Search

Aim: The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. Materials & methods: A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. Results: From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. Conclusion: Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.

The systemic treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer have recently expanded with the US Food and Drug Administration approval of fruquintinib being added to previously approved trifluridine/tipiracil with or without bevacizumab and regorafenib. These therapies are recommended for use based on the initial clinical trials that focused on their safety and efficacy in extending overall survival of patients with refractory metastatic disease, as well as later studies, including the ReDOS study that confirmed the dose-escalation strategy of regorafenib to be key in optimizing duration of therapy and preventing side effects. Although more research is needed on how to sequence third-line therapies, data from real-world studies showed that switching from regorafenib to trifluridine/tipiracil with or without bevacizumab allowed patients to have a chemotherapy-free break and led to improved survival, suggesting that there may be a benefit for using regorafenib first. Current treatment guidelines state that each therapy can be given before or after the others. Generally, sequencing considerations in the refractory setting include multiple variables such as tumor characteristics, toxicities, factors that are important to the patient, response to prior lines of therapy, and extent of disease.

Background: There are few molecular markers driving treatment selection in later lines of treatment for advanced colorectal cancer patients. The vast majority of patients who progress after first- and second-line therapy undergo chemotherapy regardless of molecular data., Objective: We aimed to assess the prognostic and predictive effects of specific RAS mutations on overall survival of patients receiving regorafenib (rego), trifluridine/tipiracil (TFD/TPI), or both., Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective observational study based on data from a previous study of our research network, involving nine Italian institutions over a 10-year timeframe (2012-2022). Extended RAS analysis, involving KRAS exon 2-4 and NRAS exon 2-4, and BRAF were the main criteria for inclusion in this retrospective evaluation. Patients with BRAF mutation were excluded. Patients were classified according to treatment (rego- or TFD/TPI-treated) and RAS mutational status (wild-type [WT], KRAS codon 12 mutations, KRAS codon 13 mutations, KRAS rare mutations and NRAS mutations, KRAS G12C mutation and KRAS G12D mutation)., Results: Overall, 582 patients were included in the present analysis. Overall survival did not significantly differ in rego-treated patients according to RAS extended analysis, although a trend toward a better median survival in patients carrying G12D mutation (12.0 months), Codon 13 mutation (8.0 months), and Codon 12 mutation (7.0 months) has been observed, when compared with WT patients (6.0 months). Overall survival did not significantly differ in TFD/TPI-treated patients according to RAS extended analysis, although a trend toward a better median survival in WT patients had been observed (9.0 months) in comparison with the entire population (7.0 months). Patients receiving both drugs displayed a longer survival when compared with the population of patients receiving rego alone (p = 0.005) as well as the population receiving TFD/TPI alone (p < 0.001), suggesting a group enriched for favorable prognostic factors. However, when each group was analyzed separately, the addition of TFD/TPI therapy to the rego-treated group improved survival only in all-RAS WT patients (p = 0.003). Differently, the addition of rego therapy to TFD/TPI-treated patients significantly improved OS in the Codon 12 group (p = 0.0004), G12D group (p = 0.003), and the rare mutations group (p = 0.02), in addition to all-RAS WT patients (p = 0.002). The rego-TFD/TPI sequence, compared with the reverse sequence, significantly improved OS only in the KRAS codon 12 group (p = 0.003)., Conclusions: Our data demonstrate that RAS mutations do not affect outcome in rego-treated patients as well as TFD/TPI-treated patients. Nevertheless, a trend toward a higher efficacy of rego in RAS-mutated (in particular codon 12, rare RAS mutations, and G12D) patients has been recorded. The rego-TFD/TPI sequence seems to be superior to the reverse sequence in patients carrying an RAS codon 12 mutation, although the impact of other factors as disease burden or performance status cannot be excluded., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background/aim: This study aimed to describe the chemotherapy effects after trifluridine/tipiracil (TFTD) and/or regorafenib treatment in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients., Patients and Methods: Patients receiving regorafenib or TFTD for metastatic CRC during 2013-2018 were selected and divided into two groups: one with additional chemotherapy after regorafenib or TFTD (CTX group) and one without additional chemotherapy (Non-CTX group). Patients were followed up from a landmark point (90 days from the last day of administration of regorafenib or TFTD). We compared overall survival (OS) between the groups., Results: The median OS was 7.7 months in the CTX group and 4.1 months in the non-CTX groups. Several sensitivity analyses did not negate the survival advantage detected in the CTX group., Conclusion: The chemotherapy after regorafenib or TFTD was associated with prolonged OS in advanced CRC patients. Further study is required to determine appropriate treatment choice., (Copyright © 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This study evaluated the cost utility of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) compared with that of best supportive care (BSC) in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with, or not considered candidates for, available therapies, including fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapies; anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents; and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents, in Japan., Methods: Efficacy data, utility values, and costs were extracted from published studies. The cost and effectiveness of regorafenib and of T/T were compared with those of BSC and examined between the 2 agents over a 5-year time horizon using a partitioned survival analysis. The health outcomes were life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The costs were year-2018 revisions to the drug prices and medical fees. The uncertainty and robustness of the model were verified by 1-way sensitivity analysis, probability sensitivity analysis, and scenario analysis compared with different clinical studies. A 2% per-annum discount was applied to expenses and QALYs. The willingness-to-pay threshold used was 5 million Japanese yen (JPY)., Findings: Regorafenib and T/T had incremental costs of 11,898,982 JPY (107,781 US dollars [USD]) and 5,000,141 JPY (45,291 USD), incremental effects of 0.249 QALYs (0.280 LYs) and 0.344 QALYs (0.421 LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of 47,773,791 JPY (432,734 USD) and 14,550,577 JPY (131,799 USD) per QALY, respectively. Results of sensitivity analyses all exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of 15 million JPY. In the comparison of the 2 agents, T/T was a dominant alternative over regorafenib., Implications: As a third-line or later treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Japan, T/T is cost-effective compared with BSC, whereas regorafenib is not. It is necessary to adjust the price of regorafenib based on the results of this analysis, with the improvement of clinical parameters such as survival time and adverse events., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the absence of head-to-head comparison studies, the present network meta-analysis evaluated and compared the efficacy of 4 therapeutic alternatives for refractory colorectal cancer., Materials and Methods: The search focused on results from phase III randomized controlled trials. Separate (subgroup) network meta-analyses were conducted to obtain drug comparisons stratified by various patient characteristics. The principal outcome of interest was overall survival (OS)., Results: No difference in OS was found between regorafenib and TAS-102. For a rectal primary location, TAS-102 conferred benefit versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.671), but regorafenib did not (HR, 0.950). For patients aged > 65 years, TAS-102 showed benefit versus placebo (HR, 0.579) but regorafenib did not (HR, 0.816). For patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 in the indirect comparison, regorafenib showed benefit versus placebo (HR, 0.687), as did TAS-102 (HR, 0.756) but with a lower advantage. For patients with RAS wild type not previously treated with anti-EGFR antibodies, panitumumab was the optimal choice for OS., Conclusions: No differences in OS were found between regorafenib and TAS-102. Possible greater efficacy was found for TAS-102 compared with regorafenib for patients with a rectal primary location, ECOG PS > 0, and age > 65 years. In contrast, regorafenib showed possible greater effectiveness for patients with ECOG PS 0 and age < 65 years. In the RAS WT population, the anti-EGFR drug showed superiority with respect to TAS-102 and regorafenib. These results should be viewed as only exploratory, and further prospective studies are warranted to validate these data., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Trifluridine and tipiracil (FTD + TPI) and regorafenib (REG) are approved treatments for the treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study assesses adherence and duration of therapy with FTD + TPI versus REG and explores the effect of sequencing on adherence., Materials and Methods: Adults diagnosed with mCRC were identified in the IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims: U.S. database (October 2014-July 2017). The observation period spanned from the index date (first dispensing of FTD + TPI or REG) to the earliest of a switch to another mCRC agent, the end of continuous enrollment, or the end of data availability. Medication possession ratio (MPR), proportion of days covered (PDC), and persistence and time to discontinuation (gap ≥45 days) were compared between FTD + TPI and REG users and among switchers (FTD + TPI-to-REG vs. REG-to-FTD + TPI)., Results: A total of 469 FTD + TPI and 311 REG users were identified. FTD + TPI users had higher compliance with an MPR ≥80% (odds ratio [OR], 2.47; p < .001) and PDC ≥80% (OR, 2.77; p < .001). FTD + TPI users had better persistence (82.8% vs. 68.0%; p < .001) and lower risk of discontinuation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; p = .006). Among switchers (96 FTD + TPI-to-REG; 83 REG-to-FTD + TPI), those switching from FTD + TPI to REG were more likely to have an MPR ≥80% (OR, 2.91; p < .001) and PDC ≥80% (OR, 4.60; p < .001) compared with REG-to-FTD + TPI switchers while treated with these drugs. Additionally, FTD + TPI-to-REG switchers had a lower risk of first treatment discontinuation (HR, 0.66; p = .009)., Conclusion: FTD + TPI users had significantly higher adherence and persistence, and patients who were treated with FTD + TPI before switching to REG also had higher adherence and persistence outcomes., Implications for Practice: Trifluridine plus tipiracil (FTD + TPI) and regorafenib (REG) prolong survival in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but have different tolerability profiles. This study assessed real-world adherence to treatment with FTD + TPI versus REG and compared outcomes among patients who switched from FTD + TPI to REG and vice versa. FTD + TPI was associated with significantly higher medication adherence and longer time to discontinuation than REG. Patients treated with FTD + TPI prior to switching to REG also showed higher adherence outcomes. Findings could help inform decision making regarding the choice and sequencing of treatment with FTD + TPI versus REG in patients with mCRC., (© 2019 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Salvage chemotherapy for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer using trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) and regorafenib has shown survival benefits. We evaluated the antitumor effects of FTD or FTD/TPI combined with regorafenib in vitro and in vivo. SW620, HCT 116, and HT-29 human colorectal cancer cell lines were treated with FTD and regorafenib simultaneously and sequentially. Cell death, incorporation of FTD into DNA, and molecules related to FTD and regorafenib-associated cell death were investigated. The antitumor effects of FTD combined with regorafenib in SW620 and COLO205 xenografts were also evaluated. Cell death was greater after sequential treatment with FTD followed by regorafenib in SW620 cells, but not in HCT 116 and HT-29 cells, than after treatment with FTD alone, which was attributable to thymidylate synthase reduction with the induction of apoptosis. In contrast, simultaneous and sequential exposure to regorafenib followed by FTD, but not FTD alone, attenuated the cell death effect. Furthermore, combined FTD/TPI treatment followed by regorafenib had greater antitumor activity than either monotherapy in SW620 and COLO205 xenograft models. Treatment results following regorafenib administration subsequent to FTD or FTD/TPI suggest that sequential therapy with FTD/TPI prior to regorafenib may be effective in a clinical setting.