Jonathan M Loree1, Sean K Tan2, Laurence M Lafond2, Caroline H Speers3, Hagen F Kennecke2, Winson Y Cheung4. 1. Division of GI Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 2. Division of Medical Oncology, University of British Columbia, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. Cancer Control Research, Gastrointestinal Cancers Outcomes Unit Database, University of British Columbia, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 4. Division of Medical Oncology, University of British Columbia, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Cancer Control Research, Gastrointestinal Cancers Outcomes Unit Database, University of British Columbia, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: winson.cheung@albertahealthservices.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With improved survival and longer duration of treatment, clinicians managing metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) increasingly consider intermittent (IC) or maintenance chemotherapy (MC), but the effect of these treatment modifications on real-world outcomes is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using a population-based cohort of mCRC patients who received combination chemotherapy, we aimed to describe the use of IC/MC and their effect on overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 617 patients, 120 (19%) had periods of IC, 67 (11%) had periods of MC, and 53 (9%) had periods of both. Most (85.5%) modifications occurred in the first-line setting. The receipt of IC (median OS [mOS], 37 vs. 21 months; P < .0001) or MC (mOS, 36 vs. 24 months; P = .0015) was associated with improved mOS compared with continuous combination therapy. In multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, and regimen used at the time of treatment modification, IC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.65; P < .0001), MC (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.88; P = .002), and the combination (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.63; P < .0001) were all associated with improved mOS. Among patients receiving MC, individuals with (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90; P = .005) and without (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-1.00; P = .048) re-escalation to their original cytotoxic regimen had improved mOS compared with continuous therapy. The use of IC was associated with an improved OS compared with MC (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.90; P = .009). CONCLUSION: In patients with mCRC, IC and MC are reasonable options to maintain quality of life and do not appear to negatively affect OS in carefully selected patients.
BACKGROUND: With improved survival and longer duration of treatment, clinicians managing metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) increasingly consider intermittent (IC) or maintenance chemotherapy (MC), but the effect of these treatment modifications on real-world outcomes is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using a population-based cohort of mCRC patients who received combination chemotherapy, we aimed to describe the use of IC/MC and their effect on overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 617 patients, 120 (19%) had periods of IC, 67 (11%) had periods of MC, and 53 (9%) had periods of both. Most (85.5%) modifications occurred in the first-line setting. The receipt of IC (median OS [mOS], 37 vs. 21 months; P < .0001) or MC (mOS, 36 vs. 24 months; P = .0015) was associated with improved mOS compared with continuous combination therapy. In multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, and regimen used at the time of treatment modification, IC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.65; P < .0001), MC (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.88; P = .002), and the combination (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.63; P < .0001) were all associated with improved mOS. Among patients receiving MC, individuals with (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90; P = .005) and without (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-1.00; P = .048) re-escalation to their original cytotoxic regimen had improved mOS compared with continuous therapy. The use of IC was associated with an improved OS compared with MC (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47-0.90; P = .009). CONCLUSION: In patients with mCRC, IC and MC are reasonable options to maintain quality of life and do not appear to negatively affect OS in carefully selected patients.
Authors: Yan Shi; Quanli Han; Huan Yan; Yao Lv; Jing Yuan; Jie Li; Shasha Guan; Zhikuan Wang; Lei Huang; Guanghai Dai Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-05-13 Impact factor: 5.738