Suppr超能文献

在转移性结直肠癌的后续治疗中,重新挑战和重新引入抗表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)联合化疗是否有作用?一项回顾性分析。

Is there a role for rechallenge and reintroduction of anti-EGFR plus chemotherapy in later lines of therapy for metastatic colorectal carcinoma? A retrospective analysis.

作者信息

Karani Amanda, Felismino Tiago Cordeiro, Diniz Lara, Macedo Mariana Petaccia, Silva Virgilio Souza E, Mello Celso Abdon

机构信息

Department of Medical Oncology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, Sao Paulo 01509-000, Brazil.

Department of Pathology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, Sao Paulo 01509-000, Brazil.

出版信息

Ecancermedicalscience. 2020 Jul 13;14:1069. doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2020.1069. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mechanisms of resistance have been described during disease progression (PD) for patients under treatment with anti-EGFR plus chemotherapy (CT). The aim of our study was to evaluate efficacy of anti-EGFR rechallenge (ReCH) and reintroduction (ReIn) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of patients with mCRC that previously received anti-EGFR + CT and interrupted therapy due to PD in the ReCH group and other reasons in the ReIn group. We aimed to describe progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and response rate (RR) after re-exposure and to evaluate prognostic factors associated with PFS.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. The median follow-up after re-exposure was 39.3 months. ReCH was adopted in 25% and ReIn in 75%. The median anti-EGFR free interval was at 10.5 months. At re-exposure, the main CT regimen was FOLFIRI in 58.8%. Cetuximab and Panitumumab were used in 59 and 9 patients, respectively. mPFS for ReCH and ReIn was 3.3 × 8.4 months, respectively ( 0.001). The objective response rate for ReCH and ReIn was 18% and 52%, respectively. In univariate analysis, adverse prognostic factors related to PFS were: stable disease or PD at first anti-EGFR exposure (HR: 2.12, CI:1.20-3.74; = 0.009); ReCH (HR: 3.44, CI:1.88-6.29, < 0.0001); rechallenge at fourth or later lines (HR: 2.51, CI:1.49-4.23, = 0.001); panitumumab use (HR: 2.26 CI:1.18-5.54, = 0.017). In the multivariate model, only ReCH remained statistically significant (HR = 2.63, CI: 1.14-6.03, = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

In our analysis, ReCH resulted in short PFS and low RR. However, reintroduction of anti-EGFR plus CT before complete resistance arose resulted in prolonged PFS. These data could be clinically useful to guide a treatment break due to side effects or patient decisions. Our data should be confirmed by larger and prospective trials.

摘要

背景

对于接受抗表皮生长因子受体(anti-EGFR)联合化疗(CT)治疗的患者,在疾病进展(PD)过程中的耐药机制已有描述。我们研究的目的是评估转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者中抗EGFR再激发(ReCH)和重新引入(ReIn)的疗效。

材料与方法

这是一项对mCRC患者的回顾性分析,这些患者先前接受过抗EGFR + CT治疗,在ReCH组中因PD中断治疗,在ReIn组中因其他原因中断治疗。我们旨在描述再次暴露后的无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和缓解率(RR),并评估与PFS相关的预后因素。

结果

68例患者符合纳入标准。再次暴露后的中位随访时间为39.3个月。25%的患者采用ReCH,75%的患者采用ReIn。抗EGFR的中位停药间隔为10.5个月。再次暴露时,主要的CT方案为FOLFIRI,占58.8%。西妥昔单抗和帕尼单抗分别用于59例和9例患者。ReCH组和ReIn组的mPFS分别为3.3个月和8.4个月(P = 0.001)。ReCH组和ReIn组的客观缓解率分别为18%和52%。单因素分析中,与PFS相关的不良预后因素为:首次抗EGFR暴露时疾病稳定或进展(HR:2.12,CI:1.20 - 3.74;P = 0.009);ReCH(HR:3.44,CI:1.88 - 6.29,P < 0.0001);在四线或更后线进行再激发(HR:2.51,CI:1.49 - 4.23,P = 0.001);使用帕尼单抗(HR:2.26,CI:1.18 - 5.54,P = 0.017)。在多变量模型中,只有ReCH仍具有统计学意义(HR = 2.63,CI:1.14 - 6.03,P = 0.022)。

结论

在我们的分析中,ReCH导致PFS较短且RR较低。然而,在完全耐药出现之前重新引入抗EGFR联合CT可延长PFS。这些数据在临床上可能有助于指导因副作用或患者决策而进行的治疗中断。我们的数据应通过更大规模的前瞻性试验加以证实。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7317/7373642/d01004ef7d9e/can-14-1069fig1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验