Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Phase II Study of S-1 and Irinotecan Plus Bevacizumab as Second-line Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Resistant to the Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin-cetuximab Regimen

HIROAKI TANIOKA, KEN SHIMADA, AKIHITO TSUJI, MITSUGU KOCHI, HO MIN KIM, TAKAO TAKAHASHI, TADAMICHI DENDA, AKINORI TAKAGANE, TAKANORI WATANABE, MASAHITO KOTAKA, MASATO NAKAMURA, YU SUNAKAWA, MASAHIRO TAKEUCHI, WATARU ICHIKAWA and MASASHI FUJII
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2675-2681; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15745
HIROAKI TANIOKA
1Department of Clinical Oncology, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tanioka@med.kawasaki-m.ac.jp
KEN SHIMADA
2Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Showa University Koto Toyosu Hospital, Tokyo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
AKIHITO TSUJI
3Department of Clinical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kida, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MITSUGU KOCHI
4Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University Itabashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HO MIN KIM
5Department of Surgery, Itami City Hospital, Itami, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TAKAO TAKAHASHI
6Department of Surgical Oncology, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TADAMICHI DENDA
7Division of Gastroenterology, Chiba Cancer Center, Chiba, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
AKINORI TAKAGANE
8Department of Surgery, Hakodate Goryoukaku Hospital, Hakodate, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TAKANORI WATANABE
9Department of Surgery, Japanese Red Cross Society Himeji Hospital, Himeji, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MASAHITO KOTAKA
10Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Sano Hospital, Kobe, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MASATO NAKAMURA
11Aizawa Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aizawa Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YU SUNAKAWA
12Department of Clinical Oncology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MASAHIRO TAKEUCHI
13Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
WATARU ICHIKAWA
14Division of Medical Oncology, Showa University Fujigaoka Hospital, Yokohama, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MASASHI FUJII
4Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University Itabashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: The usefulness of angiogenesis inhibitors as second-line treatment after the progression of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody drug-containing regimens for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has not been fully investigated. Therefore, we conducted a phase II study to verify the efficacy and safety of the combination of S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (SIRB regimen) as second-line treatment for patients with oxaliplatin and cetuximab-refractory KRAS wild-type mCRC. Patients and Methods: Patients with mCRC who had previously received oxaliplatin and cetuximab-containing regimen were eligible for this study. Patients were infused with bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg and irinotecan 150 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1, whereas S-1 80 mg/m2 was administered orally twice daily until day 15, followed by a 7-day drug holiday period. The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. Results: In total, 17 patients were enrolled in this study. The 6-month PFS rate was 64.7% [95% confidence interval (CI)=41.99-87.43], median PFS was 10.1 months (95%CI=4.11-17.28), and median overall survival was 21.8 months (95%CI=9.79-37.91). The response rate was 23.5% (95%CI=6.81-49.90%). Grade ≥3 adverse events were observed in 10% of patients, and included leukopenia [3 (17.6%)], neutropenia [5 (29.4%)], anorexia [2 (11.8%)], diarrhea [2 (11.8%)], and hypertension [3 (17.6%)]. No treatment-related deaths or febrile neutropenia were observed. Conclusion: The SIRB regimen might be a promising second-line treatment option for patients with oxaliplatin and cetuximab-refractory KRAS wild-type mCRC in terms of efficacy and safety.

Key Words:
  • S-1
  • irinotecan
  • bevacizumab
  • SIRB
  • cetuximab
  • second-line treatment

The combination of folinic acid and fluorouracil with either irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) has been established as a standard regimen for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Tournigand et al. (1) investigated two sequences – FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX and FOLFOX followed by FOLFIRI – and found no difference in overall survival (OS) between the two regimens.

Therefore, in cases where oxaliplatin-based regimens were used in the first-line setting, irinotecan-based regimens were recommended as second-line treatments, and vice versa. To improve the therapeutic effects of these cytotoxic drug regimens only, it has become possible to use molecular target drugs such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody drugs together with cytotoxic regimens (2-4). Bevacizumab was reported to prolong survival in two observational studies and one phase III trial when used continuously in patients with mCRC after standard first-line bevacizumab-based treatment (5-7). Regarding anti-EGFR antibody as first-line treatment, the combination of anti-EGFR antibody and cytotoxic drugs has been shown to improve prognosis in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC, and this combination regimen is recommended in the latest guidelines in several countries (2-4). According to these guidelines, the optimal second-line regimen after standard first-line anti-EGFR-based treatment is VEGF inhibitor-based treatment. However, the usefulness of second-line VEGF inhibitors after the progression of first-line anti-EGFR-based treatment has not been fully investigated. According to a post-hoc analysis of subsequent therapies in the FIRE-3 trial comparing first-line cetuximab and bevacizumab with FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type mCRC, about half of the patients in the first-line cetuximab group received bevacizumab in subsequent treatment lines. As a result, OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were improved from the start of the second-line treatment compared with patients in the first-line bevacizumab group (8). These findings suggested that the subsequent use of anti-VEGF agents after first-line anti-EGFR treatment failure may contribute to favorable clinical outcomes.

In recent years, treatments that replace intravenous fluorouracil with oral fluoropyrimidines have been developed. Regimens containing oral fluoropyrimidine play a significant role in improving quality of life because continuous infusion is not required. Furthermore, in addition to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX), which has already become the standard of care, combinations of tegafur– gimeracil–oteracil potassium capsules (S-1), which were developed in Japan, plus oxaliplatin (SOX) (9), S-1 plus irinotecan (IRIS: 4-week regimen or SIR: 3-week regimen) (10, 11), and the combinations of oral fluoropyrimidines plus oxaliplatin or irinotecan with bevacizumab (12-14) have also been reported. However, the efficacy and safety of SIR plus bevacizumab (SIRB regimen) has not been fully investigated in the second-line setting for patients with oxaliplatin and anti-EGFR antibody-refractory RAS wild-type mCRC. Therefore, we conducted a phase II study to verify the efficacy and safety of the SIRB regimen for patients with oxaliplatin and cetuximab-refractory KRAS wild-type mCRC.

Patients and Methods

Study design. This phase II, multi-institutional clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a triweekly SIRB regimen for KRAS exon 2 wild-type mCRC treated with cetuximab and oxaliplatin as first-line therapy. The study was performed in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and ethical guidelines for clinical studies. The protocol of this study was approved by the institutional review board or ethics committee of each institution (JACCRO R2-8). Written informed consent was obtained from all patients before the study began. This study has been registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000010319).

Inclusion criteria. Patients meeting the following criteria were included in the study: age ≥20 years at the time of providing informed consent; likely to survive for ≥3 months; capable of oral ingestion; histologically confirmed mCRC; advanced unresectable/recurrent mCRC resistant to first-line fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin plus cetuximab therapy; evaluable lesions (regardless of whether they were measurable); able to provide written informed consent after receiving a thorough explanation of the contents of this study; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0-1. In addition, patients who met the following criteria for major organ function within 14 days of enrollment were also included: white blood cell count in the range of 3,000-12,000 per mm3; neutrophil count ≥1,500 per mm3; platelets ≥10.0×104 per mm3; hemoglobin ≥9.0 g/dl; blood bilirubin ≤1.5 mg/dl; aspartate transaminase ≤100 IU/l (200 IU/l if liver metastasis was present); alanine transaminase ≤ 100 IU/l (200 IU/l if liver metastasis was present); serum creatinine ≤1.2 mg/dl; creatinine clearance ≥50 ml/min; proteinuria ≤1+; and prothrombin time/international normalized ratio <1.5.

Exclusion criteria. Patients with the following conditions were excluded from the study: brain metastases; interstitial pneumonia or pulmonary fibrosis; present or previous history of serious heart disease; history of thromboembolism; history of hemoptysis; severe paresthesia or dysesthesia with functional impairment; large amounts of cancerous fluids (e.g., pleural effusion, ascites, pericardial effusion); radiotherapy for primary or metastatic disease; treatment with drugs that inhibit platelet function (aspirin preparation at 325 mg/day); hemorrhagic tendencies, coagulopathy, or clotting factor abnormalities; active peptic ulcer disease; watery stool or uncontrollable diarrhea; or intestinal paralysis and/or intestinal obstruction.

Treatment protocol. Bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg was administered as a 30-90-min infusion on day 1 and irinotecan 150 mg/m2 as a 90-min infusion on day 1 every 3 weeks. The dose of S-1 was determined according to the patient’s body surface area (BSA) as follows: BSA <1.25 m2: 80 mg/day; BSA 1.25-1.5 m2: 100 mg/day; and BSA >1.5 m2: 120 mg/day (for creatinine clearance 50-60 ml/min, the initial dose of S-1 was reduced by one level) administered orally twice daily after breakfast and dinner (from after dinner on day 1 to after breakfast on day 15 followed by 7 days of drug holiday). A single cycle lasted 3 weeks. Premedication with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3-receptor antagonist combined with dexamethasone 6.6 mg was recommended before the administration of irinotecan.

End points. The primary end point of this phase II study was 6-month PFS rate. The secondary end points were PFS, OS, response rate (RR), and safety (incidence rate and severity of adverse events).

Safety and response evaluation. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST ver. 1.1) was used to determine the tumor response, and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 Japanese Translated Japan Clinical Oncology Group Version (CTCAE v4.0-JCOG) was used to evaluate adverse events. The ECOG PS scale was used to assess the general condition of the patients.

Statistical analysis. The rationale for determining the target sample size was as follows. In the FIRIS study, which tested the non-inferiority of IRIS versus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for unresectable advanced or recurrent mCRC, patients with resistance to prior fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin treatments had a 6-month PFS rate of approximately 40% in the IRIS group and 30% in the FOLFIRI group (11). In the ML18147 study, wherein the importance of continuing bevacizumab as second-line therapy in patients with mCRC resistant to the bevacizumab-containing regimen in first-line therapy was studied, the 6-month PFS rate was approximately 45% in patients who received the regimen and approximately 30% in those who did not (7). Based on these results, we assumed a threshold 6-month PFS rate of 30% and an expected 6-month PFS rate of 45% for this study. The calculation of the required sample size at a=0.05 and b=0.20 indicated that 61 cases needed to be enrolled. Therefore, the sample size for our study was set at 70, considering possible dropouts.

Survival time analysis for PFS and OS was performed on the analysis population. Survival functions were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method along with median and annual PFS. The Greenwood formula was used to obtain 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In terms of tumor shrinkage, point estimates were calculated for the RR, and two-sided 95%CIs were calculated for the analysis population. An accurate CI based on the binomial distribution was used for interval estimation.

Results

Patient characteristics. A total of 17 patients were enrolled from eight centers between July 2013 and May 2015. Enrollment was stopped in October 2015 due to poor patient accrual. Data were extracted in December 2017, after which, the analysis was performed. Of the 17 patients enrolled, there were no ineligible patients or patients who withdrew before treatment, thus all 17 were included in the full analysis set. No protocol deviations occurred after treatment initiation, and thus all 17 patients were likewise included in the per protocol set and safety analysis. The mean observation period was 21.8 months (95%CI=2.89-44.32). The clinical characteristics of the patients are shown in Table I. The median age was 67 years (range=49-78 years). There were 11 (64.7%) males and 6 (35.3%) females. The ECOG PS was 0 in 14 patients (82.4%) and 1 in 3 (17.6%). The primary tumor sites were the colon and rectum, in 11 (64.7%) and 6 (35.3%) patients, respectively. All cases had undergone surgical resection before the initiation of first-line treatment. The metastatic sites were the liver, lungs, abdominal lymph nodes, and other, in 11 (64.7%), 9 (52.9%), 9 (52.9%), and 5 (29.4%) patients, respectively. The UGT1A1 gene was wild-type (*1/*1) in 8 (47.1%) patients, heterozygous (*1/*6, *1/*28) in 6 (35.3%), homozygous or double heterozygous (*6/*6, *28/*28, *6/*28) in none, and unmeasured in 3 (17.6%). First-line therapy included treatment with FOLFOX plus cetuximab and SOX plus cetuximab in 8 (47.1%) and 9 (52.9%) patients, respectively. The best response of the first-line therapy was complete response (CR) in 1 patient (5.9%), partial response (PR) in 14 (82.4%), stable disease (SD) in 1 (5.9%), and progressive disease (PD) in 1 (5.9%). The median treatment duration of the first-line therapy was 11.0 months (range=1.0-30.0 months).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Patient characteristics.

Efficacy and safety. The 6-month PFS rate was 64.7% (95%CI=41.99-87.43%), median PFS was 10.1 months (95%CI=4.11-17.28) and patients were followed for a median of 10.1 months (range=1.84-17.38 months) (Figure 1). The median OS was 21.8 months (95%CI=9.79-37.91) and patients were followed for a median of 21.8 months (range=2.89-44.32 months) (Figure 2). The RR was 23.5% (95%CI=6.81-49.90), with 0 CR, 4 (23.5%) PR, 11 (64.7%) SD, and 2 (11.8%) PD cases. The disease control rate was 88.2% (95%CI=63.56-98.54) (Table II). The median number of treatment cycles was 7 (range=1-25). The median relative dose intensities of each agent were 85.2% for irinotecan, 78.1% for S1, and 95.8% for bevacizumab. The safety results of the 17 patients are shown in Table III. Grade ≥3 adverse events were noted in 10% of the patients and included leukopenia in 3 patients (17.6%), neutropenia in 5 (29.4%), anorexia in 2 (11.8%), diarrhea in 2 (11.8%), and hypertension in 3 (17.6%). No febrile neutropenia or treatment-related deaths occurred.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Progression-free survival (PFS) of S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab as a second-line regimen (n=17). The 6-month PFS was 64.7% [95% confidence interval (CI)=41.99-87.43]. The median PFS was 10.1 months (95%CI=4.11-17.28). CI: Confidence interval; PFS: progression-free survival.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Overall survival (OS) of S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab as a second-line regimen (n=17). The median OS was 21.8 months (95% confidence interval=9.79-37.91).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Response of patients to treatment.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Adverse events according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

Discussion

This phase II study demonstrated that a triweekly SIRB regimen might be an effective and well-tolerated second-line treatment for patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC who have become refractory to cetuximab and oxaliplatin as first-line treatment. Our results indicated a promising 6-month PFS rate of 64.7%, median PFS of 10.1 months, and median OS of 21.8 months. The number of cases was 17, which was less than the 70 cases for which the sample size was initially set, but was considered suitable for the primary end point. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first multicenter phase II clinical trial conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of second-line bevacizumab-containing regimens in patients with anti-EGFR antibody-refractory KRAS wild-type mCRC.

Second-line VEGF inhibitors plus standard chemotherapy are known as a safe and effective option for patients with mCRC who received bevacizumab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment, regardless of their RAS status. In the phase III ML18147 trial, which investigated the continuous use of bevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy in patients with progression of mCRC after standard first-line bevacizumab-based chemotherapy, the primary end point of OS in the second-line therapy was 11.2 months in the bevacizumab group and 9.8 months in the chemotherapy-only group [hazard ratio (HR)=0. 81, p=0.0062] (6). The survival benefit of both ramucirumab and aflibercept plus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for patients with cancer progression who had received bevacizumab as first-line treatment were also shown in the RAISE and VELOUR trials, respectively (15, 16). Therefore, VEGF inhibitors used in combination with fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan as a second-line treatment have been shown to prolong OS, even after patients became refractory to bevacizumab as a first-line treatment. Median OS and PFS in the present study were 21.8 and 10.1 months; in contrast, median OS and PFS of continuous use of VEGF inhibitors after refractory to bevacizumab in these three phase III trials (ML18147, RAISE, VELOUR) were 11.2-13.5 and 5.7-6.9 months, respectively (7, 15, 16). As one of the reasons for the good clinical outcome in our study, the subsequent use of bevacizumab after failure of first-line anti-EGFR treatment may contribute to prolong OS and PFS.

In a preliminary study, VEGF receptor-1 was found to be expressed in human cancer cells that were resistant to anti-EGFR drugs (17). After patients become refractory to first-line anti-EGFR antibody drugs, the use of VEGF inhibitors in second-line treatments can be beneficial. However, a phase III trial using many VEGF inhibitors as second-line treatment demonstrated the usefulness of continued bevacizumab and other VEGF inhibitors after the development of treatment resistance to first-line bevacizumab. To our knowledge, no studies have prospectively investigated the optimal use of VEGF inhibitors as second-line therapy for patients with RAS wild-type mCRC using first-line anti-EGFR drugs. The results of the FIRE-3 study suggested that the first-line introduction of anti-EGFR therapy may induce good tolerability and efficacy for second-line anti-VEGF therapy (8). In that phase III trial, OS favored the first-line cetuximab group, which had a median OS of 7.5 months longer than that observed in the first-line bevacizumab group. On the other hand, PFS was similar in both groups. According to an analysis of subsequent therapies with regard to this trial, about half of the patients in the cetuximab group received bevacizumab in subsequent treatment lines, and PFS from the start of second-line therapy in the cetuximab group was 6.5 months, compared with 4.7 months in the bevacizumab group (p<0.001), and OS from the start of second-line therapy was 16.3 and 13.2 months (p=0.021), respectively. Similarly, Hsu et al. (18) retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab as first- or third-line treatment. Compared with the reverse sequence group, the first-line cetuximab followed by third-line bevacizumab group had better clinical outcomes. Considering these preclinical and clinical results, the subsequent use of anti-VEGF agents after failure of first-line anti-EGFR treatment may contribute to favorable clinical outcomes after second-line treatment. Conversely, three randomized phase II studies examining the subsequent use of second-line anti-EGFR therapy after first-line bevacizumab did not show better clinical outcomes compared with the continuous use of bevacizumab from first- to second-line therapy. In patients with RAS wild-type mCRC, first-line introduction of anti-EGFR therapy followed by second-line anti-VEGF may represent an optimal sequence with a better survival advantage (19-21). In fact, in the present study, median PFS and OS were 10.1 and 21.8 months, respectively, which was non-inferior to the PFS (6.5 months) and OS (13.2 months) from the start of second-line therapy in the cetuximab group in the FIRE-3 trial.

In the phase III FIRIS trial, the combination of S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine, and irinotecan (IRIS: irinotecan 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, S-1 80 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period) was shown to be non-inferior to FOLFIRI as second-line treatment (11). It was also reported that the frequency of Grade 3 or higher neutropenia, diarrhea, anorexia, and fatigue was higher in the IRIS than in the FOLFIRI group. In the present study, Grade 3 neutropenia, diarrhea, and anorexia were observed in 29.4%, 11.8%, and 11.8% of the patients, respectively, compared with 3.62%, 20.5%, and 11.0% in the IRIS group in the FIRIS study, but all adverse events were manageable. Although our study regimen differed from the IRIS regimen in the FIRIS trial in terms of dosage and administration for S1 and irinotecan, and involved the combination of bevacizumab, the incidence of adverse events did not differ between the present study regimen and the IRIS regimen. Therefore, the combination of S1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab may be a promising treatment modality alongside other VEGF inhibitor regimens and has the potential to become a favorable option in second-line settings.

The present study had several limitations. First, this was a single-arm trial with a limited sample size. Moreover, patient recruitment was terminated before the number of patients reached 70, which led to an underpowered analysis. Second, S-1 for colorectal cancer has only been available in European and Asian countries, and the pharmacokinetics and toxicities of S-1 are known to be different between European and East Asian patients (22). Third, only patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type CRC were eligible; anti-EGFR antibody is considered ineffective in patients with KRAS exon 3, 4, NRAS, and BRAF V600E-mutated CRC. Since expanded RAS and BRAF testing was not approved in Japan at the start of this study, these patients could not be excluded.

SIRB, which was prospectively examined in the present study, was shown to be effective and tolerable in terms of safety. This regimen is mainly administered using oral preparations, and the infusion interval is every 3 weeks, which is a convenient treatment method for outpatients. Therefore, we believe that this regimen is one of useful second-line treatments for patients with oxaliplatin and cetuximab-refractory KRAS wild-type advanced unresectable or recurrent mCRC.

Acknowledgements

The Authors would like to thank the recruited patients and their families, the collaborators who contributed to this study, and the members of the Japan Clinical Cancer Research Organization (JACCRO) Data Center and Support Office. The Authors would also like to thank Yasuhiro Shimada, Kenji Omura, and Toru Takebayashi for the independent data and assistance with the safety monitoring committee.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    Shimada, K., Tsuji, A., Kochi, M., Denda, T., Kotaka, M., Nakamura, M., Sunakawa, Y., Ichikawa, W. and Fujii, M. conceived and designed the study. Tanioka, H., Tsuji, A., Kochi, M., Kim, H. M., Takahashi, T., Denda, T., Takagane, A. and Watanabe, T. gathered the data. Takeuchi, M. analysed the data. All the Authors were involved in interpretation of the data, development review, and approval of the manuscript. Tanioka, H., Shimada, K., Ichikawa, W. and Fujii, M. were responsible for the final decision to submit for publication.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    Tsuji, A. has received honoraria from Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Merck Biopharma Co., Ltd.; and scholarship donations from Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Takahashi, T. belongs endowed chair from Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd. Denda, T. has received honoraria from Sysmex Corporation and Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; and fees for promotional materials from Sawai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; and research funding from MSD K.K. and Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Kotaka, M. has received honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd. and Eli Lilly Japan K.K. Nakamura, M. has received honoraria from Bayer Yakuhin, Ltd., Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Ltd., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan Co., Ltd., Merck Biopharma Co., Ltd., Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Sanofi Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd. Sunakawa, Y. has received honoraria and research funding from Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Ichikawa, W. has received honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd. and Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.; and research funding from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. The other Authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest in relation to this study.

  • Funding

    This study was funded by the Japan Clinical Cancer Research Organization (JACCRO).

  • Received March 4, 2022.
  • Revision received March 22, 2022.
  • Accepted March 23, 2022.
  • Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Tournigand C,
    2. André T,
    3. Achille E,
    4. Lledo G,
    5. Flesh M,
    6. Mery-Mignard D,
    7. Quinaux E,
    8. Couteau C,
    9. Buyse M,
    10. Ganem G,
    11. Landi B,
    12. Colin P,
    13. Louvet C and
    14. de Gramont A
    : FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study. J Clin Oncol 22(2): 229-237, 2004. PMID: 14657227. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.113
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Yoshino T,
    2. Arnold D,
    3. Taniguchi H,
    4. Pentheroudakis G,
    5. Yamazaki K,
    6. Xu RH,
    7. Kim TW,
    8. Ismail F,
    9. Tan IB,
    10. Yeh KH,
    11. Grothey A,
    12. Zhang S,
    13. Ahn JB,
    14. Mastura MY,
    15. Chong D,
    16. Chen LT,
    17. Kopetz S,
    18. Eguchi-Nakajima T,
    19. Ebi H,
    20. Ohtsu A,
    21. Cervantes A,
    22. Muro K,
    23. Tabernero J,
    24. Minami H,
    25. Ciardiello F and
    26. Douillard JY
    : Pan-Asian adapted ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KACO, MOS, SSO and TOS. Ann Oncol 29(1): 44-70, 2018. PMID: 29155929. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx738
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Watanabe T,
    2. Itabashi M,
    3. Shimada Y,
    4. Tanaka S,
    5. Ito Y,
    6. Ajioka Y,
    7. Hamaguchi T,
    8. Hyodo I,
    9. Igarashi M,
    10. Ishida H,
    11. Ishihara S,
    12. Ishiguro M,
    13. Kanemitsu Y,
    14. Kokudo N,
    15. Muro K,
    16. Ochiai A,
    17. Oguchi M,
    18. Ohkura Y,
    19. Saito Y,
    20. Sakai Y,
    21. Ueno H,
    22. Yoshino T,
    23. Boku N,
    24. Fujimori T,
    25. Koinuma N,
    26. Morita T,
    27. Nishimura G,
    28. Sakata Y,
    29. Takahashi K,
    30. Tsuruta O,
    31. Yamaguchi T,
    32. Yoshida M,
    33. Yamaguchi N,
    34. Kotake K,
    35. Sugihara K and Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum
    : Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) Guidelines 2014 for treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 20(2): 207-239, 2015. PMID: 25782566. DOI: 10.1007/s10147-015-0801-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Van Cutsem E,
    2. Cervantes A,
    3. Adam R,
    4. Sobrero A,
    5. Van Krieken JH,
    6. Aderka D,
    7. Aranda Aguilar E,
    8. Bardelli A,
    9. Benson A,
    10. Bodoky G,
    11. Ciardiello F,
    12. D’Hoore A,
    13. Diaz-Rubio E,
    14. Douillard JY,
    15. Ducreux M,
    16. Falcone A,
    17. Grothey A,
    18. Gruenberger T,
    19. Haustermans K,
    20. Heinemann V,
    21. Hoff P,
    22. Köhne CH,
    23. Labianca R,
    24. Laurent-Puig P,
    25. Ma B,
    26. Maughan T,
    27. Muro K,
    28. Normanno N,
    29. Österlund P,
    30. Oyen WJ,
    31. Papamichael D,
    32. Pentheroudakis G,
    33. Pfeiffer P,
    34. Price TJ,
    35. Punt C,
    36. Ricke J,
    37. Roth A,
    38. Salazar R,
    39. Scheithauer W,
    40. Schmoll HJ,
    41. Tabernero J,
    42. Taïeb J,
    43. Tejpar S,
    44. Wasan H,
    45. Yoshino T,
    46. Zaanan A and
    47. Arnold D
    : ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 27(8): 1386-1422, 2016. PMID: 27380959. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw235
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Grothey A,
    2. Sugrue MM,
    3. Purdie DM,
    4. Dong W,
    5. Sargent D,
    6. Hedrick E and
    7. Kozloff M
    : Bevacizumab beyond first progression is associated with prolonged overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a large observational cohort study (BRiTE). J Clin Oncol 26(33): 5326-5334, 2008. PMID: 18854571. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3212
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Kubicka S,
    2. Greil R,
    3. André T,
    4. Bennouna J,
    5. Sastre J,
    6. Van Cutsem E,
    7. von Moos R,
    8. Osterlund P,
    9. Reyes-Rivera I,
    10. Müller T,
    11. Makrutzki M,
    12. Arnold D and ML18147 study investigators including AIO, GERCOR, FFCD, UNICANCER GI, TTD, BGDO, GEMCAD, and AGMT groups
    : Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy continued beyond first progression in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy: ML18147 study KRAS subgroup findings. Ann Oncol 24(9): 2342-2349, 2013. PMID: 23852309. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt231
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Bennouna J,
    2. Sastre J,
    3. Arnold D,
    4. Österlund P,
    5. Greil R,
    6. Van Cutsem E,
    7. von Moos R,
    8. Viéitez JM,
    9. Bouché O,
    10. Borg C,
    11. Steffens CC,
    12. Alonso-Orduña V,
    13. Schlichting C,
    14. Reyes-Rivera I,
    15. Bendahmane B,
    16. André T,
    17. Kubicka S and ML18147 Study Investigators
    : Continuation of bevacizumab after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (ML18147): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14(1): 29-37, 2013. PMID: 23168366. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70477-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Modest DP,
    2. Stintzing S,
    3. von Weikersthal LF,
    4. Decker T,
    5. Kiani A,
    6. Vehling-Kaiser U,
    7. Al-Batran SE,
    8. Heintges T,
    9. Lerchenmüller C,
    10. Kahl C,
    11. Seipelt G,
    12. Kullmann F,
    13. Stauch M,
    14. Scheithauer W,
    15. Held S,
    16. Möhler M,
    17. Jung A,
    18. Kirchner T and
    19. Heinemann V
    : Impact of subsequent therapies on outcome of the FIRE-3/AIO KRK0306 trial: First-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors in metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 33(32): 3718-3726, 2015. PMID: 26261259. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.2887
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Yamada Y,
    2. Tahara M,
    3. Miya T,
    4. Satoh T,
    5. Shirao K,
    6. Shimada Y,
    7. Ohtsu A,
    8. Sasaki Y and
    9. Tanigawara Y
    : Phase I/II study of oxaliplatin with oral S-1 as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 98(6): 1034-1038, 2008. PMID: 18319719. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604271
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Goto A,
    2. Yamada Y,
    3. Yasui H,
    4. Kato K,
    5. Hamaguchi T,
    6. Muro K,
    7. Shimada Y and
    8. Shirao K
    : Phase II study of combination therapy with S-1 and irinotecan in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 17(6): 968-973, 2006. PMID: 16603600. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdl066
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Muro K,
    2. Boku N,
    3. Shimada Y,
    4. Tsuji A,
    5. Sameshima S,
    6. Baba H,
    7. Satoh T,
    8. Denda T,
    9. Ina K,
    10. Nishina T,
    11. Yamaguchi K,
    12. Takiuchi H,
    13. Esaki T,
    14. Tokunaga S,
    15. Kuwano H,
    16. Komatsu Y,
    17. Watanabe M,
    18. Hyodo I,
    19. Morita S and
    20. Sugihara K
    : Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) versus fluorouracil and folinic acid plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised phase 2/3 non-inferiority study (FIRIS study). Lancet Oncol 11(9): 853-860, 2010. PMID: 20708966. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70181-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Komatsu Y,
    2. Yuki S,
    3. Sogabe S,
    4. Fukushima H,
    5. Nakatsumi H,
    6. Kobayashi Y,
    7. Iwanaga I,
    8. Nakamura M,
    9. Hatanaka K,
    10. Miyagishima T,
    11. Kudo M,
    12. Munakata M,
    13. Meguro T,
    14. Tateyama M and
    15. Sakata Y
    : Phase II study of combined chemotherapy with irinotecan and S-1 (IRIS) plus bevacizumab in patients with inoperable recurrent or advanced colorectal cancer. Acta Oncol 51(7): 867-872, 2012. PMID: 22554343. DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2012.682629
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Yamada Y,
    2. Takahari D,
    3. Matsumoto H,
    4. Baba H,
    5. Nakamura M,
    6. Yoshida K,
    7. Yoshida M,
    8. Iwamoto S,
    9. Shimada K,
    10. Komatsu Y,
    11. Sasaki Y,
    12. Satoh T,
    13. Takahashi K,
    14. Mishima H,
    15. Muro K,
    16. Watanabe M,
    17. Sakata Y,
    18. Morita S,
    19. Shimada Y and
    20. Sugihara K
    : Leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab versus S-1 and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (SOFT): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14(13): 1278-1286, 2013. PMID: 24225157. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70490-X
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Miyamoto Y,
    2. Tsuji A,
    3. Tanioka H,
    4. Maekawa S,
    5. Kawanaka H,
    6. Kitazono M,
    7. Oki E,
    8. Emi Y,
    9. Murakami H,
    10. Ogata Y,
    11. Saeki H,
    12. Shimokawa M,
    13. Natsugoe S,
    14. Akagi Y,
    15. Baba H and
    16. Maehara Y
    : S-1 and irinotecan plus bevacizumab as second-line chemotherapy for patients with oxaliplatin-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter phase II study in Japan (KSCC1102). Int J Clin Oncol 21(4): 705-712, 2016. PMID: 26746689. DOI: 10.1007/s10147-015-0943-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Tabernero J,
    2. Yoshino T,
    3. Cohn AL,
    4. Obermannova R,
    5. Bodoky G,
    6. Garcia-Carbonero R,
    7. Ciuleanu TE,
    8. Portnoy DC,
    9. Van Cutsem E,
    10. Grothey A,
    11. Prausová J,
    12. Garcia-Alfonso P,
    13. Yamazaki K,
    14. Clingan PR,
    15. Lonardi S,
    16. Kim TW,
    17. Simms L,
    18. Chang SC,
    19. Nasroulah F and RAISE Study Investigators
    : Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 16(5): 499-508, 2015. PMID: 25877855. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70127-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Van Cutsem E,
    2. Tabernero J,
    3. Lakomy R,
    4. Prenen H,
    5. Prausová J,
    6. Macarulla T,
    7. Ruff P,
    8. van Hazel GA,
    9. Moiseyenko V,
    10. Ferry D,
    11. McKendrick J,
    12. Polikoff J,
    13. Tellier A,
    14. Castan R and
    15. Allegra C
    : Addition of aflibercept to fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan improves survival in a phase III randomized trial in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with an oxaliplatin-based regimen. J Clin Oncol 30(28): 3499-3506, 2012. PMID: 22949147. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.8201
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Bianco R,
    2. Rosa R,
    3. Damiano V,
    4. Daniele G,
    5. Gelardi T,
    6. Garofalo S,
    7. Tarallo V,
    8. De Falco S,
    9. Melisi D,
    10. Benelli R,
    11. Albini A,
    12. Ryan A,
    13. Ciardiello F and
    14. Tortora G
    : Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 contributes to resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor drugs in human cancer cells. Clin Cancer Res 14(16): 5069-5080, 2008. PMID: 18694994. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4905
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Hsu HC,
    2. Liu YC,
    3. Wang CW,
    4. Chou WC,
    5. Hsu YJ,
    6. Chiang JM,
    7. Lin YC and
    8. Yang TS
    : Sequential cetuximab/bevacizumab therapy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. Cancer Med 8(7): 3437-3446, 2019. PMID: 31090176. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.2235
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Hecht JR,
    2. Cohn A,
    3. Dakhil S,
    4. Saleh M,
    5. Piperdi B,
    6. Cline-Burkhardt M,
    7. Tian Y and
    8. Go WY
    : SPIRITT: A randomized, multicenter, phase II study of panitumumab with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab with FOLFIRI as second-line treatment in patients with unresectable wild type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 14(2): 72-80, 2015. PMID: 25982297. DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2014.12.009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Shitara K,
    2. Yonesaka K,
    3. Denda T,
    4. Yamazaki K,
    5. Moriwaki T,
    6. Tsuda M,
    7. Takano T,
    8. Okuda H,
    9. Nishina T,
    10. Sakai K,
    11. Nishio K,
    12. Tokunaga S,
    13. Yamanaka T,
    14. Boku N,
    15. Hyodo I and
    16. Muro K
    : Randomized study of FOLFIRI plus either panitumumab or bevacizumab for wild-type KRAS colorectal cancer-WJOG 6210G. Cancer Sci 107(12): 1843-1850, 2016. PMID: 27712015. DOI: 10.1111/cas.13098
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Bennouna J,
    2. Hiret S,
    3. Bertaut A,
    4. Bouché O,
    5. Deplanque G,
    6. Borel C,
    7. François E,
    8. Conroy T,
    9. Ghiringhelli F,
    10. des Guetz G,
    11. Seitz JF,
    12. Artru P,
    13. Hebbar M,
    14. Stanbury T,
    15. Denis MG,
    16. Adenis A and
    17. Borg C
    : Continuation of bevacizumab vs cetuximab plus chemotherapy after first progression in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: the UNICANCER PRODIGE18 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 5(1): 83-90, 2019. PMID: 30422156. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4465
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Chuah B,
    2. Goh BC,
    3. Lee SC,
    4. Soong R,
    5. Lau F,
    6. Mulay M,
    7. Dinolfo M,
    8. Lim SE,
    9. Soo R,
    10. Furuie T,
    11. Saito K,
    12. Zergebel C and
    13. Rosen LS
    : Comparison of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of S-1 between Caucasian and East Asian patients. Cancer Sci 102(2): 478-483, 2011. PMID: 21143703. DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2010.01793.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 42 (5)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 42, Issue 5
May 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Phase II Study of S-1 and Irinotecan Plus Bevacizumab as Second-line Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Resistant to the Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin-cetuximab Regimen
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
4 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Phase II Study of S-1 and Irinotecan Plus Bevacizumab as Second-line Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Resistant to the Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin-cetuximab Regimen
HIROAKI TANIOKA, KEN SHIMADA, AKIHITO TSUJI, MITSUGU KOCHI, HO MIN KIM, TAKAO TAKAHASHI, TADAMICHI DENDA, AKINORI TAKAGANE, TAKANORI WATANABE, MASAHITO KOTAKA, MASATO NAKAMURA, YU SUNAKAWA, MASAHIRO TAKEUCHI, WATARU ICHIKAWA, MASASHI FUJII
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2675-2681; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15745

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Phase II Study of S-1 and Irinotecan Plus Bevacizumab as Second-line Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Resistant to the Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin-cetuximab Regimen
HIROAKI TANIOKA, KEN SHIMADA, AKIHITO TSUJI, MITSUGU KOCHI, HO MIN KIM, TAKAO TAKAHASHI, TADAMICHI DENDA, AKINORI TAKAGANE, TAKANORI WATANABE, MASAHITO KOTAKA, MASATO NAKAMURA, YU SUNAKAWA, MASAHIRO TAKEUCHI, WATARU ICHIKAWA, MASASHI FUJII
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2675-2681; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15745
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Tumor Budding Grade and T Stage as Recurrence Predictors of High-risk Stage II Colorectal Cancer
  • Pathologic Complete Response (pCR) in Patient With Myxofibrosarcoma Who Underwent Neoadjuvant Radiation Concurrent to Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Machine Learning Model to Guide Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy in Febrile Neutropenic Patients With Hematologic Malignancies
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • S-1
  • irinotecan
  • bevacizumab
  • SIRB
  • cetuximab
  • second-line treatment
Anticancer Research

© 2025 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire