Prognostic Nomogram and Patterns of Use of FOLFIRI-Aflibercept in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Data Analysis

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The VELOUR study evaluated the efficacy and safety of adding aflibercept to FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) in second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, a nomogram that can stratify patients according to prognosis is unavailable, and the frequency and effect of the pragmatic use of modified schedules in actual practice remains unknown. Method The sample consists of 250 patients with mCRC treated with aflibercept and irinotecan-based chemotherapy at nine Spanish academic centers between January 2013 and September 2015. The result of a Cox proportional hazards model regression for overall survival (OS), adjusted for covariates available in daily practice, was represented as a nomogram and web-based calculator. Harrell's c-index was used to assess discrimination. Results The prognostic nomogram for OS includes six variables: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, tumor location, number of metastatic sites, mutational status, better response to previous treatment(s), and carcinoembryonic antigen. The model is well calibrated and has acceptable discriminatory capacity (optimism-corrected c-index, 0.723; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.666–0.778). Median OS was 6.1 months (95% CI, 5.1–8.8), 12.4 months (95% CI, 9.36–14.8), and 22.9 months (95% CI, 16.6–not reached) for high-, intermediate-, and low-risk groups, respectively. Age, comorbidity, or use of modified FOLFIRI regimens did not affect prognosis in this series. Grade 3–4 adverse events were less common following modified schedules. The admission rate because of toxicity was higher in ≥65 years (9.7% vs. 19.6%; odds ratio, 2.26; p = .029). Conclusion We have developed and internally validated a prognostic model for use in individuals with colorectal cancer initiating therapy with FOLFIRI-aflibercept to predict both OS and the effect of pragmatic modifications of the classic regime on efficacy and safety. This can aid in decision making and in designing future trials.