Suppr超能文献

一项比较regorafenib 在先前治疗的转移性结直肠癌患者中不同剂量诱导治疗方法的随机 2 期研究(REARRANGE 试验)。

A randomised phase 2 study comparing different dose approaches of induction treatment of regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer patients (REARRANGE trial).

机构信息

Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Institute of Oncology (VHIO), CIBERONC, Barcelona, Spain; Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.

Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Institute of Oncology (VHIO), CIBERONC, Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Eur J Cancer. 2022 Dec;177:154-163. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.09.037. Epub 2022 Oct 14.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the safety of two regorafenib dose-escalation approaches in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mCRC and progression during or within 3 months following their last standard chemotherapy regimen were randomised to receive the approved dose of regorafenib of 160 mg QD (arm A) or 120 mg QD (arm B) administered as 3 weeks of treatment followed by 1 week off, or 160 mg QD 1 week on/1 week off (arm C). The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with G3/G4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in each arm.

RESULTS

There were 299 patients randomly assigned to arm A (n = 101), arm B (n = 99), or arm C (n = 99); 297 initiated treatments (arm A n = 100, arm B n = 98, arm C n = 99: population for safety analyses). G3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 60%, 55%, and 54% of patients in arms A, B, and C, respectively. The most common G3/4 AEs were hypertension (19, 12, and 20 patients), fatigue (20, 14, and 15 patients), hypokalemia (11, 7, and 10 patients), and hand-foot skin reaction (8, 7, and 3 patients). Median overall survival was 7.4 (IQR 4.0-13.7) months in arm A, 8.6 (IQR 3.8-13.4) in arm B, and 7.1 (IQR 4.4-12.4) in arm C.

CONCLUSIONS

The alternative regorafenib dosing schedules were feasible and safe in patients with mCRC who had been previously treated with standard therapy. There was a higher numerical improvement on the most clinically relevant AEs in the intermittent dosing arm, particularly during the relevant first two cycles.

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT02835924.

摘要

目的

本文旨在评估两种瑞戈非尼剂量递增方案在难治性转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者中的安全性。

患者和方法

mCRC 患者在末次标准化疗方案期间或之后 3 个月内进展,随机接受批准剂量的瑞戈非尼 160mg QD(A 组)或 120mg QD(B 组),治疗 3 周后停药 1 周,或 160mg QD 1 周/停药 1 周(C 组)。主要终点是每组中发生 G3/G4 治疗相关不良事件(AE)的患者比例。

结果

299 例患者被随机分配至 A 组(n=101)、B 组(n=99)或 C 组(n=99);297 例患者开始治疗(A 组 n=100,B 组 n=98,C 组 n=99:安全性分析人群)。A、B 和 C 组分别有 60%、55%和 54%的患者发生 G3/4 治疗相关 AE。最常见的 G3/4 AE 为高血压(19、12 和 20 例患者)、疲劳(20、14 和 15 例患者)、低钾血症(11、7 和 10 例患者)和手足皮肤反应(8、7 和 3 例患者)。A 组中位总生存期为 7.4 个月(IQR 4.0-13.7),B 组为 8.6 个月(IQR 3.8-13.4),C 组为 7.1 个月(IQR 4.4-12.4)。

结论

在先前接受标准治疗的 mCRC 患者中,替代瑞戈非尼剂量方案是可行且安全的。在间歇给药组中,最具临床意义的 AE 有更高的数值改善,尤其是在前两个相关周期中。

政府标识符

NCT02835924。

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