O Köstek1, N C Demircan2, A Gökyer2, A Küçükarda2, B S Sunal3, M B Hacıoğlu2, H Eslame4, S Solak3, E Yılmaz3, S Uzunoğlu2, N Tunçbilek3, I Çiçin2, B Erdoğan2. 1. Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Trakya University School of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey. osmankostek@hotmail.com. 2. Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Trakya University School of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey. 3. Department of Radiology, Trakya University School of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey. 4. Trakya University School of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to assess whether anti-EGFR combined chemotherapy regimens are related with loss of skeletal muscle mass and to compare cetuximab and panitumumab therapies in the aspect of skeletal muscle area change as well as to assess whether skeletal muscle mass loss has prognostic significance in the RAS wild mCRC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 56 patients (30 patients in cetuximab arm and 26 patients in panitumumab) who had computed tomography images were retrospectively evaluated at the diagnosis and follow up during the treatment period before progression. RESULTS: During treatment period 24 patients (42.8%) had muscle loss. Of these, 7 (29.2%) patients were treated at first-line and 17 (70.8%) patients were treated at second-line setting. There was no significant difference in the aspect of skeletal muscle loss among cetuximab and panitumumab combined treatment regimens. Median PFS was 9.1 (8.6-9.6) months in muscle loss group and 13.9 (7.2-20.6) months in muscle stable group (p = 0.001). Median OS was 23.4 (95% CI 15.8-31.0) months in muscle stable group and 19.1 (95% CI 17.0-21.3) months in muscle loss group (p = 0.57) at first-line setting. For second-line, median OS was 21.2 (14.7-27.7) months in muscle stable group and 14.4 (6.0-22.4) months in muscle loss group (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Decrease in skeletal muscle mass before progression on CT imaging is an independent indicator for shorter PFS value in RAS WT mCRC patients who received anti-EGFR combined chemotherapy regimens at both the first and second-line settings. Beside that shorter overall survival values also were significantly seen in patients who had muscle loss during anti-EGFR therapy in the second-line setting.
PURPOSE: We aimed to assess whether anti-EGFR combined chemotherapy regimens are related with loss of skeletal muscle mass and to compare cetuximab and panitumumab therapies in the aspect of skeletal muscle area change as well as to assess whether skeletal muscle mass loss has prognostic significance in the RAS wild mCRC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 56 patients (30 patients in cetuximab arm and 26 patients in panitumumab) who had computed tomography images were retrospectively evaluated at the diagnosis and follow up during the treatment period before progression. RESULTS: During treatment period 24 patients (42.8%) had muscle loss. Of these, 7 (29.2%) patients were treated at first-line and 17 (70.8%) patients were treated at second-line setting. There was no significant difference in the aspect of skeletal muscle loss among cetuximab and panitumumab combined treatment regimens. Median PFS was 9.1 (8.6-9.6) months in muscle loss group and 13.9 (7.2-20.6) months in muscle stable group (p = 0.001). Median OS was 23.4 (95% CI 15.8-31.0) months in muscle stable group and 19.1 (95% CI 17.0-21.3) months in muscle loss group (p = 0.57) at first-line setting. For second-line, median OS was 21.2 (14.7-27.7) months in muscle stable group and 14.4 (6.0-22.4) months in muscle loss group (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Decrease in skeletal muscle mass before progression on CT imaging is an independent indicator for shorter PFS value in RAS WT mCRC patients who received anti-EGFR combined chemotherapy regimens at both the first and second-line settings. Beside that shorter overall survival values also were significantly seen in patients who had muscle loss during anti-EGFR therapy in the second-line setting.
Entities:
Keywords:
Anti-EGFR treatment; Metastatic colorectal cancer; Prognosis; Skeletal muscle mass
Authors: Marc Peeters; Timothy Jay Price; Andrés Cervantes; Alberto F Sobrero; Michel Ducreux; Yevhen Hotko; Thierry André; Emily Chan; Florian Lordick; Cornelis J A Punt; Andrew H Strickland; Gregory Wilson; Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu; Laslo Roman; Eric Van Cutsem; Valentina Tzekova; Simon Collins; Kelly S Oliner; Alan Rong; Jennifer Gansert Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Susanne Blauwhoff-Buskermolen; Kathelijn S Versteeg; Marian A E de van der Schueren; Nicole R den Braver; Johannes Berkhof; Jacqueline A E Langius; Henk M W Verheul Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Y Douillard; S Siena; J Cassidy; J Tabernero; R Burkes; M Barugel; Y Humblet; G Bodoky; D Cunningham; J Jassem; F Rivera; I Kocákova; P Ruff; M Błasińska-Morawiec; M Smakal; J L Canon; M Rother; K S Oliner; Y Tian; F Xu; R Sidhu Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: I Ozola Zalite; R Zykus; M Francisco Gonzalez; F Saygili; A Pukitis; S Gaujoux; R M Charnley; V Lyadov Journal: Pancreatology Date: 2014-12-04 Impact factor: 3.996
Authors: Volker Heinemann; Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal; Thomas Decker; Alexander Kiani; Ursula Vehling-Kaiser; Salah-Eddin Al-Batran; Tobias Heintges; Christian Lerchenmüller; Christoph Kahl; Gernot Seipelt; Frank Kullmann; Martina Stauch; Werner Scheithauer; Jörg Hielscher; Michael Scholz; Sebastian Müller; Hartmut Link; Norbert Niederle; Andreas Rost; Heinz-Gert Höffkes; Markus Moehler; Reinhard U Lindig; Dominik P Modest; Lisa Rossius; Thomas Kirchner; Andreas Jung; Sebastian Stintzing Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-07-31 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Homayoun Zargar; Nima Almassi; Evan Kovac; Cesar Ercole; Erick Remer; Brian Rini; Andrew Stephenson; Jorge A Garcia; Petros Grivas Journal: Bladder Cancer Date: 2017-01-27