Introduction

Oncology Letters

1792-1074 1792-1082

D.A. Spandidos

10.3892/ol.2017.6960

OL-0-0-6960

Articles

Impact of the individualization of the first-line chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer based on collagen gel droplet-embedded drug sensitivity test

Ochiai

Takumi

1 Nishimura

Kazuhiko

1 Watanabe

Tomoo

1 Kitajima

Masayuki

1 Nakatani

Akinori

1 Nagayasu

Kiichi

1 Naito

Shigetoshi

1 Sato

Tsuyoshi

1 Kishine

Kenji

1 Abe

1 Hara

Chihiro

1 Yamada

Susumu

1 Mashiko

Satomi

2 Nagaoka

Isao

1Department of Surgery, Tobu Chiiki Hospital, Tokyo Metropolitan Health and Medical Treatment Corporation, Tokyo 125-8512, Japan 2Department of Pharmacy, Tobu Chiiki Hospital, Tokyo Metropolitan Health and Medical Treatment Corporation, Tokyo 125-8512, Japan 3Department of Host Defense and Biochemical Research, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo 113-8421, Japan

Correspondence to: Dr Takumi Ochiai, Department of Surgery, Tobu Chiiki Hospital, Tokyo Metropolitan Health and Medical Treatment Corporation, 5-14-1 Kameari, Katsushika, Tokyo 125-8512, Japan, E-mail: takumi_ochiai@tokyo-hmt.jp

11 2017

15 09 2017

14 5 6045 6052 23082016 23022017

2017

Leucovorin (FOL) and fluorouracil (5-FU) plus oxaliplatin (l-OHP; FOLFOX) or FOL and 5-FU plus irinotecan (SN-38; FOLFIRI) are widely used as first-line chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). However, second-line chemotherapy must be abandoned in certain cases due to disease progression, adverse effects or high medical cost. Therefore, the most effective regimen should be selected as first-line chemotherapy. We reported that individualization of first-line treatment (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI/Dual/Poor responder) was possible using the collagen gel droplet-embedded culture drug sensitivity test (CD-DST) and that individualized first-line chemotherapy with CD-DST may improve the prognosis of patients with unresectable CRC. The aim of the present prospective cohort study was to evaluate the individualization of first-line chemotherapy using CD-DST, with a focus on prognosis. Between March 2008 and December 2015, tumor specimens were obtained from 120 patients with CRC who had not received preoperative chemotherapy. CD-DST was performed and the growth inhibition rate (IR) was determined by exposure for 24 h with 5-FU and l-OHP (6.0 and 3.0 µg/ml, respectively) and 5-FU and SN-38 (6.0 and 0.2 µg/ml, respectively). The cumulative distribution of IR values under each condition was evaluated on the basis that the clinical response to FOLFOX and FOLFIRI is equivalent (~50%). The prognosis of dual responder was improved compared with that of poor responders, however this difference was identified to be significant. There was no different prognosis between patients treated with an appropriate first-line regimen and patients treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen in dual responders. However, in poor responders, there were significant differences of prognosis between patients treated with an appropriate first-line regimen and patients treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen (P=0.036). In conclusion, the results from the present study suggest that administration of the recommended first-line regimen using CD-DST for patients with unresectable CRC is important for the improvement of prognosis, particularly in poor responders.

colorectal cancer individualized chemotherapy collagen gel droplet-embedded drug sensitivity test leucovorin and fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan

Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide (1). Over the last 20 years, and the last decade in particular, the clinical outcome for metastatic CRC patients has improved greatly due to patients undergoing advanced surgical resection of localized metastasis and advanced systemic chemotherapy (2,3). The leucovorin (FOL) and fluorouracil (5-FU) plus oxaliplatin (l-OHP; FOLFOX) or FOL and 5-FU plus irinotecan (SN-38; FOLFIRI) with molecularly-targeted drugs are used as first-line chemotherapy regimens worldwide in the treatment of advanced CRC (4,5). Recently studies have revealed that the median survival time (MST) of advanced CRC with the chemotherapy was >30 months with the integration of multiple cytotoxic agents and molecularly-targeted therapies (6–8). It is common knowledge that the treatment period of the first-line chemotherapy is the longest, and that the response rate of the first-line chemotherapy is the highest (9). However, second-line chemotherapy must be abandoned in certain cases due to disease progression and adverse effects. In addition, high medical costs have been reported to be a significant problem (10–14). Therefore, a more effective regimen should be selected as first-line chemotherapy treatment in a clinical setting.

A previous report demonstrated that individualization of first-line chemotherapy was possible using the collagen gel droplet-embedded culture drug sensitivity test (CD-DST) and individualized first-line chemotherapy using CD-DST may improve the prognosis of patients with unresectable CRC (15,16).

The aim of this prospective cohort study was to evaluate the individualization of first-line chemotherapy using CD-DST, focusing on prognosis.

Materials and methods <sec> <title>Patients

During the period between March 2008 and December 2015, tumor specimens were obtained from 120 patients with CRC. Lymph node metastasis and/or distant metastasis was reported in these patients. No patient was treated with preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Written informed consent for measurement of individual chemosensitivity was obtained from all patients. Approval for the present study was obtained from the Tobu Chiiki Hospital Institutional Review Board (No. 02.03.29. #1).

Methods

The CD-DST was performed using a Human Cancer Primary Culture System Kit; Primastarä (Kurabo Industries, Ltd., Chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan). Tumor tissue was excised from primary surgical specimens and subjected to the CD-DST. The CD-DST allows for the evaluation of drug sensitivity using isolated 3-dimensionally cultured tumor cells in a small collagen gel droplet, and was used to evaluate the sensitivity of the tumors to 5-FU, which was performed according to a previous description by Kobayashi et al (17,18). Each specimen was washed 5 times with 50 ml saline, followed by additional washing 5 times with 50 ml antibiotic fluid containing 1.0 mg/ml piperacillin and 0.5 mg/ml kanamycin. The transport bottle contained 1.0 mg/ml piperacillin, 0.5 mg/ml kanamycin and 2.5 µg/ml amphotericin B. Tissue (1 g) was treated for 2 h at 37°C with a cocktail containing 1.0% dispersion enzyme EZ™ (Kurabo Industries, Ltd.). Dispersed cell suspensions were inoculated into pre-culture media on collagen-coated flasks (CG-flusk™, Kurabo Industries, Ltd.) overnight. Viable tumor cells were subsequently recovered by 0.05% collagenase treatment. Recovered cells were embedded in 30 µl collagen gel droplets.

The embedded cells were cultivated in culture media containing 5-FU and l-OHP at 6.0 and 3.0 µg/ml (FOLFOX regimen), or 5-FU and SN-38 at 6.0 and 0.2 µg/ml (FOLFIRI regimen), respectively, for 24 h at 37°C. Following the removal of the anticancer agent-containing media, cells were additionally cultured for 7 days in serum-free culture media (PCM-2™, Kurabo Japan) to prevent the growth of fibroblasts. Viable cells were stained with neutral red solution and counted using the imaging colorimetric quantification method (Primage™, Kurabo Japan). The surviving cell number ratio between the drug-treated and control group, which received no drug treatment, was calculated. A growth rate <0.8 was regarded a successful culture.

The histograms and the cumulative distributions of the growth inhibition rates (IRs) under the two conditions were evaluated based on the evidence that the clinical response rates to FOLFOX and FOLFIRI were ~50% (9,19–21). Therefore, taking the median of the histogram as the cut off value in each regimen, the patients were divided into responder and poor responder.

All patients were divided into 4 cohorts: FOLFOX and FOLFIRI responder (dual responder), FOLFOX responder, FOLFIRI responder and poor responder.

All patients were divided into 3 cohorts: FOLFOX recommended, FOLFIRI recommended and the two regimens recommended.

The patients with the chemotherapy were divided into 2 cohorts: Treated with appropriate first-line regimen and treated with inappropriate first-line regimen.

First-line regimens were selected by the attending physician. Frequencies of chemotherapy and prognosis were prospectively evaluated and compared among the cohorts.

Statistical analysis

Histograms were analyzed with the D'Agostino-Pearson omnibus normality test. Frequencies of chemotherapy were compared between the two cohorts using the t-test. The MST was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The overall survival (OS) curves of the two cohorts were compared by the log-rank test. Data are presented as the means ± standard deviation (SD) and were analyzed using GraphPad Prism (version 5.04; GraphPad Software, Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA). P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.

Results

Patient characteristics are demonstrated in Table I. The median follow-up period was 1124 days. The individual growth IRs under each of the two conditions are presented in Table II. Histograms of the individual growth IRs (%) under the conditions of the FOLFOX regimen and FOLFIRI regimen are presented in Figs. 1 and 2, respectively. The median, mean, SD and standard error (SE) of the mean with the FOLFOX regimen were 59.6, 59.5, 16.8 and 1.54, respectively. The median, mean, SD and SE of the mean with the FOLFIRI regimen were 70.0, 67.7, 16.8 and 1.53, respectively. The histograms passed the normality test (α=0.05; FOLFOX regimen, P=0.52; FOLFIRI regimen, P=0.07).

<sec> <title>Four cohorts (dual, FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, and poor responder)

The 4 cohorts based on the cumulative distribution of the individual growth IRs between the two conditions is shown in Fig. 3. Individualization of first-line chemotherapy was possible in all 120 patients, with dual responder, FOLFOX responder, FOLFIRI responder and poor responder in 53, 8, 8, and 51 patients, respectively. Thirty-nine of the patients eventually received the chemotherapy in dual responder (n=21), FOLFOX responder (n=3), FOLFIRI responder (n=2) and poor responder (n=13). The MST in dual responder and poor responder was 1128 and 810 days, respectively (P=0.119, Fig. 4).

Three cohorts (FOLFOX, FOLFIRI and the two regimens recommended)

Individualization of first-line chemotherapy was possible in all 120 patients, with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI showing higher efficacy in 63 and 51 patients, respectively, and equal efficacy in 6 cases (Fig. 5). Thirty-nine of the patients eventually received the chemotherapy in FOLFOX recommended (n=22), FOLFIRI recommended (n=15), and the two regimens recommended (n=2).

Two cohorts (appropriate and inappropriate first-line chemotherapy)

Thirty-nine patients with unresectable CRC were treated with chemotherapy. Patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen and those treated with inappropriate first-line regimen were 28 and 11, respectively. All patients treated with inappropriate first-line regimen received FOLFOX therapy (Fig. 5). The MST in patients treated with the appropriate first-line regimen and those treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen was 960 and 506 days, respectively (P=0.218, Fig. 6). In dual responders, the MST in patients treated with the appropriate first-line regimen (n=17) and those treated with the inappropriate first-line regimen (n=4) was 1044 and 1073 days, respectively (P=0.793, Fig. 7). In the poor responder group, the MST in patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen (n=8) and those treated with inappropriate first-line regimen (n=5) was 810 and 337 days, respectively (P=0.036, Fig. 8). The mean frequency of appropriate and inappropriate regimen in the two cohorts was 22.8±5.17 and 11.0±1.98 courses, respectively (P=0.142, Fig. 9).

Discussion

The present study demonstrated three things. Firstly, the prognosis of a dual responder was improved compared with that of poor responders. Secondly, there was no different prognosis between patients treated with the appropriate first-line regimen and patients treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen in dual responders. Thirdly, in poor responders, there were significant differences in the prognosis between patients treated with an appropriate first-line regimen and patients treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen.

The prognosis of dual responders was improved compared with that of a poor responder. However, there no significant difference was identified between the two cohorts. The reason for this may be that the periods of observation of 4 patients in the dual responder group were <150 days. In the dual responder group, the longest-term survivor (>2700 days) was treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen. However, the patient's growth IRs of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI were 77.9 and 85.5%, respectively. These growth IRs were high level. For certain patients, whose growth IRs of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI were high-level, it was not significant whether FOLFOX or FOLFIRI was administered first. This result may support Grothey's report in dual responders. Several studies have investigated individualization in 5-FU-based chemotherapy based on the 5-FU metabolism-associated enzymatic and genetic characteristics of the individual patient (22–29). In addition, the individualization of 5-FU-based chemotherapy based on the serum 5-FU concentration has been reported lately (30–34). However, individualization in 5-FU-based chemotherapy remains to be implemented in a clinical setting. Therefore, CD-DST may be useful to detect poor responder in 5-FU-based chemotherapy. On the other hand, the individualized chemotherapy with molecularly-targeted anticancer agents may be implemented based on the genetic characteristics of the individual patient. Recently, the importance of the biomarker for molecularly-targeted anticancer agents has become increasingly evident in a clinical setting (35–37). In poor responders, the biomarker for molecularly-targeted anticancer agents is required in order to improve the prognosis. Therefore, advanced studies into biomarkers are important.

There was no different prognosis between patients treated with the appropriate first-line regimen and patients treated with the inappropriate first-line regimen in dual responders. Grothey et al (38) reported that while it was not significant whether FOLFOX or FOLFIRI was administered first, it was crucial that full administration of the targeted dosages of all 3 drugs (5-FU, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) was achieved (38). However, second-line chemotherapy must be abandoned in certain patients due to disease progression, adverse effects or high medical cost in a clinical setting. The cost of molecularly-targeted anticancer agents in particular is expensive. Therefore, the number of reports on cost effectiveness analysis and cost utility analysis are rapidly increasing (10–14). In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the rate of second-line chemotherapy enforcement in PRIME study, OPUS study, NO16966 study and FIRE-3 study was 62, <50, 53 and 69.9%, respectively (39–42). Even in those recent RCTs with strict eligible standard, second-line chemotherapy could not be carried out in >30% of the patients. First-line chemotherapy is usually administered over a long period of time (9). In addition, the response rate of the first-line chemotherapy is typically higher compared with second-line chemotherapy (43,44). Therefore, selection of a more effective regimen as the first-line chemotherapy using CD-DST is extremely important even for dual responder patients in a clinical setting. The present study has already reported the following: When the clinical response rates of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI were 50%, responders were identified using the median based on the histograms of the individual growth IRs. The efficacies of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI were not exactly equivalent in all the individuals. By using CD-DST, it was possible to individualize the first line chemotherapy and may also improve the prognosis of patients with unresectable CRC.

In poor responders, there were significant differences of prognosis between patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen and patients treated with an inappropriate first-line regimen. Moreover, more chemotherapy in patients treated with the appropriate first-line regimen was performed. It is crucial to administer the appropriate first-line regimen. Administration of a more effective first-line regimen leads to prolonging the period of first-line chemotherapy and increases the total number of chemotherapy cycles. This indicates the importance for the detection of poor responders and the selection of first-line chemotherapy using CD-DST.

There were certain limitations to the present cohort study. Firstly, the sample size was small; a larger sample size would have improved the quality of the data. Secondly, in the present study, the periods of observation of 4 patients in dual responder were shorter (<150 days) compared with other patients. The short periods of observation may influence statistical analysis. Moreover, the present study was not randomized. The individualization of first-line chemotherapy using CD-DST requires additional prospective randomized studies.

In conclusion, the results from the present study suggest that the administration of the recommended first-line regimen using CD-DST for patients with unresectable CRC is important for improvement in prognosis. It is important to administrate appropriate first-line regimen, particularly in poor responders.

References 1

Ferlay

Soerjomataram

Dikshit

Eser

Mathers

Rebelo

Parkin

Forman

Bray

Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012

Int J Cancer136E359E3862015

10.1002/ijc.29210

25220842

Adam

De Gramont

Figueras

Guthrie

Kokudo

Kunstlinger

Loyer

Poston

Rougier

Rubbia-Brandt

The oncosurgery approach to managing liver metastases from colorectal cancer: A multidisciplinary international consensus

Oncologist17122512392012

10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0121

22962059

Jones

Stättner

Sutton

Dunne

McWhirter

Fenwick

Malik

Poston

Controversies in the oncosurgical management of liver limited stage IV colorectal cancer

Surg Oncol2353602014

10.1016/j.suronc.2014.02.002

24631118

NCCN: NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Colon Cancer. Version 1 2017http://www.nccn.orgFebruary242017

Van Cutsem

Cervantes

Adam

Sobrero

Van Krieken

Aderka

Aguilar

E Aranda

Bardelli

Benson

Bodoky

ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Ann Oncol27138614222016

10.1093/annonc/mdw235

27380959

Fakih

Metastatic colorectal cancer: Current state and future directions

J Clin Oncol33180918242015

10.1200/JCO.2014.59.7633

25918280

Venook

Niedzwiecki

Lenz

Mahoney

Innocenti

O'Neil

Shaw

Polite

Hochster

Goldberg

CALGB/SWOG 80405: Analysis of patients undergoing surgery as part of treatment strategy

Ann Oncol251412014

10.1093/annonc/mdu438.8

Recondo

JrDíaz-Cantón

de la Vega

Greco

Recondo

SrValsecchi

Advances and new perspectives in the treatment of metastatic colon cancer

World J Gastrointest Oncol62112242014

10.4251/wjgo.v6.i7.211

25024813

Tournigand

André

Achille

Lledo

Flesh

Mery-Mignard

Quinaux

Couteau

Buyse

Ganem

FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: A randomized GERCOR study

J Clin Oncol222292372004

10.1200/JCO.2004.05.113

14657227

Leung

Chan

Leung

Systematic review and quality assessment of cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmaceutical therapies for advanced colorectal cancer

Ann Pharmacother475065182013

10.1345/aph.1R152

23548649

Parkin

Bray

Ferlay

Pisani

Global cancer statistics, 2002

CA Cancer J Clin55741082005

10.3322/canjclin.55.2.74

15761078

Drummond

Sculpher

Torrance

O'Brien

Stoddart

Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmesOxford University Press

New York, NY

2005

Manca

Asseburg

Vergel

Y Bravo

Seymour

Meade

Stephens

Parmar

Sculpher

The cost-effectiveness of different chemotherapy strategies for patients with poor prognosis advanced colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS)

Value Health1522312012

10.1016/j.jval.2011.07.008

22264968

Lange

Prenzler

Frank

Kirstein

der Schulenburg

JM Vogel Aandvon

A systematic review of cost-effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies for metastatic colorectal cancer

Eur J Cancer5040492014

10.1016/j.ejca.2013.08.008

24011538

Ochiai

Nishimura

Watanabe

Kitajima

Hashiguchi

Nakatani

Marusasa

Muraki

Nagaoka

Futagawa

Leucovorin and fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin or leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan as individualized first-line therapy based on a drug sensitivity test

Exp Ther Med13253292010

10.3892/etm_00000050

22993545

Ochiai

Nishimura

Watanabe

Kitajima

Nakatani

Inou

Washio

Sakuyama

Sato

Kishine

Individualized chemotherapy for colorectal cancer based on the collagen gel droplet-embedded drug sensitivity test

Oncol Lett46216242012

23205073

Kobayashi

Tanisaka

Doi

Kodama

Higashiyama

Nakagawa

Miyake

Taki

Hara

Yasutomi

An in vitro chemosensitivity test for solid tumors using collagen gel droplet embedded cultures

Int J Oncol114494551997

21528231

Kobayashi

Higashiyama

Minamigawa

Tanisaka

Takano

Yokouchi

Kodama

Hata

Examination of in vitro chemosensitivity test using collagen droplet culture method with colorimetric endpoint quantification

Jpn J Cancer Res922032102001

10.1111/j.1349-7006.2001.tb01083.x

11223550

de Gramont

Figer

Seymour

Homerin

Hmissi

Cassidy

Boni

Cortes-Funes

Cervantes

Freyer

Leucovorin and fluorouracil with or without oxaliplatin as first-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer

J Clin Oncol18293829472000

10.1200/JCO.2000.18.16.2938

10944126

Goldberg

Sargent

Morton

Fuchs

Ramanathan

Williamson

Findlay

Pitot

Alberts

A randomized controlled trial of fluorouracil plus leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin combinations in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer

J Clin Oncol2223302004

10.1200/JCO.2004.09.046

14665611

Douillard

Cunningham

Roth

Navarro

James

Karasek

Jandik

Iveson

Carmichael

Alakl

Irinotecan combined with fluorouracil compared with fluorouracil alone as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: A multicentre randomized trial

Lancet355104110472000

10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02034-1

10744089

Ochiai

Nishimura

Noguchi

Kitajima

Tsukada

Watanabe

Nagaoka

Futagawa

Prognostic impact of orotate phosphoribosyl transferase among 5-fluorouracil metabolic enzymes in resectable colorectal cancers treated by oral 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy

Int J Cancer118308430882006

10.1002/ijc.21779

16425285

Aki

Bando

Takahashi

Uehara

Numoto

Ito

Sasa

Izumi

A retrospective study on TS mRNA expression and prediction of the effects of adjuvant oral 5-fluorouracil in breast cancer

Oncol Lett19819872010

22870098

Komori

Osada

Tomita

Nishio

Kumazawa

Tachibana

Tsuchiya

Yoshida

Predictive value of orotate phosphoribosyltransferase in colorectal cancer patients receiving 5-FU-based chemotherapy

Mol Clin Oncol14534602013

10.3892/mco.2013.71

24649191

Ochiai

Umeki

Miyake

Iida

Okumura

Ohno

Sakamoto

Miyoshi

Takahashi

Tsumura

Impact of 5-fluorouracil metabolizing enzymes on chemotherapy in patients with resectable colorectal cancer

Oncol Rep328878922014

10.3892/or.2014.3299

24994673

Sasako

Terashima

Ichikawa

Ochiai

Kitada

Kurahashi

Sakuramoto

Katai

Sano

Imamura

Impact of the expression of thymidylate synthase and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase genes on survival in stage II/III gastric cancer

Gastric Cancer185385482015

10.1007/s10120-014-0413-8

25112781

Kawakami

Zaanan

Sinicrope

Implications of mismatch repair-deficient status on management of early stage colorectal cancer

J Gastrointest Oncol66766842015

26697201

Jung

Kim

Prognostic impact of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer presenting with mucinous, signet-ring, and poorly differentiated cells

Ann Coloproctol3258652016

10.3393/ac.2016.32.2.58

27218096

Ashktorab

Ahuja

Kannan

Llor

Ellis

Xicola

Laiyemo

Carethers

Brim

Nouraie

A meta-analysis of MSI frequency and race in colorectal cancer

Oncotarget2334546345572016

10.18632/oncotarget.8945

van Kuilenburg

Maring

Evaluation of 5-fluorouracil pharmacokinetic models and therapeutic drug monitoring in cancer patients

Pharmacogenomics147998112013

10.2217/pgs.13.54

23651027

Paci

Veal

Bardin

Levêque

Widmer

Beijnen

Astier

Chatelut

Review of therapeutic drug monitoring ofanticancer drugs part 1-Cytotoxics

Eur J Cancer50201020192014

10.1016/j.ejca.2014.04.014

24889915

Derissen

Jacobs

Huitema

Rosing

Schellens

Beijnen

Exploring the intracellular pharmacokinetics of the 5-fluorouracil nucleotides during capecitabine treatment

Br J Clin Pharmacol819499572016

10.1111/bcp.12877

26718616

Yang

Zhang

Zhou

Zhang

Yang

Tong

Lyu

Han

Individual 5-fluorouracil dose adjustment via pharmacokinetic monitoring versus conventional body-area-surface method: A meta-analysis

Ther Drug Monit3879862016

10.1097/FTD.0000000000000238

26309030

Lee

Beumer

Chu

Therapeutic drug monitoring of 5-fluorouracil

Cancer Chemother Pharmacol784474642016

10.1007/s00280-016-3054-2

27217046

Bencsikova

Bortlicek

Halamkova

Ostrizkova

Kiss

Melichar

Pavlik

Dusek

Valik

Vyzula

Zdrazilova-Dubska

Efficacy of bevacizumab and chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: Broadening KRAS-focused clinical view

BMC Gastroenterol15372015

10.1186/s12876-015-0266-6

25888291

Hecht

Cohn

Dakhil

Saleh

Piperdi

Cline-Burkhardt

Tian

SPIRITT: A randomized, multicenter, phase II study of panitumumab with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab with FOLFIRI as second-line treatment in patients with unresectable wild type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer

Clin Colorectal Cancer1472802015

10.1016/j.clcc.2014.12.009

25982297

Sartore-Bianchi

Trusolino

Martino

Bencardino

Lonardi

Bergamo

Zagonel

Leone

Depetris

Martinelli

Dual-targeted therapy with trastuzumab and lapatinib in treatment-refractory, KRAS codon 12/13 wild-type, HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer (HERACLES): A proof-of-concept, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

Lancet Oncol177387462016

10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00150-9

27108243

Grothey

Sargent

Goldberg

Schmoll

Survival of patients with advanced colorectal cancer improves with the availability of fluorouracil-leucovorin, irinotecan andoxaliplatin in the course of treatment

J Clin Oncol22120912142004

10.1200/JCO.2004.11.037

15051767

Cassidy

Clarke

Díaz-Rubio

Scheithauer

Figer

Wong

Koski

Lichinitser

Yang

Rivera

Randomized phase III study of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin compared with fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

J Clin Oncol26200620122008

10.1200/JCO.2007.14.9898

18421053

Douillard

Siena

Cassidy

Tabernero

Burkes

Barugel

Humblet

Bodoky

Cunningham

Jassem

Randomized, phase III trial of panitumumab with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: The PRIME study

J Clin Oncol28469747052010

10.1200/jco.2010.28.15_suppl.3528

20921465

Bokemeyer

Bondarenko

Hartmannde Braud

Schuch

Zubel

Celik

Schlichting

Koralewski

Efficacy according to biomarker status of cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: The OPUS study

An Oncol22153515462011

10.1093/annonc/mdq632

Modest

Stintzing

von Weikersthal

Decker

Kiani

Vehling-Kaiser

Al-Batran

Heintges

Lerchenmüller

Kahl

Impact of subsequent therapies on outcome of the FIRE-3/AIO KRK0306 trial: First-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors in metastatic colorectal cancer

J Clin Oncol33371837262015

10.1200/JCO.2015.61.2887

26261259

Haller

Rothenberg

Wong

Koralewski

Miller

JrBodoky

Habboubi

Garay

Olivatto

Oxaliplatin plus irinotecan compared with irinotecan alone as second-line treatment after single-agent fluoropyrimidine therapy for metastatic colorectal carcinoma

J Clin Oncol26454445502008

10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1249

18824706

Koopman

Antonini

Douma

Wals

Honkoop

Erdkamp

de Jong

Rodenburg

Vreugdenhil

Loosveld

Sequential versus combination chemotherapy with capecitabine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin in advanced colorectal cancer (CAIRO): A phase III randomised controlled trial

Lancet3701351422007

10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61086-1

17630036

Figure 1.

Histogram of individual growth inhibition rate (%) in culture media containing 5-FU and l-OHP at 6.0 and 3.0 µg/ml for 24 h at 37°C. 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; l-OHP, l-oxaliplatin; FOLFOX, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin.

Figure 2.

Histogram of individual growth inhibition rate (%) in culture media containing 5-FU and SN-38 at 6.0 and 0.2 µg/ml for 24 h at 37°C. 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; SN-38, irinotecan; FOLFIRI, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan.

Figure 3.

Correlation between cumulative distribution of individual growth inhibition rate between each condition. Solid line indicates cumulative rate 50%. The upper right half area indicates dual responder. The lower right half area indicates FOLFOX responder. The upper left half area indicates FOLFIRI responder. The lower left half area indicates poor responder. Open circle indicates the patients treated without chemotherapy. Closed circle indicates the patients treated with chemotherapy. FOLFOX, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin; FOLFIRI, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan.

Figure 4.

Overall survival rates in dual responder (black line) and poor responder (gray line).

Figure 5.

Correlation between cumulative distribution of individual growth inhibition rate between each condition. Solid line indicates equivalence in efficacy for FOLFOX and FOLFIRI. FOLFIRI was superior to FOLFOX in upper left half. FOLFOX was superior to FOLFIRI in lower right half. Open circle indicates the patients treated without chemotherapy. Closed circle indicates the patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen. Closed triangle indicates the patients treated with inappropriate first-line regimen. FOLFOX, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin; FOLFIRI, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan.

Figure 6.

In all patients, overall survival rates in patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen (black line) and patients treated with inappropriate first-line regimen (gray line).

Figure 7.

In dual responders, overall survival rates in patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen (black line) and patients treated with inappropriate first-line regimen (gray line).

Figure 8.

In poor responders, overall survival rates in patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen (black line) and patients treated with inappropriate first-line regimen (gray line).

Figure 9.

Frequency of chemotherapy of the patients treated with appropriate first-line regimen and the patients treated with inappropriate first-line regimen.

Table I.

Patient characteristics.

Variables	Value
Age, years, mean (range)	66.1 (36–83)
Gender
Male/female	79/41
Histological type
Papillary adenocarcinoma	2
Well differentiated adenocarcinoma	22
Moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma	80
Poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma	6
Mucinous adenocarcinoma	9
Squamous cell carcinoma	1
Primary tumor site
Colon/rectum	76/44

Table II.

Growth inhibition rates (%) of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI.

Patient no.	FOLFOX	FOLFIRI
1	80.1	82.9
2	71.3	79.2
3	81.2	83.4
4	60.0	68.7
5	29.9	66.5
6	69.7	89.6
7	58.7	63.2
8	73.0	85.2
9	63.2	75.9
10	77.9	85.5
11	76.3	85.6
12	53.6	62.6
13	41.9	60.7
14	81.3	80.9
15	42.3	70.2
16	84.8	86.8
17	75.9	83.9
18	59.2	76.4
19	69.9	85.5
20	57.0	49.7
21	79.2	83.0
22	86.1	89.1
23	67.3	74.4
24	81.3	85.2
25	60.4	71.9
26	93.4	98.6
27	62.6	84.9
28	58.5	54.8
29	81.2	84.0
30	66.5	73.3
31	81.3	78.1
32	59.9	74.1
33	53.3	65.0
34	49.3	48.3
35	44.7	49.3
36	68.8	72.1
37	59.7	69.4
38	50.8	59.3
39	51.6	56.5
40	57.9	70.2
41	58.5	63.7
42	62.4	72.5
43	15.2	21.5
44	82.9	84.3
45	66.3	68.1
46	46.7	57.2
47	71.3	70.0
48	32.6	43.2
49	56.4	59.2
50	63.4	64.6
51	59.7	55.3
52	46.2	45.4
53	68.7	77.7
54	49.2	42.7
55	31.5	43.8
56	35.5	41.5
57	69.5	76.6
58	57.0	53.7
59	53.7	55.8
60	72.4	83.4
61	29.4	43.8
62	37.7	65.1
63	68.4	77.2
64	47.9	73.7
65	58.8	69.1
66	50.5	76.5
67	74.3	81.9
68	36.4	46.3
69	81.4	82.4
70	68.0	80.9
71	64.3	78.2
72	69.9	83.7
73	40.7	58.0
74	61.4	55.3
75	60.0	79.5
76	44.8	60.2
77	73.3	93.9
78	66.6	79.8
79	27.8	25.5
80	47.7	66.2
81	51.5	62.6
82	59.4	69.9
83	30.6	26.6
84	68.6	75.6
85	66.5	81.8
86	75.0	73.5
87	56.3	57.1
88	58.0	69.0
89	31.0	47.3
90	84.5	89.5
91	42.1	26.9
92	51.1	54.2
93	86.8	92.0
94	54.8	56.9
95	52.0	70.1
96	49.4	71.7
97	23.7	53.5
98	45.4	63.0
99	47.9	52.6
100	64.6	63.5
101	64.9	78.5
102	53.9	61.4
103	45.4	59.9
104	60.1	79.2
105	36.0	37.1
106	59.1	81.3
107	60.1	69.4
108	34.5	39.9
109	39.8	47.3
110	39.0	44.9
111	38.3	43.3
112	39.9	40.3
113	54.6	66.8
114	79.0	86.8
115	88.1	95.0
116	58.6	52.0
117	88.5	94.1
118	84.9	84.6
119	83.3	83.7
120	99.7	99.9

FOLFOX, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin; FOLFIRI, leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan.