study to compare oral S-1 with a 24-h infusion of irinotecan plus bevacizumab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab.

METHODS

The subjects comprised 120 chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRC. The study group received a 24-h infusion of irinotecan at a dose of 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, combined with oral S-1 80 mg/m2 on days 1-14 (24h-SIRI/B). The FOLFIRI/B group received irinotecan at a dose of 150 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil given at a dose of 400 mg/m2 as a bolus injection and at a dose of 2,400 mg/m2 as a 46-h infusion, and 200 mg/m2 leucovorin on days 1 and 15. Bevacizumab was given at a dose of 5.0 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 in both groups. Treatment was repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was 1-year progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were PFS, response rates (RR), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

From December 2013 through January 2018, 120 patients were randomly assigned, 61 patients to the 24h-SIRI/B and 59 patients to the FOLFIRI/B. The median follow-up period was 22.8 months. The 1-year PFS rate was 43.14% in the 24h-SIRI/B arm and 19.15% in the FOLFIRI/B arm (HR = 0.312 [95%CI 0.13-0.78], p = 0.01). The median PFS was 10.2 months (95%CI 8.8-14.3) and 10.0 months (95%CI 7.4-11.0), and the median OS was 29.7 months (95%CI 22.9-43.9) and 28.8 months (95%CI 18.4-ND), respectively (p = 0.3758, p = 0.8234). The overall RR was 86.3 and 61.7%, respectively (p = 0.0053). AEs were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the 24h-SIRI/B regimen is an effective and reasonably well-tolerated regimen for the first-line treatment of mCRC.

Quality of life assessment and reporting in colorectal cancer: A systematic review of phase III trials published between 2012 and 2018

BACKGROUND

In this study, our aim was to describe quality of life (QoL) prevalence and heterogeneity in QoL reporting in colorectal cancer phase III trials.

METHODS

We included all phase III trials evaluating anticancer drugs in colorectal cancer patients published between 2012 and 2018 by 11 major journals.

RESULTS

Out of the 67 publications identified, in 41 (61.2 %) QoL was not listed among endpoints. Out of 26 primary publications of trials including QoL among endpoints, QoL results were not reported in 10 (38.5 %). Overall, no QoL data were available in 51/67 (76.1 %) primary publications. In particular, in the metastatic setting, QoL data were not available in 12/18 (66.7 %) trials with primary endpoint overall survival, and in 20/29 (69.0 %) trials with other primary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

QoL was absent in a high proportion of recently published phase III trials in colorectal cancer, even in trials of second or further lines, where attention to QoL should be particularly high.