卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗或卡培他滨单药在晚期结直肠癌维持治疗中的疗效与安全性

李剑萍; 高学仁; 张晓艳; 陈平; 陈苏蓉; 卞伟钢; 黄志军

doi:10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20210908

卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗或卡培他滨单药在晚期结直肠癌维持治疗中的疗效与安全性

doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20210908

李剑萍¹,
高学仁²,
张晓艳¹,
陈平¹,
陈苏蓉¹,
卞伟钢¹,
黄志军^1, ,

1.
徐州医科大学盐城临床学院，盐城市第一人民医院肿瘤科，江苏盐城　224006
2.
盐城师范学院药学院，江苏盐城　224007

基金项目: 江苏省第五期“333工程”科研基金资助项目（BRA2018248）

lijp79@163.com

中图分类号: R735

计量

文章访问数: 4449
HTML全文浏览量: 2437
PDF下载量: 41
被引次数: 0

Efficacy and Safety of Capecitabine Combined with Bevacizumab or Single Agent of Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy for Advanced Colorectal Cancer

1.
Dept. of Oncology，The Yancheng Clinical College of Xuzhou Medical University，The First People’s Hospital of Yancheng，Yancheng Jiangsu 224006
2.
School of Pharmacy， Yancheng Teachers’ University，Yancheng Jiangsu 224007，China

摘要

摘要: 目的探索XELOX方案联合贝伐珠单抗一线诱导治疗晚期结直肠癌序贯卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗或卡培他滨单药维持治疗的疗效与安全性。方法 100例晚期结直肠癌患者，一线予以XELOX方案（奥沙利铂和卡培他滨）联合贝伐珠单抗诱导治疗6周期，疗效评价为完全缓解、部分缓解或疾病稳定，按1∶1分成卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗组（n = 50例）和卡培他滨单药组（n = 50例）维持治疗至首次疾病进展或毒副反应不可耐受。主要研究终点为维持治疗至疾病进展时间（PFS₁），次要研究终点为诱导治疗开始至疾病进展时间（PFS₂）、总生存时间（OS）和毒副反应。结果 100例晚期结直肠癌患者进行维持治疗，2组基线临床病理学特征均衡，卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗维持治疗的中位PFS₁、中位PFS₂及中位OS均较卡培他滨单药组显著延长，分别为9.0（95%CI：8.52～9.47）比7.2（6.16～8.24，P < 0.0001）个月、13.5（12.55～14.45）比12.3（11.21～13.38，P < 0.0001）个月和27.0（25.31～28.69）比26.2（24.09～28.31，P = 0.011）个月。亚组分析显示，联合维持治疗显著延长同时性转移、RAS/BRAF突变亚组的PFS₁及男性、肝转移亚组的OS。2组化疗相关毒副反应相似，最常见为中性粒细胞下降、粘膜炎、手足综合征和腹泻。联合组高血压（20% 比4%）及蛋白尿（14% 比 2%）的发生率明显高于单药组。结论卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗及卡培他滨单药均可作为安全有效的晚期结直肠癌一线经XELOX方案联合贝伐珠单抗诱导治疗获得疾病控制后维持治疗的选择。卡培他滨联合贝伐珠单抗维持治疗有更好的生存获益。
- 晚期结直肠癌 /
- 诱导治疗 /
- 维持治疗 /
- 贝伐珠单抗 /
- 卡培他滨
Abstract: Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine combined with bevacizumab or single agent of capecitabine as the maintenance therapy following the induction of XELOX regimen combined with bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. Methods A total of 100 patients with the advanced colorectal cancer were treated with XELOX regimen （oxaliplatin plus capecitabine） combined with bevacizumab as first-line induction therapy for 6 cycles, whose efficacy were evaluated as the complete response, partial response or stable disease. These patients were divided in a 1∶1 ratio into the capecitabine combined with bevacizumab group （n = 50） and the single agent of capecitabine group （n = 50） for the maintenance therapy until the first disease progression or intolerable adverse events. The primary end point was progression-free survival from the initiation of maintenance therapy to the disease progression （PFS₁）. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival from the initiation of induction therapy to the disease progression （PFS₂）, overall survival （OS） and adverse events. Results One-hundred patients were treated with capecitabine plus bevacizumab （n = 50） or single agent of capecitabine （n = 50） as the maintenance therapy. The median PFS₁, median PFS₂, and median OS of combination group were significantly longer than those of the monotherapy group, which were 9.0 （95% confidence interval （CI） 8.52-9.47） versus 7.2 （6.16-8.24, P < 0.0001） months, 13.5 （12.55-14.45） versus 12.3 （11.21-13.38, P < 0.0001） months and 27.0 （25.31-28.69） versus 26.2 （24.09-28.31, P = 0.011） months, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that PFS₁ of the combination group was significantly prolonged in the simultaneous metastasis and RAS/BRAF mutant subgroups. OS of the combination group was significantly prolonged in the male and liver metastatic subgroups. Similar treatment-related adverse events were observed in both groups. The most common toxicities both were neutropenia, mucositis, hand-foot syndrome and diarrhea. The incidence of hypertension （20% versus 4%） and proteinuria （14% versus 2%） were higher in the combination group than that in the monotherapy group. Conclusion Both capecitabine combined with the bevacizumab and the single agent of capecitabine can be considered as the appropriate options following the induction of XELOX regimen combined with bevacizumab as the first line treatment for advanced colorectal cancer with good efficacy and acceptable toxicities. Capecitabine combined with bevacizumab as maintenance therapy has a better survival benefit than single agent of capecitabine.
- Advanced colorectal cancer /
- Induction therapy /
- Maintenance therapy /
- Bevacizumab /
- Capecitabine

HTML全文

图 1 Kaplan-Meier方法的生存分析曲线

A：PFS₁：维持治疗至首次疾病进展或毒副反应不能耐受；B：PFS₂：诱导治疗开始至首次疾病进展或毒副反应不耐受；C：OS：诱导治疗开始至死亡或末次随访时间。

Figure 1. Statistical results of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 基线临床病理特征[n（%）]

Table 1. Baseline clinicopathological characteristics [n（%）]

基线特征	Cape/BEV（n = 50）	Cape（n = 50）	χ²	P
基线特征	n（%）	n（%）	χ²	P
年龄			0.05	0.83
≥65岁	16（32.0）	17（34.0）
< 65岁	34（68.0）	33（66.0）
性别			0.18	0.67
男	32（64.0）	34（68.0）
女	18（36.0）	16（32.0）
ECOG评分			0.22	0.64
0	13（26.0）	11（22.0）
1	37（74.0）	39（78.0）
原发部位			0.27	0.87
右半结肠	31（62.0）	30（60.0）
左半结肠	9（18.0）	11（22.0）
直肠	10（20.0）	9（18.0）
转移部位^*			0.21	0.90
肝	26（52.0）	25（50.0）
肺	18（36.0）	17（34.0）
其他	11（22.0）	13（26.0）
转移时机			0.04	0.84
同时性转移	25（50.0）	24（48.0）
异时性转移	25（50.0）	26（52.0）
原发灶切除			0.16	0.69
是	28（56.0）	30（60.0）
否	22（44.0）	20（40.0）
诱导治疗疗效			0.30	0.86
CR	2（4.0）	3（6.0）
PR	20（40.0）	21（42.0）
SD	28（56.0）	26（52.0）
RAS/BRAF			0.27	0.87
野生型	17（34.0）	16（32.0）
突变型	25（50.0）	24（48.0）
未知	8（16.0）	10（20.0）
备注：完全缓解（complete response，CR），部分缓解（partial response，PR），疾病稳定（stable disease，SD），ECOG 体力状况评分系统。^*因患者可能存在多部位同时性转移，故总和超过100%。

下载: 参考文献(19)

[1]	Chen W,Zheng R,Baade P D,et al. Cancer statistics in China,2015[J]. CA Cancer J Clin,2016,66(2):115-132. doi: 10.3322/caac.21338
[2]	Arnold M,Sierra M S,Laversanne M,et al. Global patterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality[J]. Gut.,2017,66(4):683-691. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310912
[3]	Van Cutsem E,Nordlinger B,Adam R,et al. Towards a pan-European consensus on the treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases[J]. Eur J Cancer,2006,42(14):2212-2221. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2006.04.012
[4]	Luo H Y,Li Y H,Wang W,et al. Single-agent capecitabine as maintenance therapy after induction of XELOX (or FOLFOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer:Randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety[J]. Ann Oncol,2016,27(6):1074-1081. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw101
[5]	Geng R,Wang G,Qiu L,et al. Metronomic capecitabine as maintenance treatment after first line induction with XELOX for metastatic colorectal cancer patients[J]. Medicine (Baltimore),2020,99(51):e23719.
[6]	Simkens L H,van Tinteren H,May A,et al. Maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (CAIRO3):A phase 3 randomised controlled trial of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group[J]. Lancet,2015,385(9980):1843-1852. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62004-3
[7]	Petrioli R,Francini E,Cherri S,et al. Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin and bevacizumab,followed by maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab for patients aged > 75 years with metastatic colorectal cancer[J]. Clin Colorectal Cancer,2018,17(4):e663-e669. doi: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.07.002
[8]	Nakayama G,Ishigure K,Yokoyama H,et al. The efficacy and safety of CapeOX plus bevacizumab therapy followed by capecitabine plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer:Amulti-center,single-arm,phase Ⅱ study (CCOG-0902)[J]. BMC Cancer,2017,17(1):243. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3245-1
[9]	Tournigand C,Cervantes A,Figer A,et al. OPTIMOX1:A randomized study of FOLFOX4 or FOLFOX7 with oxaliplatin in a stop-and-go fashion in advanced colorectal cancer-a GERCOR study[J]. J Clin Oncol,2006,24(3):394-400. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.0106
[10]	Chibaudel B,Maindrault-Goebel F,Lledo G,et al. Can chemotherapy be discontinued in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer? The GERCOR OPTIMOX2 study[J]. J Clin Oncol,2009,27(34):5727-5733. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.4344
[11]	D í az-Rubio E,G ó mez-España A,Massutí B,et al. Spanish cooperative group for the treatment of digestive tumors. First-line XELOX plus bevacizumab followed by XELOX plus bevacizumab or single-agent bevacizumab as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer:The phase Ⅲ MACRO TTD study[J]. Oncologist,2012,17(1):15-25. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0249
[12]	Matter-Walstra K,Schwenkglenks M,Betticher D,et al. Bevacizumab continuation versus treatment holidays after first-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer:A health economic analysis of a randomized phase 3 trial (SAKK 41/06)[J]. Clin Colorectal Cancer,2016,15(4):314-320.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.clcc.2016.03.002
[13]	Aparicio T,Ghiringhelli F,Boige V,et al. Bevacizumab maintenance versus no maintenance during chemotherapy-free intervals in metastatic colorectal cancer:A randomized phase Ⅲ trial (PRODIGE 9)[J]. J Clin Oncol,2018,36(7):674-681. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.2931
[14]	Noepel-Duennebacke S,Arnold D,Hertel J,et al. Impact of the localization of the primary tumor and RAS/BRAF mutational status on maintenance strategies after first-line oxaliplatin,fluoropyrimidine,and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer:Results from the AIO 0207 Trial[J]. Clin Colorectal Cancer,2018,17(4):e733-e739. doi: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.07.007
[15]	Aparicio T,Bennouna J,Le Malicot K,et al. Predictive factors for early progression during induction chemotherapy and chemotherapy-free interval:Analysis from PRODIGE 9 trial[J]. Br J Cancer,2020,122(7):957-962. doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-0735-8
[16]	Loupakis F,Yang D,Yau L,et al. Primary tumor location as a prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst,2015,107(3):dju427.
[17]	Manfredi S,Turpin A,Malka D,et al. Maintenance treatment with fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab versus fluoropyrimidine alone after induction chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer:The bevamaint - prodige 71 -(FFCD 1710)phase Ⅲ study[J]. Dig Liver Dis,2020,52(10):1143-1147. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2020.06.034
[18]	Sherman S K,Lange J J,Dahdaleh F S,et al. Cost-effectiveness of maintenance capecitabine and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer[J]. JAMA Oncol,2019,5(2):236-242. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.5070
[19]	Geng R,Wang G,Qiu L,et al. Metronomic capecitabine as maintenance treatment after first line induction with XELOX for metastatic colorectal cancer patients[J]. Medicine(Baltimore),2020,99(51):e23719.

相关文章(20)

[1]	张瀚予, 罗娟, 董明志, 陈杞殷, 张峰睿, 郭蕊, 童俊英, 缪应雷. 英夫利西单抗及维得利珠单抗治疗中重度溃疡性结肠炎的回顾性队列研究, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20241006
[2]	罗娅, 余彦廷, 张雪, 王重娟. 托珠单抗治疗COVID-19导致继发感染风险的Meta分析, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20240208
[3]	刘梦君, 陈寿坤, 韩留鑫, 彭静, 周玮莎, 张蕴潆, 王艺颖, 夏加伟. 罗沙司他治疗EPO抵抗的维持性血透HIV/AIDS患者的疗效观察, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20240820
[4]	杨东艳, 林华, 张宇箫, 赵昆颖, 向丽蓉, 杨淑达, 胡炜彦. 贝伐珠单抗联合替莫唑胺用于复发性高级别脑胶质瘤的有效性及安全性分析, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20240410
[5]	王燕, 丁荣, 张吕玲, 王若花, 赵晓玲, 马娜. 输血治疗联合放化疗在结直肠癌患者中的疗效及对肿瘤标志物和T淋巴细胞水平的影响, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20220809
[6]	车河龙, 李志晋, 王克强, 邱卫明, 曹毅, 罗来斌. 结直肠癌切除术后吻合口出血急诊内镜治疗的疗效分析, 昆明医科大学学报. doi: 10.12259/j.issn.2095-610X.S20221032
[7]	杨怀勇, 黎麟达. 双歧杆菌三联活菌胶囊联合二甲双胍治疗对结直肠癌合并2型糖尿病患者血糖控制和临床疗效, 昆明医科大学学报.
[8]	杨宏军, 王晓斌, 孙相华, 李治纲. 冷循环射频消融治疗88例结直肠癌肝转移临床疗效, 昆明医科大学学报.
[9]	张智显, 顾后, 林劼, 雷学芬, 江利锋, 李楠, 路欣妍. 阿帕替尼联合雷替曲塞治疗常规治疗失败的结直肠癌肝转移的疗效, 昆明医科大学学报.
[10]	张娜, 何文娴, 杨雪梅, 李桂萍, 崔妍婷, 毋江洪. 贝伐单抗联合顺铂胸腔灌注治疗肺腺癌恶性胸腔积液, 昆明医科大学学报.
[11]	张智显, 顾后, 林劼, 曹洪明, 雷学芬, 江利锋. 伽马刀联合贝伐单抗对比替莫唑胺治疗术后恶性脑胶质瘤的临床疗效, 昆明医科大学学报.
[12]	秦剑, 黄姗, 聂波. 地西他滨治疗骨髓增生异常综合征37例临床疗效分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
[13]	张晓芸. 多发性骨髓瘤的治疗进展, 昆明医科大学学报.
[14]	张升宁. 联合肝脏离断和门静脉结扎的二步肝切除治疗结直肠癌肝转移, 昆明医科大学学报.
[15]	姜凤元. 低位直肠癌96例临床治疗分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
[16]	梁毓琳. 贝伐单抗治疗穿透性角膜移植术后新生血管对泪膜功能的影响, 昆明医科大学学报.
[17]	殷亮. 结直肠癌治疗进展, 昆明医科大学学报.
[18]	. 老年人结直肠癌外科治疗56例临床分析, 昆明医科大学学报.
[19]	. 加味当归四逆汤防治卡培他滨相关性手足综合征的临床疗效观察, 昆明医科大学学报.
[20]	谭晶. 吉西他滨联合奥沙利铂与吉西他滨单独化疗治疗晚期胰腺癌的近期疗效比较, 昆明医科大学学报.