RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The years since 2005 have seen major changes in cancer treatment and significant increases in the number of anticancer drugs available. However, there are relatively few published data to reflect how those changes are affecting the activity and workload of oncology services. To explore the effects of those changes, we reviewed the population-based cancer treatment activity on Vancouver Island for the period 2010-2015. METHODS: Information about new patient referrals, radiation courses, new chemotherapy cycles commenced, total intravenous (IV) chemotherapy treatment visits, and pharmacy activity for oral anticancer drug prescriptions was obtained from BC Cancer Agency databases. RESULTS: During the 5-year study period, the Vancouver Island population increased by 2.8% and the number of new referrals to the BC Cancer Agency increased by 17.7%. The overall number of radiation courses increased by 6.1%. In contrast, IV chemotherapy activity increased by 52.1% for new courses commenced and by 62% for total IV chemotherapy attendances. Oral anticancer drug prescriptions rose by 22.9% during the 5-year period. CONCLUSIONS: Our study documents substantial recent increases in cancer therapy activity in terms of patient referrals and particularly IV chemotherapy and oral anticancer therapy. The data reported here could be of value in planning for future care provision.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The survival benefit for single-agent anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) therapy compared with combination therapy with irinotecan in KRAS wildtype (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) patients in the third-line treatment setting is not known. The objective of the present study was to describe the characteristics of, and to compare survival outcomes in, two cohorts of patients treated with either singleagent panitumumab or combination therapy with cetuximab and irinotecan. METHODS: The study enrolled patients with KRAS wt mcrc previously treated with both irinotecan and oxaliplatin who had received either panitumumab or combination cetuximab-irinotecan before April 1, 2011, at the BC Cancer Agency (bcca). Patients were excluded if they had received anti-egfr agents in earlier lines of therapy. Data were prospectively collected, except for performance status (ps), which was determined by chart review. Information about systemic therapy was extracted from the bcca Pharmacy Database. RESULTS: Of 178 eligible patients, 141 received panitumumab, and 37 received cetuximab-irinotecan. Compared with patients treated with cetuximab-irinotecan, panitumumab-treated patients were significantly older and more likely to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ecog) ps of 2 or 3 (27.7% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.001). Other baseline prognostic variables and prior and subsequent therapies were similar. Median overall survival was 7.7 months for the panitumumab group and 8.3 months for the cetuximab-irinotecan group. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that survival outcomes were similar regardless of the therapy selected (hazard ratio: 1.28; p = 0.34). An ecog ps of 2 or 3 compared with 0 or 1 was the only significant prognostic factor in this treatment setting (hazard ratio: 3.37; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Single-agent panitumumab and cetuximab-irinotecan are both reasonable third-line treatment options, with similar outcomes, for patients with chemoresistant mcrc.