1.
Fast-track multidisciplinary treatment versus conventional treatment for colorectal cancer: a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled study.
Li, J, Kong, XX, Zhou, JJ, Song, YM, Huang, XF, Li, GH, Ying, XJ, Dai, XY, Lu, M, Jiang, K, et al
BMC cancer. 2019;(1):988
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic surgery, fast-track perioperative treatment and XELOX chemotherapy are effective strategies for shortening the duration of hospital stay for cancer patients. This trial aimed to clarify the safety and efficacy of the fast-track multidisciplinary treatment (FTMDT) model compared to conventional surgery combined with chemotherapy in Chinese colorectal cancer patients. METHODS This trial was a prospective randomized controlled study with a 2 × 2 balanced factorial design and was conducted at six hospitals. Patients in group 1 (FTMDT) received fast-track perioperative treatment and XELOX adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in group 2 (conventional treatment) received conventional perioperative treatment and mFOLFOX6 adjuvant chemotherapy. Subgroups 1a and 2a had laparoscopic surgery and subgroups 1b and 2b had open surgery. The primary endpoint was total length of hospital stay during treatment. RESULTS A total of 374 patients were randomly assigned to the four subgroups, and 342 patients were finally analyzed, including 87 patients in subgroup 1a, 85 in subgroup 1b, 86 in subgroup 2a, and 84 in subgroup 2b. The total hospital stay of group 1 was shorter than that of group 2 [13 days, (IQR, 11-17 days) vs. 23.5 days (IQR, 15-42 days), P = 0.0001]. Compared to group 2, group 1 had lower surgical costs, fewer in-hospital complications and faster recovery (all P < 0.05). Subgroup 1a showed faster surgical recovery than that of subgroup 1b (all P < 0.05). There was no difference in 5-year overall survival between groups 1 and 2 [87.1% (95% CI, 80.7-91.5%) vs. 87.1% (95% CI, 80.8-91.4%), P = 0.7420]. CONCLUSIONS The FTMDT model, which integrates laparoscopic surgery, fast-track treatment, and XELOX chemotherapy, was the superior model for enhancing the recovery of Chinese patients with colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01080547 , registered on March 4, 2010.
2.
Sorafenib Plus Hepatic Arterial Infusion of Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin vs Sorafenib Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Portal Vein Invasion: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
He, M, Li, Q, Zou, R, Shen, J, Fang, W, Tan, G, Zhou, Y, Wu, X, Xu, L, Wei, W, et al
JAMA oncology. 2019;(7):953-960
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Sorafenib is the first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein invasion; however, it has shown unsatisfactory survival benefit. Sorafenib plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX) has shown promising results for these patients in a previous phase 2 study. OBJECTIVE To investigate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib plus HAIC compared with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein invasion. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This randomized, open-label clinical trial enrolled 818 screened patients. Of the 818 participants, 247 with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein invasion were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequence to receive sorafenib plus HAIC or sorafenib. This trial was conducted at 5 hospitals in China and enrolled patients from April 1, 2016, to October 10, 2017, with a follow-up period of 10 months. INTERVENTIONS Randomization to receive 400 mg sorafenib twice daily (sorafenib group) or 400 mg sorafenib twice daily plus HAIC (SoraHAIC group) (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 on day 1, and fluorouracil infusion 2400 mg/m2 for 46 hours, every 3 weeks). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary endpoint was overall survival by intention-to-treat analysis. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. RESULTS For 247 patients (median age, 49 years; range, 18-75 years; 223 men and 24 women), median overall survival was 13.37 months (95% CI, 10.27-16.46) in the SoraHAIC group vs 7.13 months (95% CI, 6.28-7.98) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.26-0.48; P < .001). The SoraHAIC group showed a higher response rate than the sorafenib group (51 [40.8%] vs 3 [2.46%]; P < .001), and a longer median progression-free survival (7.03 [95% CI, 6.05-8.02] vs 2.6 [95% CI, 2.15-3.05] months; P < .001). Grade 3/4 adverse events that were more frequent in the SoraHAIC group than in the sorafenib group included neutropenia (12 [9.68%] vs 3 [2.48%]), thrombocytopenia (16 [12.9%] vs 6 [4.96%]), and vomiting (8 [6.45%] vs 1 [0.83%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Sorafenib plus HAIC of FOLFOX improved overall survival and had acceptable toxic effects compared with sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein invasion. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02774187.
3.
Meta-Analysis of Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy Combined With Traditional Medicines for Colorectal Cancer: Contributions of Specific Plants to Tumor Response.
Chen, M, May, BH, Zhou, IW, Xue, CC, Zhang, AL
Integrative cancer therapies. 2016;(1):40-59
Abstract
This meta-analysis evaluates the clinical evidence for the addition of traditional medicines (TMs) to oxaliplatin-based regimens for colorectal cancer (CRC) in terms of tumor response rate (TRR). Eight electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy combined with TMs compared to the same oxaliplatin-based regimen. Data on TRR from 42 randomized controlled trials were analyzed using Review Manager 5.1. Studies were conducted in China or Japan. Publication bias was not evident. The meta-analyses suggest that the combination of the TMs with oxaliplatin-based regimens increased TRR in the palliative treatment of CRC (risk ratio [RR] 1.31 [1.20-1.42], I(2) = 0%). Benefits were evident for both injection products (RR 1.36 [1.18-1.57], I(2) = 0%) and orally administered TMs (RR 1.27 [1.15-1.41], I(2) = 0%). Further sensitivity analysis of specific plant-based TMs found that Paeonia, Curcuma, and Sophora produced consistently higher contributions to the RR results. Compounds in each of these TMs have shown growth-inhibitory effects in CRC cell-line studies. Specific combinations of TMs appeared to produce higher contributions to TRR than the TMs individually. Notable among these was the combination of Hedyotis, Astragalus, and Scutellaria.