Optimal patient selection for yttrium-90 glass plus chemotherapy in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases: additional quality of life, efficacy, and safety analyses from the EPOCH study.

Abstract

Evaluating transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma of the liver who have progressed on first-line chemotherapy (EPOCH) demonstrated superior outcomes using yttrium-90 glass microspheres plus chemotherapy (TARE/Chemo) vs chemotherapy (Chemo) to treat colorectal liver metastases. Additional exploratory analyses were undertaken to assess the impact of TARE/Chemo on efficacy, safety, time to subsequent therapy, time to deterioration in quality of life (QoL), and identify criteria for improved patient selection. Time to deterioration in QoL was analyzed for the primary study population. Subsequently, a post hoc analysis was undertaken to identify subgroups for which time to deterioration in QoL was improved with TARE/Chemo vs Chemo. Progression-free survival (PFS), hepatic (h)PFS, time to subsequent therapy, and safety outcomes were compared between treatments. The primary population showed no significant difference in time to deterioration in QoL between treatment arms; however, significance was seen in 2 identified subgroups, namely: Subgroup A (N = 303) which excluded patients with both Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 1 and baseline CEA ≥ 35ng/mL from both treatment arms; subgroup B (N = 168) additionally excluded patients with KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma) mutation. In subgroup A, TARE/Chemo patients (N = 143) demonstrated superior outcomes vs Chemo (N = 160): PFS (9.4 vs. 7.6 months, hazard ratio (HR): 0.64; 1-sided P = .0020), hPFS (10.8 vs. 7.6 months, HR: 0.53; 1-sided P < .0001), time to deterioration in QoL (5.7 vs. 3.9 months, HR: 0.65; 1-sided P = .0063), and time to subsequent therapy (21.2 vs. 10.5 months, HR: 0.52; 1-sided P < .0001). Subgroup B patients showed similar but larger significant differences between treatment arms. Median PFS, hPFS, and time to deterioration in QoL were numerically greater for TARE/Chemo in both subgroups vs the primary population, with the greatest magnitude of difference in subgroup B. Both subgroups exhibited higher percentage of CEA responders and improved ORR with TARE/Chemo vs chemo alone. Safety (reported as event rate/100 patient-years) was higher with Chemo in all populations. Additional efficacy analyses in the primary population are also reported. Careful patient selection, including consideration of the prognostic factors ECOG, baseline CEA, and KRAS status, sets outcome expectations in patients with colorectal liver metastases suitable for TARE/Chemo as second-line treatment (Trial Registry Number: NCT01483027).