Cargando…
Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Irinotecan (IRI) and oxaliplatin (Ox) are standard therapeutic agents of the first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that treatment with Ox-based compared with IRI-based regimens was associated wi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7863255/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33541293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-07823-7 |
_version_ | 1783647457983332352 |
---|---|
author | Kawai, Sadayuki Takeshima, Nozomi Hayasaka, Yu Notsu, Akifumi Yamazaki, Mutsumi Kawabata, Takanori Yamazaki, Kentaro Mori, Keita Yasui, Hirofumi |
author_facet | Kawai, Sadayuki Takeshima, Nozomi Hayasaka, Yu Notsu, Akifumi Yamazaki, Mutsumi Kawabata, Takanori Yamazaki, Kentaro Mori, Keita Yasui, Hirofumi |
author_sort | Kawai, Sadayuki |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Irinotecan (IRI) and oxaliplatin (Ox) are standard therapeutic agents of the first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that treatment with Ox-based compared with IRI-based regimens was associated with better overall survival (OS). However, these reports did not include trials of molecular targeting agents and did not take methods for the administration of concomitant drugs, such as bolus or continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil, into account. A systematic literature review was performed to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles between IRI- and Ox-based regimens as the first-line treatments for mCRC. METHODS: This meta-analysis used data from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and SCOPUS. The primary endpoint was OS, and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Nineteen trials involving 4571 patients were included in the analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of OS, PFS, and ORR. There was no significant heterogeneity. Regarding ≥ grade 3 AEs, IRI-based regimens were associated with a high incidence of leukopenia, febrile neutropenia, and diarrhea. Moreover, there was a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients who received Ox-based regimens. In a subgroup analysis, IRI combined with bevacizumab was correlated with a better PFS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.82–0.98, P = 0.02), but not with OS (pooled HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.80–1.03, P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: Although the safety profiles of IRI- and Ox-based regimens varied, their efficacy did not significantly differ. The combination of anti-VEGF antibody and IRI was associated with better PFS compared with anti-VEGF antibody and Ox. Both regimens could be used as the first-line treatments for mCRC with consideration of the patients’ condition or toxicity profiles. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7863255 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78632552021-02-05 Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis Kawai, Sadayuki Takeshima, Nozomi Hayasaka, Yu Notsu, Akifumi Yamazaki, Mutsumi Kawabata, Takanori Yamazaki, Kentaro Mori, Keita Yasui, Hirofumi BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: Irinotecan (IRI) and oxaliplatin (Ox) are standard therapeutic agents of the first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that treatment with Ox-based compared with IRI-based regimens was associated with better overall survival (OS). However, these reports did not include trials of molecular targeting agents and did not take methods for the administration of concomitant drugs, such as bolus or continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil, into account. A systematic literature review was performed to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles between IRI- and Ox-based regimens as the first-line treatments for mCRC. METHODS: This meta-analysis used data from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and SCOPUS. The primary endpoint was OS, and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Nineteen trials involving 4571 patients were included in the analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of OS, PFS, and ORR. There was no significant heterogeneity. Regarding ≥ grade 3 AEs, IRI-based regimens were associated with a high incidence of leukopenia, febrile neutropenia, and diarrhea. Moreover, there was a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients who received Ox-based regimens. In a subgroup analysis, IRI combined with bevacizumab was correlated with a better PFS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.82–0.98, P = 0.02), but not with OS (pooled HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.80–1.03, P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: Although the safety profiles of IRI- and Ox-based regimens varied, their efficacy did not significantly differ. The combination of anti-VEGF antibody and IRI was associated with better PFS compared with anti-VEGF antibody and Ox. Both regimens could be used as the first-line treatments for mCRC with consideration of the patients’ condition or toxicity profiles. BioMed Central 2021-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7863255/ /pubmed/33541293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-07823-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Kawai, Sadayuki Takeshima, Nozomi Hayasaka, Yu Notsu, Akifumi Yamazaki, Mutsumi Kawabata, Takanori Yamazaki, Kentaro Mori, Keita Yasui, Hirofumi Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
title | Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
title_full | Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
title_short | Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
title_sort | comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7863255/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33541293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-07823-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kawaisadayuki comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT takeshimanozomi comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT hayasakayu comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT notsuakifumi comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT yamazakimutsumi comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT kawabatatakanori comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT yamazakikentaro comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT morikeita comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis AT yasuihirofumi comparisonofirinotecanandoxaliplatinasthefirstlinetherapiesformetastaticcolorectalcancerametaanalysis |