Does Rapid Drug Desensitization to Chemotherapy Affect Survival Outcomes?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin may affect prognosis by jeopardizing the timely completion of scheduled treatment sessions or by forcing reactive patients into unexpected changes in therapy. Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) enables these patients to receive their first-choice treatments safely. However, the possible effects of RDD on the efficacy of oxaliplatin have never been studied. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of RDD on survival rates in oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients. METHODS: We performed a 7-year retrospective study to compare survival between oxaliplatin-hypersensitive cases (patients receiving oxaliplatin by RDD) and nonallergic controls (patients receiving standard oxaliplatin infusions). The primary endpoint of this study was overall survival (OS) in cases and controls (Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test comparisons). RESULTS: OS was 23.7 months (95%CI, 15.3-30.9) for the 67 cases who underwent 337 RDDs, while for controls (n=143), OS was 34.5 months (95%CI, 21.7-55.5). There were no significant differences between the groups (HR, 1.42; 95%CI, 0.93-2.17; P =.104). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcomes of oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients who received oxaliplatin via RDD did not differ significantly from those of control patients who received oxaliplatin via standard administration. Receiving oxaliplatin by means of RDD might be an effective therapeutic alternative for oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients.

Does rapid drug desensitization to chemotherapy affect survival outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin may affect prognosis by jeopardizing the timely completion of scheduled treatment sessions or by forcing reactive patients into unexpected changes in therapy. Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) enables these patients to receive their first-choice treatments safely. However, the possible effects of RDD on the efficacy of oxaliplatin have never been studied. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of RDD on survival rates in oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients. METHODS: We performed a 7-year retrospective study to compare survival between oxaliplatin-hypersensitive cases (patients receiving oxaliplatin by RDD) and nonallergic controls (patients receiving standard oxaliplatin infusions). The primary endpoint of this study was overall survival (OS) in cases and controls (Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test comparisons). RESULTS: OS was 23.7 months (95%CI, 15.3-30.9) for the 67 cases who underwent 337 RDDs, while for controls (n=143), OS was 34.5 months (95%CI, 21.7-55.5). There were no significant differences between the groups (HR, 1.42; 95%CI, 0.93-2.17; P =.104). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcomes of oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients who received oxaliplatin via RDD did not differ significantly from those of control patients who received oxaliplatin via standard administration. Receiving oxaliplatin by means of RDD might be an effective therapeutic alternative for oxaliplatin-hypersensitive patients

ANTECEDENTES: Las reacciones de hipersensibilidad al oxaliplatino podrían afectar al pronóstico vital cuando fuerzan a los pacientes a cambiar de tratamiento o cuando impiden que lo finalicen. La desensibilización rápida medicamentosa permite que estos pacientes reciban sus tratamientos de primera elección. Sin embargo, no existen datos sobre si la desensibilización rápida medicamentosa podría tener algún efecto sobre la eficacia del oxaliplatino. OBJETIVO: El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar los efectos que la desensibilización rápida medicamentosa al oxalipatlino pudiera tener sobre la eficacia del tratamiento en los pacientes alérgicos al oxaliplatino sometidos a desensibilización. MÉTODOS: Estudio retrospectivo comparando datos de supervivencia, durante un periodo de 7 años, de pacientes alérgicos al oxaliplatino (recibiendo oxaliplatino mediante desensibilización rápida medicamentosa) y controles no alérgicos (recibiendo administraciones estándar de oxaliplatino). La supervivencia global se seleccionó como el criterio de valoración de la eficacia principal y se analizó con el estimador Kaplan-Meier utilizando comparaciones mediante la prueba de log-ran. RESULTADOS: La supervivencia global de los 67 casos fue de 23,7 meses (IC95%, 15,3-30,9), que se sometieron a 337 desensibilizaciones rápidas medicamentosas. Para los 143 controles la supervivencia global fue 34,5 meses (IC95%, 21,7-55,5). No se encontraron diferencias significativamente estadísticas entre ambos grupos (HR, 1,42; IC95%, 0,93-2,17;P=0,104). CONCLUSIONES: Los resultados de supervivencia de los pacientes sometidos a desensibilización no fueron significativamente distintos a los de los controles que recibieron oxaliplatino de forma estándar. La desensibilización se presenta como una alternativa para recibir oxaliplatino de forma eficaz en pacientes alérgicos

Efficacy of trifluridine and tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo, with supportive care, in a randomized, controlled trial of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from Spain: results of a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 RECOURSE trial

Purpose. TAS-102 is a combination of the thymidine-based nucleoside analog trifluridine and the thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor tipiracil. Efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory or intolerant to standard therapies were evaluated in the phase 3 RECOURSE trial. Results of RECOURSE demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with TAS-102 versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 and 0.48 for OS and PFS, respectively; both P < 0.001]. The current analysis evaluates efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup. Methods. Primary and key secondary endpoints were evaluated in a post hoc analysis of the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, using univariate and multivariate analyses. Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics. Results. The RECOURSE Spanish subgroup included 112 patients (mean age 61 years, 62 % male). Median OS was 6.8 months in the TAS-102 group (n = 80) versus 4.6 months in the placebo group (n = 32) [HR = 0.47; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.78; P = 0.0032). Median PFS was 2.0 months in the TAS-102 group and 1.7 months in the placebo group (HR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.30-0.74; P = 0.001). Eighty (100 %) TAS-102 versus 31 (96.9 %) placebo patients had adverse events (AEs). The most common drug-related ≥Grade 3 AE was neutropenia (40 % TAS-102 versus 0 % placebo). There was 1 (1.3 %) case of febrile neutropenia in the TAS-102 group versus none in the placebo group. Conclusions. In the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, TAS-102 was associated with significantly improved OS and PFS versus placebo, consistent with the overall RECOURSE population. No new safety signals were identified (AU)

No disponible

Efficacy of trifluridine and tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo, with supportive care, in a randomized, controlled trial of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from Spain: results of a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 RECOURSE trial.

PURPOSE: TAS-102 is a combination of the thymidine-based nucleoside analog trifluridine and the thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor tipiracil. Efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory or intolerant to standard therapies were evaluated in the phase 3 RECOURSE trial. Results of RECOURSE demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with TAS-102 versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 and 0.48 for OS and PFS, respectively; both P < 0.001]. The current analysis evaluates efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup. METHODS: Primary and key secondary endpoints were evaluated in a post hoc analysis of the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, using univariate and multivariate analyses. Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The RECOURSE Spanish subgroup included 112 patients (mean age 61 years, 62 % male). Median OS was 6.8 months in the TAS-102 group (n = 80) versus 4.6 months in the placebo group (n = 32) [HR = 0.47; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.78; P = 0.0032). Median PFS was 2.0 months in the TAS-102 group and 1.7 months in the placebo group (HR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.30-0.74; P = 0.001). Eighty (100 %) TAS-102 versus 31 (96.9 %) placebo patients had adverse events (AEs). The most common drug-related ≥Grade 3 AE was neutropenia (40 % TAS-102 versus 0 % placebo). There was 1 (1.3 %) case of febrile neutropenia in the TAS-102 group versus none in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In the RECOURSE Spanish subgroup, TAS-102 was associated with significantly improved OS and PFS versus placebo, consistent with the overall RECOURSE population. No new safety signals were identified. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV STUDY NUMBER: NCT01607957.