RESUMO
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) retreatment in advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, ASCO, and ESMO websites for studies evaluating EGFR-TKI retreatment in advanced/metastatic NSCLC patients. All analyses were performed using R software (v.4.2.2). We included 19 studies (9 CTs and 10 retrospective cohorts) with a total of 886 patients. In a pooled analysis of all patients during retreatment with TKI, median OS was 11.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.2-13.4 months) and PFS was 3.2 months (95% CI 2.5-3.9 months). ORR was 15% (95% CI 10-21%) and DCR was 61% (95% CI 53-67%). The subanalysis by generation of TKI in the rechallenge period revealed a slightly better ORR for patients on 3rd generation TKI (p = 0.05). Some limitations include the high heterogeneity of some of the analyses and inability to perform certain subanalyses. Our results unequivocally support the benefit of EGFR-TKI rechallenge in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients progressing on TKI treatment after a TKI-free interval. These findings may be especially valuable in areas where access to novel therapeutic drugs and clinical trials is limited.
RESUMO
BACKGROUNDS: Immunotherapy is effective for patients with advanced thymic carcinoma (TC). However, the effectiveness of rechallenge immunotherapy in patients who are resistant to immunotherapy has not been investigated. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with advanced TC using immunotherapy between 2016 and 2023 at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, and Fujian Cancer Hospital were evaluated in this study. Tumor response was evaluated according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were included in this study. The median PFS (mPFS) for all patients was 5.43 months and the median OS (mOS) was 16 months. After rechallenge immunotherapy, only three patients achieved partial response, resulting in an overall response rate of 16.7%, and nine patients attained stable disease, resulting in a disease control rate of 66.7%. Patients who underwent rechallenge immunotherapy had shorter mPFS compared to chemotherapy (3.53 months vs. 6.00 months, P = 0.041). In addition, the incidence of Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in these patients was 22.2%. CONCLUSION: Rechallenge immunotherapy has poor efficacy in immunotolerant TC patients.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The optimal drug regimen and sequence are still unknown for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are candidates for third-line (3L) or subsequent treatment. The aim of this study is to know the opinion of experts on the most appropriate treatment options for mCRC in 3L and to clarify certain clinical decisions in Spain. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi method, a group of experts discussed the treatment in 3L of patients with mCRC and developed a questionnaire with 21 items divided into 5 sections. RESULTS: After 2 rounds, the 67 panelists consulted agreed on 17 items (81%). They considered that the main objective of 3L is to equally increase survival and improve patients' quality of life (QoL), but preferably the QoL. It was agreed that patients with mCRC in 3L prefer to receive active versus symptomatic treatment. Panelists considered trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) to be the best oral treatment available to them in 3L. In patients with MSI-H or dMMR and BRAF V600E, the panelists mostly prefer targeted treatments. Panelists agreed the use of a therapeutic sequence that not only increases outcomes but also allows patients to be treated later. Finally, it was agreed that FTD/TPI has a mechanism of action that allows it to be used in patients refractory to previous treatment with 5-fluorouracil. CONCLUSION: The experts agreed with most of the proposed items on 3L treatment of mCRC, prioritizing therapeutic options that increase survival and preserve QoL, while facilitating the possibility that patients can continue to be treated later.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Neoplasias Colorretais , Técnica Delphi , Qualidade de Vida , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Consenso , Pirrolidinas/uso terapêutico , Trifluridina/uso terapêutico , Timina/uso terapêutico , Inquéritos e Questionários , Metástase Neoplásica , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/genética , EspanhaRESUMO
PURPOSE: To investigate the potential clinical importance of continuing immunotherapy beyond progression in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). METHODS: The data of patients with aNSCLC who experienced progressive disease after receiving first-line immunotherapy plus chemotherapy were collected from multiple centers for the period from January 1, 2018 to May 31, 2022. According to the second-line treatment, the patients were classified into two groups: the continuation of immunotherapy beyond progression (CIBP) group and the discontinuation of immunotherapy beyond progression (DIBP) group. The efficacy and safety of the treatment were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Overall, data from 169 patients were analyzed; 93 patients were enrolled in the CIBP group and 76 patients were in the DIBP group. The median second-line progression-free survival was 5.5 months in the CIBP group, which for the DIBP group was 3.4 (p = 0.011). The median overall survival of the CIBP group was 13.3 months, whereas that of the DIBP group was 8.8 months (p = 0.031). The disease control rate of the CIBP group (79.57%) was observably higher than that of the DIBP group (64.47%; p = 0.028). Among patients who responded better (complete or partial response) to prior therapy, the median progression-free survival was 5.5 months and 3.3 months in the CIBP and DIBP groups respectively (p = 0.022), and the median overall survival was 14.8 months and 8.8 months in the CIBP and DIBP groups respectively (p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Continuing immunotherapy as a second-line treatment could be beneficial to the survival of patients with aNSCLC with disease progression beyond initial chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Progressão da Doença , Imunoterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Humanos , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/terapia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/mortalidade , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/patologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidade , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Imunoterapia/métodos , Adulto , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Taxa de Sobrevida , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rechallenging advanced melanoma patients with BRAFi/MEKi. Seven studies, accounting for 400 patients, were included. Most patients received immunotherapy before the rechallenge, and 79% underwent rechallenge with the combination of BRAFi/MEKi. We found a median progression-free survival of 5 months and overall survival of 9.8 months. The one-year survival rate was 42.63%. Regarding response, ORR was 34% and DCR 65%. There were no new or unexpected safety concerns. Rechallenge with BRAFi/MEKi can improve outcomes in advanced melanoma patients with refractory disease. These findings have significant implications for clinical practice, particularly in the setting of progressive disease in later lines and limited treatment options.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance for the management of RAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in daily practice. METHODS: Nominal group and Delphi techniques were used. A steering committee of seven experts analyzed the current management of RAS wt mCRC, through which they identified controversies, critically analyzed the available evidence, and formulated several guiding statements for clinicians. Subsequently, a group of 30 experts (the expert panel) was selected to test agreement with the statements, through two Delphi rounds. The following response categories were established in both rounds: 1 = totally agree, 2 = basically agree, 3 = basically disagree, 4 = totally disagree. Agreement was defined if ≥ 75% of answers were in categories 1 and 2 (consensus with the agreement) or 3 and 4 (consensus with the disagreement). RESULTS: Overall, 71 statements were proposed, which incorporated the following areas: (1) overarching principles; (2) tumor location; (3) triplets; (4) maintenance; (5) second-line and beyond treatments; (6) Rechallenge and liquid biopsy. After the two Delphi rounds, only six statements maintained a lack of clear consensus. CONCLUSIONS: This document aims to describe the expert's attitude when dealing with several common clinical questions regarding patients with RAS wt mCRC.
Assuntos
Comitês Consultivos , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorretais/genética , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Genes ras/genética , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Bevacizumab/uso terapêutico , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Camptotecina/uso terapêutico , Colo Ascendente/patologia , Colo Transverso/patologia , Neoplasias do Colo/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias do Colo/genética , Neoplasias do Colo/patologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Receptores ErbB/antagonistas & inibidores , Fluoruracila/uso terapêutico , Genótipo , Humanos , Leucovorina/uso terapêutico , Biópsia Líquida , Quimioterapia de Manutenção/métodos , Compostos Organoplatínicos/uso terapêutico , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/genética , RetratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mechanisms of resistance have been described during disease progression (PD) for patients under treatment with anti-EGFR plus chemotherapy (CT). The aim of our study was to evaluate efficacy of anti-EGFR rechallenge (ReCH) and reintroduction (ReIn) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of patients with mCRC that previously received anti-EGFR + CT and interrupted therapy due to PD in the ReCH group and other reasons in the ReIn group. We aimed to describe progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and response rate (RR) after re-exposure and to evaluate prognostic factors associated with PFS. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. The median follow-up after re-exposure was 39.3 months. ReCH was adopted in 25% and ReIn in 75%. The median anti-EGFR free interval was at 10.5 months. At re-exposure, the main CT regimen was FOLFIRI in 58.8%. Cetuximab and Panitumumab were used in 59 and 9 patients, respectively. mPFS for ReCH and ReIn was 3.3 × 8.4 months, respectively (p 0.001). The objective response rate for ReCH and ReIn was 18% and 52%, respectively. In univariate analysis, adverse prognostic factors related to PFS were: stable disease or PD at first anti-EGFR exposure (HR: 2.12, CI:1.20-3.74; p = 0.009); ReCH (HR: 3.44, CI:1.88-6.29, p < 0.0001); rechallenge at fourth or later lines (HR: 2.51, CI:1.49-4.23, p = 0.001); panitumumab use (HR: 2.26 CI:1.18-5.54, p = 0.017). In the multivariate model, only ReCH remained statistically significant (HR = 2.63, CI: 1.14-6.03, p = 0.022). CONCLUSION: In our analysis, ReCH resulted in short PFS and low RR. However, reintroduction of anti-EGFR plus CT before complete resistance arose resulted in prolonged PFS. These data could be clinically useful to guide a treatment break due to side effects or patient decisions. Our data should be confirmed by larger and prospective trials.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The treatment of patients with BRAFv600 mutant melanomas progressing to BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) and immunotherapy remains challenging. Preclinical studies and a small phase 2 trials have recently suggested that rechallenging with BRAFi may have a roll in these patients. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the current evidence on the efficacy of BRAF inhibition therapy rechallenge after progression to BRAFi in metastatic BRAFv600 melanoma patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library CENTRAL up to November 2018. The target was restricted to patients with unresectable and/or metastatic BRAF V600 mutant melanoma that had previously progressed on BRAFi, were off-treatment for a period of time and then retreated with a BRAF inhibition strategy. We included prospective trials, observational studies and case reports. The primary outcomes were overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival since the start of the treatment. RESULTS: Up to November 2018, nine reports met our inclusion criteria: five case reports, three observational studies and a phase 2 trial. No comparative studies have been reported. In total, 188 patients met the inclusion criteria for this review. Efficacy results of the observational reports and the clinical trial are presented. ORR varied between 28 and 43% and DCR between 57 and 72%. Duration of response was reported in 1 retrospective study and was of 14 months. PFS varied between 4.9 and 5 months and OS was not reported in all studies. CONCLUSION: Although no comparative studies have been conducted, rechallenging with BRAF inhibition therapy seems a plausible treatment option. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these results.
Assuntos
Melanoma/tratamento farmacológico , Terapia de Alvo Molecular , Mutação , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/uso terapêutico , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/antagonistas & inibidores , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas B-raf/genética , Humanos , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/patologia , PrognósticoRESUMO
Osimertinib is a first-line treatment option for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring EGFR mutations. Pneumonitis is a severe adverse event (AE) related to osimertinib treatment which appears to be more frequent when associated with concurrent or previous anti-PD(L)1 exposure. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of osimertinib rechallenge, especially in the setting of central nervous system (CNS) metastases, are scarce. We herein describe a case of a 53-year-old patient with metastatic EGFR-mutated NSCLC, who developed pneumonitis after osimertinib treatment and was successfully rechallenged with 40 mg daily osimertinib, with CNS response. This dose reduction strategy may be an option for selected patients with brain metastases after tyrosine kinase inhibitors-induced AEs.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Our objective was to evaluate the benefit of re-exposing patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) to a combination of oxaliplatin, irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed patients with mCRC who received a combination of oxaliplatin, irinotecan and fluorouracil as a rechallenge regimen after progressing on the same drugs. Both FOLFOXIRI and FOLFIRINOX were used. Toxicity was evaluated for each treatment cycle, and survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients who were treated between January 2011 and December 2013 were selected for this study. Most of the patients (95.2%) had an ECOG status of 0-1. The median age at diagnosis was 52.1 years (range 36-77 years), and 14 (66.6%) patients had wild-type KRAS. Thirteen patients received FOLFIRINOX, and eight received FOLFOXIRI. Most patients had previously received at least three regimens, with 80% receiving anti-VEGF and 66% anti-EGFR antibodies. The response rate was 38%, and 24% patients had stable disease. The median time to disease progression was 4.0 months (range 1.0-9.1 months), and the median overall survival duration was 8.6 months (range 6.3-11.5 months). Most patients required dose adjustment and treatment delays. One patient experienced grade 5 neutropenic sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Both FOLFIRINOX and FOLFOXIRI are active and potentially feasible rechallenge treatment options for heavily pretreated patients with good performance status. With dose reduction and close monitoring for toxicity, the risk of serious adverse events can be minimised.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Camptotecina/análogos & derivados , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos/efeitos dos fármacos , Fluoruracila/uso terapêutico , Leucovorina/uso terapêutico , Compostos Organometálicos/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacologia , Camptotecina/farmacologia , Camptotecina/uso terapêutico , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/etiologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/mortalidade , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Progressão da Doença , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Esquema de Medicação , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Fluoruracila/farmacologia , Humanos , Irinotecano , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Leucovorina/farmacologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Compostos Organometálicos/farmacologia , Compostos Organoplatínicos/farmacologia , Compostos Organoplatínicos/uso terapêutico , Oxaliplatina , Retratamento/efeitos adversos , Retratamento/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma (mCRC) has evolved, and survival is over 30 months in contemporary trials. Nevertheless, there is a paucity of effective regimes after the first or second-line treatment. Thus, reexposure to previously used drugs has become a treatment strategy for some patients. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of retreatment with an oxaliplatin-containing regimen in mCRC and correlate this with clinicopathologic features. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 83 patients with mCRC who underwent reexposure to oxaliplatin (REOX). REOX was defined as a second trial of an oxaliplatin-containing regimen after a previous failure. Primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). RESULTS: The median age was 53.5 years, and the female/male ratio was 51.8%/48.2%. The site of the primary tumor was colon (67.5%) and rectal (32.5%). KRAS was mutated in 39.8%. Liver-limited metastasis was found in 19.3% of patients. The main regimen was 5-fluorouracil, levoleucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) (84.3%). Bevacizumab and cetuximab were used in 42.2% and 6% of patients, respectively. REOX was used in the third and fourth lines in 48.2% and 25.3% of patients, respectively. The median TTF after REOX was 6.04 months. Overall survival (OS) was 10.04 months. Disease control (complete response + partial response + stable disease) was observed in 56.6%, whereas 42.2% had progressive disease. Partial response + complete response to previous oxaliplatin was predictive of prolonged OS. Patients who attained disease control had better median OS compared with those with progressive disease (14.5 vs. 6.24 months; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: In the setting of heavily pretreated patients with mCRC, REOX was an effective treatment, with mTTF of 6.04 months in our cohort. Selection of patients with the longest time since previous oxaliplatin can translate in better outcome. Further studies should be conducted to confirm our data.