Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis.

Authors

null

Romain Cohen

Sorbonne University, Department of Medical Oncology, Saint-Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France

Romain Cohen , Morteza Raeisi , Qian Shi , Benoist Chibaudel , Takayuki Yoshino , John Raymond Zalcberg , Richard Adams , Chiara Cremolini , Eric Van Cutsem , Volker Heinemann , Josep Tabernero , Cornelis J. A. Punt , Dirk Arnold , Herbert I. Hurwitz , Jean-Yves Douillard , Alan P. Venook , Leonard B. Saltz , Timothy S. Maughan , Thierry Andre , Aimery De Gramont

Organizations

Sorbonne University, Department of Medical Oncology, Saint-Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France, Statistical Unit, Fondation A.R.CA.D - Aide et Recherche en CAncérologie Digestive, Levallois-Perret, France, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, Department of Medical Oncology, Fondation Cognacq-Jay, Franco-British Hospital, Levallois-Perret, France, Department of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan, Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine and Department of Medical Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, Cardiff University and Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, United Kingdom, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy, Department of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, Digestive Oncology Unit, University Hospitals Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, Department of Medicine III, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain, Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Asklepios Tumorzentrum Hamburg, Asklepios Klinik Altona, Hamburg, Germany, Duke University, Durham, NC, Medical Oncology Department, Integrated Centers for Oncology Nantes, Nantes, France, Department of Medicine, The University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, Department of Medical Oncology, Franco-British Hospital, Levallois-Perret, France

Research Funding

Other
ARCAD Foundation

Background: Approximately 30% of patients (pts) diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop liver metastases (LM). Liver is the most common organ of metastasis of CRC. The ARCAD database contains individual patient data of randomized trials that included CRC pts with initially unresectable metastases treated with systemic therapy. The aim of this study was to assess the response and survival outcomes in non-LM (NLM) vs LM across different lines of treatment. Methods: We analyzed survival outcomes of mCRC pts with either single site (SS) or multiple sites (MS) according to LM status in the following treatment groups: A: chemotherapy (CT) alone, B: CT + VEGF-antibodies, C: CT + EGFR-antibodies in KRAS wild-type tumors, within first-line (1L) and second line (2L) of therapy and D: pts enrolled on third line (≥3L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib and placebo. The primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) which were assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and adjusted Cox models on ECOG PS, age, and gender. Results: We included 26 trials with 17924 pts. 14066 pts had LM. Pts with LM had a higher rate of colon vs rectum as primary tumor (72 vs 62%; P< .001) and less SS (31 vs 47%; P< .001) than those with NLM. OS and PFS results in subgroups are reported in the table. In groups A and B, we found better OS and PFS outcomes in NLM pts as either SS or MS in 1L and 2L. In group C from 1L, we found better survival outcomes in pts with SS LM. In pts with MS, NLM superiority was observed in OS but not in PFS. However, these results were influenced by primary tumor sidedness. In group D, better OS and PFS was observed in pts without LM than those with LM whether in pts with SS or MS. Response rates were higher in LM than in NLM in most 1L and 2L subgroups. Conclusions: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from the 1L to ≥3L. Survival with CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF according to LM and NLM differs significantly in 1L and 2L but not with CT + anti-EGFR. This data justifies using LM as a stratification factor at least in ≥3L trials.

NLM vs LM (Reference)
HR (95% CI)
1L2L≥3L
OSPFSOSPFSOSPFS
Group AAll pts.76 (.68-.84).84 (.77-.92).64 (.58-.71).72 (.66-.79)Group D -
Trifluridine/tipiracil or Regorafenib
.36 (.29-.44).52 (.44-.60)
SS.79 (.67-.94).93 (.80-1.1).58 (.48-.69).67 (.57-.78).33 (.21-.51).43 (.31-.59)
MS.76 (.67-.86).81 (.72-.91).71 (.63-.81).77 (.69-.87).39 (.30-.51).58 (.48-.71)
Group BAll pts.81 (.74-.89).91 (.84-.98).62 (.55-.71).75 (.67-.84)Groupe D -
Placebo
.40 (.32-.52).60 (.49-.73)
SS.88 (.77-1.0).99 (.89-1.1).55 (.44-.68).76 (.63-.91).14 (.07-.28).43 (.25-.73)
MS.84 (.73-.96).88 (.79-.99).81 (.68-.96).79 (.68-.91).51 (.39-.68).62 (.50-.79)
Group CAll pts.97 (.86-1.1)1.0 (.91-1.2)1.1 (.84-1.5)1.2 (.93-1.6)
SS1.2 (1.0-1.5)1.1 (.95-1.3)1.1 (.44-2.8)1.9 (.88-3.9)
MS.85 (.72-1.0)1.1 (.90-1.3)1.1 (.80-1.5)1.1 (.82-1.5)

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Colorectal and Anal

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Colorectal and Anal

Sub Track

Colorectal Cancer–Advanced Disease

Citation

J Clin Oncol 41, 2023 (suppl 16; abstr 3554)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.3554

Abstract #

3554

Poster Bd #

254

Abstract Disclosures