| Literature DB >> 30360603 |
Apatsara Treenert1, Nutthada Areepium, Suebpong Tanasanvimon.
Abstract
Purpose: Irinotecan is an anticancer medicine which is used mostly in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment as second or third line chemotherapy. Several factors affect its efficacy and toxicity, including pharmacogenomics. This study aimed to investigate the impacts of ABCC2 and SLCO1B1 polymorphisms on treatment responses in irinotecan-based chemotherapy in 49 Thai mCRC patients. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: Metastatic colorectal cancer; ABCC2; SLCO1B1; irinotecan
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30360603 PMCID: PMC6291051 DOI: 10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.10.2757
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ISSN: 1513-7368
Patient Characteristics and Treatment Response
| Characteristic | N (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Total number of participants | 49 | |
| Age(mean ± SD) | 59.57±12.23 (26,81) | |
| Characteristic | N | % |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 32 | 65.3 |
| Female | 17 | 34.7 |
| Performances status | ||
| ECOG score=0 | 4 | 8.2 |
| ECOG score=1 | 45 | 91.8 |
| Histology | ||
| well differentiated | 19 | 38.8 |
| moderately differentiated | 21 | 42.9 |
| poorly differentiated | 6 | 12.2 |
| No data | 3 | 6.1 |
| Primary tumor site | ||
| Colon | 18 | 36.7 |
| Sigmoid | 15 | 30.6 |
| Rectum | 16 | 32.7 |
| Metastatic site | ||
| Liver | 10 | 20.4 |
| Lung | 6 | 12.2 |
| other (eg. peritoneal, pelvic, bladder, ovarian, spleen, ovary, bone) | 8 | 16.3 |
| lung and liver | 14 | 28.6 |
| liver or lung+other | 11 | 22.4 |
| Treatment line | ||
| first line | 7 | 14.3 |
| Second line | 32 | 65.3 |
| >second line | 10 | 20.4 |
| Treatment regimen | ||
| Irinotecan | 5 | 10.2 |
| Irinotecan+capecitabine | 9 | 18.4 |
| IFL | 31 | 63.3 |
| Irinotecan+other | 4 | 8.2 |
| Irinotecan dose | ||
| 100-125 mg/m2 | 25 | 51 |
| 150 mg/m | 21 | 42.9 |
| 180 mg/m2 | 3 | 6.1 |
| C/C | 32 | 65.3 |
| C/T | 16 | 32.7 |
| T/T | 1 | 2.0 |
| A/A | 5 | 10.2 |
| A/G | 11 | 22.4 |
| G/G | 33 | 67.3 |
| Responder | ||
| Complete response (CR) | 0 | 0 |
| Partial response (PR) | 5 | 10.2 |
| Non-responder | ||
| Stable disease (SD) | 22 | 44.9 |
| Progressive disease (PD) | 22 | 44.9 |
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.
Association between Factors and Overall Response
| Total number of participants = 49 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | N | Overall response | χ2 value | P-value | |
| PR (%) | SD + PD (%) | ||||
| Gender | 0.069 | 1.000 | |||
| Male | 32 | 3 (9.4) | 29 (90.6) | ||
| Female | 17 | 2 (11.8) | 15 (88.2) | ||
| Age(years) | 0.668 | 0.639 | |||
| ≤ 60 years | 28 | 2 (7.1) | 26 (92.6) | ||
| >60 years | 21 | 3 (14.3) | 18 (85.7) | ||
| ECOG status | 1.041 | 0.359 | |||
| 0 | 4 | 1 (25) | 3 (75) | ||
| 1 | 45 | 4 (8.9) | 41 (91.1) | ||
| Histology | 3.759 | 0.289 | |||
| Well differentiated | 19 | 3 (15.8) | 16 (84.2) | ||
| Moderately differentiated | 21 | 1 (4.8) | 20 (95.2) | ||
| Poorly differentiated | 6 | 0 (0) | 6 (100) | ||
| No data | 3 | 1 (33.3) | 2 (66.7) | ||
| Primary tumor site | 0.677 | 0.713 | |||
| colon | 18 | 1 (5.6) | 17 (94.4) | ||
| sigmoid | 15 | 2 (13.3) | 13 (86.7) | ||
| rectum | 16 | 2 (12.5) | 14 (87.5) | ||
| Metastatic site | 5.813 | 0.214 | |||
| liver | 10 | 2 (20) | 8 (80) | ||
| lung | 6 | 0 (0) | 6 (100) | ||
| other (eg.peritoneal, pelvic, bladder, ovarian, spleen, ovary, bone) | 8 | 0 (0) | 8 (100) | ||
| lung and liver | 14 | 3 (21.4) | 11 (78.6) | ||
| liver or lung+other | 11 | 0 (0) | 11 (100) | ||
| Treatment line | 3.124 | 0.210 | |||
| first line | 7 | 2 (28.6) | 5 (71.4) | ||
| second line | 32 | 2 (6.3) | 30 (93.7) | ||
| >second line | 10 | 1 (10) | 9 (90) | ||
| Number of metastatic sites | 1.899 | 0.387 | |||
| 1 | 19 | 2 (10.5) | 17 (89.5) | ||
| 2 | 19 | 3 (15.8) | 16 (84.2) | ||
| >2 | 11 | 0 (0) | 11 (100) | ||
| Previous treatment | 1.426 | 0.699 | |||
| Chemotherapy | 4 | 1 (25) | 3 (75) | ||
| Surgery+chemotherapy | 30 | 3 (10) | 27 (90) | ||
| Surgery+radiotherapy+chemotherapy | 11 | 1 (9.1) | 10 (90.9) | ||
| Radiotherapy+chemotherapy | 4 | 0 (0) | 4 (100) | ||
| Treatment regimen | 10.548 | 0.014 | |||
| Irinotecan | 5 | 0 (0) | 5 (100) | ||
| Irinotecan+capecitabine | 9 | 2 (22.2) | 7 (77.8) | ||
| IFL | 31 | 1 (3.2) | 30 (96.8) | ||
| Irinotecan+other | 4 | 2 (50) | 2 (50) | ||
| Irinotecan dose | 11.499 | 0.003 | |||
| 100-125mg/m2 | 25 | 1 (4) | 24 (96) | ||
| 150mg/m2 | 21 | 2 (9.5) | 19 (90.5) | ||
| 180mg/m2 | 3 | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) | ||
| 0.531 | 0.646 | ||||
| CC | 32 | 4 (12.5) | 28 (87.5) | ||
| CT,TT | 17 | 1 (5.9) | 16 (94.1) | ||
| 0.405 | 1.000 | ||||
| AA,AG | 16 | 1 (6.3) | 15 (93.7) | ||
| GG | 33 | 4 (12.1) | 29 (87.9) | ||
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.
Treatment response was an objective tumor response which was classified according to RECIST criteria.
Association between Genetic Polymorphism and Severe Diarrhea in Patients with the SLCO1B1 Polymorphism
| Total number of participants 49 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gene | genotype | N | Diarrhea after cycle 1 | χ2 value | P-value | |
| Grade 0-2 | Grade 3-4 | |||||
| AA | 5 | 4 (80) | 1 (20) | 8.983 | 0.011* | |
| AG | 11 | 11 (100) | 0 (0) | |||
| GG | 33 | 33 (100) | 0 (0) | |||
Association between Genetic Polymorphism and Clinical Benefit in Combined Genotype (ABCC2 and SLCO1B1*1b)
| Total number of participants 49 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allele | Allele | N | Clinical benefit | χ2 value | P-value | |
| PR + SD (%) | PD (%) | |||||
| AA+AG | CC | 10 | 3 (30) | 7 (70) | 7.440 | 0.059* |
| CT + TT | 6 | 6 (100) | 0 (0) | |||
| GG | CC | 22 | 12 (54.5) | 10 (45.5) | ||
| CT + TT | 11 | 6 (54.5) | 5 (45.5) | |||
Association between Genetic Polymorphism and Anemia in Patients with the SLCO1B1 Polymorphism
| Total number of participants 49 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gene | genotype | N | Anemia after cycle 2 | χ2 value | P-value | |
| Grade 0-2 | Grade 3-4 | |||||
| AA | 5 | 4 (80) | 1 (20) | 8.983 | 0.011* | |
| GA | 11 | 11 (100) | 0 (0) | |||
| GG | 33 | 33 (100) | 0 (0) | |||