化疗再挑战或再引入与瑞戈非尼或曲氟尿苷/替吡拉西钠治疗预处理转移性结直肠癌患者的比较:二线治疗后疗效的密度扫描分析(PROSERpYNa 研究)

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Clinical colorectal cancer Pub Date : 2024-06-12 DOI:10.1016/j.clcc.2024.06.002
M.A. Calegari , I.V. Zurlo , E. Dell'Aquila , M. Basso , A. Orlandi , M. Bensi , F. Camarda , A. Anghelone , C. Pozzo , I. Sperduti , L. Salvatore , D. Santini , D.C. Corsi , E. Bria , G. Tortora
{"title":"化疗再挑战或再引入与瑞戈非尼或曲氟尿苷/替吡拉西钠治疗预处理转移性结直肠癌患者的比较:二线治疗后疗效的密度扫描分析(PROSERpYNa 研究)","authors":"M.A. Calegari ,&nbsp;I.V. Zurlo ,&nbsp;E. Dell'Aquila ,&nbsp;M. Basso ,&nbsp;A. Orlandi ,&nbsp;M. Bensi ,&nbsp;F. Camarda ,&nbsp;A. Anghelone ,&nbsp;C. Pozzo ,&nbsp;I. Sperduti ,&nbsp;L. Salvatore ,&nbsp;D. Santini ,&nbsp;D.C. Corsi ,&nbsp;E. Bria ,&nbsp;G. Tortora","doi":"10.1016/j.clcc.2024.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div><span>The optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) beyond second line is still questioned. Besides the standard of care agents (regorafenib, </span>REG, or trifluridine/tipiracil, FTD/TPI), chemotherapy rechallenge or reintroduction (CTr/r) are commonly considered in clinical practice, despite weak supporting evidence. The prognostic performance of CTr/r, REG and FTD/TPI in this setting are herein evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><div>PROSERpYNa is a multicenter, observational, retrospective study, in which patients with refractory mCRC, progressing after at least 2 lines of CT, treated with CTr/r, REG or FTD/TPI, are considered eligible and were enrolled in 2 independent data sets (exploratory and validation). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (RR) and safety. A propensity score adjustment was accomplished for survival analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Data referring to patients treated between Jan-10 and Jan-19 from 3 Italian institutions were gathered (341 and 181 treatments for exploratory and validation data sets respectively). In the exploratory cohort, median OS (18.5 <em>vs.</em> 6.5 months), PFS (6.1 <em>vs.</em> 3.5 months) and RR (28.6% <em>vs.</em> 1.4%) were significantly longer for CTr/r compared to REG/FTD/TPI. Survival benefits were retained at the propensity score analysis, adjusted for independent prognostic factors identified at multivariate analysis. Moreover, these results were confirmed within the validation cohort analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Although the retrospective fashion, CTr/r proved to be a valuable option in this setting in a real-world context, providing superior outcomes compared to standard of care agents at the price of a moderate toxicity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10373,"journal":{"name":"Clinical colorectal cancer","volume":"24 1","pages":"Pages 1-10.e4"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chemotherapy Rechallenge or Reintroduction Compared to Regorafenib or Trifluridine/Tipiracil for Pretreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Analysis of Treatment Beyond Second Line (Proserpyna Study)\",\"authors\":\"M.A. Calegari ,&nbsp;I.V. Zurlo ,&nbsp;E. Dell'Aquila ,&nbsp;M. Basso ,&nbsp;A. Orlandi ,&nbsp;M. Bensi ,&nbsp;F. Camarda ,&nbsp;A. Anghelone ,&nbsp;C. Pozzo ,&nbsp;I. Sperduti ,&nbsp;L. Salvatore ,&nbsp;D. Santini ,&nbsp;D.C. Corsi ,&nbsp;E. Bria ,&nbsp;G. Tortora\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clcc.2024.06.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div><span>The optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) beyond second line is still questioned. Besides the standard of care agents (regorafenib, </span>REG, or trifluridine/tipiracil, FTD/TPI), chemotherapy rechallenge or reintroduction (CTr/r) are commonly considered in clinical practice, despite weak supporting evidence. The prognostic performance of CTr/r, REG and FTD/TPI in this setting are herein evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><div>PROSERpYNa is a multicenter, observational, retrospective study, in which patients with refractory mCRC, progressing after at least 2 lines of CT, treated with CTr/r, REG or FTD/TPI, are considered eligible and were enrolled in 2 independent data sets (exploratory and validation). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (RR) and safety. A propensity score adjustment was accomplished for survival analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Data referring to patients treated between Jan-10 and Jan-19 from 3 Italian institutions were gathered (341 and 181 treatments for exploratory and validation data sets respectively). In the exploratory cohort, median OS (18.5 <em>vs.</em> 6.5 months), PFS (6.1 <em>vs.</em> 3.5 months) and RR (28.6% <em>vs.</em> 1.4%) were significantly longer for CTr/r compared to REG/FTD/TPI. Survival benefits were retained at the propensity score analysis, adjusted for independent prognostic factors identified at multivariate analysis. Moreover, these results were confirmed within the validation cohort analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Although the retrospective fashion, CTr/r proved to be a valuable option in this setting in a real-world context, providing superior outcomes compared to standard of care agents at the price of a moderate toxicity.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical colorectal cancer\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 1-10.e4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical colorectal cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1533002824000574\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical colorectal cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1533002824000574","RegionNum":3,"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
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
Chemotherapy Rechallenge or Reintroduction Compared to Regorafenib or Trifluridine/Tipiracil for Pretreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Analysis of Treatment Beyond Second Line (Proserpyna Study)

Background

The optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) beyond second line is still questioned. Besides the standard of care agents (regorafenib, REG, or trifluridine/tipiracil, FTD/TPI), chemotherapy rechallenge or reintroduction (CTr/r) are commonly considered in clinical practice, despite weak supporting evidence. The prognostic performance of CTr/r, REG and FTD/TPI in this setting are herein evaluated.

Patients and methods

PROSERpYNa is a multicenter, observational, retrospective study, in which patients with refractory mCRC, progressing after at least 2 lines of CT, treated with CTr/r, REG or FTD/TPI, are considered eligible and were enrolled in 2 independent data sets (exploratory and validation). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (RR) and safety. A propensity score adjustment was accomplished for survival analyses.

Results

Data referring to patients treated between Jan-10 and Jan-19 from 3 Italian institutions were gathered (341 and 181 treatments for exploratory and validation data sets respectively). In the exploratory cohort, median OS (18.5 vs. 6.5 months), PFS (6.1 vs. 3.5 months) and RR (28.6% vs. 1.4%) were significantly longer for CTr/r compared to REG/FTD/TPI. Survival benefits were retained at the propensity score analysis, adjusted for independent prognostic factors identified at multivariate analysis. Moreover, these results were confirmed within the validation cohort analyses.

Conclusions

Although the retrospective fashion, CTr/r proved to be a valuable option in this setting in a real-world context, providing superior outcomes compared to standard of care agents at the price of a moderate toxicity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical colorectal cancer
Clinical colorectal cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
64
审稿时长
27 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Colorectal Cancer is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that publishes original articles describing various aspects of clinical and translational research of gastrointestinal cancers. Clinical Colorectal Cancer is devoted to articles on detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of colorectal, pancreatic, liver, and other gastrointestinal cancers. The main emphasis is on recent scientific developments in all areas related to gastrointestinal cancers. Specific areas of interest include clinical research and mechanistic approaches; drug sensitivity and resistance; gene and antisense therapy; pathology, markers, and prognostic indicators; chemoprevention strategies; multimodality therapy; and integration of various approaches.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Table of contents Table of contents Editorial Board Efficacy and Safety of KH903 Plus FOLFIRI as a Second-Line Treatment in Unresectable Recurrent or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase 2 Study
×
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