Effcacy and toxicity of regorafenib compared to reintrodaction of chemotherapy in metastatic colon cancer: retrospective multicenter study

Q4 Medicine
E. S. Kuzmina, M. Yu. Fedyanin, I. V. Reshetov, I. A. Pokataev, V. N. Galkin
{"title":"Effcacy and toxicity of regorafenib compared to reintrodaction of chemotherapy in metastatic colon cancer: retrospective multicenter study","authors":"E. S. Kuzmina, M. Yu. Fedyanin, I. V. Reshetov, I. A. Pokataev, V. N. Galkin","doi":"10.21294/1814-4861-2023-22-4-34-43","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The objective of the study is to compare the effectiveness of various systemic therapies in the 3rd and subsequent lines of therapy of metastatic colon cancer. Material and Methods . Retrospective multicenter study collected data from 2 clinics of the Russian Federation. We considered overall survival (OS) as the main criterion of effectiveness. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the additional criterion. We performed a single- and multifactorial analysis of the effect of various parameters on PFS. To evaluate the effectiveness of regorafenib and the reintroduction of previously effective drugs, we should prove the equivalence of reintroduction of the 3rd line chemotherapy (CT) and targeted therapy to regorafenib on the 6-month overall survival, provided that the equivalence boundaries would be between 0.8 and 1.25. To reach the 0.05 probability of type I error and the 80 % study power, 178 patients (89 in each group) should be included in the study. Results . The database identifed 215 patients with morphologically confrmed metastatic colon cancer who received two or more lines of antitumor drug therapy from 2010 to 2021. We selected 132 patients with the history of regorafenib therapy and 83 patients with the reintroduction of a previously used chemotherapy regimen as 3rd line treatment. The median OS in the reintroduction and regorafenib groups did not differ (HR, 1.01; 95 % CI, 0.7–1.45; p=0.920); 6-month OS were 74 and 70 %, respectively. Progression-free survival was signifcantly higher in the reintroduction group (HR, 1.94; 95 % CI, 1.3–2.7; p<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the reintroduction of previous treatment regimens kept its independent positive effect on PFS (HR, 1.9; 95 % CI, 1.3–2.8; p<0.001). In our study, toxicity on the 3rd line of CT developed in 117 (54.4 %) of 215 patients and signifcantly more frequent in the regorafenib group: 67.4 % (89/132) vs 33.7 % (28/83) in the group with repeated administration of previously effective regimens (p<0.001). Conclusion . Regorafenib and reintroduction of the previous treatment in the 3rd line did not differ in overall survival. Progression-free survival was signifcantly higher in the reintroduction group as the 3rd line of treatment, with signifcantly lower toxicity.","PeriodicalId":21881,"journal":{"name":"Siberian journal of oncology","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Siberian journal of oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21294/1814-4861-2023-22-4-34-43","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of the study is to compare the effectiveness of various systemic therapies in the 3rd and subsequent lines of therapy of metastatic colon cancer. Material and Methods . Retrospective multicenter study collected data from 2 clinics of the Russian Federation. We considered overall survival (OS) as the main criterion of effectiveness. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the additional criterion. We performed a single- and multifactorial analysis of the effect of various parameters on PFS. To evaluate the effectiveness of regorafenib and the reintroduction of previously effective drugs, we should prove the equivalence of reintroduction of the 3rd line chemotherapy (CT) and targeted therapy to regorafenib on the 6-month overall survival, provided that the equivalence boundaries would be between 0.8 and 1.25. To reach the 0.05 probability of type I error and the 80 % study power, 178 patients (89 in each group) should be included in the study. Results . The database identifed 215 patients with morphologically confrmed metastatic colon cancer who received two or more lines of antitumor drug therapy from 2010 to 2021. We selected 132 patients with the history of regorafenib therapy and 83 patients with the reintroduction of a previously used chemotherapy regimen as 3rd line treatment. The median OS in the reintroduction and regorafenib groups did not differ (HR, 1.01; 95 % CI, 0.7–1.45; p=0.920); 6-month OS were 74 and 70 %, respectively. Progression-free survival was signifcantly higher in the reintroduction group (HR, 1.94; 95 % CI, 1.3–2.7; p<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the reintroduction of previous treatment regimens kept its independent positive effect on PFS (HR, 1.9; 95 % CI, 1.3–2.8; p<0.001). In our study, toxicity on the 3rd line of CT developed in 117 (54.4 %) of 215 patients and signifcantly more frequent in the regorafenib group: 67.4 % (89/132) vs 33.7 % (28/83) in the group with repeated administration of previously effective regimens (p<0.001). Conclusion . Regorafenib and reintroduction of the previous treatment in the 3rd line did not differ in overall survival. Progression-free survival was signifcantly higher in the reintroduction group as the 3rd line of treatment, with signifcantly lower toxicity.
瑞非尼治疗转移性结肠癌与重新引入化疗的疗效和毒性比较:回顾性多中心研究
该研究的目的是比较转移性结肠癌三线及后续治疗中各种全身疗法的有效性。材料和方法。回顾性多中心研究收集了俄罗斯联邦2个诊所的数据。我们将总生存期(OS)作为疗效的主要标准。无进展生存期(PFS)是附加标准。我们对各种参数对PFS的影响进行了单因素和多因素分析。为了评估瑞戈非尼的有效性和重新引入既往有效药物,我们需要证明重新引入三线化疗(CT)和靶向治疗与瑞戈非尼在6个月总生存期上的等效性,其等效边界在0.8 ~ 1.25之间。为了达到0.05的I型错误概率和80%的研究效率,178例患者(每组89例)应纳入研究。结果。该数据库确定了215例形态学证实的转移性结肠癌患者,这些患者在2010年至2021年期间接受了两种或两种以上的抗肿瘤药物治疗。我们选择了132例有瑞非尼治疗史的患者和83例重新引入以前使用的化疗方案作为三线治疗的患者。再引入组和瑞非尼组的中位OS无差异(HR, 1.01;95% ci, 0.7-1.45;p = 0.920);6个月生存率分别为74%和70%。放归组的无进展生存期明显高于放归组(HR, 1.94;95% ci, 1.3-2.7;术中,0.001)。多因素分析显示,重新引入以前的治疗方案对PFS保持了独立的积极作用(HR, 1.9;95% ci, 1.3-2.8;术中,0.001)。在我们的研究中,215名患者中有117名(54.4%)出现了CT 3线毒性,瑞非尼组的发生率明显更高:67.4% (89/132)vs 33.7%(28/83)重复给药组(p<0.001)。结论。瑞非尼和在第三线重新引入先前的治疗在总生存期上没有差异。作为第三线治疗,重新引入组的无进展生存期明显较高,毒性明显较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Siberian journal of oncology
Siberian journal of oncology Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
117
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: The main objectives of the journal are: -to promote the establishment of Russia’s leading worldwide positions in the field of experimental and clinical oncology- to create the international discussion platform intended to cover all aspects of basic and clinical cancer research, including carcinogenesis, molecular biology, epidemiology, cancer prevention, diagnosis and multimodality treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hormone therapy), anesthetic management, medical and social rehabilitation, palliative care as well as the improvement of life quality of cancer patients- to encourage promising young scientists to be actively involved in cancer research programs- to provide a platform for researches and doctors all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in cancer related problems. (to create a communication platform for the expansion of cooperation between Russian and foreign professional associations).- to provide the information about the latest worldwide achievements in different fields of oncology The most important tasks of the journal are: -to encourage scientists to publish their research results- to offer a forum for active discussion on topics of major interest - to invite the most prominent Russian and foreign authors to share their latest research findings with cancer research community- to promote the exchange of research information, clinical experience, current trends and the recent developments in the field of oncology as well as to review interesting cases encountered by colleagues all over the world- to expand the editorial board and reviewers with the involvement of well-known Russian and foreign experts- to provide open access to full text articles- to include the journal into the international database- to increase the journal’s impact factor- to promote the journal to the International and Russian markets
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信