Clinical Research Papers:
Irinotecan plus cisplatin followed by octreotide long-acting release maintenance treatment in advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma: IPO-NEC study
Metrics: PDF 1950 views | HTML 2797 views | ?
Abstract
Jie Li1,*, Ming Lu1,*, Zhihao Lu1,*, Zhongwu Li2, Yiqiang Liu2, Li Yang3, Jian Li1, Xiaotian Zhang1, Jun Zhou1, Xicheng Wang1, Jifang Gong1, Jing Gao1, Yan Li1 and Lin Shen1
1 Department of GI Oncology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University School of Oncology, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China
2 Department of Pathology, Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University School of Oncology, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China
3 Center of clinical oncology, The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, China
* These authors have contributed equally to this work
Correspondence to:
Lin Shen, email:
Keywords: gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas; irinotecan; cisplatin; octreotide long-acting release; heterogeneous
Received: February 21, 2016 Accepted: October 16, 2016 Published: October 25, 2016
Abstract
There have been very few prospective studies of first-line chemotherapy on advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (GEP-NEC). This phase II study assessed the activity and safety of irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) followed by octreotide long-acting release (LAR) maintenance treatment in advanced GEP-NEC. Forty patients were treated and eighteen patients (45.0%) had a partial response. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5.7 months and 12.9 months, respectively. Because GEP-NECs are heterogeneous, a subgroup analysis was conducted by dividing all patients into a high proliferation neuroendocrine tumor (NET) group (well differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms with a Ki-67 level between 20-60%) or a poorly differentiated NEC (PDNEC) group. Compared with the PDNEC group, the patients in high proliferation NET group had a lower response rate (0% versus 51.4%) but longer PFS (8.9 versus 5.7 months) and received more octreotide LAR treatment (median cycles, 7 versus 3). The most common toxicities included grade 3/4 leukopenia/neutropenia (60%), nausea/vomiting (17.5%) and diarrhea (12.5%). Therefore, IP is an active regimen in patients with advanced GEP-PDNEC and should probably not be given to patients with advanced high proliferative NET. The benefit of octreotide LAR maintenance therapy on high proliferation NETs requires further study.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/27682/2768241d028fb307792a83699ece770c70e3cd07" alt="Creative Commons License"
PII: 12900