RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Second-line treatment with irinotecan for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs survival. It is uncertain whether irinotecan is better administered with 5-fluorouracil or alone in patients previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine. We compared toxicity (particularly diarrhoea), quality of life, and efficacy of combination chemotherapy and irinotecan in these patients. METHODS: In DaVINCI, a randomised phase II trial, patients with advanced colorectal cancer were randomly allocated to: Combination therapy (FOLFIRI), irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) IV over 90 min, day 1), 5-fluorouracil (400mg/m(2) IV bolus and 2400 mg/m(2) by 46-hour infusion from day 1) and folinic acid (20mg/m(2) IV bolus, day 1), 2-weekly; or Single-agent, irinotecan (350 mg/m(2) IV over 90 min), 3-weekly. Toxicity was evaluated every treatment cycle; QOL and response 6-weekly. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial, amended from a larger factorial design, was terminated early due to slow recruitment. Results were also combined with other second-line irinotecan trials. FINDINGS: We randomised 44 patients to combination and 45 to single agent. Eight patients in the irinotecan arm and 4 in the combination arm had grade 3/4 diarrhoea (P=0.24). Treatment groups did not differ significantly in overall QOL changes, response rate or progression free or overall-survival. In a systematic review of 29 trials of second-line irinotecan-based treatment, single-agent irinotecan was associated with more diarrhoea and alopecia than the combination but efficacy was similar. INTERPRETATION: Combination treatment compared with single-agent irinotecan reduces alopecia and diarrhoea without compromising efficacy on clinical outcomes. Both regimens remain as reasonable treatment options. FUNDING: Research grant (Pfizer).
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Alopecia/induzido quimicamente , Antineoplásicos Fitogênicos/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Camptotecina/administração & dosagem , Camptotecina/efeitos adversos , Camptotecina/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Adjuvante , Diarreia/induzido quimicamente , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Fluoruracila/administração & dosagem , Humanos , Infusões Intravenosas , Injeções Intravenosas , Irinotecano , Leucovorina/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Projetos de Pesquisa , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
PURPOSE: This phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study compared the overall survival associated with irinotecan plus gemcitabine (IRINOGEM) versus gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM) in patients with chemotherapy-naive, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IRINOGEM patients received starting doses of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 given weekly for 2 weeks every 3-week cycle. GEM patients received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 of 8 weeks (induction) and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. The primary end point of the trial was survival. Secondary end points included tumor response, time to tumor progression (TTP), changes in CA 19-9, and safety. RESULTS: In each arm, 180 randomly assigned patients comprised the intent-to-treat population evaluated for efficacy; 173 IRINOGEM and 169 GEM patients were treated. Median survival times were 6.3 months for IRINOGEM (95% CI, 4.7 to 7.5 months) and 6.6 months for GEM (95% CI, 5.2 to 7.8 months; log-rank P =.789). Tumor response rates were 16.1% (95% CI, 11.1% to 22.3%) for IRINOGEM and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.9% to 8.6%) for GEM (chi2 P <.001). Median TTP was 3.5 months for IRINOGEM versus 3.0 months for GEM (log-rank P =.352). However, subset analyses in patients with locally advanced disease suggested a TTP advantage with IRINOGEM versus GEM (median, 7.7 v 3.9 months). CA 19-9 progression was positively correlated with tumor progression. The incidence of grade 3 diarrhea was higher in the IRINOGEM group but grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities and quality-of-life outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION: IRINOGEM safely improved the tumor response rate compared with GEM but did not alter overall survival.