Survival Outcomes with Regorafenib and/or Trifluridine/Tipiracil Sequencing to Rechallenge with Third-Line Regimens in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Real-World Subgroup Comparison from the ReTrITA Study.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Current oncology Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.3390/curroncol31120574
Carlo Signorelli, Maria Alessandra Calegari, Annunziato Anghelone, Alessandro Passardi, Giovanni Luca Frassineti, Alessandro Bittoni, Jessica Lucchetti, Lorenzo Angotti, Emanuela Di Giacomo, Ina Valeria Zurlo, Cristina Morelli, Emanuela Dell'Aquila, Adele Artemi, Donatello Gemma, Domenico Cristiano Corsi, Alessandra Emiliani, Marta Ribelli, Federica Mazzuca, Giulia Arrivi, Federica Zoratto, Mario Giovanni Chilelli, Marta Schirripa, Maria Grazia Morandi, Fiorenza Santamaria, Manuela Dettori, Antonella Cosimati, Rosa Saltarelli, Alessandro Minelli, Emanuela Lucci-Cordisco, Michele Basso
{"title":"Survival Outcomes with Regorafenib and/or Trifluridine/Tipiracil Sequencing to Rechallenge with Third-Line Regimens in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Real-World Subgroup Comparison from the ReTrITA Study.","authors":"Carlo Signorelli, Maria Alessandra Calegari, Annunziato Anghelone, Alessandro Passardi, Giovanni Luca Frassineti, Alessandro Bittoni, Jessica Lucchetti, Lorenzo Angotti, Emanuela Di Giacomo, Ina Valeria Zurlo, Cristina Morelli, Emanuela Dell'Aquila, Adele Artemi, Donatello Gemma, Domenico Cristiano Corsi, Alessandra Emiliani, Marta Ribelli, Federica Mazzuca, Giulia Arrivi, Federica Zoratto, Mario Giovanni Chilelli, Marta Schirripa, Maria Grazia Morandi, Fiorenza Santamaria, Manuela Dettori, Antonella Cosimati, Rosa Saltarelli, Alessandro Minelli, Emanuela Lucci-Cordisco, Michele Basso","doi":"10.3390/curroncol31120574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is ongoing discussion around the optimal course of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) following the second line. Trifluridine/tipiracil (T) and regorafenib (R) have been the mainstay of therapy in this situation, as they both increased overall survival (OS) in comparison to a placebo. Despite the paucity of evidence, therapy rechallenge is also recognized as an option for practical use. In the third-line scenario of mCRC, we planned to investigate the survival outcomes using (T) and (R), both with and without prior rechallenge treatment.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Between 2012 and 2023, we examined the medical records of 1156 patients with refractory mCRC who were enrolled in the multicenter retrospective ReTrITA study. We then separated the patients into two cohorts based on the rechallenge therapy that was given before regorafenib and/or trifluridine/tipiracil at 17 Italian centres.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 981 patients underwent T and/or R therapy, while 175 patients had therapy rechallenge before T and/or R. The median overall survival (mOS) for patients treated with T/R and R/T sequences in the rechallenge therapy cohort was 14.5 months and 17.6 months, respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.1955). A statistically significant survival benefit was observed in patients who received monotheraphy with R (mOS: 6 months) compared to the T group (mOS: 4.2 months) (<i>p</i> = 0.0332). In the same cohort, a median progression-free survival (mPFS) benefit was demonstrated in favour of the R/T group (11.3 months) vs. 9 months of the reverse sequence (<i>p</i> = 0.4004). In the no-rechallenge cohort, the mOS was statistically longer in the R/T sequence than in the T/R sequence (16.2 months vs. 12.3 months, respectively; <i>p</i> = 0.0014). In terms of the mPFS, we saw the same significant result for the adoption of R/T treatment (11.5 months vs. 8.4 months, respectively; <i>p</i> < 0.0001). The two monotherapy groups did not reveal any significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study suggests that rechallenge therapy may improve survival rates in the third-line treatment of mCRC, particularly if it is administered before sequential R/T treatment. This could allow for the extension of mCRC treatment choices until prospective studies are finished or randomised trials are performed.</p>","PeriodicalId":11012,"journal":{"name":"Current oncology","volume":"31 12","pages":"7793-7808"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11674570/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31120574","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is ongoing discussion around the optimal course of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) following the second line. Trifluridine/tipiracil (T) and regorafenib (R) have been the mainstay of therapy in this situation, as they both increased overall survival (OS) in comparison to a placebo. Despite the paucity of evidence, therapy rechallenge is also recognized as an option for practical use. In the third-line scenario of mCRC, we planned to investigate the survival outcomes using (T) and (R), both with and without prior rechallenge treatment.

Materials and methods: Between 2012 and 2023, we examined the medical records of 1156 patients with refractory mCRC who were enrolled in the multicenter retrospective ReTrITA study. We then separated the patients into two cohorts based on the rechallenge therapy that was given before regorafenib and/or trifluridine/tipiracil at 17 Italian centres.

Results: A total of 981 patients underwent T and/or R therapy, while 175 patients had therapy rechallenge before T and/or R. The median overall survival (mOS) for patients treated with T/R and R/T sequences in the rechallenge therapy cohort was 14.5 months and 17.6 months, respectively (p = 0.1955). A statistically significant survival benefit was observed in patients who received monotheraphy with R (mOS: 6 months) compared to the T group (mOS: 4.2 months) (p = 0.0332). In the same cohort, a median progression-free survival (mPFS) benefit was demonstrated in favour of the R/T group (11.3 months) vs. 9 months of the reverse sequence (p = 0.4004). In the no-rechallenge cohort, the mOS was statistically longer in the R/T sequence than in the T/R sequence (16.2 months vs. 12.3 months, respectively; p = 0.0014). In terms of the mPFS, we saw the same significant result for the adoption of R/T treatment (11.5 months vs. 8.4 months, respectively; p < 0.0001). The two monotherapy groups did not reveal any significant differences.

Conclusions: This study suggests that rechallenge therapy may improve survival rates in the third-line treatment of mCRC, particularly if it is administered before sequential R/T treatment. This could allow for the extension of mCRC treatment choices until prospective studies are finished or randomised trials are performed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Regorafenib和/或Trifluridine/Tipiracil测序对转移性结直肠癌三线方案再挑战的生存结果:来自ReTrITA研究的多中心回顾性真实世界亚组比较
背景:关于二线治疗后转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)的最佳治疗方案的讨论正在进行中。Trifluridine/tipiracil (T)和regorafenib (R)是这种情况下的主要治疗方法,因为与安慰剂相比,它们都增加了总生存期(OS)。尽管缺乏证据,治疗再挑战也被认为是一种实际使用的选择。在mCRC的三线方案中,我们计划使用(T)和(R)来研究有和没有事先再挑战治疗的生存结局。材料和方法:2012年至2023年,我们检查了1156例难治性mCRC患者的医疗记录,这些患者参加了多中心回顾性ReTrITA研究。然后,我们根据在瑞非尼和/或trifluridine/tipiracil之前给予的再挑战治疗在17个意大利中心将患者分为两个队列。结果:共有981例患者接受了T和/或R治疗,175例患者在T和/或R治疗前进行了再挑战治疗。再挑战治疗队列中接受T/R和R/T序列治疗的患者的中位总生存期(mOS)分别为14.5个月和17.6个月(p = 0.1955)。与T组(mOS: 4.2个月)相比,接受R单药治疗的患者(mOS: 6个月)的生存获益具有统计学意义(p = 0.0332)。在同一队列中,R/T组的中位无进展生存期(mPFS)获益(11.3个月)优于相反顺序组的9个月(p = 0.4004)。在无再挑战队列中,R/T序列的mOS比T/R序列的mOS更长(分别为16.2个月和12.3个月;P = 0.0014)。在mPFS方面,我们看到采用R/T治疗的结果同样显著(分别为11.5个月和8.4个月;P < 0.0001)。两个单药治疗组没有发现任何显著差异。结论:这项研究表明,再挑战疗法可以提高mCRC三线治疗的生存率,特别是如果在序贯R/T治疗之前进行。这可能允许延长mCRC的治疗选择,直到前瞻性研究完成或进行随机试验。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Current oncology
Current oncology ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
664
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Current Oncology is a peer-reviewed, Canadian-based and internationally respected journal. Current Oncology represents a multidisciplinary medium encompassing health care workers in the field of cancer therapy in Canada to report upon and to review progress in the management of this disease. We encourage submissions from all fields of cancer medicine, including radiation oncology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, pediatric oncology, pathology, and cancer rehabilitation and survivorship. Articles published in the journal typically contain information that is relevant directly to clinical oncology practice, and have clear potential for application to the current or future practice of cancer medicine.
期刊最新文献
MicroRNA-129-3p Suppresses Tumor Progression and Chemoradioresistance in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Real-World Experience with CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the First-Line Palliative Setting for HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer. Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis on Treating Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer After CDK4/6 Inhibitors. The PREPARE Study: Acceptability and Feasibility of a Telehealth Trimodal Prehabilitation Program for Women with Endometrial Neoplasia. Advancing Radiobiology: Investigating the Effects of Photon, Proton, and Carbon-Ion Irradiation on PANC-1 Cells in 2D and 3D Tumor Models.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1