Pei-Long Sun1, Bing Li, Qi-Fa Ye. 1. Center of Transplant Medicine Engineering and Technology of Ministry of Health of The People´s Republic of China, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, China. peilong@sh163.net
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant cetuximab, capecitabine, and radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: Sixty-three eligible patients were selectively enrolled in this study. Neoadjuvant treatment consisted of cetuximab and capecitabine for 6 weeks and radiotherapy for 5 weeks. Surgical resection was performed 6-8 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment. KRAS mutation statuses were analyzed retrospectively after the cetuximab treatment. All the patients underwent a standardized postoperative follow-up for at least 3 years. RESULTS: A pathological complete response (pCR) was achieved in eight patients (12.7 %). Overall down-staging was found in 49 patients (77.8 %). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate was 76.2 % and 81.0 %, respectively. The most common adverse events during neoadjuvant treatment were acneiform skin rash (82.5 %), radiodermatitis (46.0 %), and diarrhea (36.5 %). KRAS mutations were detected in 19 of 63 (31.2 %) tumors. The down-staging rate in patients with KRAS wild-type (WT) was significantly higher than patients with KRAS mutation (P = 0.020). There was no significant difference in the pCR rate, 3-year DFS rate or 3-year OS rate between KRAS WT patients and KRAS-mutated patients. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant treatment with cetuximab and capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy is safe and well tolerated. The pCR rate, 3-year DFS rate and OS rate are not superior to the rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy using two or more cytotoxic agents. The KRAS WT is highly associated with tumor down-staging to cetuximab plus capecitabine-based CRT in patients with LARC.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant cetuximab, capecitabine, and radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: Sixty-three eligible patients were selectively enrolled in this study. Neoadjuvant treatment consisted of cetuximab and capecitabine for 6 weeks and radiotherapy for 5 weeks. Surgical resection was performed 6-8 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment. KRAS mutation statuses were analyzed retrospectively after the cetuximab treatment. All the patients underwent a standardized postoperative follow-up for at least 3 years. RESULTS: A pathological complete response (pCR) was achieved in eight patients (12.7 %). Overall down-staging was found in 49 patients (77.8 %). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate was 76.2 % and 81.0 %, respectively. The most common adverse events during neoadjuvant treatment were acneiform skin rash (82.5 %), radiodermatitis (46.0 %), and diarrhea (36.5 %). KRAS mutations were detected in 19 of 63 (31.2 %) tumors. The down-staging rate in patients with KRAS wild-type (WT) was significantly higher than patients with KRAS mutation (P = 0.020). There was no significant difference in the pCR rate, 3-year DFS rate or 3-year OS rate between KRAS WT patients and KRAS-mutated patients. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant treatment with cetuximab and capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy is safe and well tolerated. The pCR rate, 3-year DFS rate and OS rate are not superior to the rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy using two or more cytotoxic agents. The KRAS WT is highly associated with tumor down-staging to cetuximab plus capecitabine-based CRT in patients with LARC.
Authors: E Kapiteijn; C A Marijnen; I D Nagtegaal; H Putter; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; L Pahlman; B Glimelius; J H van Krieken; J W Leer; C J van de Velde Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-08-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J-P Machiels; C Sempoux; P Scalliet; J-C Coche; Y Humblet; E Van Cutsem; J Kerger; J-L Canon; M Peeters; S Aydin; S Laurent; A Kartheuser; B Coster; S Roels; J-F Daisne; B Honhon; L Duck; C Kirkove; M-A Bonny; K Haustermans Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-01-05 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: J B Baker; D Dutta; D Watson; T Maddala; B M Munneke; S Shak; E K Rowinsky; L-A Xu; C T Harbison; E A Clark; D J Mauro; S Khambata-Ford Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2011-01-04 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Cynthia Gail Leichman; Shannon L McDonough; Stephen R Smalley; Kevin G Billingsley; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Matthew A Beldner; Aram F Hezel; Mario R Velasco; Katherine A Guthrie; Charles D Blanke; Howard S Hochster Journal: Clin Colorectal Cancer Date: 2017-10-24 Impact factor: 4.481
Authors: M Kripp; K Horisberger; S Mai; P Kienle; T Gaiser; S Post; F Wenz; K Merx; R-D Hofheinz Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract Date: 2015-03-15 Impact factor: 2.260