Department of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.
Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer Eugene Marquis, Rennes, France.
Oncologist. 2024 Aug 5;29(8):681-689. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae128.
Evaluating transarterial radioembolization (TARE) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma of the liver who have progressed on first-line chemotherapy (EPOCH) demonstrated superior outcomes using yttrium-90 glass microspheres plus chemotherapy (TARE/Chemo) vs chemotherapy (Chemo) to treat colorectal liver metastases. Additional exploratory analyses were undertaken to assess the impact of TARE/Chemo on efficacy, safety, time to subsequent therapy, time to deterioration in quality of life (QoL), and identify criteria for improved patient selection.
Time to deterioration in QoL was analyzed for the primary study population. Subsequently, a post hoc analysis was undertaken to identify subgroups for which time to deterioration in QoL was improved with TARE/Chemo vs Chemo. Progression-free survival (PFS), hepatic (h)PFS, time to subsequent therapy, and safety outcomes were compared between treatments.
The primary population showed no significant difference in time to deterioration in QoL between treatment arms; however, significance was seen in 2 identified subgroups, namely: Subgroup A (N = 303) which excluded patients with both Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 1 and baseline CEA ≥ 35 ng/mL from both treatment arms; subgroup B (N = 168) additionally excluded patients with KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma) mutation. In subgroup A, TARE/Chemo patients (N = 143) demonstrated superior outcomes vs Chemo (N = 160): PFS (9.4 vs. 7.6 months, hazard ratio (HR): 0.64; 1-sided P = .0020), hPFS (10.8 vs. 7.6 months, HR: 0.53; 1-sided P < .0001), time to deterioration in QoL (5.7 vs. 3.9 months, HR: 0.65; 1-sided P = .0063), and time to subsequent therapy (21.2 vs. 10.5 months, HR: 0.52; 1-sided P < .0001). Subgroup B patients showed similar but larger significant differences between treatment arms. Median PFS, hPFS, and time to deterioration in QoL were numerically greater for TARE/Chemo in both subgroups vs the primary population, with the greatest magnitude of difference in subgroup B. Both subgroups exhibited higher percentage of CEA responders and improved ORR with TARE/Chemo vs chemo alone. Safety (reported as event rate/100 patient-years) was higher with Chemo in all populations. Additional efficacy analyses in the primary population are also reported.
Careful patient selection, including consideration of the prognostic factors ECOG, baseline CEA, and KRAS status, sets outcome expectations in patients with colorectal liver metastases suitable for TARE/Chemo as second-line treatment (Trial Registry Number: NCT01483027).
在接受一线化疗(EPOCH)后进展的转移性结直肠癌肝转移患者中,评估经动脉放射性栓塞(TARE)联合钇-90 玻璃微球和化疗(TARE/Chemo)与单纯化疗(Chemo)相比,前者在治疗结直肠癌肝转移方面具有更好的疗效。进行了额外的探索性分析,以评估 TARE/Chemo 对疗效、安全性、后续治疗时间、生活质量(QoL)恶化时间以及确定改善患者选择的标准的影响。
对主要研究人群的 QoL 恶化时间进行分析。随后,进行了一项事后分析,以确定 TARE/Chemo 与 Chemo 相比改善 QoL 恶化时间的亚组。比较了两种治疗方法的无进展生存期(PFS)、肝脏(h)PFS、后续治疗时间和安全性结果。
主要人群中两种治疗方法的 QoL 恶化时间无显著差异;然而,在两个确定的亚组中观察到了显著差异,即:亚组 A(N=303)排除了两个治疗组中同时具有东部肿瘤协作组(ECOG)1 和基线 CEA≥35ng/mL 的患者;亚组 B(N=168)另外排除了 KRAS(Kirsten 大鼠肉瘤)突变的患者。在亚组 A 中,TARE/Chemo 患者(N=143)与 Chemo 患者(N=160)相比,疗效更好:PFS(9.4 个月 vs. 7.6 个月,风险比(HR):0.64;单侧 P=0.0020)、hPFS(10.8 个月 vs. 7.6 个月,HR:0.53;单侧 P<.0001)、QoL 恶化时间(5.7 个月 vs. 3.9 个月,HR:0.65;单侧 P=0.0063)和后续治疗时间(21.2 个月 vs. 10.5 个月,HR:0.52;单侧 P<.0001)。亚组 B 患者在治疗组之间也显示出类似但更大的显著差异。在两个亚组中,TARE/Chemo 的中位 PFS、hPFS 和 QoL 恶化时间均明显长于主要人群,其中亚组 B 的差异最大。两个亚组中,CEA 应答者的比例更高,TARE/Chemo 联合化疗与单纯化疗相比,客观缓解率(ORR)也更高。在所有人群中,Chemo 的安全性(以事件发生率/100 患者年报告)更高。还报告了主要人群中的其他疗效分析。
在适合 TARE/Chemo 二线治疗的结直肠癌肝转移患者中,仔细选择患者,包括考虑 ECOG、基线 CEA 和 KRAS 状态等预后因素,可以设定患者的预后期望(试验注册号:NCT01483027)。