Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Early skin toxicity predicts better outcomes, and early tumor shrinkage predicts better response after cetuximab treatment in advanced colorectal cancer

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Targeted Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cetuximab-containing treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer have been shown to have higher overall response rates and longer progression-free and overall survival than other systemic therapies. Cetuximab-related manifestations, including severe skin toxicity and early tumor shrinkage, have been shown to be predictors of response to cetuximab. We hypothesized that early skin toxicity is a predictor of response and better outcomes in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. We retrospectively evaluated 62 patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma who had unresectable tumors and were treated with cetuximab in our institution. Skin toxicity grade was evaluated on each treatment day. Tumor size was evaluated using computed tomography prior to treatment and 4–8 weeks after the start of treatment with cetuximab.Patients with early tumor shrinkage after starting treatment with cetuximab had a significantly higher overall response rate (P = 0.0001). Patients with early skin toxicity showed significantly longer overall survival (P = 0.0305), and patients with higher skin toxicity grades had longer progression-free survival (P = 0.0168).We have shown that early tumor shrinkage, early onset of skin toxicity, and high skin toxicity grade are predictors of treatment efficacy and/or outcome in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma treated with cetuximab.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van Cutsem E, Kohne CH, Hitre E et al (2009) Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 360:1408–1417

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bokemeyer C, Bondarenko I, Makhson A et al (2009) Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:663–671

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sobrero AF, Maurel J, Fehrenbacher L et al (2008) EPIC: phase III trial of cetuximab plus irinotecan after fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin failure in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:2311–2319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S et al (2004) Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351:337–345

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jonker DJ, O'Callaghan CJ, Karapetis CS et al (2007) Cetuximab for the treatment of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 357:2040–2048

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Garufi C, Torsello A, Tumolo S et al (2010) Cetuximab plus chronomodulated irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal liver metastases: POCHER trial. Br J Cancer 103:1542–1547

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gunnar F, Thomas G, Wolf OB et al (2010) Tumour response and secondary resectability of colorectal liver metastases following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cetuximab: the CELIM randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 11:38–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ye LC, Liu TS, Ren L et al (2013) Randomized controlled trial of cetuximab plus chemotherapy for patients with KRAS wild-type unresectable colorectal liver-limited metastases. J Clin Oncol 31:1931–1938

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vincenzi B, Galluzzo S, Santini D et al (2011) Early magnesium modifications as a surrogate marker of efficacy of cetuximab-based anticancer treatment in KRAS wild-type advanced colorectal cancer patients. Ann Oncol 22:1141–1146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Piessevaux H, Buyse M, De Roock W et al (2009) Radiological tumor size decrease at week 6 is a potent predictor of outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab (BOND trial). Ann Oncol 20:1375–1382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zabaglo L, Stoss O, Ruschoff J et al. HER2 staining intensity in HER2-positive disease: relationship with FISH amplification and clinical outcome in the HERA trial of adjuvant trastuzumab. Ann Oncol 2013.

  12. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Thiede C, Bayerdörffer E, Blasczyk R et al (1996) Simple and sensitive detection of mutations in the ras proto-oncogenes using PNA-mediated PCR clamping. Nucleic Acids Res 24:983–984

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lievre A, Bachet JB, Le Corre D et al (2006) KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 66:3992–3995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lievre A, Bachet JB, Boige V et al (2008) KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol 26:374–379

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rizzo S, Bronte G, Fanale D et al (2010) Prognostic vs predictive molecular biomarkers in colorectal cancer: is KRAS and BRAF wild type status required for anti-EGFR therapy? Cancer Treat Rev 36:S56–S61

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gatzemeier U, von Pawel J, Vynnychenko I et al (2011) First-cycle rash and survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving cetuximab in combination with first-line chemotherapy: a subgroup analysis of data from the FLEX phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 12:30–37

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Maughan TS, Adams RA, Smith CG et al (2011) Addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial. Lancet 377:2103–2114

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grothey A, Sargent D, Goldberg RM, Schmoll HJ (2004) Survival of patients with advanced colorectal cancer improves with the availability of fluorouracil-leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin in the course of treatment. J Clin Oncol 22:1209–1214

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tabernero J, Cervantes A, Rivera F et al (2010) Pharmacogenomic and pharmacoproteomic studies of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: biomarker analysis of a phase I dose-escalation study. J Clin Oncol 28:1181–1189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Khelwatty SA, Essapen S, Seddon AM, Modjtahedi H (2013) Prognostic significance and targeting of HER family in colorectal cancer. Front Biosci 18:394–421

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Petrelli F, Borgonovo K, Barni S (2013) The predictive role of skin rash with cetuximab and panitumumab in colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials. Target Oncol 8:173–181

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Klinghammer K, Knodler M, Schmittel A et al (2010) Association of epidermal growth factor receptor polymorphism, skin toxicity, and outcome in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck receiving cetuximab-docetaxel treatment. Clin Cancer Res 16:304–310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rowinsky EK, Schwartz GH, Gollob JA et al (2004) Safety, pharmacokinetics, and activity of ABX-EGF, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:3003–3015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu W, Innocenti F, Wu MH et al (2005) A functional common polymorphism in a Sp1 recognition site of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene promoter. Cancer Res 65:46–53

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Li T, Perez-Soler R (2009) Skin toxicities associated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors. Target Oncol 4:107–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Romito F, Giuliani F, Cormio C et al (2010) Psychological effects of cetuximab-induced cutaneous rash in advanced colorectal cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 18:329–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lang I, Kohne CH, Folprecht G et al (2013) Quality of life analysis in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated first-line with cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorin. Eur J Cancer 49:439–448

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Stintzing S, Kapaun C, Laubender RP et al (2013) Prognostic value of cetuximab-related skin toxicity in metastatic colorectal cancer patients and its correlation with parameters of the epidermal growth factor receptor signal transduction pathway: results from a randomized trial of the GERMAN AIO CRC Study Group. Int J Cancer 132:236–245

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Liu L, Cao Y, Tan A et al (2010) Cetuximab-based therapy vs noncetuximab therapy in advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials. Colorectal Dis 12:399–406

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Dawn Chalaire and Sarah Bronson of the Department of Scientific Publications at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center provided the scientific editing services. This work was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health through Cancer Center Support Grant CA16672, given to The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Oncology, KKR Sapporo Medical Center Tonan Hospital, Kita1-Nishi6, Chu-ou-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-0001, Japan

    T. Kogawa, A. Doi, T. Osuga, T. Kimura, M. Hirayama & Y. Tsuji

  2. The Center for Digestive Disease, KKR Sapporo Medical Center Tonan Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan

    A. Doi, F. Tamura, T. Mizushima, T. Kimura, S. Abe, H. Ihara, T. Kukitsu, T. Sumiyoshi, N. Yoshizaki, M. Hirayama & H. Kondo

  3. Department of Surgery, KKR Sapporo Medical Center Tonan Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan

    T. Sasaki, Y. Kawarada, S. Kitashiro & S. Okushiba

  4. Department of Cancer Biostatistics Laboratory, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan

    M. Shimokawa

  5. Department of Medical Oncology, The National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

    T. M. Fouad

Authors
  1. T. Kogawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Doi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Shimokawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. T. M. Fouad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. Osuga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. F. Tamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. T. Mizushima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. T. Kimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. S. Abe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. H. Ihara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. T. Kukitsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. T. Sumiyoshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. N. Yoshizaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. M. Hirayama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. T. Sasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Y. Kawarada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. S. Kitashiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. S. Okushiba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. H. Kondo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Y. Tsuji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Kogawa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kogawa, T., Doi, A., Shimokawa, M. et al. Early skin toxicity predicts better outcomes, and early tumor shrinkage predicts better response after cetuximab treatment in advanced colorectal cancer. Targ Oncol 10, 125–133 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11523-014-0322-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11523-014-0322-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation