21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Radioembolization With Chemotherapy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Randomized, Open-Label, International, Multicenter, Phase III Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          PURPOSE

          To study the impact of transarterial Yttrium-90 radioembolization (TARE) in combination with second-line systemic chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM).

          METHODS

          In this international, multicenter, open-label phase III trial, patients with CLM who progressed on oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based first-line therapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive second-line chemotherapy with or without TARE. The two primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and hepatic PFS (hPFS), assessed by blinded independent central review. Random assignment was performed using a web- or voice-based system stratified by unilobar or bilobar disease, oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based first-line chemotherapy, and KRAS mutation status.

          RESULTS

          Four hundred twenty-eight patients from 95 centers in North America, Europe, and Asia were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with or without TARE; this represents the intention-to-treat population and included 215 patients in the TARE plus chemotherapy group and 213 patients in the chemotherapy alone group. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.88; 1-sided P = .0013), with a median PFS of 8.0 (95% CI, 7.2 to 9.2) and 7.2 (95% CI, 5.7 to 7.6) months, respectively. The HR for hPFS was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.77; 1-sided P < .0001), with a median hPFS of 9.1 (95% CI, 7.8 to 9.7) and 7.2 (95% CI, 5.7 to 7.6) months, respectively. Objective response rates were 34.0% (95% CI, 28.0 to 40.5) and 21.1% (95% CI, 16.2 to 27.1; 1-sided P = .0019) for the TARE and chemotherapy groups, respectively. Median overall survival was 14.0 (95% CI, 11.8 to 15.5) and 14.4 months (95% CI, 12.8 to 16.4; 1-sided P = .7229) with a HR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.32) for TARE and chemotherapy groups, respectively. Grade 3 adverse events were reported more frequently with TARE (68.4% v 49.3%). Both groups received full chemotherapy dose intensity.

          CONCLUSION

          The addition of TARE to systemic therapy for second-line CLM led to longer PFS and hPFS. Further subset analyses are needed to better define the ideal patient population that would benefit from TARE.

          Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

            Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effect of First-Line Chemotherapy Combined With Cetuximab or Bevacizumab on Overall Survival in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

              Combining biologic monoclonal antibodies with chemotherapeutic cytotoxic drugs provides clinical benefit to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, but the optimal choice of the initial biologic therapy in previously untreated patients is unknown.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Clin Oncol
                J Clin Oncol
                jco
                JCO
                Journal of Clinical Oncology
                Wolters Kluwer Health
                0732-183X
                1527-7755
                10 December 2021
                20 September 2021
                : 39
                : 35
                : 3897-3907
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Department of Medicine, Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL
                [ 2 ]Department of Interventional Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
                [ 3 ]Centre Eugene Marquis, Medical Oncology, Rennes, France
                [ 4 ]Clatterbridge Cancer Center NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
                [ 5 ]University College London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
                [ 6 ]University of Louisville, Louisville, KY
                [ 7 ]Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
                [ 8 ]Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland
                [ 9 ]Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
                [ 10 ]The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
                [ 11 ]Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
                [ 12 ]Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom
                [ 13 ]Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
                [ 14 ]University of Washington, Seattle, WA
                [ 15 ]Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, United Kingdom
                [ 16 ]Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
                [ 17 ]Hospital Clínico Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza, Spain
                [ 18 ]Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
                [ 19 ]Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
                [ 20 ]University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
                [ 21 ]Department of Radiology, Section of Interventional Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
                [ 22 ]Centre Eugene Marquis, Nuclear Medicine, Rennes, France
                [ 23 ]Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA
                Author notes
                Riad Salem, MD, MBA, Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, 676 N St Clair, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60611; e-mail: r-salem@ 123456northwestern.edu .
                Article
                JCO.21.01839 00003
                10.1200/JCO.21.01839
                8660005
                34541864
                cc8bfdf4-cb6b-45d3-ab2b-dd3e4d755c84
                © 2021 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

                Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                : 27 July 2021
                : 9 August 2021
                : 16 August 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 30, Pages: 0
                Categories
                ORIGINAL REPORTS
                Gastrointestinal Cancer

                Comments

                Comment on this article