-
Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology Feb 2023Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) beyond second line treatment have a poor prognosis. Fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102),...
BACKGROUND
Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) beyond second line treatment have a poor prognosis. Fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102), panitumumab and cetuximab combined with single-agent chemotherapy regimens are currently recommended as third-line therapies for patients exhibiting disease progression. Effective late-line therapies for mCRC are urgently needed. The FRESCO randomized clinical trial (RCT) prompts fruquintinib as a third-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). A phase II study in our center reported the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus raltitrexed for the treatment of chemo-refractory mCRC. The combination of the fruquintinib, raltitrexed, and S-1 has not been reported in mCRC.
CASE DESCRIPTION
This case report presents a patient with mCRC who received third-line treatment with fruquintinib, raltitrexed, and S-1. A 54-year-old male presenting with hematochezia was admitted to West China Hospital of Sichuan University in June 2017 and underwent surgery for a tumor between the rectum and sigmoid colon. Postoperative pathology identified adenocarcinoma (wild-type RAS/RAF, no PIK3CA mutation), and the patient was diagnosed with mCRC (pathological stage, pT3pN1apM0). The mFOLFOX6 regimen was administered. The patient was subsequently diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma in May 2018 and treated with the ABVD regimen after multidisciplinary discussions. Liver metastases (intestinal-type adenocarcinoma) were detected in November 2018, and second-line therapy with the FOLFIRI regimen was initiated in January 2019. Lung metastases were identified in September 2019, so the patient was treated with a combination of raltitrexed, S-1, and fruquintinib. A partial response (PR) was detected in November 2019, and the patient underwent resection of the hepatic lesion on November 5, 2020. Computed tomography (CT) images in November 2021 revealed a stable disease; thus, raltitrexed was discontinued, and S-1 and fruquintinib were maintained. The treatment is still responding until the last follow-up (December 2022).
CONCLUSIONS
The case was characterized by the simultaneous existence of mCRC and Hodgkin lymphoma, which required management by a multidisciplinary team. Third-line therapy with fruquintinib, raltitrexed, and S-1 achieved a PR that permitted surgical resection and enabled a relatively long progression-free survival. The findings suggest that the three agents regimen might be clinically effective as late-line therapy for mCRC.
PubMed: 36915460
DOI: 10.21037/jgo-23-39 -
The Oncologist Aug 2021Bevacizumab combined with S-1 and raltitrexed demonstrated positive antitumor efficacy and acceptable toxicity. This combination might represent a treatment option for...
LESSONS LEARNED
Bevacizumab combined with S-1 and raltitrexed demonstrated positive antitumor efficacy and acceptable toxicity. This combination might represent a treatment option for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.
BACKGROUND
In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to standard therapies, S-1 plus raltitrexed showed a good objective response rate (ORR) and significant survival benefit in our previous study. In the present study, we assessed the activity and safety of bevacizumab combined with S-1 and raltitrexed.
METHODS
This investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm, phase II trial was performed at West China Hospital in China. Patients with mCRC who had disease progression after fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin and had at least one measurable lesion were eligible for this trial. Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (for tumors with wild-type RAS) and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy in the first or second line was allowed, but patients who had been treated with bevacizumab across two consecutive chemotherapy regimens were excluded. Patients received bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg on day 1), oral S-1 (80-120 mg per day for 14 days), and raltitrexed (3 mg/m on day 1) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was ORR. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity.
RESULTS
From September 2015 to November 2019, 44 patients were enrolled. Tumor response evaluation was available in 44 patients at the time of the analysis. There were no complete responses; the ORR was 15.9%, and the disease control rate was 54.5%. Median PFS and OS were 110 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.0-155.0) and 367 days (95% CI, 310.4-423.6), respectively. The combination was well tolerated.
CONCLUSION
Bevacizumab combined with S-1 and raltitrexed showed promising antitumor activity and safety in refractory mCRC.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Colorectal Neoplasms; Fluorouracil; Humans; Leucovorin; Quinazolines; Thiophenes
PubMed: 33830591
DOI: 10.1002/onco.13778 -
Cancer Management and Research 2023Treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) are scarce. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of raltitrexed...
PURPOSE
Treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) are scarce. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of raltitrexed combined with S-1 and bevacizumab in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic CRC in a clinical real-world setting.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Records of patients with metastatic CRC refractory to standard therapies who initiated raltitrexed plus S-1 and bevacizumab from October 2017 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed at our institution. The study endpoints included median overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS
Forty-four patients with metastatic CRC, who had previously undergone standard chemotherapy received the regimen comprising raltitrexed plus S-1 and bevacizumab. As of March 2022, the median follow-up was 23.2 months (95% confidence interval 15.8-30.6). The median OS and median PFS were 13.5 (95% CI 9.9-17.1) and 4.7 months (95% CI 3.6-5.8), respectively, with a 16-week PFS rate of 60.9%. Among 43 patients with measurable lesions, the ORR and DCR were 7.0% (3/43) and 65.1% (28/43), respectively. Patients without peritoneal metastases (P = 0.003, hazard ratio 0.160, 95% CI 0.048-0.531), lower carcinoembryonic antigen level (≤42.8 ng/mL) (P = 0.039, HR 0.382, 95% CI 0.153-0.952), and no previous treatment with both vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGF) and S-1 (P = 0.020, HR 0.215, 95% CI 0.059-0.785) had better OS. The incidence of any grade of treatment-related AEs was 88.6%, most of which were mild to moderate, and no treatment-related deaths occurred.
CONCLUSION
Raltitrexed combined with S-1 and bevacizumab shows promising antitumor activity and safety and could be an alternative for patients with metastatic CRC who are refractory or intolerant to standard therapy.
PubMed: 36969545
DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S398539 -
Health Technology Assessment... May 2008To evaluate three technologies for the management of advanced colorectal cancer: (1) first-line irinotecan combination [with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)] or second-line... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate three technologies for the management of advanced colorectal cancer: (1) first-line irinotecan combination [with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)] or second-line monotherapy; (2) first- or second-line oxaliplatin combination (again, with 5-FU); and (3) raltitrexed, where 5-FU is inappropriate. To examine the role of irinotecan and oxaliplatin in reducing the extent of incurable disease before curative surgery (downstaging).
SOURCES
Ten electronic bibliographic databases covering the period up to August 2004.
METHODS
Searches identified existing studies of the effectiveness and economics of the technologies and any studies that evaluated any of the indications outlined above were included. Data were extracted and assessed generic components of methodological quality. Survival outcomes were meta-analysed.
RESULTS
Seventeen trials were found, of varying methodological quality. Compared with 5-FU, first-line irinotecan improved overall survival (OS) by 2-4 months (p=0.0007), progression-free survival (PFS) by 2-3 months (p<0.00001) and response rates (p<0.001). It offered a different toxicity profile and no quality of life (QoL) advantage. However, second-line irinotecan compared with 5-FU improved OS by 2 months (p=0.035) and PFS by 1 month (p=0.03), and provided a better partial response rate, but with more toxicities and no QoL advantage. Compared with second-line best supportive care, irinotecan improved OS by 2 months (p=0.0001), had a different toxicity profile and maintained baseline QoL longer, but with no overall difference. The addition of oxaliplatin to second-line 5-FU is associated with a borderline significant improvement in overall survival (p<0.07); a significantly higher response rate (<0.0001); and more serious toxicities. There is no evidence for a significant difference in QoL. Schedules with treatment breaks may not reduce clinical effectiveness but reduce toxicity. The addition of oxaliplatin to second-line 5-FU also saw no improvement in OS (p<0.07), better PFS (by 2.1 months, p=0.0001), an 8.9% higher response rate (p<0.0001), more toxicities and no QoL advantage. There was no significant difference in OS or PFS between first-line irinotecan and oxaliplatin combinations except when 5-FU was delivered by bolus injection, when oxaliplatin provided better OS (p=0.032) and response rates (p=0.032), but not PFS (p=0.169). The regimens had different toxicity profiles and neither conferred a QoL advantage. When compared to 5-FU, raltitrexed is associated with no significant difference in overall or progression-free survival; no significant difference in response rates; more vomiting and nausea, but less diarrhoea and mucositis; no significant difference in, or worse QoL. Raltitrexed treatment was cut short in two out of four included trials due to excess toxic deaths. 5-FU followed by irinotecan was inferior to any other sequence. First-line irinotecan/5-FU combination improved OS and PFS, although further unplanned therapy exaggerated the OS effect size. Staged combination therapy (combination oxaliplatin followed by combination irinotecan or vice versa) provided the best OS and PFS, although there was no head-to-head comparison against other treatment plans. In the only trial to use three active chemotherapies in any staged combination, median OS was over 20 months. In another study, the longest median OS from a treatment plan using two active agents was 16.2 months. Where irinotecan or oxaliplatin were used with 5-FU to downstage people with unresectable liver metastases, studies consistently showed response rates of around 50%. Resection rates ranged from 9 to 35% with irinotecan and from 7 to 51% with oxaliplatin. In the one study that compared the regimens, oxaliplatin enabled more resections (p=0.02). Five-year OS rates of 5-26% and disease-free survival rates of 3-11% were reported in studies using oxaliplatin. Alone or in combination, 5-FU was more effective and less toxic when delivered by continuous infusion. Existing economic models were weak because of the use of unplanned second-line therapies in their trial data: the survival benefits in patients on such trials cannot be uniquely attributed to the allocated therapy. Consequently, the economic analyses are either limited to the use of PES (at best, a surrogate outcome) or are subject to confounding. Weaknesses in cost components, the absence of direct in-trial utility estimates and the limited use of sensitivity analysis were identified. Improvements to the methodologies used in existing economic studies are presented. Using data from two trials that planned treatment sequences, an independent economic evaluation of six plans compared with first-line 5-FU followed on progression by second-line irinotecan monotherapy (NHS standard treatment) is presented. 5-FU followed on progression by irinotecan combination cost 13,174 pounds per life-year gained (LYG) and 10,338 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Irinotecan combination followed on progression by additional second-line therapies was estimated to cost 12,418 pounds per LYG and 13,630 pounds per QALY gained. 5-FU followed on progression by oxaliplatin combination was estimated to cost 23,786 pounds per LYG and 31,556 pounds per QALY gained. Oxaliplatin combination followed on progression by additional second-line therapies was estimated to cost 43,531 pounds per LYG and 67,662 pounds per QALY gained. Evaluations presented in this paragraph should be interpreted with caution owing to missing information on the costs of salvage therapies in the trial from which data were drawn. Irinotecan combination followed on progression by oxaliplatin combination cost 12,761 pounds per LYG and 16,663 pounds per QALY gained. Oxaliplatin combination followed on progression by irinotecan combination cost 16,776 pounds per LYG and 21,845 pounds per QALY gained. The evaluation suggests that these two sequences have a cost-effectiveness profile that is favourable in comparison to other therapies currently funded by the NHS. However, the differences in OS observed between the two trials from which data were taken may be a result of heterogeneous patient populations, unbalanced protocol-driven intensity biases or other differences between underlying health service delivery systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Treatment with three active therapies appears most clinically effective and cost-effective. NHS routine data could be used to validate downstaging findings and a meta-analysis using individual patient-level data is suggested to validate the optimal treatment sequence.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Camptothecin; Colorectal Neoplasms; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Costs; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Organoplatinum Compounds; Oxaliplatin; Quinazolines; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 18462574
DOI: 10.3310/hta12150 -
Cancer Medicine Sep 2020This study aimed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of raltitrexed (Saiweijian ) plus cisplatin (SP regimen) and 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP regimen) as... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Raltitrexed versus 5-fluorouracil with cisplatin and concurrent radiotherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: An open labeled, randomized, controlled, and multicenter clinical trial.
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of raltitrexed (Saiweijian ) plus cisplatin (SP regimen) and 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP regimen) as concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC).
METHODS
Eligible patients (N = 135) were allocated randomly in a ratio of 1:1 to receive CCRT with either SP or FP. At least 2 cycles of chemotherapy was administrated during radiotherapy. Progression free survival (PFS) was primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), loco-regional relapse free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) and toxicity.
RESULTS
In this study, 68 patients received SP as CCRT, and 67 received FP. Objective responses were noted in 97.1% of the patients in the SP group and in 97.0% of the patients in the FP group (P = 1.00). At the end of a median 36 months follow-up period, the estimated 3-year PFS rates were 70.1% for SP and 66.6% for FP, respectively. The 3-year LRRFS, DMFS and OS rates were 88.9%, 74.7% and 84.0%, respectively, for the SP group, and 92.3%, 71.0% and 73.7%, respectively, for the FP group. Overall, there was no difference between treatment groups with regard to response or survival. The most frequent acute toxicities monitored in both groups were bone marrow suppression, gastrointestinal side effects and oral mucositis (OM). The overall incidence of grade 3-4 OM in the FP group (47.8%) was higher than in the SP group (11.8%). However, the incidence of other adverse effects observed in both groups was similar (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS
These data indicate that SP and FP therapies have similar efficacy in treating LA-NPC. The SP regimen showed a tolerable safety profile along with a lower frequency of severe OM and therefore, an improved life quality. In conclusion, SP was a well tolerated, effective, regimen for LA-NPC treatment.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bone Marrow; Chemoradiotherapy; Chi-Square Distribution; Cisplatin; Female; Fluorouracil; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms; Progression-Free Survival; Quinazolines; Stomatitis; Thiophenes; Young Adult
PubMed: 32657029
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3260 -
Cancer Management and Research 2019To evaluate the efficacy and safety of raltitrexed plus oxaliplatin-based transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma...
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of raltitrexed plus oxaliplatin-based transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS
A total of 123 patients with unresectable HCC were recruited into the prospective cohort study. Raltitrexed plus oxaliplatin-based TACE was performed according to the traditional method at monthly intervals and was repeated for up to 4 cycles if no disease progression or intolerable toxicity occurred. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and tumor response rate. The Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used to assess the independent prognostic factors of OS. Adverse events were also observed.
RESULTS
The median OS time and PFS were 623 days (95% CI: 461, 785) and 338 days (95% CI: 302, 704), respectively. The disease control rate was 95.5% (118/123). The Cox proportional-hazards regression model indicated that age, ECOG performance status and response to TACE as independent prognostic factors of OS. No treatment-related mortality occurred within 30 days of treatment procedure. The most common complications included postembolization syndrome, liver dysfunction and hematological toxicity. Grade 3 pain, transglutaminase abnormality and thrombocytopenia were observed in 16 (13%), 15 (12.2%) and 3 (2.4%) patients, respectively. No grade 4 adverse events were observed.
CONCLUSION
Raltitrexed plus oxaliplatin-based TACE led to high tumor response rate and promising PFS and OS, and was considered safe and tolerable in patients with unresectable HCC.
PubMed: 31819623
DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S217524 -
Oncology (Williston Park, N.Y.) Dec 2000Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin) is a novel antineoplastic platinum derivative that may exert its cytotoxic effects by blocking DNA replication/transcription, thus resulting in... (Review)
Review
Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin) is a novel antineoplastic platinum derivative that may exert its cytotoxic effects by blocking DNA replication/transcription, thus resulting in cell death in proliferating cells, as well as apoptosis. Oxaliplatin is often more potent than other platinums such as cisplatin (Platinol) in vitro, and shows greater efficacy in preclinical studies against many tumor cell lines, including some that are resistant to cisplatin and carboplatin (Paraplatin). Oxaliplatin is approved for use with the fluoropyrimidines in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Asia, Latin America, and Europe. In light of the broad efficacy of oxaliplatin in several solid tumors and the encouraging preclinical data on combination therapy with novel agents (e.g., thymidylate synthase inhibitors, epidermal growth factor-receptor antagonists, microtubule interactive agents), this article will review the published literature on novel combinations that have been tested in the laboratory and/or the clinic.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Camptothecin; Clinical Trials, Phase I as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Colorectal Neoplasms; Deoxycytidine; Fluorouracil; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Irinotecan; Leucovorin; Neoplasm Staging; Organoplatinum Compounds; Oxaliplatin; Quinazolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thiophenes; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 11204665
DOI: No ID Found -
Cancer Medicine Aug 2023Esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) accounts for approximately 90% of esophageal cancer cases in China. There are no standard regimens for second or third-line... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Efficacy and safety of irinotecan combined with raltitrexed or irinotecan monotherapy for salvage chemotherapy of esophageal squamous cell cancer: A prospective, open label, randomized phase II study.
BACKGROUND
Esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) accounts for approximately 90% of esophageal cancer cases in China. There are no standard regimens for second or third-line chemotherapy of metastatic squamous esophageal cancer. The objective of this study was to investigate the security and effectiveness of irinotecan combined with raltitrexed or irinotecan monotherapy for salvage chemotherapy of ESCC.
METHODS
One hundred and twenty-eight patients with metastatic ESCC confirmed by histopathology were enrolled into this study. These patients had failure of the first-line chemotherapy combination of fluorouracil or platinum or paclitaxel and had not undergone chemotherapy with irinotecan or raltitrexed previously. Patients were randomly divided into irinotecan combined with raltitrexed group (experiment group) and irinotecan monotherapy group (control group). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary endpoint.
RESULTS
In the control group, the median PFS (mPFS) and median OS (mOS) of patients were 3.37 and 5.3 months. In the experiment group, mPFS and mOS were 3.91 and 7.0 months. There was statistical significance of PFS and OS between two groups (PFS P = 0.002, OS P = 0.01). In subgroup analysis, in the second-line treatment, the mPFS of control and experiment group, was 3.90 and 4.60 months, mOS was 6.95 and 8.5 months, which was statistically significant differences between the two groups. (PFS P = 0.001, OS P = 0.005), In the third-line and beyond treatment, mPFS of control and experiment group was 2.80 and 3.19 months, mOS were 4.5 and 4.8 months. But there was no significant difference of PFS or OS between the two groups (PFS P = 0.19, OS P = 0.31). There was no statistical significance of toxicity side effects between two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The PFS and OS of irinotecan plus raltitrexed may be better than that of irinotecan monotherapy, especially in second line treatment, which should be confirmed with a phase III study including much more patients.
Topics: Humans; Irinotecan; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Prospective Studies; Esophageal Neoplasms; Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
PubMed: 37325938
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6264 -
Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt... 2022Irinotecan-based doublet chemotherapy strategy was standard second-line backbone for patients with oxaliplatin-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of this... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial
OBJECTIVE
Irinotecan-based doublet chemotherapy strategy was standard second-line backbone for patients with oxaliplatin-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate tolerability and efficacy of raltitrexed combined with irinotecan biweekly administered as the second-line therapy for mCRC patients.
METHODS
The study was a prospective, single-center, non-randomized, open-label phase II clinical trial. Patients with mCRC after failure with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine or its derivatives were enrolled. Irinotecan (180 mg/m) and raltitrexed (2.5 mg/m) were given intravenously on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS
Between December 2012 and October 2016, 33 and 35 patients enrolled were assessed for response and safety, respectively. The ORR was 8.6%, and the DCR was 71.4%. The median PFS was 4.5 months (95% CI 3.8-5.2). The median OS was 12.0 months (95% CI 8.5-15.5). Four patients received conversion therapy to no evidence of disease (NED), and 2 patients were still alive with beyond 24 months survival. The most common grade 3/4 AEs were anorexia (14.3%), vomiting (14.3%), nausea (11.4%), fatigue (8.6%), and leukopenia (8.6%). No one died from treatment-related events. The incidence and severity of toxicity were irrelevant to UGT1A1 status.
CONCLUSIONS
The combination of irinotecan with raltitrexed is an efficient, convenient, and acceptable toxic regimen for second-line treatment for mCRC patients.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Colorectal Neoplasms; Humans; Irinotecan; Prospective Studies; Quinazolines; Thiophenes
PubMed: 35343258
DOI: 10.1177/10732748221080332 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jun 2018To determine the efficacy and safety of transarterial embolization and low-dose continuous hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and raltitrexed in...
Transarterial embolization and low-dose continuous hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and raltitrexed for hepatocellular carcinoma with major portal vein tumor thrombus.
AIM
To determine the efficacy and safety of transarterial embolization and low-dose continuous hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and raltitrexed in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with major portal vein tumor thrombus (MPVTT).
METHODS
Eighty-six patients with MPVTT accepted routine embolization. The catheter was kept in the hepatic artery and oxaliplatin (50 mg in 250 mL of glucose) was infused by pump for 4 h, followed by raltitrexed (2 mg in 100 mL of 0.9% saline) infusion by pump for the next 1 h. The efficacy and safety were evaluated after the transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).
RESULTS
Full or partial embolization was achieved in 86 cases, where all the cases received low dose continuous hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy. Complete responses (CRs), partial responses (PRs), stable disease (SD), and disease progression (PD) for intrahepatic disease were observed in 0, 45, 20, and 21 patients, respectively. The 1-, 2-and 3-year overall survival rates of the 86 patients were 40.7%, 22.1%, and 8.1% respectively, and the median survival time was 8.7 mo. Complication was limited.
CONCLUSION
TACE with low dose continuous hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin and raltitrexed could be an option in MPVTT patient; it was shown to be effective in patients with advanced HCC with MPVTT with less toxicity.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Catheters; Chemoembolization, Therapeutic; Female; Hepatic Artery; Humans; Infusions, Intra-Arterial; Liver; Liver Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Organoplatinum Compounds; Oxaliplatin; Portal Vein; Quinazolines; Retrospective Studies; Survival Rate; Thiophenes; Thrombosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29930471
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i23.2501