Early onset metastatic colorectal cancer in patients receiving panitumumab‐based upfront strategy: overall and sex‐specific outcomes in the Valentino trial

Alessandra Raimondi,Giovanni Randon,Michele Prisciandaro,Filippo Pagani,Sara Lonardi,Carlotta Antoniotti,Silvia Bozzarelli,Andrea Sartore‐Bianchi,Marco Tampellini,Laura Fanchini,Roberto Murialdo,Matteo Clavarezza,Alberto Zaniboni,Rosa Berenato,Margherita Ratti,Fausto Petrelli,Lorenzo Antonuzzo,Monica Giordano,Alessandro Rossi,Maria Di Bartolomeo,Massimo Di Maio,Filippo Pietrantonio,Federica Morano
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.34156
2022-06-10
International Journal of Cancer
Abstract:Anti‐EGFRs plus doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for RAS/BRAF wild‐type left‐sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Early‐onset (EO) mCRC has an increasing incidence and its prognostic/predictive role and management is debatable. We performed a post‐hoc analysis of Valentino study, that randomized RAS wild‐type mCRC patients to two panitumumab‐based maintenance regimens after FOLFOX/panitumumab induction. We assessed the safety and efficacy outcomes in patients stratified for age (<50/≥50 years old). We assessed progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of treatment‐related and panitumumab‐related adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL). In 229 patients enrolled, 35 (15%) had EO mCRC, with a higher rate of female sex (P=0.020) and lower rate of primary tumor resection (P=0.001). Median PFS and OS were 10.9 versus 10.8 months (P=0.593) and 28.1 versus 27.5 months (P=0.865) in patients <50 and ≥50 years old, respectively, with no significant impact of maintenance arm. ORR and disease control rate were 74% versus 65% (P=0.337) and 97% versus 81% (P=0.013) in patients <50 or ≥50 years old. In younger patients, a trend for increased chemotherapy‐related AEs (peculiarly anemia) was shown, while significantly decreased EGFR‐related hypomagnesemia and increased skin rash were reported. No significant differences in treatment intensity or QoL were observed. In patients with EO mCRC and RAS wild‐type status, we found no differences in terms of survival outcomes based on age when selecting maintenance strategies. Management of treatment‐related AEs should consider the differential toxicity profile of age and sex. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?