Irinotecan-based Combination Research Articles

Camptothecin and Its Derivatives from Traditional Chinese Medicine in Combination with Anticancer Therapy Regimens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background/Objectives: Camptothecin (CPT) and its derivatives, irinotecan and topotecan, are integral components of cancer chemotherapy, often used in combination therapies. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of CPT-based combination treatments in cancer patients. Methods: We systematically searched the literature database using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist for articles published between 2000 and 2022. Published studies were retrieved through an electronic search on the Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. A total of 138 studies were downloaded and examined, and 71 eligible studies were selected for meta-analysis after excluding studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Results: Ultimately, a total of 71 studies were included in the analysis, comprising non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), colorectal cancer (COLRC), oesophageal/gastric cancer (O/GC), and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). For NSCLC, the objective response rate (RR) was 31.8% (95% CI: 27.3-37.1%, p = 0.025), with irinotecan plus cisplatin showing significantly higher efficacy compared to other irinotecan-based combinations. In COLRC, irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus bevacizumab demonstrated superior efficacy with a RR of 44% (95% CI: 34-58, p < 0.001) and minimal haematological toxicity. In O/GC, irinotecan-based combinations showed an average RR of 43% (95% CI: 27-70, p < 0.001) and average overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates of 10.2 and 5.5 months, respectively. For SCLC, irinotecan-based combinations had a higher control response than topotecan-based ones, while the latter exhibited higher rates of stable and progressive disease. The overall RR for SCLC was 45% (95% CI: 34.3-60.2, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The existing evidence underscored the potential of CPT-based combination therapy in various cancers. Among the various combinations discussed in this analysis, irinotecan plus cisplatin demonstrated the highest objective RR in 12 trials focused on NSCLC. This study provides valuable insights into potential treatment strategies for various types of cancer, emphasising the importance of personalised and tailored approaches to maximise efficacy and minimise adverse effects.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil plus leucovorin versus fluorouracil plus leucovorin in patients with cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapies (AIO NALIRICC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial

There is an unmet need for effective therapies in pretreated advanced biliary tract cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil plus leucovorin compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin as second-line treatment for biliary tract cancer. NALIRICC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 17 German centres for patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, metastatic biliary tract cancer, and progression on gemcitabine-based therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous infusions of nanoliposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2), fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2), and leucovorin (400 mg/m2) every 2 weeks (nanoliposomal irinotecan group) or fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2) plus leucovorin (400 mg/m2) every 2 weeks (control group). Randomisation was by permutated block randomisation in block sizes of four, stratified by primary tumour site. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival was the primary endpoint, which was evaluated in all randomly assigned patients. Secondary efficacy outcomes were overall survival, objective response rate, and quality of life. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Enrolment for this trial has been completed, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043547. Between Dec 4, 2017, and Aug 2, 2021, 49 patients were randomly assigned to the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 51 patients to the control group. Median age was 65 years (IQR 59-71); 45 (45%) of 100 patients were female. Median progression-free survival was 2·6 months (95% CI 1·7-3·6) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 2·3 months (1·6-3·4) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·87 [0·56-1·35]). Median overall survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 5·3-10·6) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 8·2 months (5·4-11·9) in the control group (HR 1·08 [0·68-1·72]). The objective response rate was 14% (95% CI 6-27; seven patients) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 4% (1-14; two patients) in the control group. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group were neutropenia (eight [17%] of 48 vs none in the control group), diarrhoea (seven [15%] vs one [2%]), and nausea (four [8%] vs none). In the control group, the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were cholangitis (four [8%] patients vs none in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group) and bile duct stenosis (four [8%] vs three [6%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 16 (33%) patients in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group (grade 2-3 diarrhoea in five patients; one case each of abdominal infection, acute kidney injury, pancytopenia, increased blood bilirubin, colitis, dehydration, dyspnoea, infectious enterocolitis, ileus, oral mucositis, and nausea). One (2%) treatment-related serious adverse event occurred in the control group (worsening of general condition). Median duration until deterioration of global health status, characterised by the time from randomisation to the initial observation of a score decline exceeding 10 points, was 4·0 months (95% CI 2·2-not reached) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 3·7 months (2·7-not reached) in the control group. The addition of nanoliposomal irinotecan to fluorouracil plus leucovorin did not improve progression-free survival or overall survival and was associated with higher toxicity compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin. Further research is necessary to define the role of irinotecan-based combinations in second-line treatment of biliary tract cancer. Servier and AIO-Studien.

Effectiveness of irinotecan plus trabectedin on a desmoplastic small round cell tumor patient-derived xenograft.

This study exploited a novel patient-derived xenograft (PDX) of desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT), which reproduces histomorphological and molecular characteristics of the clinical tumor, to assess the activity of cytotoxic and targeted anticancer agents. Antitumor effect was moderate for doxorubicin, pazopanib and larotrectenib [maximum tumor volume inhibition (max TVI), 55-66%], while trabectedin had higher activity (max TVI, 82%). Vinorelbine, irinotecan and eribulin achieved nearly complete tumor growth inhibition (max TVI, 96-98%), although tumors regrew after the end of treatment. The combination of irinotecan with either eribulin or trabectedin resulted in complete responses, which were maintained until the end of the experiment for irinotecan plus trabectedin. Irinotecan-based combinations nearly abrogated the expression of proteins of the G2/M checkpoint, preventing cell entrance in mitosis, and induced apoptotic and necroptotic cell death. Consistently, irinotecan plus trabectedin resulted in reprogramming of DSCRT transcriptome, with downregulation of E2F targets, G2/M checkpoint and mitotic spindle gene sets. This study emphasizes the importance of patient-derived preclinical models to explore new treatments for DSRCT and fosters clinical investigation into the activity of irinotecan plus trabectedin.

Antitumor activity of irinotecan with ellagic acid in C6 glioma cells.

SUMMARYOBJECTIVE:Irinotecan-based combination chemotherapies in malignant gliomas need to be examined. The aim of this study was to investigate the synergetic effect of ellagic acid, a natural polyphenolic antioxidant compound, with irinotecan, an inhibitor of topoisomerase I enzyme, on the growth, cadherin switch, and angiogenic processes of a glioma cell line.METHODS:A combination of 100 μM ellagic acid and 100 μM irinotecan was applied to rat C6 glioma cells for 24th, 48th, and 72nd h. The cell proliferation was evaluated by 5-bromo-2′-deoxyuridine immunocytochemistry. The expression levels of vascular endothelial growth factor, E-cadherin, and N-cadherin were measured using real-time polymerase chain reaction and their immunoreactivities using immunocytochemistry.RESULTS:The treatment of irinotecan with combining ellagic acid enhanced antitumor activity and the synergistic effect of these reduced the cell proliferation of C6 glioma by inhibiting the cadherin switch and promoting the antiangiogenic processes.CONCLUSIONS:Further research is required to prove a negative relationship between C6 glial cell proliferation and irinotecan with ellagic acid application. Our preliminary data suggest that even with the extremely short-term application, irinotecan with ellagic acid may affect glioma cells at the level of gene and protein expression.

Response and Disease Dynamics in Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer With Bevacizumab-Based Sequential vs. Combination Chemotherapy—Analysis of the Phase 3 XELAVIRI Trial

IntroductionEarly tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and time to DpR represent exploratory endpoints that may serve as early efficacy parameters and predictors of long-term outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We analyzed these endpoints in mCRC patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-based sequential (initial fluoropyrimidines) versus combination (initial fluoropyrimidines plus irinotecan) chemotherapy within the phase 3 XELAVIRI trial.MethodsDpR (change from baseline to smallest tumor diameter), ETS (≥20% reduction in tumor diameter at first reassessment), and time to DpR (study randomization to DpR image) were analyzed. We evaluated progression-free survival and overall survival with ETS as stratification parameter according to treatment arm, molecular subgroup, and sex.ResultsIn 370 patients analyzed, a higher rate of ETS (60.9% vs. 43.5%; p = 0.001) and significantly greater DpR (-40.0% vs. -24.7%; p < 0.001) were observed in the initial combination therapy arm. The improvement was pronounced in RAS/BRAF wild-type tumors. ETS correlated with improved survival irrespective of treatment arm (PFS: p < 0.001; OS: p = 0.012) and molecular subgroup (PFS: p < 0.001; OS: p < 0.001). Male patients in contrast to female patients with ETS had survival benefit (PFS: p < 0.001, HR 0.532; OS: p < 0.001, HR 0.574 vs. PFS: p = 0.107; OS: p = 0.965).ConclusionsInitial irinotecan-based combination therapy with bevacizumab improved ETS and DpR in mCRC patients with a particularly high irinotecan sensitivity of RAS/BRAF wild-type tumors. ETS seems to be a suitable prognostic marker for fluoropyrimidine- and bevacizumab-based combinations in mCRC. This finding was rather driven by male patients, potentially indicating that ETS might be less predictive of long-term outcome in an elderly, female population.

Treatment responses and disease dynamics in patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab-based sequential versus combination chemotherapy: Analysis of a phase 3 trial (AIO KRK0110, XELAVIRI study).

3571 Background: Early response parameters such as early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and time to DpR represent exploratory endpoints that may serve as early efficacy endpoints and potential predictors of long-term outcome. We analyzed the association of these endpoints with bevacizumab-based sequential (initial fluoropyrimidines) versus combination (initial fluoropyrimidines plus irinotecan) chemotherapy within a randomized phase III trial. Methods: DpR (change from baseline to smallest tumor diameter), ETS (≥20% reduction in tumor diameter at first reassessment), and time to DpR (study randomization to DpR-image) were analyzed in the XELAVIRI-trial. Moreover, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated with ETS as stratification parameter (ETS vs. no ETS) according to treatment arm, molecular subgroup, and sex. Results: 370 patients were available for analysis of early treatment response parameters. A higher rate of ETS (60.9% vs. 43.5%; p = 0.001) and significantly greater DpR (-40.0% vs. -24.7%; p &lt; 0.001) were observed in the initial combination compared to the sequential therapy arm, respectively. The improvement of ETS and DpR was pronounced in the subpopulation of RAS/ BRAF wildtype patients. Male in contrast to female patients significantly benefitted from initial combination treatment in terms of median DpR (male: -40.0% vs. -22.2%; p &lt; 0.001; female: -34.0% vs. -24.4%; p = 0.13) and rate of ETS (male: 64.8% vs. 40.2%; p &lt; 0.001; female: 52.5% vs. 49.3%; p = 0.73). Achievement of ETS correlated with improved survival irrespective of treatment arm (PFS: p &lt; 0.001; OS: p = 0.012) and molecular subgroup (PFS: p &lt; 0.001; OS: p &lt; 0.001). Whereas the survival benefit in male patients achieving ETS was statistically significant (PFS: p &lt; 0.001, HR 0.532 (0.409-0.692); OS: p &lt; 0.001, HR 0.574 (0.437-0.756)), there were no significant differences in PFS (p = 0.107) and OS (p = 0.965) of female patients depending on ETS. Conclusions: In the XELAVIRI trial, initial irinotecan-based combination therapy with bevacizumab improves ETS and DpR in mCRC patients. Improvement in early response parameters appears pronounced in patients with RAS/ BRAF wildtype tumors suggesting a high sensitivity to irinotecan-based treatment. ETS was predictive of PFS and OS regardless of treatment arm. This finding was rather driven by male than female patients, potentially indicating that ETS might be less predictive of long-term outcome in an elderly, female population.

Phase II Study of Panitumumab Monotherapy in Chemotherapy-Naïve Frail or Elderly Patients with Unresectable RAS Wild-Type Colorectal Cancer: OGSG 1602

Panitumumab monotherapy showed favorable efficacy and feasibility in the treatment of frail or elderly patients with RAS wild-type unresectable colorectal cancer. It is especially effective for left-sided tumors; therefore, panitumumab as first-line treatment could be an additional therapeutic option for frail elderly patients, particularly in those who are unsuitable for upfront oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based combination regimens. First-line panitumumab monotherapy is expected to be well tolerated and improve survival in patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. However, its safety and efficacy in chemotherapy-naïve frail or elderly patients with unresectable RAS wild-type (WT) colorectal cancer (CRC) have not been studied. The aim of this phase II trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of panitumumab as first-line treatment. We conducted a multicenter phase II study on patients aged ≥76 years or ≥65 years considered unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy. Panitumumab 6 mg/kg of intravenous infusion was administered every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxicities. Thirty-six patients (median age: 81 [range, 67-88] years) were enrolled between February 2017 and August 2018. Two patients were excluded from the analysis of efficacy: one from lack of image examination at baseline and the other from lack of a measurable lesion. Thirty-three (91.6%) patients had a performance status (PS) of 0 or 1, whereas two (5.6%) patients and one (2.8%) patient had a PS of 2 and 3, respectively. Twenty-eight patients (77.8%) had left-sided CRC, whereas eight (22.2%) had right-sided CRC. The RR was 50.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.4-67.6), including three patients (8.8%) who had complete responses. A total of 26.5% had stable diseases, resulting in a DCR of 76.5% (90% CI, 61.5-87.7). The RR of patients with left- and right-sided tumors was 65.4% (95% CI, 44.3-82.8) and 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0-36.9), respectively. Major grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicities were rash (n = 6, 16.7%), hypomagnesemia (n = 4, 11.1%), fatigue (n = 3, 8.3%), paronychia (n = 2, 5.6%), and hyponatremia (n = 2, 5.6%). The only grade 3 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia (n = 1, 2.8%). Panitumumab monotherapy showed favorable efficacy and feasibility in frail or elderly patients with RAS WT unresectable CRC. Survival analysis including OS, PFS, and TTF is currently in progress.

Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of Second-Line Therapy after Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Patients.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal solid tumors. In many European countries gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel is the preferred first-line treatment. An increasing number of patients are eligible for second-line therapy, but the best regimen is still controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based compared to irinotecan-based therapies in this setting. 181 advanced pancreatic cancer patients consecutively treated in three centers with a second-line therapy progressed on gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel were retrospectively enrolled. OS and PFS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and survival of the two groups was compared using the log-rank test. The median PFS and OS were respectively 3.5 (95%CI 3.2–3.8) and 8.8 months (95%CI 7.9–9.8) from second-line therapy in the overall population. The median PFS and OS were respectively 3.3 (95%CI 3.1–3.5) and 8.2 months (95%CI 7.24–9.34) with an irinotecan-based combination compared to 4.0 (95%CI 2.4–5.7) and 10.3 months (95%CI 8.62–12.02) in patients receiving an oxaliplatin-based combination. We observed a clear trend for longer survival outcomes with platinum-based doublet compared to regimens including irinotecan or nal-IRI. Head-to-head trials are still lacking. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and the presence of liver metastases could drive physicians in tailoring the treatment strategy.

Liposomal Irinotecan: A Review in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Intravenous liposomal irinotecan injection (Onivyde®) is approved for use in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma that has progressed following gemcitabine-based therapy. Liposomal irinotecan is a liposome-encapsulated formulation of the topoisomerase-1 inhibitor irinotecan, developed to overcome the pharmacological and clinical limitations of non-liposomal irinotecan. In the pivotal multinational, phase III NAPOLI-1 trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma that had progressed following gemcitabine-based therapy, liposomal irinotecan in combination with 5-FU/LV significantly prolonged median overall survival (OS; primary endpoint) and median progression-free survival (PFS) at the time of the primary analysis (after 313 events) and final analysis (after 382 events) compared with 5-FU/LV control therapy. The objective response rate was also significantly higher in the liposomal irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV group than in the control group. Liposomal irinotecan-based combination therapy had a manageable safety profile; the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of grade ≥3 severity were haematological or gastrointestinal in nature. The incidence of neutropenic sepsis was low. In a setting where there is a paucity of second-line treatment options, liposomal irinotecan in combination with 5-FU/LV is an important emerging treatment option for metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas that has progressed following gemcitabine-based therapy.

Second-line systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

The therapeutic management of people with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) who did not respond to first-line treatment represents a formidable challenge. To determine the efficacy and toxicity of second-line systemic therapy in people with metastatic CRC. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to May 2016), Ovid MEDLINE In-process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (1946 to May 2016) and Ovid Embase (1974 to May 2016). There were no language or date of publication restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy (survival, tumour response) and toxicity (incidence of severe adverse effects (SAEs)) of second-line systemic therapy (single or combined treatment with any anticancer drug, at any dose and number of cycles) in people with metastatic CRC that progressed, recurred or did not respond to first-line systemic therapy. Authors performed a descriptive analysis of each included RCT in terms of primary (survival) and secondary (tumour response, toxicity) endpoints. In the light of the variety of drug regimens tested in the included trials, we could carry out meta-analysis considering classes of (rather than single) anticancer regimens; to this aim, we applied the random-effects model to pool the data. We used hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios (RRs) to describe the strength of the association for survival (overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)) and dichotomous (overall response rate (ORR) and SAE rate) data, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Thirty-four RCTs (enrolling 13,787 participants) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Available evidence enabled us to address multiple clinical issues regarding the survival effects of second-line systemic therapy of people with metastatic CRC.1. Chemotherapy (irinotecan) was more effective than best supportive care (HR for OS: 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80; 1 RCT; moderate-quality evidence); 2. modern chemotherapy (FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin), irinotecan) is more effective than outdated chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil) (HR for PFS: 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.73; 2 RCTs; high-quality evidence) (HR for OS: 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.94; 1 RCT; moderate-quality evidence); 3. irinotecan-based combinations were more effective than irinotecan alone (HR for PFS: 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.76; 6 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence); 4. targeted agents improved the efficacy of conventional chemotherapy both when considered together (HR for OS: 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 6 RCTs; high-quality evidence) and when bevacizumab was used alone (HR for PFS: 0.67, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.75; 4 RCTs; high-quality evidence).With regard to secondary endpoints, tumour response rates generally paralleled the survival results; moreover, higher anticancer efficacy was generally associated with worse treatment-related toxicity, with the important exception of bevacizumab-containing regimens, where the addition of the targeted agent to chemotherapy did not result in a significant increase in the rate of SAE. Finally, we found that oral (instead of intravenous) fluoropyrimidines significantly reduced the incidence of adverse effects (without compromising efficacy) in people treated with oxaliplatin-based regimens.We could not draw any conclusions on other debated aspects in this field of oncology, such as ranking of treatments (not all possible comparisons have been tested and many comparisons were based on single trials enrolling a small number of participants) and quality of life (virtually no data available). Systemic therapy offers a survival benefit to people with metastatic CRC who did not respond to first-line treatment, especially when targeted agents are combined with conventional chemotherapeutic drugs. Further research is needed to define the optimal regimen and to identify people who most benefit from each treatment.

Irinotecan Monotherapy Versus Irinotecan-Based Combination as Second-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

PurposeA meta-analysis was conducted to examine the question of whether combination regimens are more effective than monotherapy as a second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer.Materials and MethodsThe MEDLINE and the EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials were searched using appropriate keywords. Only randomized controlled trials were eligible.ResultsTaxane-based study is rare; thus, four irinotecan-based studies were finally included in the meta-analysis. Out of 661 patients, 331 patients were assigned to combination therapy and 330 to monotherapy. Cisplatin or fluoropyrimidine (S-1 or 5-fluorouracil) was used as a combination partner to irinotecan. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) and for progression-free survival (PFS) was 0.938 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.796 to 1.104; p=0.442) and 0.815 (95% CI, 0.693 to 0.958; p=0.013). In subgroup analysis according to previous exposure to a partner agent, the PFS benefit of combination was observed only in the partially exposed group (HR, 0.784; 95% CI, 0.628 to 0.980; p=0.032).ConclusionSecond-line irinotecan-based combination was not associated with increased OS, but with PFS benefit, which seemed particularly significant for patients receiving combination with a new agent.

E40 - Clinical Outcome of Patients With Stage IV Colorectal Cancer Receiving Combination Chemotherapy Without Surgery As Initial Treatment

Background: At the time of diagnosis, 25% of patients (pts) with colorectal cancer (CRC) present synchronous unresectable metastases. The best therapeutic option for this pts is not yet defined: primary tumor resection (PTR) followed by chemotherapy or upfront chemotherapy without PTR? Methods: We conducted a prospective observation trial. Main study's objective was to describe the incidence of primary tumor–related complications in pts with stage IV CRC who received up-front oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy with or without target therapies. Secondary objectives were: overall response rate (ORR- according to RECIST criteria), toxicity (CTCAE v4), progression free survival (PFS) and clinical benefit (defined as: increase in body weight and appetite, improvement of existing symptoms such as pain, bleeding, anorexia, asthenia). Results: From July 2013 to January 2015, 38 pts with median age of 65.8 years (range 44-83), were enrolled. Primary tumors were: right colon (cecum, ascending or transverse colon) in 26.3% of pts, left colon (descending or sigmoid) in 52.6% and rectum in 21.1%. The most common sites of metastasis were: liver (65.8%), retroperitoneal nodes (48.1%), lung (52.7%), peritoneum (21.1%), bone (21.1%) and brain (13.2%). Metastases involved one site or organ in 52.6% of pts, two sites in 26.3%, three sites in 13.2% and four sites in 7.9%. Of 38 pts, 97,4% never required surgical palliation of their primary tumor. One patients (2,6%) required medical therapy for primary tumor subobstruction. No bleeding or intestinal perforation were observed in the site of primary tumor. After 6 months, 94.7% of pts was evaluable for response: ORR was 25%, no complete response (CR), was observed, disease control rate (CR + partial response + stable disease) was 75% and progression was 25%; median PFS was 9.3 months (range 3-15). Grade 3/4 toxicities were as follows: neutropenia 19.2%; diarrhea 11.3%; nausea-vomiting 1.6%. Pain improved in 80% of pts, constipation in 60% of pts with less need for medical treatment (laxatives and enemas toileting), appetite improved in 64.8% of pts and an increase in body weight was observed in 48.3% of pts. Conclusions: These data showed that upfront chemotherapy, without routine prophylactic resection, could be an appropriate therapeutic option for pts with neither obstructed nor hemorrhaging primary colorectal tumors in the setting of metastatic disease.

Efficacy and toxicity of adding cetuximab to chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis from 12 randomized controlled trials.

Cetuxiamb, a monoclonal antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), has been used in combination with chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the efficacy of combined therapies of cetuximab and different chemotherapy regimens remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of adding cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based chemotherapeutic regimens for the treatment of patients with mCRC with wild-type/mutated KRAS tumors. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published in Pubmed and Embase were systematically reviewed to assess the survival benefits and toxicity profile mCRC patients treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and toxicities. Results were expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Pooled estimates were generated by using a fixed-effects model or a randomized-effects model, depending on the heterogeneity among studies. A total of 12 trials involving 6,297 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. All patients were administered oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based chemotherapy with or without cetuximab. Pooled results showed that the addition of cetuximab did not significantly improve the OS (HR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.89-1.09; Z = 0.28, P = 0.78) or PFS (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.81-1.10; Z = 0.76, P = 0.49), but did improve ORR (RR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.08-1.65; Z = 2.72, P = 0.00), when compared with chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis showed the highest PFS benefit in patients with wild-type KRAS tumors (HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.65-0.99; Z = 2.1, P = 0.04) or wild-type KRAS/BRAF tumors (HR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.52-0.79; Z = 4.15, P = 0.00). When combined with cetuximab, irinotecan-based chemotherapy was significantly associated with prolonged PFS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.66-0.96; Z = 2.36, P = 0.02) for all patients with differing gene-status. The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events, including skin toxicity, diarrhea, hypertension, anorexia, and mucositis/stomatitis, was slightly higher in the combined therapy group than in the chemotherapy-only group. Based on the current evidence, the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy significantly improves the PFS in patients with wild-type KRAS or wild-type KRAS/BRAF tumors as well as the ORR in all patients. In addition, irinotecan-based combination therapy showed a beneficial effect on the PFS in all patients. These findings confirm the use of cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with mCRC with wild-type KRAS tumors. Further multi-center RCTs are needed to indentify these findings.

A meta-analysis of two Irinotecan-based phase III randomized trials for the efficacy and treatment tolerance in older patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (MCRC)

Introduction: More than 50% of newly diagnosed cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) are observed in patients >65 years. Irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy prolongs survival in patients with mCRC.

Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with resected pulmonary metastases from colorectal cancer.

e14533 Background: To determine impact of modern chemotherapy regimens after pulmonary metastasectomy from colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: A total of 122 consecutive patients who curatively resected for pulmonary metastases of CRC in eleven oncology centers were retrospectively analysed between January 2000 and April 2012. Results: Of 122 patients, 108 who received chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine-based (n = 12), irinotecan-based (n = 56) and oxaliplatin-based (n = 40) combinations were analyzed. Among these, 52 patients received bevacizumab (BEV) while 56 did not (NoBEV). With a median follow-up of 14 months after metastasectomy, median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 17 months, overall survival (OS) was not reached. Three and 5-years OS rates were 66% and 53%, respectively. There was no significant difference among cytotoxic regimens in respect to RFS and OS. Similarly, no significant difference was seen between BEV and NoBEV arms in respect to OS and RFS. In univariate analysis prior liver metastasectomy (p = 0.045), positive pulmonary margin (p = 0.028), disease-free interval &lt; 12 months (p = 0.013), and KRAS mutation (0.009) were negative significant prognostic for RFS. Thoracic pathological lymphatic involvement (p = 0.006) and higher prethoracotomy carcinoembryonic antigen (p = 0.038) were negative significant prognostic for OS. In multivariate analysis, positive pulmonary margin was the only negative independent prognostic for RFS, while thoracic lymphatic involvement was the only negative independent prognostic for OS. Conclusions: Chemotherapy type and addition of bevacizumab have no impact on both RFS and OS in the adjuvant setting following complete resection of colorectal pulmonary metastases.

Is there still a role for mitomycin-based combination chemotherapy in treating patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer? A single institution experience

Mitomycin and irinotecan are widely used in the treatment of colorectal cancer, furthermore both of these drugs are active agents against nonsmall cell lung cancer and their combination has shown synergism in preclinical studies. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mitomycin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy combination in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer progressing after previous antineoplastic therapies. Thirty-one consecutive patients suffering from nonsmall cell lung cancer, who underwent mitomycin- plus irinotecan-based chemotherapy as salvage treatment after failure of at least two previous systemic treatments, were retrospectively identified in our database. Between September 2003 and March 2011, 31 patients with histologically proven stage IIIB or IV nonsmall cell lung cancer, received mitomycin 5 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by irinotecan 150 mg/m(2) on day 2. Cycles were repeated at 2-week interval. A total of 164 cycles of treatment were given with a median of five per patient (range 1-10). The objective responses included partial response in 6 patients (19.3%), stable disease in 4 (13%), and progressive disease in 21 (67.7%). Median time to disease progression was 4 months, and median survival was 9+ months. Twelve patients (38%) reached 1-year survival. Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in seven patients (22.5%), mainly myelosuppression (neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia), mucositis, and diarrhea. No treatment-related death was recorded. The mitomycin- and irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy seems to be tolerated and active in this subset of heavily pretreated patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. However, evaluation or recruitment of a larger number of patients would be needed to provide more adequate data on safety and activity of the described combination.

IS9-4 - Systemic Chemotherapy Options after Oxaliplatin and Irinotecan-Based Combination Chemotherapy

ABSTRACT Given the fact that the median survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients exceeds 20 months and a good proportion of patients maintain their performance after failing the standard treatment. However, there is no further treatment option for metastatic colon patients who are refractory to oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and to whom novel biologic agents are not available, especially ras mutation-positive patients. Four trials (one phase II and three retrospective studies) including our reports analyzed the clinical benefit of them when compared with those with only best supportive care (BSC) and without salvage chemotherapy, in which data for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were available. Two trials used capecitabine monotherapy as a salvage chemotherapy, one S-1 monotherapy and one mitomycin C plus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (MFL). PFS was reported as follows: 2.3–2.8 months for capecitabine, 2.1 months for S-1, and 2.5 months for MFL. These salvage chemotherapies showed the trend toward slightly increased PFS. OS showed as follows: 5.3–6.1 months for capecitabine, 11.3 months for S-1, and 9.5 months for MFL. Some salvage regimens may be useful in CRC patients who maintain their performance after failing the standard treatment including biologic agents.

Should bevacizumab (B) be included in the first-line treatment of elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC)? Results from a community-based Italian observational study.

e14040 Background: Data on B for elderly patients with advanced CRC are scarce, although recent analyses demonstrated safety for its use. To investigate the efficacy and safety of treating older pts with B and chemotherapy in the clinical practice a national cohort was analyzed. Methods: In this observational cohort study 213 elderly patients from 9 Italian centers who received first-line B combined with chemotherapy were enrolled. Demographics and comorbidities were captured, along with efficacy and toxicity results. Predefined endpoints were response rate, progression-free, overall survival, and safety. Survival curves were generated with Kaplan-Maier methodology. Results: Median age was 72 (66-84), PS was 0-1 in 96%. Comorbidities at study entry were reported in 153 pts (72%): cardiovascular (including hypertension) 107, diabetes 32, respiratory 15, endocrine 10, neurological 10, renal 7, other diseases 51. Comprehensive geriatric evaluation with ADL, IADL and CIRS scores was available for only 64 pts (29%) reporting median values of 6, 8 and 20 respectively. Companion chemotherapy was 5-FU alone for 27 (12.6%), oxaliplatin-based doublet for 75 (35.2%) and irinotecan-based combination for 111 (52.1%). 81 pts had chemotherapy dose reduction, and 23 interrupted B before progression. Disease control was achieved in 86%, with median PFS/OS of 8.8/18.9 months. 76 pts were maintained on B alone or B plus 5-FU. Main toxicities were neutropenia (44%), anemia (37.5%), diarrhea (40.8%), mucositis (25.8%) and hand-foot syndrome (14.1%). Sensorial neurotoxicity was frequent among pts receiving oxaliplatin. Specific B-induced toxicities were induced or worsened hypertension in 48 pts (22.5%), proteinuria in 24 (11%), and venous or artherial thromboembolism in 16 (7.5%). Conclusions: To treat elderly CRC pts with B and chemotherapy is safe and major efficacy endpoints did not differ from expected. Geriatric evaluation is underused in the common practice and better tools are required to select elderly to be treated with antiangiogenics.

Sequential chemotherapy of hepatic arterial infusion of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI with intravenous bevacizumab in unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer after systemic chemotherapy failure.

e14080 Background: At present, systemic chemotherapy is the only established treatment in patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). The regimen combining irinotecan or oxaliplatin to 5-FU/LV is recommended as a first and second line treatment. However, after failure of oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy, there is no effective regimenremained. This pilot clinical trial explored the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of sequential chemotherapy of hepatic arterial infusion of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI with Intravenous Bevacizumab in unresectable CRLM after systemic chemotherapy failure. Methods: Patients with unresectable CRLM and history of systemic chemotherapy failure were treated with HAI oxaliplatin (35 mg/m2 2 hours: HAI-FOLFOX) or irinotecan (50 mg/m2 2 hours: HAI-FOLFIRI) followed by 5FU (1500mg 46hours) combined with intravenous Bevacizumab (200mg 90min) and LV (200mg 2hours) every 2 weeks until disease progression. Basically, HAI-FOLFOX was applied first, and after disease progression or limiting toxicity, HAI-FOLFIRI followed when the patient was still able to receive treatment. Results: Fourteen consecutive patients (median age 65 years; mean therapeutic term of prior systemic chemotherapy regimens,533 ± 266 days) were included, of whom 11 (79%) had previously received oxaliplatin (n =5), irinotecan (n = 2), or both (n = 4). Patients received a median of 13 cycles of HAI-FOLFOX (range 4–32) and among those, 7 patients sequentially received a median of 22 cycles of HAI-FOLFIRI (range 2–42). There was no technical nonfeasibility to discontinue treatment. The regimen was generally well tolerated; the most common side effects were grade 1 fatigue, anorexia, and/or hypertension. The complete and partial response rate totaled 71.4% in this sequential therapy. Median survival time was 20.1 months. Conclusions: A sequential chemotherapy of hepatic arterial infusion of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI with intravenous bevacizumab is feasible, safe, and shows promising activity in unresectable CRLM after systemic chemotherapy failure.

Hypomagnesaemia in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma treated with cetuximab.

Cetuximab is a chimeric antibody registered for the therapy of advanced colorectal carcinoma. Among the side-effects of cetuximab hypomagnesaemia has been described, but the information is still limited. We have evaluated retrospectively serum magnesium, potassium, calcium, creatinine and albumin in 51 consecutive patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma treated with cetuximab, mostly combined with irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy. A significant decrease of serum magnesium, potassium, calcium and corrected serum calcium, creatinine and albumin concentrations was already evident one week after the start of treatment. Hypomagnesaemia of any grade was detected in 56% of evaluable patients, but grade 3 or grade 4 hypomagnesaemia was observed in 6% and 4% of patients, respectively. Grade 1 hypokalemia was detected in 47%, grade 3 in 17% and grade 4 hypokalemia was detected in 6% of the patients. Among evaluable patients grade 1 hypocalcaemia was detected in (36%), grade 2 hypocalcaemia in 42%, grade 3 in 4% and grade 4 in 13% of patients. Baseline hypocalcaemia of grade 1 or higher was associated with significantly inferior survival. Asymptomatic hypomagnesaemia, hypokalemia and hypocalcaemia are common in metastatic colorectal carcinoma patients treated with cetuximab. Hypocalcaemia is a predictor of poor prognosis.