Phase III comparison of two irinotecan dosing regimens in second-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer.
ABSTRACT Randomized trials in fluorouracil (FU)-refractory colorectal cancer demonstrate significant survival advantages for patients receiving irinotecan. We prospectively compared the efficacy and tolerability of two irinotecan regimens (once a week for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week rest period [weekly] v once every 3 weeks) in such patients.
This multicenter, open-label, phase III study randomly assigned patients in a 1:2 ratio to irinotecan given either weekly (125 mg/m(2)) or once every 3 weeks (350 mg/m(2), or 300 mg/m(2) in patients who were >/= 70 years of age, who had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status equal to 2, or who had prior pelvic irradiation).
With median follow-up of 15.8 months, there was no significant difference in 1-year survival (46% v 41%, respectively; P =.42), median survival (9.9 v 9.9 months, respectively; P =.43), or median time to progression (4.0 v 3.0 months, respectively; P =.54) between the two regimens. Grade 3/4 diarrhea occurred in 36% of patients treated weekly and in 19% of those treated once every 3 weeks (P =.002). Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 29% of patients treated weekly and 34% of those treated once every 3 weeks (P =.35). Treatment-related mortality occurred in five patients (5.3%) receiving irinotecan weekly and three patients (1.6%) given therapy once every 3 weeks (P =.12). Global quality of life was not statistically different between treatment groups.
Irinotecan schedules of weekly and of once every 3 weeks demonstrated similar efficacy and quality of life in patients with FU-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer. The regimen of once every 3 weeks was associated with a significantly lower incidence of severe diarrhea.
- SourceAvailable from: Brian Seal[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: With new agents entering the market, the sequencing of first-line (Tx1), second-line (Tx2), and subsequent chemotherapy/biologics regimens are being examined. We examined how Tx1 regimens impacted the likelihood of receiving Tx2 among metastatic colon cancer (mCC) patients. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data were used to identify elderly mCC patients between 2003 and 2007. The inverse probability weighting Cox regression method was utilized to study the relationship between receipt of Tx2 and Tx1 regimens, controlling for patient-level factors. Of the 7895 elderly patients identified, 3211 (41%) received Tx1 of which 1440 proceeded to Tx2. The impact of Tx1 on receipt of Tx2 varied by the specific regimens utilized. As compared to 5FU/LV users, IROX (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 0.03; P < 0.01) and IROX + Biologics (HR = 0.20; P < 0.01) users were less likely to receive Tx2; (oxaliplatin) OX + Biologics (HR = 1.26; P < 0.01) users were more likely to receive Tx2. Significant patient-level factors included: Hispanic ethnicity (HR = 0.67; P < 0.01); being married (HR = 0.87; P = 0.01); proxy for poor performance status (HR = 0.82; P = 0.05); each 10-year age increment (HR = 1.14; P < 0.01); and State buy-in status (HR = 1.21; P = 0.01). The specific first-line regimen does impact mCC patients' likelihood of receiving Tx2 in clinical practice. Elderly mCC patients, their health care providers, and policy makers will benefit from new evidence about the impact of sequencing of treatment lines.Cancer medicine. 01/2014;
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Poor prognosis is associated with patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. To seek effective methods, we examine the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI as a second-line chemotherapy in Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A total of 55 patients with previous failure of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy were included in this study, from October 2010 to February 2012. All patients received bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) plus FOLFIRI every other week until disease progression or intolerable toxicity occurred. The response rate was 31 %, and the disease-controlled rate was 76.4 %. The median progression-free survival was 6 months, and the median overall survival was 17 months. Adverse events (AEs) related to chemotherapy were mild to moderate. Only the incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia reached to 25.5 %. The incidence of AEs related to bevacizumab was low. These AEs included grade 3-4 toxicities of hypertension and proteinuria 5.4 and 3.6 %, respectively. Bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI is an effective and safe regimen as a second-line treatment for patients with mCRC in China.Medical Oncology 12/2013; 30(4):752. · 2.14 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Clinical outcome post-progression to first-line triplet chemotherapy (CT) plus bevacizumab (FIr-B/FOx) was evaluated in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) patients (pts). Second-line treatment was selected according to fitness, KRAS genotype, previous efficacy and safety. Efficacy was evaluated and compared according to treatment or KRAS genotype, using log-rank analysis. Among 54 pts, median overall survival (OS) post-progression was 12 months, significantly better in 40 (74.1%) treated compared to 14 (25.9%) who died without further treatment. Second-line surgical treatment, 4 pts (7.4%), medical treatment, 36 pts (66.7%): triplet CT plus targeted agent, 10 (18.5%); triplet regimens, 19 (35.2%); doublet/monotherapy, 7 (13%). At follow-up of 14 months, objective response rate (ORR) was 38%, metastasectomies 12.5%, progression-free survival (PFS) 10 months, OS 14 months. According to treatment, ORR, metastasectomies, PFS and OS were significantly favourable in triplet CT plus targeted agent compared to triplet, respectively: 80%, 40%, 13 months, not reached; 28%, 6%, 8 months, 11 months. PFS and OS were significantly worse in c.35 G>A mutant compared to wild-type and/or other mutant patients. Prognosis after progression to first‑line FIr-B/FOx may be significantly favourable in MCRC pts re-challenged with intensive regimens, and unfavourable in c.35 G>A KRAS mutant patients.International Journal of Oncology 11/2013; · 2.66 Impact Factor