A single-center retrospective analysis of the efficacy and safety of a modified regimen of irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) with molecular targeting agents as second-line chemotherapy in Japanese patients with recurrent or nonresectable colorectal cancer.
Colorectal cancer
chemotherapy
irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS)
molecular targeting therapy
recurrent/non-resectable cancer
Journal
Journal of gastrointestinal oncology
ISSN: 2078-6891
Titre abrégé: J Gastrointest Oncol
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101557751
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Apr 2023
29 Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
17
09
2022
accepted:
21
03
2023
medline:
18
5
2023
pubmed:
18
5
2023
entrez:
18
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As the second-line chemotherapy for stage IV recurrent or nonresectable colorectal cancer, our hospital started a modified treatment regimen comprising of irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) [tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1)] plus molecular targeting agents (MTAs), i.e., an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor such as panitumumab (P-mab) or cetuximab (C-mab) or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor such as bevacizumab (B-mab) since October 2012. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this modified regimen. This retrospective study included 41 patients with advanced recurrent colorectal cancer at our hospital whom at least 3 courses of chemotherapy were conducted from January 2015 to December 2021. Based on the location of the primary tumor, patients were classified into two group (right-sided group, proximal to the splenic curve, and left-sided, distal to the splenic curve). We assessed archived data on RAS and BRAF status and UGT1A1 polymorphisms and use of the VEGF inhibitor bevacizumab (B-mab) and the EGFR inhibitors panitumumab (P-mab) and cetuximab (C-mab). In addition, progression-free survival rate (36M-PFS) and the overall survival rate (36M-OS) were calculated. Furthermore, the respective median survival time (MST), the median number of treatment courses; the objective response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) were assessed as well. There were 11 patients (26.8%) in the right-sided group, and 30 patients (73.2%) in the left-sided group. There were 19 patients with RAS wild type (46.3%) (1 in the right sided group and 18 in the left sided group). P-mab was used for 16 of these patients (84.2%), C-mab for 2 (10.5%), and B-mab for 1 (5.3%); the remaining 22 patients (53.7%). Ten patients in the right group and 12 patients in the left group were a mutated type and received B-mab. BRAF testing was performed in 17 patients (41.5%); as more than 50% of patients (58.5%) were included before the assay's introduction. Five patients in the right-sided group and 12 patients in the left-sided group had wild type. There was no mutated type. UGT1A1 polymorphism was tested in 16/41 patients: Eight were wild type (8/41 patients, 19.5%) and 8, mutated type. Regarding the *6/*28 double heterozygous type, there was only 1 patient in the right-sided group and the remaining 7 patients were in the left-sided group. The total number of chemotherapy courses was 299, and the median number, 6.0 (range, 3-20). PFS, OS, and MST were as follows: 36M-PFS (total/Rt/Lt), 6.2%/0.0%/8.5% (MST; 7.6/6.3/8.9 months); and 36M-OS (total/Rt/Lt), 32.1%/0.0%/44.0% (MST; 22.1/18.8/28.6 months). The ORR and CBR were 24.4% and 75.6%, respectively. The majority of AEs were grades 1 or 2 and were improved with conservative treatment. Grade 3 leukopenia was observed in 2 cases (4.9%), neutropenia in 4 cases (9.8%), and malaise/nausea/diarrhea/perforation in 1 case each (2.4%). Grade 3 leukopenia (2 patients) and neutropenia (3 patients) were more commonly observed in the left-sided group. Diarrhea and perforation were also common in the left-sided group. This second-line modified IRIS regimen with MTAs is safe and effective and results in good PFS and OS.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
As the second-line chemotherapy for stage IV recurrent or nonresectable colorectal cancer, our hospital started a modified treatment regimen comprising of irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) [tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1)] plus molecular targeting agents (MTAs), i.e., an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor such as panitumumab (P-mab) or cetuximab (C-mab) or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor such as bevacizumab (B-mab) since October 2012. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this modified regimen.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This retrospective study included 41 patients with advanced recurrent colorectal cancer at our hospital whom at least 3 courses of chemotherapy were conducted from January 2015 to December 2021. Based on the location of the primary tumor, patients were classified into two group (right-sided group, proximal to the splenic curve, and left-sided, distal to the splenic curve). We assessed archived data on RAS and BRAF status and UGT1A1 polymorphisms and use of the VEGF inhibitor bevacizumab (B-mab) and the EGFR inhibitors panitumumab (P-mab) and cetuximab (C-mab). In addition, progression-free survival rate (36M-PFS) and the overall survival rate (36M-OS) were calculated. Furthermore, the respective median survival time (MST), the median number of treatment courses; the objective response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) were assessed as well.
Results
UNASSIGNED
There were 11 patients (26.8%) in the right-sided group, and 30 patients (73.2%) in the left-sided group. There were 19 patients with RAS wild type (46.3%) (1 in the right sided group and 18 in the left sided group). P-mab was used for 16 of these patients (84.2%), C-mab for 2 (10.5%), and B-mab for 1 (5.3%); the remaining 22 patients (53.7%). Ten patients in the right group and 12 patients in the left group were a mutated type and received B-mab. BRAF testing was performed in 17 patients (41.5%); as more than 50% of patients (58.5%) were included before the assay's introduction. Five patients in the right-sided group and 12 patients in the left-sided group had wild type. There was no mutated type. UGT1A1 polymorphism was tested in 16/41 patients: Eight were wild type (8/41 patients, 19.5%) and 8, mutated type. Regarding the *6/*28 double heterozygous type, there was only 1 patient in the right-sided group and the remaining 7 patients were in the left-sided group. The total number of chemotherapy courses was 299, and the median number, 6.0 (range, 3-20). PFS, OS, and MST were as follows: 36M-PFS (total/Rt/Lt), 6.2%/0.0%/8.5% (MST; 7.6/6.3/8.9 months); and 36M-OS (total/Rt/Lt), 32.1%/0.0%/44.0% (MST; 22.1/18.8/28.6 months). The ORR and CBR were 24.4% and 75.6%, respectively. The majority of AEs were grades 1 or 2 and were improved with conservative treatment. Grade 3 leukopenia was observed in 2 cases (4.9%), neutropenia in 4 cases (9.8%), and malaise/nausea/diarrhea/perforation in 1 case each (2.4%). Grade 3 leukopenia (2 patients) and neutropenia (3 patients) were more commonly observed in the left-sided group. Diarrhea and perforation were also common in the left-sided group.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
This second-line modified IRIS regimen with MTAs is safe and effective and results in good PFS and OS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37201062
doi: 10.21037/jgo-22-899
pii: jgo-14-02-663
pmc: PMC10186548
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
663-675Informations de copyright
2023 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jgo.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jgo-22-899/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
J Clin Oncol. 2000 Aug;18(16):2938-47
pubmed: 10944126
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2004 Jun;75(6):501-15
pubmed: 15179405
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2016 Aug;78(2):397-403
pubmed: 27342247
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec;10(4):322-9
pubmed: 23915091
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014 Apr;12(4):513-9
pubmed: 24717570
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Jan 1;38(1):11-19
pubmed: 31725351
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2017 Mar;15(3):411-419
pubmed: 28275039
Cancer Sci. 2016 Dec;107(12):1843-1850
pubmed: 27712015
Oncol Rep. 2009 Sep;22(3):621-9
pubmed: 19639213
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Jul 13;3(7):e170278
pubmed: 28542671
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Oct 15;20(20):5322-30
pubmed: 25139339
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Feb 01;3(2):211-219
pubmed: 27787550
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Jun 10;37(17):1460-1469
pubmed: 30892987
N Engl J Med. 2008 Oct 23;359(17):1757-65
pubmed: 18946061
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan;138(1):65-72
pubmed: 21960318
Ann Oncol. 2017 Aug 01;28(8):1713-1729
pubmed: 28407110
Br J Cancer. 2011 Mar 1;104(5):856-62
pubmed: 21285991
Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2018 Mar;17(1):e91-e97
pubmed: 29113730
N Engl J Med. 2020 Dec 3;383(23):2207-2218
pubmed: 33264544
Discov Oncol. 2021 Aug 6;12(1):24
pubmed: 35201479
Oncologist. 2021 Jan;26(1):e90-e98
pubmed: 33400355
BMC Cancer. 2015 Apr 11;15:258
pubmed: 25886136
Anticancer Res. 2012 Jul;32(7):2545-50
pubmed: 22753712
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 Apr;86(7):2403-7
pubmed: 2648401
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Sep;11(9):853-60
pubmed: 20708966
Dig Liver Dis. 2021 Oct;53(10):1254-1259
pubmed: 34215534
Int J Clin Oncol. 2019 Apr;24(4):403-410
pubmed: 30471067
Semin Oncol. 1996 Feb;23(1 Suppl 3):27-33
pubmed: 8633250
Colorectal Dis. 2015 Jan;17(1):7-16
pubmed: 25283236
Oncol Rep. 2009 Apr;21(4):1061-6
pubmed: 19288009
World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2020 Mar 15;12(3):311-322
pubmed: 32206181
Eur J Cancer. 2017 Oct;84:69-80
pubmed: 28787661
J Gastrointest Oncol. 2021 Apr;12(2):527-534
pubmed: 34012646
Int J Clin Oncol. 2016 Aug;21(4):705-712
pubmed: 26746689
Ann Oncol. 2016 Sep;27(9):1746-53
pubmed: 27358379
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jul;14(8):749-59
pubmed: 23725851