Validation study of a prognostic classification in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who received irinotecan-based second-line chemotherapy

Abstract

The previous prognostic classification of patients with MCRC who received irinotecan-based second-line chemotherapy was validated in another independent cohort. Validation in prospective studies is warranted.

Personalizing prognosis in colorectal cancer: A systematic review of the quality and nature of clinical prognostic tools for survival outcomes

“…Figure describes the search results. The scientific literature review and web‐based search identified 53 tools predicting survival in colon or rectal cancer, reported across 63 articles . Two articles reported on the development of two tools each .…”

“…Two articles reported on the development of two tools each . Eighteen articles contained external validations only . One article updated two tools with additional prognostic information .…”

Efficacy of Second-Line Bevacizumab-Containing Chemotherapy for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer following First-Line Treatment with an Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Antibody

“…The serum levels of LDH and carcinoembryonic antigen, which have been previously reported to be associated with tumor burden and poor prognosis [29] , were significantly higher in cohort C. Regarding the third-line treatment regimen, many patients in cohorts A and B were treated with anti-EGFR antibody as the third-line or subsequent treatment. Regarding the chemotherapy platform as first-line treatment in our study, about one third of patients in cohort C were administered FOLFIRI, which demonstrated the survival advantage adding anti-EGFR antibody to FOL-FIRI in the two previous phase III trials [30] .…”

Subgroup analysis in RAISE: a randomized, double-blind phase III study of irinotecan, folinic acid, and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFIRI) plus ramucirumab or placebo in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma progression

“…Before this study, there was some indication that TTP <6 months after beginning first-line treatment may be a negative prognostic factor among patients undergoing irinotecan-based second-line therapy [11]. The RAISE study stratified patients by first-line TTP <6 versus ≥6 months and then examined the data following the study to determine whether TTP on first-line therapy was prognostic for OS.…”

“…Advanced age has been associated with more pronounced or frequent safety concerns; as a result, the risk–benefit balance of cancer treatments in the elderly population has been under scrutiny [10]. In some cases, patients with more and less aggressive disease, as assessed by time to progression (TTP) on first-line therapy, could have differential responsiveness to second-line therapy [11]. …”