HOLLYWOOD, Florida-
Advances over the last several years
have had a clear impact on median
overall survival in the first-line treatment
of metastatic colorectal cancer
and have led to revisions in the National
Comprehensive Cancer Network
(NCCN) guidelines, Paul F. Engstrom,
MD, of Fox Chase Cancer
Center, said at the NCCN 9th Annual
Conference. Dr. Engstrom served as
chairperson of the NCCN Colon Cancer
Panel.
Median overall survival has increased
from about 6 months with no
treatment, to published results of 12.6
months in 2002 with 5-FU/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) bolus to about 21 months
recently with FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin
[Eloxatin]/infusional 5-FU/LV) and
FOLFIRI (irinotecan [Camptosar]/infusional
5-FU/LV or folinic acid).
"We clearly have combinations that
work," Dr. Engstrom stated, noting
that oncologists have three options for
first-line therapy that are "probably
all equivalent." The three options are
FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, and bevacizumab(Drug information on bevacizumab)
(Avastin)/5-FU/LV.
FOLFOX/FOLFIRI
In introducing the NCCN recommendations,
Dr. Engstrom addressed
three questions. First: Should FOLAgent
FOX replace 5-FU/LV as first-line
treatment? Answering in the affirmative,
he cited the de Gramont study (J
Clin Oncol 18:2938, 2000), which compared
first-line LV/5-FU2 and FOLFOX4
regimens.
The 420-patient study, powered
only to show differences in progression-
free survival, revealed highly significant
advantages for FOLFOX in
progression-free survival (9.0 months
vs 6.2 months, P = .0003) and overall
response rate (51% vs 22%, P = .001),
with a favoring trend in median survival
(16.2 months vs 14.7 months).
Furthermore, he said, in the N9741
trial (Goldberg et al: J Clin Oncol 22:23,
2004) median time to tumor progression
was significantly longer with FOLFOX4
(8.7 months) than with IFL
(irinotecan/bolus 5-FU/LV) (6.9
months) or IROX (oxaliplatin/irinotecan)
(6.5 months). Median overall
survival was significantly longer with
FOLFOX4 (19.4 vs 17.6 months for
IROX and 14.6 months for IFL).
The price in toxicities with the oxaliplatin(Drug information on oxaliplatin)-
bearing regimens is increased
neutropenia and paresthesias. With irinotecan(Drug information on irinotecan), it is in higher rates of nausea,
vomiting, and diarrhea.
The Tournigand et al study (J Clin
Oncol 22:229-237, 2004) comparing
first-line FOLFIRI and FOLFOX6 revealed
comparable overall survival
(20.6 months for FOLFOX6 and 21.5
months for FOLFIRI), progressionfree
survival, and time to progression.
Neurotoxicity (34% vs 0%) and
neutropenia (44% vs 24%) were more
common in the FOLFOX6 arm. Nausea
(3% vs 13%), vomiting (3% vs
10%), stomatitis (1% vs 10%), and
alopecia (grade 2, 9% vs 24%) were
more common in the FOLFIRI arm.
"It looks like a choice between toxicity
profiles," Dr. Engstrom commented.
Novel Agents: Cetuximab(Drug information on cetuximab)
and Bevacizumab
The second question concerned use
of the monoclonal antibody cetuximab
(Erbitux). The EGFR (epidermal
growth factor receptor) that cetuximab
targets is found in at least 50% of
patients with colon cancer, and its
overexpression is related to worse
prognosis and more advanced disease
stage, Dr. Engstrom said.
In trials of cetuximab monotherapy
vs cetuximab/irinotecan, the combination
produced significantly higher
overall response rates and longer
times to progression. Appearance of
an acne-like rash in about 30% of patients
correlates with better response.
Dr. Engstrom stated that cetuximab
should be used only in patients who
are positive for EGFR.
The last question: How should the
antiangiogenesis agent bevacizumab
be integrated into guidelines? A trial
in metastatic colorectal cancer (Hurwitz
et al: ASCO 2003, abstract 3646)
compared IFL, IFL/bevacizumab, and
5-FU/LV/bevacizumab. The latter arm
was discontinued because of high toxicities.
The IFL/bevacizumab combination
produced significantly longer median
overall survival (20.3 vs 15.6 months,
P = .00003); progression-free survival
(10.6 vs 6.24 months, P < .00001);
overall response rate (45% vs 35%, P =
.0029); and duration of response (10.4
vs 7.1 months, P = .0014).
Hypertension was significantly
more common with the combination
(22.4% vs 8.3%, P < .01), with more
patients requiring dose adjustments
or addition of new antihypertensive
medications (10.9% vs 2.3%).
Because GI perforations were reported
in 1.5% of IFL/bevacizumab
patients and in 0% of IFL/placebo patients,
Dr. Engstrom recommended
against use of the combination in patients
within 1 or 2 months of recent
surgery.
Dr. Engstrom characterized the second-
line options as "very good" (see
Table 1). "The committee feels that
IFL should not be in the armamentarium,"
he emphasized, adding that
FOLFIRI is preferred. Where irinotecan
is not tolerated, cetuximab alone
may be substituted. Furthermore,
5-FU/LV alone or single-agent capecitabine
(Xeloda) should be used only in
patients who cannot tolerate a multidrug
regimen.
Adjuvant Therapy
Regarding the question as to
whether FOLFOX could replace 5-FU/
LV as adjuvant therapy in stage III
colorectal cancer, Dr. Engstrom pointed
to the MOSAIC trial, which compared
LV/5-FU2 with FOLFOX4 in
stage II-III colorectal cancer patients.
Disease-free survival, which was the
primary endpoint, was reduced 24%
at 3-years in the stage III patients with
FOLFOX4 (71.8% vs 65.5%) and 18%
in the stage II patients (86.6% vs
83.9%).
"We think that FOLFOX is an option
to replace 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant
setting, but you must consider
the neurotoxicity, which the elderly,
especially, may not be able to tolerate,"
Dr. Engstrom said.
