MyMedR

Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Adaptation of international guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer: an asian consensus

Cheng AL, Li J, Vaid AK, Ma BB, Teh C, Ahn JB, et al.

Clin Colorectal Cancer, 2014 Sep;13(3):145-55.
PMID: 25209093 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2014.06.004

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most common cancers worldwide, but marked epidemiological differences exist between Asian and non-Asian populations. Hence, a consensus meeting was held in Hong Kong in December 2012 to develop Asia-specific guidelines for the management of metastatic CRC (mCRC). A multidisciplinary expert panel, consisting of 23 participants from 10 Asian and 2 European countries, discussed current guidelines for colon or rectal cancer and developed recommendations for adapting these guidelines to Asian clinical practice. Participants agreed that mCRC management in Asia largely follows international guidelines, but they proposed a number of recommendations based on regional 'real-world' experience. In general, participants agreed that 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) infusion regimens in doublets can be substituted with UFT (capecitabine, tegafur-uracil) and S1 (tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine and oxonic acid), and that the monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab are recommended for KRAS wild type tumors. For KRAS mutant tumors, bevacizumab is the preferred biological therapy. FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-FU, and oxaliplatin) is preferred for initial therapy in Asian patients. The management of mCRC is evolving, and it must be emphasized that the recommendations presented here reflect current treatment practices and thus might change as more data become available.
Fulltext Efficacy, Tolerability, and Biomarker Analyses of Once-Every-2-Weeks Cetuximab Plus First-Line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in Patients With KRAS or All RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Phase 2 APEC Study

Cheng AL, Cornelio G, Shen L, Price T, Yang TS, Chung IJ, et al.

Clin Colorectal Cancer, 2017 06;16(2):e73-e88.
PMID: 27780749 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2016.08.005

BACKGROUND: In patients with KRAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), outcomes with first-line chemotherapies are improved by adding weekly cetuximab. The APEC study investigated first-line once-every-2-weeks cetuximab plus chemotherapy for patients with KRAS wt mCRC; additional biomarker subgroups were also analyzed.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: APEC was a nonrandomized phase 2 trial conducted in the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (n = 289) received once-every-2-weeks cetuximab with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI). The primary end point was best confirmed overall response rate (BORR); progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were secondary end points. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) were also evaluated.
RESULTS: In the KRAS wt population, BORR was 58.8%, median PFS 11.1 months, and median OS 26.8 months. Expanded RAS mutational analysis revealed that patients with RAS wt mCRC had better outcomes (BORR = 64.7%; median PFS = 13.0 months; median OS = 28.4 months). The data suggest that ETS and DpR may be associated with survival outcomes in the RAS wt population. Although this study was not designed to formally assess differences in outcome between treatment subgroups, efficacy results appeared similar for patients treated with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI. There were no new safety findings; in particular, grade 3/4 skin reactions were within clinical expectations.
CONCLUSION: The observed activity and safety profile is similar to that reported in prior first-line pivotal studies involving weekly cetuximab, suggesting once-every-2-weeks cetuximab is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy and may represent an alternative to weekly administration.
Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with intermediate and advanced/relapsed hepatocellular carcinoma: a TOS-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, ISMPO, JSMO, KSMO, MOS and SSO

Chen LT, Martinelli E, Cheng AL, Pentheroudakis G, Qin S, Bhattacharyya GS, et al.

Ann Oncol, 2020 03;31(3):334-351.
PMID: 32067677 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2019.12.001

The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was published in 2018, and covered the diagnosis, management, treatment and follow-up of early, intermediate and advanced disease. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2018 it was decided by both the ESMO and the Taiwan Oncology Society (TOS) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the Taiwan Joint Cancer Conference (TJCC) in May 2019 in Taipei. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2018 guidelines to take into account both the ethnic and the geographic differences in practice associated with the treatment of HCC in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with intermediate and advanced/relapsed HCC representing the oncology societies of Taiwan (TOS), China (CSCO), India (ISMPO) Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS) and Singapore (SSO). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of the current treatment practices, the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.
Fulltext APASL clinical practice guideline on hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy

Lau G, Yu ML, Wong G, Thompson A, Ghazinian H, Hou JL, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2021 Oct;15(5):1031-1048.
PMID: 34427860 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-021-10239-x

BACKGROUND & AIM: Hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy remains a major cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality in hepatitis B endemic Asia-Pacific region. This clinical practice guidelines aim to assist clinicians in all disciplines involved in the use of immunosuppressive therapy to effectively prevent and manage hepatitis B reactivation.
METHODS: All publications related to hepatitis B reactivation with the use of immunosuppressive therapy since 1975 were reviewed. Advice from key opinion leaders in member countries/administrative regions of Asian-Pacific Association for the study of the liver was collected and synchronized. Immunosuppressive therapy was risk-stratified according to its reported rate of hepatitis B reactivation.
RECOMMENDATIONS: We recommend the necessity to screen all patients for hepatitis B prior to the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy and to administer pre-emptive nucleos(t)ide analogues to those patients with a substantial risk of hepatitis and acute-on-chronic liver failure due to hepatitis B reactivation.
Correction to: APASL clinical practice guideline on hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy

Lau G, Yu ML, Wong G, Thompson A, Ghazinian H, Hou JL, et al.

Hepatol Int, 2022 Jan 25.
PMID: 35076895 DOI: 10.1007/s12072-022-10301-2
Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with resected or ablated high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave050): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial

Qin S, Chen M, Cheng AL, Kaseb AO, Kudo M, Lee HC, et al.

Lancet, 2023 Nov 18;402(10415):1835-1847.
PMID: 37871608 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01796-8

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma.
METHODS: In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice-web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098.
FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9-22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1-NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4-NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53-0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.
INTERPRETATION: Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit-risk profile more fully.
FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.