IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0234314.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regorafenib vs trifluridine/tipiracil for metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapies: A multicenter retrospective comparison study in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Misato Ogata
  • Masahito Kotaka
  • Takatsugu Ogata
  • Yukimasa Hatachi
  • Hisateru Yasui
  • Takeshi Kato
  • Akihito Tsuji
  • Hironaga Satake

Abstract

Regorafenib (REG) and trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) showed survival benefits in metastatic colorectal cancer patients previously treated with standard chemotherapies; therefore, we compared the efficacy and safety of these two treatments. Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with REG or FTD/TPI as a salvage-line therapy from May 2014 to December 2017 were included. We retrospectively analyzed long-term survival, safety, and clinical outcomes. Among 134 patients, 57 and 77 received REG and FTD/TPI, respectively. The REG group received more prior systemic chemotherapies and significantly more frequent additional chemotherapies than the FTD/TPI group did. The median follow-up was 6.2 months, whereas the median overall survival was 9.9 and 11.4 months in the REG and FTD/TPI groups, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.954, p = 0.837). The median progression-free survival was 2.0 and 3.3 months in the REG and FTD/TPI groups, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.52, p = 0.00047), indicating significant differences, whereas the objective response and disease control rates did not differ. The median overall survival of patients with additional subsequent chemotherapies after disease progression was longer than that of patients without additional chemotherapy. The most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events were hypertension and neutropenia in the REG and FTD/TPI groups, respectively. Our study suggested that sequential use of both drugs may prolong survival.

Suggested Citation

  • Misato Ogata & Masahito Kotaka & Takatsugu Ogata & Yukimasa Hatachi & Hisateru Yasui & Takeshi Kato & Akihito Tsuji & Hironaga Satake, 2020. "Regorafenib vs trifluridine/tipiracil for metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapies: A multicenter retrospective comparison study in Japan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-10, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234314
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234314
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234314&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0234314?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234314. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.