To compare the efficacy and toxicity of oxaliplatin (L-OHP) in combination with irinotecan (CPT-11), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) (FOLFOXIRI) vs irinotecan and 5-FU/LV (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC). A total of 283 chemotherapy-naïve patients with MCC were enrolled (FOLFIRI arm: n=146; FOLFOXIRI arm: n=137). In the FOLFOXIRI arm, CPT-11 (150 mg m−2) was given on d1, L-OHP (65 mg m−2) on d2, LV (200 mg m−2) on days 2 and 3 and 5-FU (400 mg m−2 as i.v. bolus and 600 mg m−2 as 22 h i.v. continuous infusion) on days 2 and 3. In the FOLFIRI arm, CPT-11 (180 mg m−2) was given on d1 whereas LV and 5-FU were administered in the same way as in the FOLFOXIRI regimen. Both regimens were administered every 2 weeks. There was no difference in terms of overall survival (median OS: 19.5 and 21.5 months, for FOLFIRI and FOLFOXIRI, respectively; P=0.337), median time to disease progression (FOLFIRI: 6.9 and FOLFOXIRI: 8.4 months; P=0.17), response rates (33.6 and 43% for FOLFIRI and FOLFOXIRI, respectively; P=0.168). Patients treated with FOLFOXIRI had a significantly higher incidence of alopecia (P=0.0001), diarrhoea (P=0.0001) and neurosensory toxicity (P=0.001) compared with patients treated with FOLFIRI. The present study failed to demonstrate any superiority of the FOLFOXIRI combination compared with the FOLFIRI regimen, although the observed median OS is one of the best ever reported in the literature.
BACKGROUND: In this superiority study, pemetrexed was compared with erlotinib in pre-treated patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC who progressed after first-line or second-line treatment were randomized to receive either pemetrexed or erlotinib. In total, 21.7% of patients in the pemetrexed arm and 23.5% of patients in the erlotinib arm had squamous cell histology, and treatment was third line in 39.2% and 46.4% of patients, respectively. The primary study endpoint was time to tumor progression (TTP). Epidermal growth factor receptor/v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (EGFR/KRAS) mutation status also was investigated. RESULTS: There was no difference in terms of the TTP (P 5.195), the objective response rate (P 5.469), or overall survival (P 5.986) between the 2 treatment arms. In patients who had squamous cell histology, erlotinib resulted in a superior TTP compared with pemetrexed (4.1 months vs 2.5 months, respectively; P 5.006). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and asthenia was significantly higher in the pemetrexed arm, whereas the incidence of grade 3 and 4 skin rash was higher in the erlotinib arm. CONCLUSIONS: Both pemetrexed and erlotinib had comparable efficacy in pre-treated patients with metastatic NSCLC, and the current results indicated that genotyping of tumor cells may have an important effect on treatment efficacy. Cancer 2013;119:2754-64.
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and the toxicity of front line FOLFOX4 combined with bevacizumab in patients with metastatsic CRC (mCRC). Results: Fifty three patients (46 with a PS 0-1) were enrolled. Complete and partial response was achieved in eight (15.1%) and 28 (52.8%) patients, respectively (ORR: 67.9%; 95% C.I.: 53.8%-92%); 11 (20.7%) patients had stable disease and six (11.3%) progressive disease. With a median follow up period of 13.5 months, time to tumor progression was 11 months while the median survival has not yet been reached; the probability of 1-, 2-and 3-year survival was 79.8%, 63.8% and 58.3%, respectively; Two patients relapsed during the follow up period. Eight (15%) patients underwent metastasectomy with R0 resections. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 15.1% of patients and one (1.9%) of them presented febrile neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicity included grade 3 diarrhea (7.6%) and grade 2 and 3 neurotoxicity in 16.9 and 15.1% of patients, respectively. One (1.9%) patient presented pulmonary embolism and one (1.9%) cardiac ischaemia. There was one (1.9%) sudden death after the first cycle.
Patients and Methods
Conclusion:The combination of FOLFOX4/bevacizumab appears to be highly effective, well tolerated and merits further evaluation in patients with mCRC.
Background:We conducted an open-label, pilot phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Methods:Thirty patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC, <70 years and with performance status 0–1 were included in the trial.Results:Complete and partial responses were observed in 4 (13.3%) and 17 (56.7%) patients, respectively (overall response rate (ORR)=70% 95% confidence interval (CI): 53.6%-86.4%); 8 patients (26.7%) had stable disease and 1 had progressive disease. The median time to tumour progression was 10.2 months (95% CI: 7.1–13.4) and the overall median survival time was 30.3 months (95% CI: 18.8–41.9). Secondary R0 resection was performed in 11 (37%) patients. Grade 3 or 4 diarrhoea and neutropenia were observed in 16 (53%) and 7 (23.3%) patients, respectively, and febrile neutropenia observed in 2 (6.6%) patients. Neurotoxicity grade 2 or 3 was reported in 7 (23.3%) and in 2 (6.7%) patients, respectively, and grade 3 rush was reported in 1 patient.Conclusion:The FOLFOXIRI/cetuximab combination presented increased activity in terms of response rate and R0 secondary liver metastases resection, and merits further investigation, especially in patients with initially unresectable disease confined to the liver.
The detection of HER2 mRNA-positive CTCs after the completion of adjuvant chemotherapy may provide clinically useful information concerning the efficacy of treatment and the prognosis of patients with operable breast cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.