Division of Personalised Oncology, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Medical Biology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Intern Med J. 2023 Sep;53(9):1610-1617. doi: 10.1111/imj.15835. Epub 2022 Sep 13.
Treatment with cetuximab provides a survival benefit for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Practice-defining cetuximab studies utilised weekly (q1w) administration. More convenient second weekly (q2w) administration is supported by pharmacokinetic data and a recent meta-analysis, but large head-to-head studies have not been conducted. Therapeutic Goods Association (TGA) prescribing information states cetuximab be administered q1w for all indications.
To assess the real-world use of q1w versus q2w cetuximab schedule and any difference in outcomes.
We analysed data from a prospective mCRC database at seven Melbourne hospitals from January 2010 to August 2019. Characteristics and outcomes for cetuximab-treated patients were examined, comparing q1w versus q2w schedules. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the primary endpoints.
Of 214 eligible patients, 103 (48%) received q1w and 111 (52%) received q2w cetuximab. Q2w cetuximab has been used in >70% of patients from 2015. Q2w was more commonly used in public patients (70% vs 13% in private, P < 0.001), in left-sided primary tumours (83% vs 68%, P = 0.025) and in combination with chemotherapy (73% q2w vs 40% q1w, P < 0.001). Q2w treatment was less common in BRAFV600E mutated tumours (4% vs 13%, P = 0.001). PFS was similar across all lines of therapy, including when analyses were limited to a left-sided primary and there was no difference in OS in multivariate analysis.
This real-world analysis shows q2w cetuximab has become the dominant method of administration, despite TGA guidance. Our outcome data adds to other data supporting the use of q2w cetuximab as the standard option. Consideration could be given to modifying current TGA advice.
西妥昔单抗治疗可为 RAS 野生型转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者带来生存获益。具有里程碑意义的西妥昔单抗研究采用每周(q1w)给药方案。药代动力学数据和最近的一项荟萃分析支持更为方便的每两周(q2w)给药方案,但尚未进行大型头对头研究。治疗商品管理局(TGA)说明书规定,所有适应证均采用 q1w 方案给予西妥昔单抗。
评估 q1w 与 q2w 西妥昔单抗方案的实际应用情况以及对结局的影响。
我们分析了 2010 年 1 月至 2019 年 8 月期间,7 家墨尔本医院前瞻性 mCRC 数据库中的数据。比较 q1w 与 q2w 方案,评估西妥昔单抗治疗患者的特征和结局。无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)是主要终点。
214 例符合条件的患者中,103 例(48%)接受 q1w 西妥昔单抗治疗,111 例(52%)接受 q2w 西妥昔单抗治疗。自 2015 年以来,q2w 方案已在超过 70%的患者中使用。q2w 方案在公共医疗机构患者(70% vs 13%,P < 0.001)、左侧原发肿瘤患者(83% vs 68%,P=0.025)和化疗联合治疗患者(73% q2w 方案 vs 40% q1w 方案,P < 0.001)中更常用。BRAFV600E 突变肿瘤患者中,q2w 治疗较少见(4% vs 13%,P=0.001)。所有治疗线的 PFS 均相似,包括在左侧原发肿瘤亚组分析中以及多变量分析中 OS 无差异。
这项真实世界分析表明,尽管 TGA 指南如此,q2w 西妥昔单抗已成为主要给药方式。我们的结局数据增加了支持 q2w 西妥昔单抗作为标准方案的其他数据。可考虑修改当前 TGA 建议。