| Literature DB >> 19664225 |
Shinichi Sugimoto1, Kuniyuki Katano, Akiyoshi Kanazawa, Hiroshi Yoshimura, Akihiko Kidani, Hiroshi Takeda, Masato Makino, Nobuhiro Ozaki, Tsuneo Tanaka, Masahide Ikeguchi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFOX) has become a standard regimen for colorectal cancer. An increase of adverse events with combination chemotherapy is predicted in elderly patients, and it remains controversial whether they should receive the same chemotherapy as younger patients. Accordingly, this study of modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) therapy was performed to compare its safety between elderly and non-elderly patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19664225 PMCID: PMC2731734 DOI: 10.1186/1756-9966-28-109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Clin Cancer Res ISSN: 0392-9078
Figure 1Schedule for mFOLFOX Therapy.
Dose-Reduction Criteria and Dose to be selected at Dose-Reduction
| 85 → 85 | 2,400 → 2,400 | |||
| 85 → 85 | 2,400 → 2,400 | |||
| ≥ | ||||
| ≥ | 85 → 85 | |||
| 400 → 400 | 2,400 → 2,400 | |||
| 400 → 400 | 2,400 → 2,400 | |||
| ≥ | ||||
| ≥ |
Abbreviation: PS, performance status
*1 During the period from administration of oxaliplatin to 2 hours after completion of administration.
*2 Administration of 5-FU should not be started until the completion of administration of oxaliplatin.
Patients Characteristics
| ≥ | |||
| 63.5 [39–69] | 74.5 [71–79] | - | |
| 11/3 | 5/3 | *0.3695 | |
| 9/5/0 | 7/1/0 | **0.2505 | |
| 4/8/2 | 7/1/0 | *0.011/0.052/0.3939 | |
| 4/2/6/0/2 | 4/1/1/1/1 | *0.291/0.709/0.161/ | |
| 12/2 | 8/0 | *0.3939 | |
| 4/10 | 2/6 | *0.6305 | |
| 1/13 | 1/7 | *0.6060 |
Abbreviation: PS, performance status; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; LN, lymph node.
*P values for SEX, primary tumor, target lesions, previous surgery (+/-), adjuvant chemotherapy (+/-) and previous treatment (+/-) were calculated with the use of Fisher's exact probability test. **P values for PS were calculated with the use of Mann-Whitney U test.
Major Adverse Events
| ≥ | |||
| 2 [14.3%] | 1 [12.5%] | 0.7090 | |
| 4 [28.6%] | 5 [62.5%] | 0.1347 | |
| 0 [0.0%] | 0 [0.0%] | - | |
| 0 [0.0%] | 0 [0.0%] | - | |
| 2 [14.3%] | 0 [0.0%] | 0.3939 | |
| 1 [7.1%] | 1 [12.5%] | 0.6060 | |
| 1 [7.1%] | 1 [12.5%] | 0.6060 | |
| 1 [7.1%] | 0 [0.0%] | 0.6363 | |
| 1 [7.1%] | 0 [0.0%] | 0.6363 | |
| | 12 [86.4%] | 7 [87.5%] | 0.7090 |
| | 6 [45.5%] | 4 [50.0%] | 0.5464 |
| | 2 [14.3%] | 1 [12.5%] | 0.7090 |
Grades of adverse events were defined according to NCI-CTC v3.0
*P values were calculated with the use of Fisher's exact probability test.
Incidence of Peripheral Neuropathy during Treatment Cycles
| 3 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
| 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
| ≥ | |||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 8 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Grades of adverse events were defined according to NCI-CTC v3.0
*P values were calculated with the use of Fisher's exact probability test.
Figure 2Occurrence of Peripheral Neuropathy in younger patients (left) and elderly patients (right). Abbreviation: G, Grade.
Figure 3Time to Treatment Failure (TTF). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate TTF curves. Median value for each group is shown.
Antitumor Effects
| ≥ | |||
| 60.0 | 50.0 | 0.5490 | |
| 100 | 83.3 | 0.3750 | |
| 0/6/4/0/2 | 0/3/2/1/1 | - |
Abbreviation: CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; NE, not evaluable; RR, response rate (CR+PR); DCR, disease control rate (CR+PR+SD).
*P values were calculated with the use of Fisher's exact probability test.