Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metastasiertes kolorektales Karzinom

Wahl der Behandlungsstrategie auf der Basis molekularer Marker

  • Zertifizierte Fortbildung
  • Published:
Im Focus Onkologie Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die Behandlung des metastasierten kolorektalen Karzinoms (mCRC) hat sich in den letzten Jahren noch einmal deutlich verbessert. Große Fortschritte betreffen vor allem Biomarker wie RAS, MSI oder BRAF, deren Kenntnis zunehmend wichtiger wird für die Auswahl und Planung von Erstlinientherapie und Behandlungssequenz. Durch die Berücksichtigung von Biomarkern lässt sich die Behandlung des mCRC im Hinblick auf Wirksamkeit und Nebenwirkungen besser dem individuellen Patienten anpassen.

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

Abb. 1:
Abb. 2:
Abb. 3:

Literatur

  1. Brenner H et al. Expected long-term impact of the German screening colonoscopy programme on colorectal cancer prevention: analyses based on 4,407,971 screening colonoscopies. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(10):1346–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. O’Connell JB et al. Colon cancer survival rates with the new American Joint Committee on Cancer sixth edition staging. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(19):1420–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Heinemann V et al. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(10):1065–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Venook AP et al. CALGB/SWOG 80405: Phase III trial of irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5-FU/leucovorin (mFOLFOX6) with bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (CET) for patients (pts) with KRAS wild-type (wt) untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (MCRC). J Clin Oncol 2014;32(Suppl, 5s):Abstr LBA3.

  5. Tournigand C et al. FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(2):229–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Loree JM et al. Retrospective comparison of CAPOX and FOLFOX dose intensity, toxicity, and clinical outcomes in the treatment of metastatic colon cancer. J Gastrointest Cancer. 2014;45(2):154–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mayer RJ et al. Randomized trial of TAS-102 for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(20):1909–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Stintzing S et al. Predictive and prognostic markers in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): personalized medicine at work. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2015;29(1):43–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hurwitz H et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(23): 2335–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Saltz LB et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(12):2013–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Giantonio BJ et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E3200. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(12):1539–44.

  12. Cunningham D et al. Bevacizumab plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in elderly patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (AVEX): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(11):1077–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Douillard JY et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(11):1023–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Van Cutsem E et al. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan plus cetuximab treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(7):692–700.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bibeau F et al. Impact of Fc{gamma}RIIa-Fc{gamma}RIIIa polymorphisms and KRAS mutations on the clinical outcome of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab plus irinotecan. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(7):1122–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lièvre A et al. KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 2006;66(8):3992–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jung A et al. Controlling the quality of RAS mutation testing by a dichotomous approach: Ring trials and benchmarking mutation frequencies by a RAS monitor. J Clin Oncol 2015;33(Suppl, 3s):Abstr 536.

  18. Schmoll HJ et al. Effect of adjuvant capecitabine or fluorouracil, with or without oxaliplatin, on survival outcomes in stage III colon cancer and the effect of oxaliplatin on post-relapse survival: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from four randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(13):1481–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tejpar S et al. Microsatellite instability, prognosis and drug sensitivity of stage II and III colorectal cancer: more complexity to the puzzle. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(11):841–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sauer R et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO-94 randomized phase III trial after a median follow-up of 11 years. J Clin Oncol. 2012};30(16):1926–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rodel C et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin versus fluorouracil alone in locally advanced rectal cancer: initial results of the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(7):679–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hong YS et al. Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus fluorouracil and leucovorin as adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (ADORE): an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(11):1245–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hofheinz RD et al. Chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine versus fluorouracil for locally advanced rectal cancer: a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(6):579–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Abrams TA et al. Chemotherapy usage patterns in a US-wide cohort of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(2):djt371.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Douillard JY et al. Irinotecan combined with fluorouracil compared with fluorouracil alone as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2000;355(9209):1041–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Saltz LB et al. Irinotecan plus fluorouracil and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. Irinotecan Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2000;343(13):905–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Schwartzberg LS et al. PEAK: a randomized, multicenter phase II study of panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(21):2240–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Stintzing S et al. Independent radiological evaluation of objective response, early tumor shrinkage, and depth of response in FIRE-3 (AIO KRK-0306) in the final RAS evaluable population. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(5s):v1–v41.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lenz HJ et al. CALGB/SWOG 80405: Phase III trial of irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5-FU/leucovorin (mFOLFOX6) with bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (CET) for patients (pts) with expanded RAS analyses untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (mCRC). Ann Oncol. 2014;25(5s): v1–v41.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Khattak MA et al. Role of first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy compared with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2015;14(2):81–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Loupakis et al. Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(17):1609–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medizinische Klinik III, Klinikum der Universität Großhadern, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, München, Deutschland

    Sebastian Stintzing

  2. http://www.springermedizin.de

    Volker Heinemann

Authors
  1. Sebastian Stintzing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Volker Heinemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Stintzing.

Additional information

Interessenkonflikte

PD Dr. med. Sebastian Stintzing gibt Vortragshonorare von Merck-Serono, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi, Bayer sowie Reisekostenerstattungen durch Merck-Serono, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi, Bayer an. Er ist zudem in Beiräten für Merck-Serono, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi, Bayer tätig. Prof. Dr. med. Volker Heinemann gibt Vortragshonorare und Forschungsunterstützung von Merck, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi an. Er ist zudem in Beiräten für Merck-Serono, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi tätig.

Der Verlag erklärt, dass die inhaltliche Qualität des Beitrags von zwei unabhängigen Gutachtern geprüft wurde. Werbung in dieser Zeitschriftenausgabe hat keinen Bezug zur CME-Fortbildung. Der Verlag garantiert, dass die CME-Fortbildung sowie die CME-Fragen frei sind von werblichen Aussagen und keinerlei Produktempfehlungen enthalten. Dies gilt insbesondere für Präparate, die zur Therapie des dargestellten Krankheitsbildes geeignet sind.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stintzing, S., Heinemann, V. Wahl der Behandlungsstrategie auf der Basis molekularer Marker. Im Focus Onkologie 18, 51–59 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15015-015-1827-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15015-015-1827-9

Search

Navigation