BACKGROUND: To evaluate the objective clinical outcomes of active specific immunotherapy (ASI) in advanced colorectal cancer (advanced CRC) and suspected minimal residual colorectal cancer (suspected minimal residual CRC). METHODS: A search was conducted on Medline and Pub Med from January 1998 to January 2010 for original studies on ASI in colorectal cancer (CRC). All articles included in this study were assessed with the application of predetermined selection criteria and were divided into two groups: ASI in advanced CRC and ASI in suspected minimal residual CRC. For ASI in suspected minimal residual CRC, a meta-analysis was executed with results regarding the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Regarding ASI in advanced colorectal cancer, a system review was performed with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: 1375 colorectal carcinoma patients with minimal residual disease have been enrolled in Meta-analysis. A significantly improved OS and DFS was noted for suspected minimal residual CRC patients utilizing ASI (For OS: HR = 0.76, P = 0.007; For DFS: HR = 0.76, P = 0.03). For ASI in stage II suspected minimal residual CRC, OS approached significance when compared with control (HR = 0.71, P = 0.09); however, the difference in DFS of ASI for the stage II suspected minimal residual CRC reached statistical significance (HR = 0.66, P = 0.02). For ASI in stage III suspected minimal residual CRC compared with control, The difference in both OS and DFS achieved statistical significance (For OS: HR = 0.76, P = 0.02; For DFS: HR = 0.81, P = 0.03). 656 advanced colorectal patients have been evaluated on ASI in advanced CRC. Eleven for CRs and PRs was reported, corresponding to an overall response rate of 1.68%. No serious adverse events have been observed in 2031 patients. CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely that ASI will provide a standard complementary therapeutic approach for advanced CRC in the near future. However, the clinical responses to ASI in patients with suspected minimal residual CRC have been encouraging, and it has become clear that immunotherapy works best in situations of patients with suspected minimal residual CRC.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the objective clinical outcomes of active specific immunotherapy (ASI) in advanced colorectal cancer (advanced CRC) and suspected minimal residual colorectal cancer (suspected minimal residual CRC). METHODS: A search was conducted on Medline and Pub Med from January 1998 to January 2010 for original studies on ASI in colorectal cancer (CRC). All articles included in this study were assessed with the application of predetermined selection criteria and were divided into two groups: ASI in advanced CRC and ASI in suspected minimal residual CRC. For ASI in suspected minimal residual CRC, a meta-analysis was executed with results regarding the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Regarding ASI in advanced colorectal cancer, a system review was performed with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: 1375 colorectal carcinomapatients with minimal residual disease have been enrolled in Meta-analysis. A significantly improved OS and DFS was noted for suspected minimal residual CRC patients utilizing ASI (For OS: HR = 0.76, P = 0.007; For DFS: HR = 0.76, P = 0.03). For ASI in stage II suspected minimal residual CRC, OS approached significance when compared with control (HR = 0.71, P = 0.09); however, the difference in DFS of ASI for the stage II suspected minimal residual CRC reached statistical significance (HR = 0.66, P = 0.02). For ASI in stage III suspected minimal residual CRC compared with control, The difference in both OS and DFS achieved statistical significance (For OS: HR = 0.76, P = 0.02; For DFS: HR = 0.81, P = 0.03). 656 advanced colorectalpatients have been evaluated on ASI in advanced CRC. Eleven for CRs and PRs was reported, corresponding to an overall response rate of 1.68%. No serious adverse events have been observed in 2031 patients. CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely that ASI will provide a standard complementary therapeutic approach for advanced CRC in the near future. However, the clinical responses to ASI in patients with suspected minimal residual CRC have been encouraging, and it has become clear that immunotherapy works best in situations of patients with suspected minimal residual CRC.
Authors: M von Mehren; P Arlen; J Gulley; A Rogatko; H S Cooper; N J Meropol; R K Alpaugh; M Davey; S McLaughlin; M T Beard; K Y Tsang; J Schlom; L M Weiner Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: R M Conry; M B Khazaeli; M N Saleh; K O Allen; D L Barlow; S E Moore; D Craig; R B Arani; J Schlom; A F LoBuglio Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Kimberly E Beck; Joseph A Blansfield; Khoi Q Tran; Andrew L Feldman; Marybeth S Hughes; Richard E Royal; Udai S Kammula; Suzanne L Topalian; Richard M Sherry; David Kleiner; Martha Quezado; Israel Lowy; Michael Yellin; Steven A Rosenberg; James C Yang Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Wittig; A Märten; T Dorbic; S Weineck; H Min; S Niemitz; B Trojaneck; D Flieger; S Kruopis; A Albers; J Löffel; A Neubauer; P Albers; S Müller; T Sauerbruch; T Bieber; D Huhn; I G Schmidt-Wolf Journal: Hum Gene Ther Date: 2001-02-10 Impact factor: 5.695
Authors: Robert M Conry; David T Curiel; Theresa V Strong; Susan E Moore; Karen O Allen; Daunte L Barlow; Denise R Shaw; Albert F LoBuglio Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: C A Uyl-de Groot; J B Vermorken; M G Hanna; P Verboom; M T Groot; G J Bonsel; C J L M Meijer; H M Pinedo Journal: Vaccine Date: 2005-03-18 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Anand G Menon; Peter J K Kuppen; Sjoerd H van der Burg; Rienk Offringa; Marie Claude Bonnet; Bert I J Harinck; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Anke Redeker; Hein Putter; Philippe Moingeon; Hans Morreau; Cornelis J M Melief; Cornelis J H van de Velde Journal: Cancer Gene Ther Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 5.987
Authors: Ayala Tamir; Ernesto Basagila; Arash Kagahzian; Long Jiao; Steen Jensen; Joanna Nicholls; Paul Tate; Gordon Stamp; Farzin Farzaneh; Phillip Harrison; Hans Stauss; Andrew J T George; Nagy Habib; Robert I Lechler; Giovanna Lombardi Journal: Cancer Immunol Immunother Date: 2007-02-23 Impact factor: 6.968
Authors: Y Sato; Y Maeda; H Shomura; T Sasatomi; M Takahashi; Y Une; M Kondo; T Shinohara; N Hida; K Katagiri; K Sato; M Sato; A Yamada; H Yamana; M Harada; K Itoh; S Todo Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-04-05 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Jun Ren; William R Gwin; Xinna Zhou; Xiaoli Wang; Hongyan Huang; Ni Jiang; Lei Zhou; Pankaj Agarwal; Amy Hobeika; Erika Crosby; Zachary C Hartman; Michael A Morse; Kevin H Eng; H Kim Lyerly Journal: Oncoimmunology Date: 2016-12-07 Impact factor: 8.110
Authors: Chand Khanna; Timothy M Fan; Richard Gorlick; Lee J Helman; Eugenie S Kleinerman; Peter C Adamson; Peter J Houghton; William D Tap; Danny R Welch; Patricia S Steeg; Glenn Merlino; Poul H B Sorensen; Paul Meltzer; David G Kirsch; Katherine A Janeway; Brenda Weigel; Lor Randall; Stephen J Withrow; Melissa Paoloni; Rosandra Kaplan; Beverly A Teicher; Nita L Seibel; Malcolm Smith; Aykut Uren; Shreyaskumar R Patel; Jeffrey Trent; Sharon A Savage; Lisa Mirabello; Denise Reinke; Donald A Barkaukas; Mark Krailo; Mark Bernstein Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-05-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Matthew Witek; Erik S Blomain; Michael S Magee; Bo Xiang; Scott A Waldman; Adam E Snook Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Micaela Martinez; Nadia Ono; Marina Planutiene; Kestutis Planutis; Edward L Nelson; Randall F Holcombe Journal: Cancer Cell Int Date: 2012-01-23 Impact factor: 5.722