Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancers in Resource-Constrained Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICS) Scenario—Outcomes, Practice Patterns, and Commentary on Treatment Costs

Abstract

Anant Ramaswamy

Introduction The overall survival (OS) of metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) in clinical practice and resource-constrained low- and middle-income countries (LMICS) like India is not known.

Materials and Methods Data of patients with mCRC treated between January 2013 and August 2017 were accessed from a prospectively maintained database. Demographics, disease characteristics, chemotherapeutic regimens, use of monoclonal antibodies, and survival outcomes in treated patients were collected and analyzed. Costs of treatment options as off 2017 were also interpreted.

Results The data of 403 patients satisfied prespecified inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. The median age of the cohort was 48 years (range: 17–86) with a predominance of rectal cancers (63.3%), liver alone metastases (47.1%), and resected primary (69.7%). Signet ring histology was present in 82 patients (20.3%). The most commonly used first-line regimen (CT1) was modified capecitabine-oxaliplatin (53.3%). Two hundred and nineteen patients (54.3%) received second-line systemic therapy (CT2). Patients received a median of two lines of therapy (range: 1–6). MoAbs were used by 48 patients (13.4%) with CT1 and 34 patients (15.5%) with CT2. Median OS of the entire cohort was 17.61 months (95% confidence interval: 15.48–19.74), which was within the predicted range, as per investigator hypothesis. The presence of signet ring histology (p<0.001), raised carcinoembryonic antigen at baseline (p=0.017), and the absence of a resected primary (p<0.001) predicted inferior median OS.

Conclusions Survival of patients with mCRC in a resource-constrained LMIC scenario like India is approximately 12 to 15 months lower than published trial data. Limited access to targeted therapy and newer expensive treatment options due to financial constraints may contribute to this disparity.

Keywords

targeted therapy - India - low- and middle-income countries - metastatic colorectal cancer - overall survival - resource constrained

• References

• 1 Heinemann V, von Weikersthal LF, Decker T. 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) 1065-1075
• 2 Venook AP, Niedzwiecki D, Lenz H-J. et al. Effect of first-line chemotherapy combined with cetuximab or bevacizumab on overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017; 317 (23) 2392-2401
• 3 Colucci G, Gebbia V, Paoletti G. et al; Gruppo Oncologico Dell'Italia Meridionale. Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell'Italia Meridionale. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (22) 4866-4875
• 4 Romera A, Peredpaya S, Shparyk Y. et al. Bevacizumab biosimilar BEVZ92 versus reference bevacizumab in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 3 (12) 845-855
• 5 Ignacio DN, Griffin JJ, Daniel MG, Serlemitsos-Day MT, Lombardo FA, Alleyne TA. An evaluation of treatment strategies for head and neck cancer in an African American population. West Indian Med J 2013; 62 (06) 504-509
• 6 Ghosh J, Gupta S, Desai S. et al. Estrogen, progesterone and HER2 receptor expression in breast tumors of patients, and their usage of HER2-targeted therapy, in a tertiary care centre in India. Indian J Cancer 2011; 48 (04) 391-396
• 7 Patil PS, Saklani A, Gambhire P. et al. Colorectal cancer in India: an audit from a tertiary center in a low prevalence area. Indian J Surg Oncol 2017; 8 (04) 484-490
• 8 Ostwal V, Pande NS, Engineer R. et al. Low prevalence of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) protein in locally advanced rectal cancers (LARC) and treatment outcomes. J Gastrointest Oncol 2019; 10 (01) 19-29
• 9 Kolarich A, George Jr TJ, Hughes SJ. et al. Rectal cancer patients younger than 50 years lack a survival benefit from NCCN guideline-directed treatment for stage II and III disease. Cancer 2018; 124 (17) 3510-3519
• 10 Feo L, Polcino M, Nash GM. Resection of the primary tumor in stage IV colorectal cancer: when is it necessary?. Surg Clin North Am 2017; 97 (03) 657-669