Rechallenge therapy versus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective study

Currently, the standard third-line treatment options for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include regorafenib, fruquintinib, and trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102), but these drugs have limited clinical efficacy. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and survival outcomes of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) versus chemotherapy rechallenge in third-line treatment for advanced mCRC patients. From January 2019 to December 2022, 107 patients met the inclusion criteria. After 1:1 matching, there were 34 patients in both the TKI and rechallenge groups. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictive factors. The result indicated that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0-1 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01-0.17; P < 0.001) and chemotherapy rechallenge (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.23-0.79; P = 0.007) were independent protective factors for overall survival (OS). Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) score of 0-3 (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.23-0.80; P = 0.008), progression-free survival (PFS) of frontline treatment (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43-1.00, P = 0.047) and chemotherapy rechallenge (HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.24-0.73; P = 0.002) were independent protective factors for PFS. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the median OS in the rechallenge group was 13.2 months (95% CI: 9.6-19.3), compared with 7.7 months (95% CI: 6.5-14.5) in the TKI group, with a statistically significant difference (HR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.26-0.86; P = 0.013). The median PFS for the rechallenge group was 5.0 months (95% CI: 4.3-6.7), compared with 3.4 months (95% CI: 2.7-4.8) in the TKI group, with a statistically significant difference too (HR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.32-0.91; P = 0.019). Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed that in Group A, the rechallenge group also had superior median OS and PFS compared with the TKI group. In conclusion, while TKIs are the current standard for third-line treatment in mCRC patients, chemotherapy rechallenge is a more effective option for patients who have achieved disease control in the first two lines of treatment.

Third-line treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective real-world study

Background

There are multiple recommendations on the third-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); however, no consensus has been reached.

Objectives

This study aimed to explore the patient demographics and the real-world third-line treatment landscape of mCRC.

Design

A retrospective real-world cohort study.

Methods

Electronic medical records of mCRC patients from Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between 2013 and 2020 were collected. Upon descriptive, comparative, and survival analyses, a retrospective study was conducted to describe demographics and clinical outcomes of mCRC patients receiving third-line treatment.

Results

Among 218 mCRC patients receiving third-line therapy, 65.5% received chemotherapy combined with or without targeted drugs, followed by anti-angiogenic monotherapy (18.4%), anti-epidermal growth factor receptor drugs (6.9%) and immunotherapy (6.4%). The overall response rate and disease control rate reached 10.2% and 59.2%, respectively; and median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 4.0 m and 10.7 m, respectively. After Cox multivariate analysis, we found that therapeutic regime was an independent prognostic factor. Compared to patients receiving anti-angiogenic monotherapy, those receiving chemotherapy combined with or without targeted drugs exhibited better prognosis. For patients whose PFS were longer in the front-line treatment, the PFS of third-line therapy was also relatively longer (p = 0.023). Multiple types of therapies (>3, p = 0.002) or multiple drugs (>5, p = 0.024) in the whole-course management of mCRC are indicators of longer survival.

Conclusion

Chemotherapy combined with or without targeted therapy remained dominated third-line choice and showed favorable efficacy compared with anti-angiogenic monotherapy. With the application of more types and quantities of effective drugs, patients would achieve better survival.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan (Nal-IRI)-based chemotherapy after irinotecan -based chemotherapy in patients with pancreas cancer

BACKGROUND

Nanoliposomal irinotecan (Nal-IRI) is a preferred second-line treatment for metastatic pancreas cancer. It is unclear, however, whether patients who had received irinotecan derive benefit.

METHODS

Medical records of metastatic pancreas cancer patients who had received irinotecan and then Nal-IRI were reviewed. The primary endpoint was overall survival after the initiation of Nal-IRI (an a priori threshold of >4 months defined success); adverse events and quotes from the medical record on decision-making were also recorded.

RESULTS

Sixty four patients met eligibility criteria with a median age of 65 years (range: 36, 80 years). The median overall survival from initiation of Nal-IRI was 5.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.3, 5.6 months). An exploratory comparison, based on no cancer progression with irinotecan versus progression, showed improved survival with Nal-IRI in the former group: 6.1 months (95% CI: 5.1, 9.3 months) versus 4.3 months (95% CI: 2.3, 4.8 months); p = 0.0006. Nal-IRI adverse events occurred as expected. Qualitative data illustrate several themes, including "limited treatment options," which appeared to drive the decision to prescribe Nal-IRI.

CONCLUSION

Nal-IRI might be considered in pancreas cancer patients who had received irinotecan, particularly in the absence of disease progression with the latter.

Oxaliplatin retreatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: Systematic review and future research opportunities

BACKGROUND

Oxaliplatin represents a main component of cytotoxic treatment regimens in colorectal cancer (CRC). Given its efficacy, oxaliplatin is frequently re-administered in the context of the continuum of care in metastatic CRC (mCRC). However, efficacy and tolerability of this therapeutic strategy has not been comprehensively assessed.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature on September 19th 2020, according to PRISMA criteria 2009. The research was performed on PubMed, ASCO Meeting Library, ESMO library and ClinicalTrials.gov for citations or ongoing trials.

RESULTS

64 records were retrieved and 13 included in the systematic review: 8 full-text articles, 4 abstracts and 1 ongoing clinical trial. According to readministration timing, studies were classified as rechallenge/reintroduction (n = 8) or stop & go/intermittent therapeutic strategies (n = 4). The studies presented wide heterogeneity in terms of efficacy (Response Rate 6-31%; Disease Control Rate 39-79%; median Progression-Free Survival 3.1-7 months). Those patients who received retreatment after prior adjuvant oxaliplatin or exploiting a stop-&-go strategy appeared to achieve better outcomes. However, no formal comparisons on treatment outcomes were feasible. The most frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events were hematologic toxicities (5-27%), peripheral neuropathy (5-14%) and hypersensitivity reactions (5-20%).

CONCLUSIONS

Retreatment with oxaliplatin for mCRC is practiced based on scarce and heterogeneous data indicating efficacy and manageable toxicity. The best strategy to exploit this approach remains to be defined, and the most promising research avenue to improve therapeutic index of oxaliplatin is represented by selection of responder patients whose tumors harbor molecular defects in the DNA damage repair pathway.

Readministration of Cancer Drugs in a Patient with Chemorefractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

A 63-year-old woman was admitted to our institution for severe pain in her right lower abdomen caused by the perforation of cecal cancer. She underwent emergency surgery, from which she was diagnosed with cecal carcinoma with liver, lung, and lymph node metastases. As she was taking aspirin to prevent cerebral infarction, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (receptor) antibody and regorafenib therapy were not used. Thus, we started a modified FOLFOX 6+cetuximab regimen. This first-line treatment initially achieved a partial response (PR), but she then developed progressive disease (PD) after 14 months. We changed the regimen to FOLFIRI, followed by trifluridine/tipiracil, but her progression-free survival periods were 2.7 months and 1 month, respectively. Although we cycled through the available array of standard cancer drugs, the patient showed a good performance status, and some benefit from treatment still seemed plausible. We readministered the 5-fluorouracil oral preparation S-1, which maintained stable disease (SD) for 7 months. After PD emerged, we readministered the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab for 7.5 months of SD. Finally, 39 months after her diagnosis, she died from rapidly progressing disease. However, her relatively long survival implies that readministering drugs similar to those used in previous regimens might benefit patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

AIM

To investigate treatment patterns and outcomes of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients beyond second progression (PD2) since regorafenib and TAS-102 became available in Hong Kong.

METHODS

The clinical records of consecutive mCRC patients who were treated beyond PD2 at Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Mary Hospital between June 2013 and February 2018, were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 176 PD2 patients (76.7% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 and a median follow-up time of 6.6 [range, 0.4-37.2] months), 104 (59%) underwent palliative care only and 72 (41%) received active third-line (3L) treatment: regorafenib (n = 22), TAS-102 (n = 6), chemotherapy + antiepidermal growth factor receptor (n = 12), chemotherapy + antivascular endothelial growth factor (n = 28) or clinical trials (n = 4). Patients on active 3L treatment had significantly longer OS than those on palliative care only: 11.7 versus 5.5 months (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.41, 95% confidence interval: 0.28-0.61, P < 0.001). For those on active treatment, OS was significantly associated with the time from diagnosis of metastasis to PD2 (P < 0.001) and post-3L treatments (P = 0.009). When analyzing treatment eligibility according to trial criteria, half of the eligible patients (54/109) did not receive active treatment, but both eligible and ineligible patients achieved better OS when receiving active 3L treatment versus palliative care only (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002). No unexpected toxicity was reported.

CONCLUSION

Active 3L and beyond treatment significantly prolonged OS versus palliative care, even in selected "trial ineligible" patients. Given a high rate of palliation only care in eligible patients, improved patient access to medicine and counseling may be needed to maximize outcomes.

Diet and Colorectal Cancer Risk in Asia--a Systematic Review

Diet is one of the major factors that can exert a majorly influence on colorectal cancer risk. This systematic review aimed to find correlations between various diet types, food or nutrients and colorectal cancer risk among Asian populations. Search limitations included Asian populations residing in Asia, being published from the year 2008 till present, and written in the English language. A total of 16 articles were included in this systematic review. We found that red meats, processed meats, preserved foods, saturated/animal fats, cholesterol, high sugar foods, spicy foods, tubers or refined carbohydrates have been found by most studies to have a positive association with colorectal cancer risk. Inversely, calcium/dairy foods, vitamin D, general vegetable/fruit/fiber consumption, cruciferous vegetables, soy bean/soy products, selenium, vitamins C,E and B12, lycophene, alpha-carotene, beta-carotene, folic acid and many other vitamins and minerals play a protective role against colorectal cancer risk. Associations of fish and seafood consumption with colorectal cancer risk are still inconclusive due to many varying findings, and require further more detailed studies to pinpoint the actual correlation. There is either a positive or no association for total meat consumption or white meats, however their influence is not as strong as with red and processed meats.