Ramucirumab‐containing chemotherapy for patients with gastrointestinal neuroendocrine carcinoma refractory/intolerant to platinum‐based chemotherapy: A multicenter observational retrospective study (WJOG13420G)

Le résumé fourni par la source

No standard second-line chemotherapy has been established for gastrointestinal neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC). This study aimed to determine whether ramucirumab (RAM) is a treatment candidate in this setting. We retrospectively collected data from patients with gastric and colorectal NEC who received second-line chemotherapy following platinum-based chemotherapy. The pathological diagnosis of NEC was confirmed centrally according to the World Health Organization 2019 classification. We compared the clinical outcomes between second- or later-line chemotherapy in the RAM group and second-line chemotherapy in the non-RAM group. One-hundred patients diagnosed with NEC by central pathological review were studied. The RAM and non-RAM groups included 44 (gastric/colorectal cancer, 34/10) and 56 (37/19) patients, respectively. In the RAM group, 68% of patients received RAM as second-line chemotherapy. RAM was most frequently combined with weekly paclitaxel for gastric NEC and FOLFIRI for colorectal NEC. The RAM group showed better trends in overall survival and progression-free survival than the non-RAM group, with a median of 9.0 versus 5.6 months and 4.3 versus 1.8 months, respectively (hazard ratios [HR]: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.45-1.28] and 0.45 [0.27-0.75]). Efficacy was more pronounced in gastric NEC (PFS HR: 0.32, OS HR: 0.56) compared to colorectal NEC (PFS HR: 0.82, OS HR: 1.47). The objective response rate was significantly higher in the RAM group (44%) than in the non-RAM group (6%), with notably higher responses observed in patients receiving paclitaxel plus RAM (62%). This study suggested that RAM-containing chemotherapy, especially paclitaxel plus RAM for gastric NEC, seems promising and should be further investigated.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.