RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) beyond second line is still questioned. Besides the standard of care agents (regorafenib, REG, or trifluridine/tipiracil, FTD/TPI), chemotherapy rechallenge or reintroduction (CTr/r) are commonly considered in clinical practice, despite weak supporting evidence. The prognostic performance of CTr/r, REG and FTD/TPI in this setting are herein evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PROSERpYNa is a multicenter, observational, retrospective study, in which patients with refractory mCRC, progressing after at least 2 lines of CT, treated with CTr/r, REG or FTD/TPI, are considered eligible and were enrolled in 2 independent data sets (exploratory and validation). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (RR) and safety. A propensity score adjustment was accomplished for survival analyses. RESULTS: Data referring to patients treated between Jan-10 and Jan-19 from 3 Italian institutions were gathered (341 and 181 treatments for exploratory and validation data sets respectively). In the exploratory cohort, median OS (18.5 vs. 6.5 months), PFS (6.1 vs. 3.5 months) and RR (28.6% vs. 1.4%) were significantly longer for CTr/r compared to REG/FTD/TPI. Survival benefits were retained at the propensity score analysis, adjusted for independent prognostic factors identified at multivariate analysis. Moreover, these results were confirmed within the validation cohort analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Although the retrospective fashion, CTr/r proved to be a valuable option in this setting in a real-world context, providing superior outcomes compared to standard of care agents at the price of a moderate toxicity.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers; â¼20% of patients have metastases at diagnosis, and 50%-60% subsequently develop metachronous metastases. Bone involvement, despite being rare, is usually associated with higher disease burden, worse prognosis, impaired quality of life, and significant health-related cost. In the last few years, following the positive results of the TRIBE and TRIBE2 trials, the association of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab has become the new standard of care for metastatic CRC. Despite being highly efficacious in all subgroups, little is known about the activity of this regimen in patients with bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies focusing on patients with skeletal deposits. RESULTS: Our analyses on the whole population showed that patients with baseline bone involvement reported shorter overall survival [OS; 14.0 versus 26.2 months; hazard ratio (HR) 2.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-2.87; P < 0.001] and progression-free survival (PFS; 6.2 versus 11.1 months; HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.42-2.69; P < 0.001) compared with those without bone metastases; no significant interaction with the treatment was reported for PFS (P = 0.094) and OS (P = 0.38). Bone metastases had a negative prognostic implication in the multivariate analysis (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.54-3.26; P < 0.001). Furthermore, patients with bone lesions at first radiological progression (including those with baseline bone metastases) had a shorter OS compared with those who progressed in other sites (10.4 versus 13.2 months; HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.15-1.91; P = 0.002). A trend toward inferior OS (7.5 versus 11 months, HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.92-2.45; P = 0.10) appeared in patients with basal skeletal deposits compared with those with bone involvement at first radiological progression. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed the negative prognostic impact of bone metastases in CRC. Furthermore, we demonstrated for the first time that the survival advantage of triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is maintained even in this prognostically unfavorable subgroup.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas , Neoplasias del Colon , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Humanos , Bevacizumab/farmacología , Bevacizumab/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Calidad de Vida , Camptotecina/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/farmacología , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Pronóstico , Neoplasias del Colon/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Óseas/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The phase III TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies randomized metastatic colorectal cancer patients to first-line FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab or a doublet (FOLFIRI or FOLFOX)/bevacizumab. The studies demonstrated a significant benefit from the triplet at the price of an increased incidence of chemotherapy-related adverse events (AEs). In both trials, males and females aged between 18 and 70 years with ECOG PS ≤2 and between 71 and 75 years with ECOG PS = 0 were eligible. We investigated the effect of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab versus doublets/bevacizumab according to age and gender. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subgroup analyses according to age (<70 versus 70-75 years) and gender were carried out for overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and AE rates. RESULTS: Of 1187 patients, 1005 (85%) were aged <70 years and 182 (15%) 70-75 years; 693 (58%) were males and 494 (42%) females. There was no evidence of interaction between age or gender and the benefit provided by the intensification of the upfront chemotherapy in terms of ORR and PFS, or the increased risk of experiencing G3/4 AEs. Elderly patients and females experienced higher rates of overall G3/4 AEs (73% versus 60%, P < 0.01 and 69% versus 57%, P < 0.01, respectively). Notably, in the FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab subgroup, G3/4 diarrhea and febrile neutropenia occurred in 27% and 16% of elderly patients, respectively, while females reported high incidences of any grade nausea (67%) and vomiting (50%). CONCLUSIONS: The improvements in terms of ORR and PFS of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab versus doublets/bevacizumab are independent of gender and age, with a similar relative increase in AEs among elderly patients and females. Initial dose reductions and possibly primary G-CSF prophylaxis should be recommended for patients between 70 and 75 years old treated with FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab, and a careful management of antiemetic prophylaxis should be considered among females.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Bevacizumab/efectos adversos , Camptotecina/administración & dosificación , Camptotecina/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/efectos adversos , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Náusea/inducido químicamente , Náusea/patología , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Compuestos Organoplatinos/administración & dosificación , Compuestos Organoplatinos/efectos adversos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Caracteres Sexuales , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vómitos/inducido químicamente , Vómitos/patologíaRESUMEN
Background: Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), defined as absolute neutrophils count divided by absolute lymphocytes count, has been reported as poor prognostic factor in several neoplastic diseases but only a few data are available about unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts). The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic and predictive role of NLR in the TRIBE trial. Patients and methods: Pts enrolled in TRIBE trial were included. TRIBE is a multicentre phase III trial randomizing unresectable and previously untreated mCRC pts to receive FOLFOXIRI or FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. A cut-off value of 3 was adopted to discriminate pts with low (NLR < 3) versus high (NLR ≥ 3) NLR, as primary analysis. As secondary analysis, NLR was treated as an ordinal variable with three levels based on terciles distribution. Results: NLR at baseline was available for 413 patients. After multiple imputation at univariate analysis, patients with high NLR had significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.27 (95% CI 1.05-1.55), P = 0.017] and overall survival (OS) [HR 1.56 (95% CI 1.25-1.95), P < 0.001] than patients with low NLR. In the multivariable model, NLR retained a significant association with OS [HR 1.44 (95% CI 1.14-1.82), P = 0.014] but not with PFS [HR 1.18 (95% CI 0.95-1.46), P = 0.375]. No interaction effect between treatment arm and NLR was evident in terms of PFS (P for interaction = 0.536) or OS (P for interaction = 0.831). Patients with low [HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.64-1.08)] and high [HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.54-0.97)] NLR achieved similar PFS benefit from the triplet and consistent results were obtained in terms of OS [HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.62-1.12) for low NLR; HR 0.82 (95% CI 0.59-1.12) for high NLR]. Conclusion: This study confirmed the prognostic role of NLR in mCRC pts treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in the first line, showing the worse prognosis of pts with high NLR. The advantage of the triplet is independent of NLR at baseline.