Retrospective study of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil efficacy as a third‑line or later chemotherapy regimen for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

Tanaka,Akira; Sadahiro,Sotaro; Suzuki,Toshiyuki; Okada,Kazutake; Saito,Gota; Miyakita,Hiroshi

doi:10.3892/ol.2018.9421

Retrospective study of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil efficacy as a third‑line or later chemotherapy regimen for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

Authors:
- Akira Tanaka
- Sotaro Sadahiro
- Toshiyuki Suzuki
- Kazutake Okada
- Gota Saito
- Hiroshi Miyakita
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa 259‑1193, Japan
Published online on: September 7, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9421
Pages: 6589-6597
Copyright: © Tanaka et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) are novel antitumor agents for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. However, it is unclear which patients may derive a survival benefit from these drugs in real‑life clinical practice. We evaluated retrospectively the efficacy and safety of regorafenib and TAS‑102 at a single institution between June 2013 and November 2015. Cox regression analysis was carried out to obtain predictive scores (the nearest integers of hazard ratio) for survival benefit. Forty‑four patients treated with regorafenib or TAS‑102 were included in the analysis; among them, 17 received crossover treatment. The median overall survival (OS) was 9.1 months for regorafenib and 9.3 months for TAS‑102, and the corresponding values after crossover were 7.1 and 5.3 months, respectively. OS was not correlated to relative dose intensity, but was proportional to the total administered dose of each drug. Adverse events were tolerable even after crossover. We identified three variables as significant for prediction of OS with good discrimination (C‑statistic=0.70): Poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, time since diagnosis of metastatic disease ≤18 months, and previous chemotherapy continued ≥2 months beyond progression were all predictors of poor OS. Regorafenib and TAS‑102 can be recommended for patients with better performance status and slow progression of metastatic disease. Optimal survival benefit was provided by prompt administration of either drug after failure of previous chemotherapy, with flexible titration to the optimal dose for each individual patient.

View Figures

View References

1	Howlader N, Noone A, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Miller D, Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, et al: SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2012. National Cancer Institute; Bethesda, MD, USA: 2015
2	Abrams TA, Meyer G, Schrag D, Meyerhardt JA, Moloney J and Fuchs CS: Chemotherapy usage patterns in a US-wide cohort of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 106:djt3712014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Wilhelm SM, Dumas J, Adnane L, Lynch M, Carter CA, Schütz G, Thierauch KH and Zopf D: Regorafenib (BAY 73–4506): A new oral multikinase inhibitor of angiogenic, stromal and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases with potent preclinical antitumor activity. Int J Cancer. 129:245–255. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Lenz HJ, Stintzing S and Loupakis F: TAS-102, a novel antitumor agent: A review of the mechanism of action. Cancer Treat Rev. 41:777–783. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Crawford J, Becker PS, Armitage JO, Blayney DW, Chavez J, Curtin P, Dinner S, Fynan T, Gojo I, Griffiths EA, et al: Myeloid growth factors, version 2.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 15:1520–1541. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Van Cutsem E, Cervantes A, Adam R, Sobrero A, Van Krieken JH, Aderka D, Aguilar Aranda E, Bardelli A, Benson A, Bodoky G, et al: ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 27:1386–1422. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Grothey A, Van Cutsem E, Sobrero A, Siena S, Falcone A, Ychou M, Humblet Y, Bouché O, Mineur L, Barone C, et al: Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): An international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 381:303–312. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Li J, Qin S, Xu R, Yau TC, Ma B, Pan H, Xu J, Bai Y, Chi Y, Wang L, et al: Regorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care in Asian patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CONCUR): A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 16:619–629. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Mayer RJ, Van Cutsem E, Falcone A, Yoshino T, Garcia-Carbonero R, Mizunuma N, Yamazaki K, Shimada Y, Tabernero J, Komatsu Y, et al: Randomized trial of TAS-102 for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 372:1909–1919. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Xu J, Kim TW, Shen L, Sriuranpong V, Pan H, Xu R, Guo W, Han SW, Liu T, Park YS, et al: Results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) monotherapy in Asian patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: The TERRA study. J Clin Oncol. 36:350–358. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Moriwaki T, Fukuoka S, Taniguchi H, Takashima A, Kumekawa Y, Kajiwara T, Yamazaki K, Esaki T, Makiyama C, Denda T, et al: Propensity score analysis of regorafenib versus trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy (REGOTAS): A Japanese society for cancer of the colon and rectum multicenter observational study. Oncologist. 23:7–15. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	García-Alfonso P, Feliú J, García-Carbonero R, Grávalos C, Guillén-Ponce C, Sastre J and García-Foncillas J: Is regorafenib providing clinically meaningful benefits to pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer? Clin Transl Oncol. 18:1072–1081. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, et al: New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 45:228–247. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Hryniuk W and Bush H: The importance of dose intensity in chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2:1281–1288. 1984. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Health and Human Services, . National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute: Common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE). v4.03. 2013.https://www.eortc.be/services/doc/ctc/CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_5×7.pdfAugust 20–2013
16	Wilkinson GN and Rogers CE: Symbolic description of factorial models for analysis of variance. Appl Stat-J R Stat Soc. 22:392–399. 1973.
17	Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL and Mark DB: Multivariable prognostic models: Issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 15:361–387. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Pencina MJ and D'Agostino RB: Overall C as a measure of discrimination in survival analysis: Model specific population value and confidence interval estimation. Stat Med. 23:2109–2123. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	R Development Core Team, . R: A language and environment for statistical computingR Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: 2016
20	Masuishi T, Taniguchi H, Hamauchi S, Komori A, Kito Y, Narita Y, Tsushima T, Ishihara M, Todaka A, Tanaka T, et al: Regorafenib versus trifluridine/tipiracil for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective comparison. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 16:e15–e22. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Sueda T, Sakai D, Kudo T, Sugiura T, Takahashi H, Haraguchi N, Nishimura J, Hata T, Hayashi T, Mizushima T, et al: Efficacy and safety of regorafenib or TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard therapies. Anticancer Res. 36:4299–4306. 2016.PubMed/NCBI
22	Adenis A, de la Fouchardiere C, Paule B, Burtin P, Tougeron D, Wallet J, Dourthe LM, Etienne PL, Mineur L, Clisant S, et al: Survival, safety, and prognostic factors for outcome with Regorafenib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard therapies: Results from a multicenter study (REBECCA) nested within a compassionate use program. BMC Cancer. 16:4122016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Bekaii-Saab TS, Ou FS, Anderson DM, Ahn DH, Boland PM, Ciombor KK, Jacobs NL, Desnoyers RJ, Cleary JM, Meyers JP, et al: Regorafenib dose optimization study (ReDOS): Randomized phase II trial to evaluate dosing strategies for regorafenib in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)- An ACCRU network study. J Clin Oncol. 36 4 Suppl:S6112018.
24	Osawa H: Response to regorafenib at an initial dose of 120 mg as salvage therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Mol Clin Oncol. 6:365–372. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Grothey A, Falcone A, Humblet Y, Bouche O, Mineur L, Adenis A, Tabernero J, Yoshino T, Lenz HJ and Goldberg RM: Characteristics of patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with regorafenib (REG) who had progression-free survival (PFS) >4 months (m): Subgroup analysis of the phase 3 CORRECT trial. Ann Oncol. 27 Suppl 6:S516P2016. View Article : Google Scholar
26	Puthiamadathil JM and Weinberg BA: Emerging combination therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer - impact of trifluridine/tipiracil. Cancer Manag Res. 9:461–469. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Austin PC: The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Stat Med. 32:2837–2849. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI