Raltitrexed plus Oxaliplatin in the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Evidence Following Conditional NICE Technology Appraisal Recommendations: A Critical Analysis of Methods, Quality and Risk of Bias

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) may approve health technologies on condition of more evidence generated only in research (OiR) or only with research (OwR). NICE specifies the information needed to comply with its request, although it may not necessarily guarantee good quality and timely evidence for re-appraisal, before reaching a final decision.

AIM

This study aimed to critically appraise the methods, quality and risk of bias of evidence generated in response to NICE OiR and OwR technology appraisal (TA) and highly specialised technologies (HSTs) recommendations.

METHODS

NICE TAs (between March 2000 and September 2020) and HST evaluations (to October 2023) of medicines were reviewed. Conditional recommendations were analysed to identify the evidence requested by NICE for re-appraisal. The new evidence was analysed for compliance with NICE's request and assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tools for risk of bias in randomised trials and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised evidence.

RESULTS

NICE made 54 conditional recommendations from TAs (13 OiR and 41 OwR) and five conditional recommendations for HSTs (all OwR). Of these, 16 TAs presented additional evidence for re-appraisal (9 OiR [69%] and 7 OwR [17%]) and three HSTs (3 OwR [60%]). Two of the nine re-appraised TAs with OiR recommendation and four of the seven OwR complied fully with NICE's request for further evidence, while all three from the HSTs complied. The majority of re-appraised TAs and HSTs included evidence that was deemed to be at serious, high, moderate or unclear risk of bias. Among the 26 randomised controlled trials from TAs assessed, eight were categorised as having low risk of bias in all domains and ten had at least one domain as a high risk of bias. Reporting was unclear for the remainder. Twenty-two non-randomised studies, primarily single-arm studies, were susceptible to biases mostly due to the selection of participants and to confounding. Two HSTs provided evidence from randomised controlled trials which were classified as unclear or high risk of bias. All non-randomised evidence from HSTs were categorised as moderate or serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

There is widespread non-compliance with agreed data requests and important variation in the quality of evidence submitted in response to NICE conditional approval recommendations. Quality standards ought to be stipulated in respect to evidence contributing to re-appraisals following NICE conditional approval recommendations.

Preliminary outcomes of raltitrexed eluting bead-transarterial chemoembolization using Callispheres® beads for gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma liver metastasis

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) with Callispheres® beads (CB) is currently used in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, clinical data regarding DEB-TACE using raltitrexed-eluting CB for gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma liver metastases (GALM) treatment is limited. We aimed to report the preliminary outcomes of DEB-TACE using CB in unresectable GALM patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled unresectable GALM patients who were treated with DEB-TACE using raltitrexed-eluting CB from October 2018 to October 2021. Totally, 25 patients, 18 males and 7 females, mean age 66.8±9.5 years, were continuously enrolled. Postoperative treatment response, survival rates, and complication were calculated during the procedure and follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were technically successful, with a technical success rate of 96.0%. The 3-month overall response rate and disease control rate were 21.7% and 73.9%, and 6-month overall response rate and disease control rate were 30.0% and 65.0%. The median survival time from diagnosis of GALM was 31.3 months. The median survival time and median PFS from first DEB-TACE was 21.3 months (95% confidence interval 9.1-33.5) and 10.7 months (3.7-17.7), respectively. Main adverse events included abdominal pain (36.0%), fever (12.0%), and nausea/vomiting (28.0%) after DEB-TACE. No treatment-related deaths and grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

DEB-TACE using raltitrexed eluting CB was demonstrated as a safe and efficient alternative choice for GALM.

Efficacy and safety of raltitrexed-based transarterial chemoembolization for colorectal cancer liver metastases

The liver is the most common site of colorectal cancer metastases. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with raltitrexed and oxaliplatin for colorectal liver metastases in a prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial conducted in 12 hospitals from different areas in China. A total of 90 patients with colorectal liver metastases were enrolled and treated by TACE with raltitrexed 4 mg and oxaliplatin 100 mg, followed by embolotherapy with 50 mg oxaliplatin and 5-20 ml lipiodol, administered every 28 days for four cycles. Patients were followed up every 3 months after the treatment and up to 12 months. The primary endpoint was time to progression. For the full analysis set (FAS), the median time to progression and overall survival were 9.1 and 17.8 months, respectively. The disease control rate in FAS was 71 (78.9%). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported for 24 (26.7%) out of all 90 patients. Grade 3 thrombocytopenia, transglutaminase abnormality, and decreased neutrophil were observed in eight (8.9%), six (6.7%), and five (5.6%) patients, respectively. No unexpected adverse events or toxic deaths were observed. TACE with raltitrexed plus oxaliplatin is feasible, clinically beneficial, and well tolerated with low-grade toxicity for colorectal cancer patients with liver metastases.

Raltitrexed-based chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer

AIMS

To evaluate the efficiency and safety profile of raltitrexed-based chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.

METHODS

An electronic search was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials comparing raltitrexed-based regimen to 5-fluorouracil-based regimen in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. The outcomes included overall survival, overall response rate and toxicities.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 11 studies with 4622 patients. Overall, there were no significant differences between the two regimens in terms of overall survival (HR=1.06, 95% CI: 0.96-1.17, P=0.23) or overall response rate (RR=1.09, 95% CI: 0.86-1.38, P=0.47). In subgroup analysis, patients in raltitrexed/oxaliplatin group had significantly higher partial response (RR=1.53, 95% CI: 1.17-2.00, P=0.002), overall response rate (RR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.10-1.82, P=0.006), disease control rate (RR=1.16, 95% CI: 1.04-1.29, P=0.009) and lower progressive disease (RR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.84, P=0.002) when compared to 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin group. Occurrence of severe anemia (RR=2.23, 95% CI: 1.38-3.59, P=0.0001), asthenia (RR=2.29, 95% CI: 1.36-3.84, P=0.002), hepatic disorders (RR=7.51, 95% CI: 1.30-43.56, P=0.02), and nausea/vomit (RR=1.70, 95% CI: 1.03-2.81, P=0.04) were significantly higher with the raltitrexed arm treatment, while frequencies of grade 3/4 alopecia (RR=0.36, 95% CI: 0.26-0.50, P<0.00001) and stomatitis/mucositis (RR=0.14, 95% CI: 0.07-0.31, P<0.00001) were increased in the 5-fluorouracil group.

CONCLUSIONS

Raltitrexed-based chemotherapy regimen leads to an equivalent overall survival and response rates with acceptable toxicities compared to traditional 5-fluorouracil-based regimen in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Raltitrexed can be a treatment option for these patients when 5-fluorouracil-based regimens are not tolerated or inappropriate.

A randomized phase II study to compare oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) versus oxaliplatin plus raltitrexed (TOMOX) as first-line chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare TOMOX versus FOLFOX4 as first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

191 chemotherapy-naïve patients were randomized to receive TOMOX or FOLFOX4. Patients were evaluated every 3 months and chemotherapy was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Overall response rate was the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

183 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis (92 TOMOX and 91 FOLFOX4). Overall response rate was 45.6 and 36.3 % (p = 0.003) for TOMOX and FOLFOX4, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in overall survival (15.6 and 17.2 months; p = 0.475); progression-free survival (7.7 and 8.7 months; p = 0.292), and response duration (6.4 and 7.6 months; p = 0.372) for TOMOX and FOLFOX4, respectively. Grades 3 and 4 neutropenia (p < 0.0001) and leukopenia (p = 0.028) were more common with the FOLFOX4 regimen, while hepatic disorders and asthenia were higher in TOMOX group (p = ns). There were two treatment-related deaths in the FOLFOX4 arm and one in the TOMOX arm. Quality of life analysis based on the SF-36 revealed differences between the two regimens for physical and mental composite scores after 6 weeks, and for body pain and emotional role functioning after 6 and 12 weeks; all of these favored the FOLFOX4 arm (p ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

TOMOX and FOLFOX4 seem to have similar efficacy and are well tolerated in the first-line treatment for advanced CRC with different profiles of toxicity. The convenient TOMOX regimen may offer an alternative to fluoropyrimidine-based regimens.

Beyond 5-fluorouracil: new horizons in systemic therapy for advanced colorectal cancer

Worldwide, colorectal cancer is a common cancer and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Patients frequently present with, or later develop, metastatic disease. Median survival with supportive care alone is approximately 6 - 8 months. However, a number of recent developments have greatly increased the range of therapeutic options, improving median survival to > 20 months. Cytotoxic agents such as capecitabine, irinotecan and oxaliplatin are now established treatment strategies. In parallel, an improved understanding of tumour biology has led to the development of non-cytotoxic targeted therapies. Examples include bevacizumab (targeting tumour angiogenesis) and cetuximab (targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor). These agents have recently been incorporated into standard management. This paper reviews these and other advances in the care of patients with advanced colorectal cancer and discusses a number of agents that are currently under development.