FOLFOXIRI plus bev improves ETS and DoR when compared with FOLFIRI plus bev. Achieving rapid and deep tumor shrinkage consistently delays tumor progression and prolongs survival in patients treated with first-line chemotherapy plus bev. ETS is a promising and valuable end point for clinical trials' design deserving further investigation.
This study confirmed the prognostic role of NLR in mCRC pts treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in the first line, showing the worse prognosis of pts with high NLR. The advantage of the triplet is independent of NLR at baseline.
Background: Despite the well-known negative prognostic value of the V600E BRAF mutation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), its outcome is quite heterogeneous, and the basis for this prognostic heterogeneity should be better defined. Methods: Two large retrospective series of V600E BRAF-mutated mCRC from 22 institutions served as an exploratory and validation set to develop a prognostic score. The model was internally and externally validated. Results: A total of 395 V600E BRAF-mutated mCRCs were included in the exploratory set. Performance status, CA19.9, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, grading and liver, lung and nodal involvement emerged as independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). Two different scoring systems were built: a 'complete' score (0e16) including all significant covariates and a 'simplified' score (0e9), based only on clinicopathological covariates, and excluding laboratory values. Adopting the complete score, proportions of patients with a low (0e4), intermediate (5e8) and high (9e16) score were 44.7%, 42.6% and 12.6%, respectively. The median OS was 29.6, 15.5 (hazard ratio [HR] for intermediate vs low risk: 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44e3.22, p < .001) and 6.6 months (HR for high vs low risk: 4.72, 95% CI: 2.72e8.20, p < .001). Similar results were observed also after adjusting for the type of first-line treatment and adopting the simplified score. The simplified prognostic score derived from the exploratory set was then applied to the validation set for external confirmation. Conclusions: These scoring systems are based on easy-to-collect data and defined specific subgroups with relevant differences in their life expectancy. These tools could be useful in clinical practice, would allow better stratification of patients in clinical trials and may be adopted for proper adjustments in exploratory translational analyses.
Individual plasma concentrations of 5-FU and 5-FDHU were determined on day 1of the first cycle with a validated high performance liquid chromatography method, and the main pharmacokinetic variables were determined. Follow-up of all patients was extended up to 5 years after the end of adjuvant chemotherapy, and DFS was recorded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate any correlation among 5-FU pharmacokinetics, clinical and pathologic variables, and DFS. Results: The area under the time/concentration curve (AUC) of 5-FU was significantly lower in 58 subjects who recurred (7.5 F 2.9 h  mg/L) with respect to other patients (9.3 F 4.1 h  mg/L). Furthermore, AUC values lower than 8.4 h  mg/L together with lymph node involvement and the interruption of treatment or reduction of doses were identified as risk factors at univariate analysis. The completion of 6 cycles of adjuvant treatment without dosage modifications was the only independent risk factor at multivariate analysis, despite a trend toward significance for 5-FU AUC values (cutoff value, 8.4 hÂmg/L) was observed (P = 0.06). Conclusions: Pharmacokinetics of 5-FU should be regarded as an important factor for predicting disease recurrence in colorectal cancers.
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.