Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon Cancer Therapy (X-ACT) trial: overview of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness

The X-ACT (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon Cancer Therapy) trial compared the efficacy and safety of the oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine with bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV; Mayo Clinic regimen) as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer. A total of 1987 patients were enrolled at 164 centers worldwide. Disease-free survival (primary study endpoint) in the capecitabine arm was at least equivalent to that in the 5-FU/LV arm; the upper limit of the hazard ratio was significantly (P < 0.001) below the predefined margins for noninferiority. Capecitabine was also associated with significantly fewer fluoropyrimidine-related grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs; P < 0.001) and fewer AE-related hospital admissions/days than 5-FU/LV. Pharmacoeconomic analyses performed in several countries show that the savings in direct costs (drug administration and AE-related costs) associated with capecitabine versus 5-FU/LV offset the acquisition costs of the drug. Furthermore, capecitabine reduces patient travel time and costs, making it a "dominant" strategy (ie, less costly and more effective) in the adjuvant setting. In conclusion, efficacy, safety, convenience, and cost findings from the X-ACT trial show that capecitabine offers at least equivalent clinical benefit compared with bolus 5-FU/LV and can replace intravenous 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer. The X-ACT trial has not only helped to better define the role of capecitabine but has also broadened the options available to patients with early-stage disease to include a uniquely effective oral outpatient treatment.     

Oral capecitabine as an alternative to i.v. 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy for colon cancer: safety results of a randomized, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral capecitabine achieves a superior response rate with an improved safety profile compared with bolus 5-fluorouracil-leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We report here the results of a large phase III trial investigating adjuvant oral capecitabine compared with 5-FU/LV (Mayo Clinic regimen) in Dukes' C colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged 18-75 years with resected Dukes' C colon carcinoma were randomized to receive 24 weeks of treatment with either oral capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) twice daily, days 1-14 every 21 days (n = 993), or i.v. bolus 5-FU 425 mg/m(2) with i.v. leucovorin 20 mg/m(2) on days 1-5, repeated every 28 days (n = 974). RESULTS: Patients receiving capecitabine experienced significantly (P <0.001) less diarrhea, stomatitis, nausea/vomiting, alopecia and neutropenia, but more hand-foot syndrome than those receiving 5-FU/LV. Fewer patients receiving capecitabine experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia/sepsis and stomatitis (P <0.001), although more experienced grade 3 hand-foot syndrome than those treated with 5-FU/LV (P <0.001). Capecitabine demonstrates a similar, favorable safety profile in patients aged <65 years or > or = 65 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Based on its improved safety profile, capecitabine has the potential to replace 5-FU/LV as standard adjuvant treatment for patients with colon cancer. Efficacy results are expected to be available in Keywords: Adjuvant treatment, capecitabine, chemotherapy, colorectal cancer     

Oral capecitabine: bridging the Atlantic divide in colon cancer treatment

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) plus leucovorin (LV) has been the mainstay of treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC), with infused schedules more widely adopted in Europe and bolus schedules preferred in North America. However, the effective, oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine is increasingly replacing intravenous (IV) 5-FU/LV on both sides of the Atlantic. Capecitabine generates 5-FU preferentially in tumor and is a well-established, first-line treatment for metastatic CRC. In this setting, capecitabine achieves a superior response rate, at least equivalent time to disease progression (TTP) and overall survival, and favorable safety compared with bolus 5-FU/LV. The benefits of capecitabine have been transfered into the adjuvant setting. Recent data from a large, international, randomized trial (Xeloda Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial [X-ACT]) confirm that capecitabine (Xeloda, Roche Laboratories, Nutley, NJ) achieves favorable safety versus 5-FU/LV (Mayo Clinic regimen) and is at least as effective as IV 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III colon cancer. Capecitabine is also an effective and well-tolerated combination partner for oxaliplatin (XELOX) and irinotecan (XELIRI), achieving high efficacy with a good safety profile. An extensive phase III clinical trial program is further establishing the potential of the simplified capecitabine combinations to improve outcomes and unify treatment practices in the metastatic and adjuvant settings. New combinations with novel agents such as capecitabine/oxaliplatin plus erlotinib or bevacizumab are currently under investigation. Capecitabine has also shown promising activity and good tolerability in combination with radiotherapy in rectal cancer.     

Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for the treatment of colorectal cancer

Based on improved safety and efficacy results, advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment has recently shifted from intravenous bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) monotherapy to standard combinations of prolonged intravenous 5-FU infusion with either oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or irinotecan (FOLFIRI). Capecitabine, a rationally designed oral fluoropyrimidine that is converted into 5-FU preferentially at the tumor site, could replace infusional 5-FU as the mainstay of combined chemotherapy treatment for metastatic CRC. Evidently, oral medication obviates the drawbacks of prolonged intravenous infusion. The combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin is especially attractive owing to its favorable tolerability profile, good activity and convenient administration schedule. Phase III trials comparing capecitabine/oxaliplatin with infusional regimens of 5-FU +/- LV and oxaliplatin in advanced CRC show similar toxicity and efficacy outcomes with both regimens. Capecitabine has the potential to replace 5-FU/LV as the optimal combination partner for oxaliplatin at a higher cost. Capecitabine and oxaliplatin concomitantly with radiation therapy has been evaluated before surgery in rectal cancer treatment. The combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin, with or without bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody blocking VEGF, is also being evaluated in early stage colon cancer.     

Adjuvant therapy of colon cancer

Although surgical resection is still the only curative maneuver in the treatment of colon cancer, efforts of the past decades have proved that systemic chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting definitely improves the curative rate for those patients with localized colon cancer. The combination of the 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) remains the reference treatment. However, the advantage of infusional 5-FU/LV with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) as adjuvant treatment may change the paradigm soon. Capecitabine may be considered as an alternative to 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant therapy of stage III colon cancer. The clinical benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for localized node negative (stage II) disease is definite but small, even though there is yet no universal consensus. Novel molecular and biologic-oriented agents are being studied. Further analysis and definition of prognostic and predictive markers may allow future adjuvant therapy to be individualized.     

Patients with locally advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer treated with capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil as monotherapy or combination therapy with oxaliplatin: a cost comparison

IntroductionThis study quantified the costs associated with the acquisition of chemotherapy, its administration, and the management of chemotherapy-related complications, and their effect on total patient expenditures.Patients and MethodsPatients with locally advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer treated with capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as monotherapy or combination therapy with oxaliplatin from 2003-2006 were identified in the Thomson Reuters MarketScan® databases. Selection bias between treatment groups was addressed by propensity score matching, assessment of the risk of complications using Cox models, and an estimate of expenditures using general linear models.ResultsIn respect to monotherapy, capecitabine users (n = 1272) were propensity score matched to 5-FU/LV users on a 1:1 ratio. The adjusted mean monthly cost was significantly lower for patients treated with capecitabine versus 5-FU/LV ($6683 vs. $9304, respectively; P < .0001). Although the cost of drug acquisition was significantly higher for capecitabine than for 5-FU/LV (unadjusted P < .0001), significantly lower costs of capecitabine administration (unadjusted P < .0001) and management of complications (adjusted costs, P < .0001) offset the difference, and drove a lower overall cost. In regard to combination therapy, capecitabine/oxaliplatin users (n = 263) were propensity score matched to 5-FU/LV/oxaliplatin users (n = 526) on a 1:2 ratio. The adjusted mean monthly cost was significantly lower for capecitabine/oxaliplatin than for 5-FU/LV/oxaliplatin ($11,436 vs. $14,320, respectively; P < .0001). The cost difference was driven by the significantly lower administration costs of capecitabine-based chemotherapy (unadjusted P < .0001) and management of complications (adjusted P < .0001).ConclusionThe monthly cost per patient during capecitabine or capecitabine/oxaliplatin treatment is significantly lower than during 5-FU/LV or 5-FU/LV/oxaliplatin treatment because of lower costs for the administration of chemotherapy and for the management of complications.     

Cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin and capecitabine in the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer

For many years, the standard treatment for stage III colon cancer has been surgical resection followed by 5-fluorouracil in combination with folinic acid (5-FU/LV). Ongoing clinical trial evidence suggests that capecitabine and oxaliplatin (in combination with 5-FU/LV) may improve disease-free survival and overall survival when compared against 5-FU/LV alone in the adjuvant setting. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness profiles of these two regimens in comparison to standard chemotherapy, using evidence from two international randomised controlled trials. Survival modelling techniques were employed to extrapolate survival curves from the two trials in order to estimate the long-term benefits of alternative treatment options over the remaining lifetime of patients. The health economic analysis suggests that capecitabine is expected to produce greater health gains at a lower cost than 5-FU/LV. Oxaliplatin in combination with 5-FU/LV is estimated to cost pounds 2970 per additional QALY gained when compared to 5-FU/LV alone. Future research should attempt to elucidate uncertainties concerning the optimal roles of capecitabine and/or oxaliplatin in the adjuvant setting in order to achieve the maximum level of clinical benefit.     

Oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin: integrated efficacy data and novel analyses from two large, randomised, phase III trials

This study evaluates the efficacy of capecitabine using data from a large, well-characterised population of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated in two identically designed phase III studies. A total of 1207 patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomised to either oral capecitabine (1250 mg m(-2) twice daily, days 1-14 every 21 days; n=603) or intravenous (i.v.) bolus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV; Mayo Clinic regimen; n=604). Capecitabine demonstrated a statistically significant superior response rate compared with 5-FU/LV (26 vs 17%; P<0.0002). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that capecitabine consistently resulted in superior response rates (P<0.05), even in patient subgroups with poor prognostic indicators. The median time to response and duration of response were similar and time to progression (TTP) was equivalent in the two arms (hazard ratio (HR) 0.997, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.885-1.123, P=0.95; median 4.6 vs 4.7 months with capecitabine and 5-FU/LV, respectively). Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified younger age, liver metastases, multiple metastases and poor Karnofsky Performance Status as independent prognostic indicators for poor TTP. Overall survival was equivalent in the two arms (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84-1.06, P=0.48; median 12.9 vs 12.8 months, respectively). Capecitabine results in superior response rate, equivalent TTP and overall survival, an improved safety profile and improved convenience compared with i.v. 5-FU/LV as first-line treatment for MCRC. For patients in whom fluoropyrimidine monotherapy is indicated, capecitabine should be strongly considered. Following encouraging results from phase I and II trials, randomised trials are evaluating capecitabine in combination with irinotecan, oxaliplatin and radiotherapy. Capecitabine is a suitable replacement for i.v. 5-FU as the backbone of colorectal cancer therapy.     

Capecitabine

Capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine carbamate, is adopted worldwide. As the treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer, capecitabine showed at least comparable efficacy with a favorable safety profile to bolus 5-FU/LV. In a large phase III trial (Xeloda Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial: X-ACT), as the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III colon cancer, capecitabine showed at least comparable disease-free survival, overall survival, and relapse-free survival with a favorable safety profile to bolus 5-FU/LV. Additionally, capecitabine-based combination regimens with oxaliplatin or irinotecan are now under evaluation. In phase II studies, capecitabine has shown the promising results in combination therapy. In Japan, capecitabine has been evaluated since 1994. In a recent phase II study, which evaluated the global dose as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer, the response rate was 35% (95% CI 23.1-48.4). The median time to disease progression was 169 days and the median overall survival was 617 days. Hand-foot syndrome (HFS), a characteristic adverse event of capecitabine, was observed in 73.3% of the patients, but the grade 3/4 was observed in 13.3% of the patients and only one patient discontinued the treatment due to HFS. An immediate approval of capecitabine in Japan is expected.     

An economic evaluation of oxaliplatin for the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in the United Kingdom (UK)

The MOSAIC study was the first trial to show a statistically significant disease-free survival benefit for a treatment regimen for stage III colon cancer in the adjuvant setting. At 4 years, there was a 25% reduction in the risk of disease recurrence in these patients for the combination of oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA compared with 5-FU/FA alone (p=0.002). This analysis evaluates the long-term cost effectiveness of oxaliplatin given in combination with 5-FU/FA from the perspective of the NHS in the United Kingdom (UK). The cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained over a lifetime was calculated using patient level data from the MOSAIC trial. Trial data were available for a median of 4 years of follow-up, these data were then extrapolated to a lifetime horizon. The estimated incremental lifetime cost per quality-adjusted life-year of oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA compared with 5-FU/FA alone in patients with stage III postoperative colon cancer is pound 4805. This compares favourably with other accepted interventions in oncology.     

Capecitabine (Xeloda) improves medical resource use compared with 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin in a phase III trial conducted in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma

Standard therapy for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer consists of 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin (5-FU/LV) administered intravenously (i.v.). Capecitabine (Xeloda), an oral fluoropyrimidine carbamate which is preferentially activated by thymidine phosphorylase in tumour cells, mimics continuous 5-FU and is a recently developed alternative to i.v. 5-FU/LV. The choice of oral rather than intravenous treatment may affect medical resource use because the two regimens do not require the same intensity of medical intervention for drug administration, and have different toxicity profiles. Here we examine medical resource use in the first-line treatment of colorectal cancer patients with capecitabine compared with those receiving the Mayo Clinic regimen of 5-FU/LV. In a prospective, randomised phase III clinical trial, 602 patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer recruited from 59 centres worldwide were randomised to treatment with either capecitabine or the Mayo regimen of 5-FU/LV. In addition to clinical efficacy and safety endpoints, data were collected on hospital visits required for drug administration, hospital admissions, and drugs and unscheduled consultations with physicians required for the treatment of adverse events. Capecitabine treatment in comparison to 5-FU/LV in advanced colorectal carcinoma resulted in superior response rates (26.6% versus 17.9%, P=0.013) and improved safety including less stomatitis and myelosuppression. Capecitabine patients required substantially fewer hospital visits for drug administration than 5-FU/LV patients. Medical resource use analysis showed that patients treated with capecitabine spent fewer days in hospital for the management of treatment related adverse events than did patients treated with 5-FU/LV. In addition, capecitabine reduced the requirement for expensive drugs, in particular antimicrobials fluconazole and 5-HT3-antagonists to manage adverse events. As anticipated with an oral home-based therapy patients receiving capecitabine needed more frequent unscheduled home, day care, office and telephone consultations with physicians. In the light of clinical results from the phase III trial demonstrating increased efficacy in terms of response rate, equivalent time to progression (TTP) and survival (OS), and a superior safety profile, the results from this medical resource assessment indicate that capecitabine treatment of colorectal cancer patients results in a substantial resource use saving relative to the Mayo Clinic regimen of 5-FU/LV. This benefit is derived principally from the avoidance of hospital visits for i.v. drug administration, less expensive drug therapy for the treatment of toxic side-effects, and fewer treatment-related hospitalisations required during the course of therapy for adverse drug reactions in comparison to patients treated with 5-FU/LV.     

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer

Surgical resection of the primary and regional lymph nodes is still, at this time, the standard treatment of colon cancer. However, the risk of recurrence is still high in many patients. Efforts of the past decades have proved the role of systemic chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting in improving the curative rates. The combination of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)and leucovorin (LV) remains the cornestorne of colon cancer chemotherapy worldwide. The addition of Oxaliplatin to infusional 5FU/LV has been shown to prolong significantly disease-free survival and capecitabine may be considered as an alternative to 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant therapy of stage III colon cancer. Novel molecular and biological-oriented agents are being studied, with promising date.     

Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil in colorectal cancer: where are we now?

Fluorouracil (5-FU) remains the most widely used agent for colorectal cancer. Capecitabine is a rationally designed 5-FU pro-drug developed to mimic the continuous infusion of 5-FU while avoiding complications and inconvenience of intravenous administration. Capecitabine is absorbed intact from the gastrointestinal tract, converted enzymatically to active 5-FU, and released directly into the tumor. Capecitabine’s efficacy and safety are shown in multiple phase III trials across different disease stages and therapy lines. Three randomized phase III trials demonstrated the equivalence of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus 5-FU/leucovorin (LV)/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX). The safety of capecitabine compared with 5-FU depends on the regimen of 5-FU used. The adverse event rate with oxaliplatin in combination with infusional 5-FU is similar to that of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin but is associated with more neutropenia and venous thrombotic events; capecitabine plus oxaliplatin-based regimens tend to be associated with more grade 3 diarrhea and hand-foot skin reaction. Combination therapy with capecitabine and irinotecan (CapeIRI) versus 5-FU/LV and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) had more variable results; some former schedules resulted in excessive treatment-related toxicity. More recent data show that lower capecitabine and irinotecan doses, different schedules, and combination with targeted agents (e.g, bevacizumab) have resulted in more favorable outcomes.     

Redefining adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer: X-ACT trial

The current standard adjuvant chemotherapy for suitable patients with stage III colon cancer is the combination of oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid (5-FU/LV). However, until recently and for many years prior to this, the accepted standard adjuvant chemotherapy was 6-8 months of bolus 5-FU/LV. However, bolus treatment was associated with significant toxicity, namely stomatitis, diarrhea and neutropenia, in addition to multiple hospital visits for drug administration for patients. The X-ACT trial (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon Cancer Therapy) compared traditional bolus 5-FU/LV (as per the Mayo Clinic regimen) with capecitabine, in the adjuvant treatment of 1987 stage III colon cancer patients. The main safety, efficacy and pharmacoeconomic results have all been published, and the updated 5-year efficacy results have also recently been presented. This trial demonstrated that capecitabine was at least as effective as bolus 5-FU/LV in terms of disease-free and overall survival, with trends towards superiority for both. Moreover, there was much less toxicity associated with capecitabine, apart from hand-foot syndrome which was significantly more prevalent. On the basis of the X-ACT trial, capecitabine was approved by the US FDA, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence and the Scottish Medicines Consortium as monotherapy for the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer.     

Redefining adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer: X-ACT trial

The current standard adjuvant chemotherapy for suitable patients with stage III colon cancer is the combination of oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid (5-FU/LV). However, until recently and for many years prior to this, the accepted standard adjuvant chemotherapy was 6–8 months of bolus 5-FU/LV. However, bolus treatment was associated with significant toxicity, namely stomatitis, diarrhea and neutropenia, in addition to multiple hospital visits for drug administration for patients. The X-ACT trial (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon Cancer Therapy) compared traditional bolus 5-FU/LV (as per the Mayo Clinic regimen) with capecitabine, in the adjuvant treatment of 1987 stage III colon cancer patients. The main safety, efficacy and pharmacoeconomic results have all been published, and the updated 5-year efficacy results have also recently been presented. This trial demonstrated that capecitabine was at least as effective as bolus 5-FU/LV in terms of disease-free and overall survival, with trends towards superiority for both. Moreover, there was much less toxicity associated with capecitabine, apart from hand–foot syndrome which was significantly more prevalent. On the basis of the X-ACT trial, capecitabine was approved by the US FDA, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence and the Scottish Medicines Consortium as monotherapy for the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer.     

Real‐world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer

Since the generalisability of trial‐based economic evaluations may be limited, there is an increasing focus on real‐world cost‐effectiveness. Real‐world studies involve evaluating the effects and costs of treatments in daily clinical practice. This study reports on the real‐world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatments of stage III colon cancer in a population‐based observational study. Analyses were based on a detailed retrospective medical chart review which was conducted for 206 patients with colon cancer treated in 2005 and 2006 in the Netherlands. Mean total costs per patient were €9681 for 5‐FU/LV, €9736 for capecitabine, €32 793 for FOLFOX and €18 361 for CAPOX. Drug costs and the costs related to hospitalisations for chemotherapy administration were the main cost drivers. We identified a potential for substantial cost‐savings when the 48 h administration of 5FU/LV in the FOLFOX regimen were to take place in an outpatient setting or be replaced by oral capecitabine as in the CAPOX regimen. This analysis based on detailed real‐life data clearly indicates that clinical choices made in oncology based on efficacy of therapy have economic consequences. Considering today's reality of finite healthcare resources, these economic consequences deserve a formal role in clinical decision making, for instance in guideline development.     

Capecitabine--a review of its antitumor activity and toxicity in clinical studies

Capecitabine is a novel fluoropyrimidine carbamate, orally administered and rationally designed to undergo tumor-selective activation. Some studies have been proven it to be safe for outpatient treatment and to have significant antitumor activity in colorectal and breast cancer patients. Randomized trials of patients with advanced colorectal cancer using capecitabine versus Leucovorin (LV).5-FU were studied in two groups. Capecitabine results in both a higher response rate and a more favorable toxicity profile than LV.5-FU. In women aged 55 years or more with breast cancer, capecitabine showed at least comparable efficacy to CMF combination therapy. Capecitabine offers a new effective oral treatment option as a single agent for patients with advanced colorectal or breast cancer.     

Future treatment options with capecitabine in solid tumours

The oral fluoropyrimidine, capecitabine is attracting great interest in the context of tumour-selective therapy and rationally designed combination regimens. Agents such as taxanes upregulate thymidine phosphorylase (TP), and there is therefore a clear rationale for their combination with capecitabine. Preclinical studies of capecitabine/taxane combination therapy demonstrated synergistic antitumour activity and phase I studies showed encouraging efficacy. Therefore, a randomised, phase III trial (docetaxel versus docetaxel/capecitabine) has been initiated in anthracycline-refractory metastatic breast cancer patients. Recruitment is complete. In colorectal cancer, capecitabine/oxaliplatin combination therapy is promising and a phase I, dose-finding trial has been conducted in patients with refractory metastatic solid tumours. A similar trial has evaluated capecitabine/irinotecan combination treatment. Capecitabine is also being investigated as adjuvant therapy for colorectal and breast cancers. The primary objective of the ongoing X-ACT trial in almost 2000 Dukes' C colon cancer patients is to demonstrate at least equivalent disease-free survival between capecitabine and the Mayo Clinic regimen. In addition, the CALGB is planning a randomised, phase III trial of capecitabine versus doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide or cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil (CMF) as adjuvant treatment in high-risk, node-negative breast cancer patients aged >65 years.     

Comparison of oral capecitabine versus intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment in 605 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a randomized phase III study.

PURPOSE: To compare the response rate, efficacy parameters, and toxicity profile of oral capecitabine with bolus intravenous (IV) fluorouracil plus leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively randomized 605 patients to treatment with oral capecitabine for 14 days every 3 weeks or 5-FU/LV by rapid IV injection daily for 5 days in 4-week cycles. RESULTS: The overall objective tumor response rate among all randomized patients was significantly higher in the capecitabine group (24.8%) than in the 5-FU/LV group (15.5%; P =.005). In the capecitabine and 5-FU/LV groups, median times to disease progression were 4.3 and 4.7 months (log-rank P =.72), median times to treatment failure were 4.1 and 3.1 months (P =.19), and median overall survival times were 12.5 and 13.3 months (P =.974), respectively. Capecitabine, compared with bolus 5-FU/LV treatment, produced a significantly lower incidence (P <.0002) of diarrhea, stomatitis, nausea, and alopecia. Patients treated with capecitabine also displayed lower incidences of grade 3/4 stomatitis and grade 3/4 neutropenia (P <.0001) leading to significantly less neutropenic fever/sepsis. Grade 3 hand-foot syndrome (P <.00001) and grade 3/4 hyperbilirubinemia were the only toxicities more frequently associated with capecitabine than with 5-FU/LV treatment. CONCLUSION: Oral capecitabine was more active than 5-FU/LV in the induction of objective tumor responses. Time to disease progression and survival were at least equivalent for capecitabine compared with the 5-FU/LV arm. Capecitabine also demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits over bolus 5-FU/LV in terms of tolerability.     

Capecitabine and radiotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is used in rectal cancer to prolong survival, downsize tumors prior to surgery, and allow for sphincter-sparing surgery. Capecitabine is an oral fluoropyrimidine that generates 5-FU preferentially within the tumor. It has been shown to be as effective as 5-FU and well tolerated in the metastatic and adjuvant settings in colorectal cancer. Capecitabine is more convenient for patients than 5-FU, and it avoids the risks of infection and thromboembolism associated with intravenous administration. It was also shown to reduce the use of medical resources, healthcare professionals' time, and cost of therapy. Emerging data from Phase II trials of neoadjuvant regimens in which capecitabine has been substituted for 5-FU are encouraging.