Search

Introduction: Fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improve overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with pancreatic cancer, compared with gemcitabine (GEM). However, whether PFS is a surrogate marker of OS in pancreatic cancer chemotherapy focusing on FOLFIRINOX or GEM plus nab-paclitaxel remains unknown. We aimed to verify whether PFS can be a surrogate marker of OS in prognosis prediction., Methods: This was an integrated analysis of the NAPOLEON study and retrospective cohort of the NAPOLEON-2 study - a multicenter observational study conducted in Japan, using real-world data. The primary and secondary endpoints were OS and PFS, respectively. The correlation between OS and PFS in first- and second-line treatments was assessed using Method of Moments estimation. An analysis was performed in patients with confirmed OS at the end of follow-up. The NAPOLEON-2 cohort included only patients who received 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and nanoliposomal irinotecan (NFF) as second-line treatment., Results: Among 479 patients, the correlation between PFS and OS from first- and second-line chemotherapies was calculated in 310 and 225 patients, respectively. The R-squared values for the correlation between PFS and OS from first- and second-line chemotherapies were 0.74 and 0.76, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in first-line treatment between the FOLFIRINOX and GEM plus nab-paclitaxel groups (p = 0.92). Therefore, the FOLFIRINOX group may not have shown a stronger correlation than the NFF group., Conclusion: PFS can be a surrogate marker of OS in first- and second-line therapies. Appropriate prognostic estimation might contribute to proper treatment selection., (© 2024 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Introduction: Original FOLFIRINOX (oFFX) is more toxic than other regimens for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC); therefore, a modified FFX (mFFX) regimen with a reduced dosage has been used in Japanese clinical practice. However, very few studies have compared these two regimens., Methods: This study was conducted as part of a multicenter retrospective study of 318 patients with mPC across 14 centers in Japan (NAPOLEON study). To control for potential bias and confounders, we conducted a propensity score-adjusted analysis of patient characteristics and clinical outcomes., Results: oFFX and mFFX were administered to 48 and 54 patients. More patients with younger age and poorer performance status were included in the oFFX group. The overall survival (OS; median, 11.6 vs. 11.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-1.40; p = 0.67), progression-free survival (PFS) (median, 6.3 vs. 5.7 months; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.56-1.28; p = 0.44), and overall response rate (29 vs. 26%, p = 0.71) were not significantly different for the oFFX and mFFX groups. Thrombopenia and liver dysfunction were significantly more frequent with oFFX than with mFFX. The median received dose intensity of CPT-11 was higher with oFFX than with mFFX (299 vs. 270 mg/m2/week, p < 0.01). The propensity score-adjusted analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in OS and PFS between the two groups., Conclusion: In our data, there was no significant difference in efficacy between mFFX and oFFX, and mFFX has fewer adverse events., (© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Because of their rarity, there are no clear guidelines for the treatment of anal carcinomas; such tumors are normally subjected to the same modalities as recommended for rectal cancer. We report a patient with anal canal mucinous adenocarcinoma, with metastases in the pararectal and right inguinal lymph nodes, who was treated with abdominoperineal resection followed by mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy for 6 months (12 cycles). The patient has remained recurrence-free thus far, approximately 2 years since the surgery. As the optimal treatments for anal carcinomas have not been fully elucidated, we present this case to highlight a possible course of action for such patients that appears to be effective and promising.

Anal canal adenocarcinoma is a relatively rare malignancy without established diagnostic and treatment criteria. Case reports of chemotherapy for anal canal adenocarcinoma with distant metastasis are limited, and there is no convincing evidence for treatment effectiveness. A 62-year-old man complained of difficulty in defecation, anal pain, and bleeding during bowel movement. He was diagnosed with moderately differentiated primary anal canal adenocarcinoma. A computed tomography scan revealed multiple metastases in the lung and liver. The patient was treated with abdominoperineal resection to control local tumor growth and then with chemotherapy consisting of mFOLFOX6 + bevacizumab. Because he had an activating KRAS mutation, anti-EGFR therapy was not considered. A reduction in the size of lung and liver metastases was observed after 4 courses of mFOLFOX6 + bevacizumab, and after 22 courses, maximum reduction in the metastatic lesions was achieved. The patient demonstrated tolerable levels of oxaliplatin-related peripheral neurotoxicity (grades 1-2) and was considered as having partial response to treatment. He is currently at the partial response state for 1 year. We plan to continue the treatment unless the patient develops progressive disease or intolerable adverse reactions. This case demonstrates that anal canal adenocarcinoma with distant metastases could be successfully treated with mFOLFOX6 + bevacizumab therapy according to the guidelines for rectal carcinoma. However, as anal canal carcinoma has multiple histological subtypes, it is important to establish subtype-specific treatment strategies.

The incidence, morbidity, and mortality of colorectal cancer are increasing, largely owing to an increasingly aging population. Additionally, along with the increasing age of cancer patients, the number of patients with various comorbidities such as membranous nephropathy is also rising, and problems associated with the administration of chemotherapy to elderly patients with these conditions are becoming more common. Herein, we describe a case involving an 80-year-old woman who presented with general malaise, edematous limbs, and pleural effusion. An abdominal CT revealed multiple, relatively large, metastatic lesions in a wide area of the liver and left pleural effusion, and she was accordingly diagnosed with membranous nephropathy secondary to ascending colon cancer and multiple liver metastases. Despite her advanced age and the presence of membranous nephropathy, her general condition was favorable and chemotherapy was hence administered. Taking the toxicity profiles and the patient's preference into consideration, S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX) therapy was selected, which showed a good tolerability. An abdominal CT after 8 cycles of SOX therapy revealed a marked reduction in the metastatic lesions in the liver and a decrease in the left pleural effusion, and the levels of tumor markers also decreased (partial response). At the latest follow-up, after the completion of 16 cycles, the condition of the patient remained stable, without any apparent signs of progressive disease. Based on this case, we conclude that, even for elderly patients with systemic complications or comorbid diseases, standard treatments should be considered after their general conditions, and therapeutic regimens have been sufficiently examined.