| Literature DB >> 24179647 |
Renata Ferrarotto1, Laura Testa, Rachel P Riechelmann, Marina Sahade, Luiz T Siqueira, Frederico P Costa, Paulo M Hoff.
Abstract
The role of chemotherapy in well differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NET) has been questioned. It was recently demonstrated that everolimus and sunitinib have activity in low and intermediate grade pancreatic NET. The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapOx) combination in treating NET in an unselected population. In this regard, we retrospectively evaluated 24 patients diagnosed with metastatic NET treated with CapOx at two Brazilian institutes that are reference centers in cancer care. Tumor response was measured by RECIST criteria. Median age at diagnosis was 56 years, 71% had ECOG 0 or 1, the majority of tumors were primary from pancreas (67%) followed by lung (17%), and 29% were functional. According to WHO classification criteria, 25% were grade 1, 37.5% grade 2 and 37.5% grade 3. Most patients received CapOx as second-line therapy, with a median of 6 cycles. Twenty-nine percent of patients had partial response by RECIST criteria. No association was observed between response rate and tumor grade, primary site or line of CapOx. The median time to progression was 9.8 months and median time to treatment failure was 12.1 months. Seventy-five percent of patients are alive at the time of this analysis; therefore, median overall survival was not reached. The CapOx combination was shown to be active in an unselected population with metastatic NET and may be a good platform for the incorporation of the newer molecular targeted agents being investigated for the treatment of this entity.Entities:
Keywords: capecitabine; chemotherapy; neuroendocrine tumors; oxaliplatin
Year: 2013 PMID: 24179647 PMCID: PMC3804810 DOI: 10.4081/rt.2013.e35
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rare Tumors ISSN: 2036-3605
Patients characteristics.
| N. | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Male | 17 | 71 |
| Female | 7 | 29 |
| Performance status | ||
| ECOG 0 | 5 | 21 |
| ECOG 1 | 12 | 50 |
| ECOG ≥ 2 | 7 | 29 |
| Primary site | ||
| Pancreas | 15 | 63 |
| Lung | 4 | 17 |
| Small intestine | 2 | 8 |
| Unknown | 2 | 8 |
| Rectum | 1 | 4 |
| Functional syndrome | ||
| Carcinoid syndrome | 4 | 17 |
| Insulinoma | 2 | 8 |
| VIPoma | 1 | 4 |
| Grade | ||
| Grade 1 | 6 | 25 |
| Grade 2 | 9 | 37.50 |
| Grade 3 | 9 | 37.50 |
| Metastatic site | ||
| Liver | 23 | 96 |
| Lymph nodes | 18 | 75 |
| Peritoneum | 6 | 25 |
| Bone | 4 | 17 |
| Others | 5 | 21 |
Treatment charachteristics.
| N. | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Local treatment pre-CapOx | ||
| Surgery (primary site) | 1 | 4 |
| Metastasectomy (hepatic resection) | 6 | 25 |
| Embolization | 2 | 8 |
| Chemoembolization | 1 | 4 |
| Systemic treatment other than CapOx | ||
| Somatostatin analogs +/- INF | 11 | 46 |
| Cisplatin or carboplatin + VP-16 or CPT-11 | 8 | 33 |
| Capecitabine | 5 | 21 |
| Lutecium radioligand therapy | 5 | 21 |
| Everolimus | 5 | 21 |
| Others | 6 | 25 |
| Cisplatin or carboplatin + taxane | 2 | 8 |
| 5-FU + adriamicin + streptozotocin (FAS) | 2 | 8 |
| Line of CapOx | ||
| First | 12 | 50 |
| Second | 6 | 25 |
| Third or beyond | 6 | 25 |
| Maintenance treatment post-CapOx | ||
| Capecitabine | 4 | 17 |
| Everolimus | 2 | 8 |
| Somatostatin analogs | 1 | 4 |
Median n. cycles of CapOx 6 (range 2-13). INF, interferon; VP-16, cisplatin or carboplatin associated with etoposide; CPT-11, irinotecan; 5-FU, fluorouracil; FAS, fluorouracil + adriamicin + streptozotocin.
Grade 2 and 3 toxicities associated with the CapOx regimen (total n. patients=24).
| Grade 2 (N) | % | Grade 3 (N) | % | Total n. | % of total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall toxicity | ||||||
| Grade 2 | 15 | 63 | ||||
| Grade 3 | 6 | 25 | ||||
| CapOx dose reduction | 8 | 33 | ||||
| Hospitalizations | ||||||
| Disease-related | 4 | 17 | ||||
| Treatment-related | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Infection (not due to neutropenia) | 3 | 13 | ||||
| Main reported toxicities | ||||||
| Neuropathy | 7 | 29 | 2 | 8 | 9 | 37 |
| Hand-foot syndrome | 3 | 13 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 17 |
| Diarrhea | 1 | 4 | 2 | 8 | 3 | 12 |
| Hematologic toxicity (neutropenia) | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Nausea | 2 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Asthenia | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Oxaliplatin hypersensibility reaction | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 4 |
Figure 1.Waterfall plot demonstrating the percentage variation of tumor lesion size. Red line indicates 30% shrinkage (Partial response by RECIST criteria).
Figure 2.Time to tumor progression (TTP). Blue line demonstrates median ATP of 9.8 m (range 7.4-12.2 m). N. progressions=16; patients censored=8.
Figure 3.Time to treatment failure (TTF). Blue line demonstrates median TTP of 12.1 m (range 6.9-17.2 m). N. patients who failed CapOx=13; patients censored=11.