The Importance of Early Tumor Shrinkage and Deepness of Response in Assessing the Efficacy of Systemic Anticancer Treatment with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Česká verze

Authors: L. Holubec ^1,2; V. Liška ^2,3; J. Fínek ¹
Authors place of work: Onkologická a radioterapeutická klinika LF UK a FN Plzeň2 Biomedicínské centrum, LF UK v Plzni3 Chirurgická klinika LF UK a FN Plzeň ¹
Published in the journal: Klin Onkol 2015; 28(2): 89-93
Category: Přehled
doi: https://doi.org/10.14735/amko201589

Summary

Background:
The efficacy of anticancer therapy is regularly evaluated using the following indicators – objective response rate, progression free survival and overall survival. The change in the tumor burden extent is assessed by the cumulative change in the size of target tumor lesions using imaging methods where WHO and RECIST criteria are most frequently used. The main problem of these criteria is that they use different definitions of response rate evaluation. Generally, existing results of these evaluations do not confirm a direct correlation between the objective response rate and survival (progression free survival or overall survival). Another problem of these methods is that the results of the assessment do not correlate with the biological activity of tumor growth, since it is a static evaluation of clinical status.

Aim:
This review article provides an overview of results related to new possibilities for evaluating the efficacy of anticancer therapy using the concept of ‘depth of response’ and the concept of ’early tumor shrinkage’ in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Conclusion:
The results of numerous post‑hoc and exploratory analyses of clinical studies consistently suggest that early tumor shrinkage and depth of response are important variables in assessing the efficacy of systemic anticancer treatment.

Key words:
colorectal cancer – neoplasm metastases – RECIST – early tumor shrinkage – deepness of response

This work was supported by the project ED2.1.00/03.076 from European Regional Development Fund and by the grant IGA MZCR 12025 and IGA MZCR 14329.

The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.

The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE “uniform requirements” for biomedical papers.

Submitted:
12. 8. 2014

Accepted:
30. 9. 2014

Zdroje

1. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumors: revised RECIST guideline (version1.1). Europ J Cancer 2009; 45(2): 228– 247. doi: 10.1016/ j.ejca.2008.10.026.

2. De Roock W, Piessevaux H, De Schutter J et al. KRAS wild‑type state predicts survival and is associated to early radiological response in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. Ann Oncol 2008; 19(3): 508– 515.

3. Arnold D, Hinke A, Reinacher‑ Schick AC et al. Waterfall plot analysis of XELOX or XELIRI with cetuximab or bevacizumab in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC): Combined analysis of two randomized first‑line phase II trials of the AIO CRC study group. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26 (15 Suppl): 4067.

4. Heun JM, Grothey A, Branda ME et al. Tumor status at 12 weeks predicts survival in advanced colorectal cancer: findings from NCCTG N9741. Oncologist 2011; 16(6): 859– 867. doi: 10.1634/ theoncologist.2011‑ 0064.

5. Suzuki C, Blomqvist L, Sundin A et al. The initial change in tumor size predicts response and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with combination chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2012; 23(4): 948– 954. doi: 10.1093/ annonc/ mdr350.

6. Piessevaux H, Buyse M, Schlichting M et al. Use of early tumor shrinkage to predict long‑term outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31(30): 3764– 3775. doi: 10.1200/ JCO.2012.42.8532.

7. Mansman UR, Sartorius U, Laubender PR et al. Deepness of response: a quantitative analysis of its impact on post‑progression survival time after first‑line treatment in patients with mCRC. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30 (Suppl 34): abstr. 427.

8. Mansman UR, Laubender PR, Sartorius U et al. Improved early prediction of individual prognosis for patients with mCRC: joint modeling of tumor shrinkage with volume data for PFS and OS. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30 (Suppl): abstr. 3603.

9. Douillard JY, Salvatore S, Tabernero J et al. Overall survival (OS) and tumor shrinkage outcomes in partients with symptomatic/ asymptomatic mCRC: data from the PRIME study. Ann Oncol 2013; 24 (Suppl 4): iv32– iv33.

10. Zhao B, Lee SM, Qi J et al. Minor response rate to predict patient survival. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31 (Suppl): abstr. 3635.

11. Cremolini C, Loupakis F, Antoniotti C et al. Assessing tumor response beyond RECIST criteria: early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and deepness of response (DoR) in phase III TRIBE trial by the GONO group. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49: S491.

12. Cremolini C, Loupakis F, Lonardi S et al. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and deepness of response (DoR) to predict progression‑free, postprogression, and overall survival: Results from the phase III TRIBE trial. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32 (Suppl 3): abstr. 521.

13. Modest DP, Laubender RP, Stintzing S et al. Early tumor shrinkage in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first‑line treatment with cetuximab combined with either CAPIRI or CAPOX: an analysis of the German AIO KRK 0104 trial. Acta Oncol 2013; 52(5): 956– 962. doi: 10.3109/ 0284186X.2012.752580.

14. Heinemann V, Modest D, Fischer von Weikersthal L et al. Independent Radiological Evaluation of Objective Response Early Tumor Shrinkage, and Depth of Response in FIRE‑ 3 (AIO KRK‑ 0306). Ann Oncol 2014; 25 (Suppl 2): abstr. O‑ 0030.

15. Rivera F. First‑line treatment with modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) + panitumumab (pmab) or bevacizumab (bev) in wild‑type (WT) RAS metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC): tumor response outcomes beyond RECIST. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (Suppl 3): abstr. 660.

16. Hradecká I, Ríhová B, Horová R et al. The cost study of first‑line treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma with bevacizumab‑ containing regimen in the Czech Republic. Klin Onkol 2014; 27(4): 255– 260. doi: 10.14735/ amko2014255.

17. Sevčíková K, Ušáková V, Bartošová Z et al. Surgical treatment of metastases and its impact on prognosis in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Klin Onkol 2014; 27(1): 38– 44. doi: 10.14735/ amko201438.