e18022 Background: In Russia, there are no federal screening programs for detecting early stage of colon cancer; therefore we can assess the impact of various factors that could potentially affect the mortality of pts with mCRC Methods: We conducted a survey with 13 question according treatment of pts with CRC in 17 regional comprehensive cancer centers in 14 regions of Russia, with a total population of 26.347 billion. Results of the survey were conducted by methods of descriptive statistics. Effects of factors on mortality rate in regions were analyzed by a regression model Results: Only 34% pts with stage II-III received adjuvant chemotherapy. Mutation status of KRAS gene has been evaluated only in 33% pts with mCRC. In 2013, metastasectomy was performed only 13% of pts. Only 80% of pts who needed systemic treatment received chemotherapy (CT): doublets of CT (XELOX/FOLFOX/FLOX or FOLFIRI/XELIRI/IFL) - 49%, monotherapy of fluoropyrimidines - 39% of pts, bevacizumab – in 14% and anti-EGFR antibodies - 5% pts. Only 14% of pts with mCRC was placed central vein devices. Second line CT was performed in 47% pts: doublets – in 54%, monotherapy of fluoropyrimidines - in 24% pts, bevacizumab - 13% and anti-EGFR antibody - 8%. Third-line treatment was performed in 25% of pts: anti-EGFR antibodies - in 7.5%. According to regression analysis adjuvant chemotherapy (р = 0.01), bevacizumab only in the 1st line (р = 0.01), and installation of central venous devises (р = 0.07) and anti-EGFR antibody in the 1st line (р = 0.1) in wtKRAS pts had independent positive effect on the mortality rate in regions. We revealed a significant reverse connection between a high mortality rate in the region and administration of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy as 1st line treatment of metastatic disease (p = 0.01) Conclusions: The mortality with colorectal cancer is depended of complex factors that reflect the health care organization in the region, both at the stage of treatment of pts with early-stage and metastatic disease. We revealed that targeted agents are the most effective only in the 1st line settings.
e15007 Background: Afl is one of the antiagiogenic agents used for the treatment for mCRC. Cardiovascular toxicity of Afl is shown to be a main reason of the drug discontinuation but there are no studies on factors associated with nonhem adverse events(AEs). The aim of the study was to define clinical factors associated with the development of Gd.3-4 nonhem AEs. Methods: Pts with mCRC treated with FOLFIRI+Afl were included in a multicenter prospective base from 2016-18. Multivariative regression analysis was performed with Chicago, IL v.22.0. Factors studied included demographic, disease characteristics, data about concomitant diseases(CD) and concomitant medications. Results: 278 pts with mCRC from 18 centers were included. Mean age – 58.7, 48.6% were male, mean number of metastases– 2. ECOG 0-1–97.5%pts. RASm had 133 (47.8%) pts. Afl+FOLFIRI was used as the 2nd line therapy–in 67.6%. CD were in 194 (69.8%), cardiovascular–in 175 (62.9%). ORR(CR+PR)17.3%, SD-43.9%. MedPFS was 6.0 mos. Afl discontinuation due to AEs 11.9%. AE were reported in 201 (72.3%), Gd3-4 – in 69 (24.8%); nonhem AEs – in 178 (64%), Gd3-4–52 (18.8%)pts. Among Gd3-4 nonhem AEs were arterial hypertension Gd1-2–77 (27.7%), Gd3-4-in 36 (12.9%), vomiting Gd1-2–45 (16.2%), diarrhea Gd1-2–in 32 (11.5%), asthenia Gd1-2 –in 29 (10.4%), hepatotoxicity Gd1-2–in 2(5%), thrombosis–in 2 (5%) pts. Multivariate regression analysis showed that among the factors studied number of lines of treatment (OR1.4,95%CI1.1-2.1,p=0.03) and CD requiring medical support (OR 2.0,95%CI1.1-3.7,p=0.03) were found as independent factors of nonhem AE Gd3-4 development. ACE-inhibitors (OR2.2,95%CI1.2-4.3,p=0.02), calcium-channel blockers (CCB)(OR4.1,95%CI1.6-10.4,p=0.003 ) were the medical drugs considered to be significant. Conclusions: Number of lines and CD requiring medical support, especially with ACE-inhibitors or CCB, identifies a significant risk of developing cardiovascular non-hem AEs Gd3-4 with FOLFIRI + Afl.
644 Background: an assessment of efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in combination with everolimus in unselected patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) progressed during or following ≥1 line of antiangiogenic targeted therapy. Methods: Russian multicenter observational study included 73 consecutive patients with morphologically verified mRCC progressed during or following ≥1 line of antiangiogenic targeted therapy, treated with lenvatinib (18 mg/d) and everolimus (5 mg/d) in 20 Russian centers. Median age of the patients was 59 (23-73) years, a male-to-female ratio - 3:1. Most common histological type of kidney cancer was clear-cell RCC (71 (95.8%)). More than 2 lines of previous treatment were administered in 45 (61.6%) cases. Most patients were diagnosed with multiple metastases (71 (97.3%)) in >1 site (61 (83.6%)). Nephrectomy was performed in 87.7% (64/73) of cases. At the combined therapy start ECOG PS 2-4 was registered in 16 (20.5%), poor prognosis according to IMDC score – in 33 (45.2%) patients. Median follow-up was 9.7 (1-26) months. Results: objective response rate was 11% (8/73); tumor control was reached in 93.2% (68/73) of cases. Median objective response duration was 10.5 (4.3-16.8) months, tumor control duration – 10.0 (2.5-17.5) months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) achieved 16.9 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 12.1-20.6), overall survival (OS) – 20.8 (95% CI: 15.7-25.9) months. Any adverse events (AE) developed in 83.6% (61/73), AE grade 3-5 - in 23.3% (17/73) of cases. Most frequent AE grade 3-4 were diarrhea (10 (13.6%)) and arterial hypertension (6 (8.2%)). Unacceptable toxicity demanded treatment cancellation in 4.2% (3/73), therapy interruption – in 30.1% (22/73) and dose reduction – in 32.9% (24/73) of patients. Conclusions: unselected mRCC patients administered with combined targeted therapy in the real world practice were registered with lower objective response rate, similar survival and better tolerability comparing with population assigned for lenvatinib plus everolimus in the randomized phase II trial.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.