A retrospective observational study to estimate the attrition of patients across lines of systemic treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer in Canada.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antineoplastic Agents
/ therapeutic use
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Bevacizumab
/ therapeutic use
Camptothecin
/ analogs & derivatives
Canada
Colorectal Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
ErbB Receptors
/ antagonists & inhibitors
Fluorouracil
/ therapeutic use
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Leucovorin
/ therapeutic use
Middle Aged
Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)
Young Adult
KRAS testing
Treatment patterns
anti-vascular growth factor agents
chemotherapy
epidermal growth factor inhibitor
Journal
Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)
ISSN: 1718-7729
Titre abrégé: Curr Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9502503
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2019
12 2019
Historique:
entrez:
4
1
2020
pubmed:
4
1
2020
medline:
17
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Selection and sequencing of treatment regimens for individual patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) is driven by maintaining reasonable quality of life and extending survival, as well as by access to and cost of therapies. The objectives of the present study were to describe, for patients with mcrc, attrition across lines of systemic therapy, patterns of therapy and their timing, and A retrospective chart review at 6 Canadian academic centres included sequential patients who were diagnosed with mcrc from 1 January 2009 onward and who initiated first-line systemic treatment for mcrc between 1 January and 31 December 2009. Death was included as a competing risk in the analysis. The analysis included 200 patients who started first-line therapy. The proportions of patients who started second-, third-, and fourth-line systemic therapy were 70%, 30%, and 15% respectively. Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab was the most common first-line combination (66%). The most common first-line regimen was folfiri plus bevacizumab. In the modern treatment era, a high proportion of patients receive at least two lines of therapy for mcrc, but only 19% receive egfri therapy. Earlier
Sections du résumé
Background
Selection and sequencing of treatment regimens for individual patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) is driven by maintaining reasonable quality of life and extending survival, as well as by access to and cost of therapies. The objectives of the present study were to describe, for patients with mcrc, attrition across lines of systemic therapy, patterns of therapy and their timing, and
Methods
A retrospective chart review at 6 Canadian academic centres included sequential patients who were diagnosed with mcrc from 1 January 2009 onward and who initiated first-line systemic treatment for mcrc between 1 January and 31 December 2009. Death was included as a competing risk in the analysis.
Results
The analysis included 200 patients who started first-line therapy. The proportions of patients who started second-, third-, and fourth-line systemic therapy were 70%, 30%, and 15% respectively. Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab was the most common first-line combination (66%). The most common first-line regimen was folfiri plus bevacizumab.
Conclusions
In the modern treatment era, a high proportion of patients receive at least two lines of therapy for mcrc, but only 19% receive egfri therapy. Earlier
Identifiants
pubmed: 31896945
doi: 10.3747/co.26.4861
pii: conc-26-e748
pmc: PMC6927777
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antineoplastic Agents
0
KRAS protein, human
0
Bevacizumab
2S9ZZM9Q9V
EGFR protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
ErbB Receptors
EC 2.7.10.1
Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)
EC 3.6.5.2
Leucovorin
Q573I9DVLP
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Camptothecin
XT3Z54Z28A
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e748-e754Informations de copyright
2019 Multimed Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare the following interests: This study was funded by Amgen. HK has participated in clinical trials and advisory boards for Hoffman–La Roche, Sanofi, and Amgen. SB has participated in advisory boards sponsored by Amgen and Lilly, and has received speaking honoraria from Amgen. JM has participated in clinical trials, advisory boards, and educational events for Amgen. PK has received educational grants from Amgen, Novartis, Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Celgene, and Taiho Pharma Canada, and has participated in advisory boards with Amgen, Novartis, Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Celgene, Taiho Pharma Canada, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. NA has participated in clinical trials and advisory boards with Amgen and Roche. FC has no conflicts of interest to disclose. MPC and BG are former employees of Amgen Canada and have stock or stock options in the company.
Références
J Oncol Pract. 2010 Nov;6(6):301-7
pubmed: 21358960
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Feb;106(2):djt371
pubmed: 24511107
Curr Oncol. 2016 Oct;23(5):329-333
pubmed: 27803597
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Feb 1;3(2):165-166
pubmed: 27722749
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Feb 1;3(2):194-201
pubmed: 27722750
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jul 20;103(14):1130-3
pubmed: 21697545
Ann Oncol. 2017 Aug 1;28(8):1862-1868
pubmed: 28449055
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2017 Jun;16(2):147-153
pubmed: 27670894
N Engl J Med. 2009 Apr 2;360(14):1408-17
pubmed: 19339720
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2016 Jun;15(2):135-40
pubmed: 26553578
Oncologist. 2012;17(12):1486-95
pubmed: 23015662
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Apr;58(4):783-7
pubmed: 20345862
BMC Cancer. 2017 Nov 28;17(1):798
pubmed: 29183279
Curr Oncol. 2010 Nov;17(6):39-45
pubmed: 21151408
J Oncol Pract. 2009 Sep;5(5):228-33
pubmed: 20856733
Curr Med Res Opin. 2011 Jan;27(1):123-30
pubmed: 21128878
Curr Oncol. 2011 Aug;18(4):e180-4
pubmed: 21874108
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Nov 1;28(31):4697-705
pubmed: 20921465
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 22;10(10):e0140717
pubmed: 26491871