scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of panitumumab in combination with trifluridine/tipiracil for pre-treated patients with unresectable, metastatic colorectal cancer with wild-type RAS: The phase 1/2 APOLLON study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Kato ◽  
Yoshinori Kagawa ◽  
Yasutoshi Kuboki ◽  
Makio Gamoh ◽  
Yoshito Komatsu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Multicentre Phase

Abstract Background We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of combination treatment with panitumumab plus trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who were refractory/intolerant to standard therapies other than anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy. Methods APOLLON was an open-label, multicentre, phase 1/2 trial. In the phase 1 part, 3 + 3 de-escalation design was used to investigate the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D); all patients in the phase 2 part received the RP2D. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and safety. Results Fifty-six patients were enrolled (phase 1, n = 7; phase 2, n = 49) at 25 Japanese centres. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in patients receiving panitumumab (6 mg/kg every 2 weeks) plus FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2 twice daily; days 1–5 and 8–12 in a 28-day cycle), which became RP2D. PFS rate at 6 months was 33.3% (90% confidence interval [CI] 22.8–45.3). Median PFS, OS, ORR, DCR, and TTF were 5.8 months (95% CI 4.5–6.5), 14.1 months (95% CI 12.2–19.3), 37.0% (95% CI 24.3–51.3), 81.5% (95% CI 68.6–90.8), and 5.8 months (95% CI 4.29–6.21), respectively. Neutrophil count decreased (47.3%) was the most common Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Conclusion Panitumumab plus FTD/TPI exhibited favourable anti-tumour activity with a manageable safety profile and may be a therapeutic option for pre-treated mCRC patients.

scholarly journals TRIPLETE: a randomised phase III study of modified FOLFOXIRI plus panitumumab versus mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab as initial therapy for patients with unresectableRASandBRAFwild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

ESMO Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. e000403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrice Borelli ◽  
Roberto Moretto ◽  
Sara Lonardi ◽  
Andrea Bonetti ◽  
Carlotta Antoniotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Multicentre Phase ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients ◽  
To Receive

BackgroundFOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is considered a standard option in the upfront treatment of clinically selected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer irrespective ofRASandBRAFmolecular status. The randomised MACBETH and VOLFI studies showed that a modified FOLFOXIRI regimen in combination with cetuximab or panitumumab, respectively, achieved high therapeutic activity inRASandBRAFwild-type patients with an acceptable toxicity profile. Drawing from these considerations, we designed TRIPLETE study aiming at comparing two different chemotherapy backbones (mFOLFOXIRI or mFOLFOX6) in combination with panitumumab in the first-line treatment of patients withRASandBRAFwild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.MethodsThis is a prospective, open-label, multicentre phase III trial in which initially unresectable and previously untreatedRASandBRAFwild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients are randomised to receive a standard treatment with mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or an experimental regimen with modified FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan 150 mg/m2, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, L-leucovorin 200 mg/m2, 5-fluoruracil 2400 mg/m248-hour continuous infusion) plus panitumumab up to 12 cycles, followed by panitumumab plus 5-fluorouracil and L-leucovorin until disease progression. The primary endpoint is overall response rate according to RECIST 1.1 criteria.DiscussionThe relative benefit of chemotherapy intensification when using an anti-EGFR-based regimen in molecularly selected patients is unknown; TRIPLETE study aims at filling this gap of knowledge. The study is sponsored by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest Cooperative Group and is currently ongoing at 42 Italian centres.Clinical trial informationNCT03231722.

FOLFOXIRI Plus Panitumumab As First-Line Treatment of RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label, Phase II VOLFI Study (AIO KRK0109)

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (35) ◽  
pp. 3401-3411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik P. Modest ◽  
Uwe M. Martens ◽  
Jorge Riera-Knorrenschild ◽  
Jobst Greeve ◽  
Axel Florschütz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Secondary Resection ◽  
Open Label Phase

PURPOSE This trial investigated the addition of panitumumab to triplet chemotherapy with fluorouracil/folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) in a two-to-one randomized, controlled, open-label, phase II trial in patients with untreated RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST (version 1.1). The experimental arm (modified FOLFOXIRI [mFOLFOXIRI] plus panitumumab) was considered active if the ORR was ≥ 75%. The experimental ORR was compared with an estimated ORR of 60% based on historical data, verified by a randomized control group (FOLFOXIRI). The power of the trial was 80%, with a potential type I error of 0.05. Secondary end points included secondary resection rate, toxicity, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS A total of 63 patients were randomly assigned to the experimental arm and 33 patients to the control arm. The ORR of the mFOLFOXIRI plus panitumumab arm exceeded 75% and was higher when compared with that of FOLFOXIRI (87.3% v 60.6%; odds ratio, 4.469; 95% CI, 1.61 to 12.38; P = .004). The secondary resection rate was improved with the addition of panitumumab (33.3% v 12.1%; P = .02). Progression-free survival was similar in the study arms, whereas overall survival showed a trend in favor of the panitumumab-containing arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.11; P = .12). CONCLUSION The addition of panitumumab to mFOLFOXIRI in patients with RAS WT metastatic colorectal cancer improved the ORR and rate of secondary resection of metastases and represents a treatment option in selected and fit patients in need of highly active first-line therapy. Future studies should determine whether the addition of panitumumab to mFOLFOXIRI prolongs survival.

Exploratory biomarker findings from cohort 2 of MODUL: An adaptable, phase 2, signal-seeking trial of fluoropyrimidine + bevacizumab ± atezolizumab maintenance therapy for BRAFwt metastatic colorectal cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3570-3570
Author(s):  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Dirk Arnold ◽  
Michel Ducreux ◽  
Peter J. O'Dwyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Experimental Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
First Line Therapy

3570 Background: MODUL is an adaptable, phase 2, signal-seeking trial testing novel agents as first-line therapy for predefined subgroups of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previously reported findings demonstrated that adding atezolizumab to fluoropyrimidine (FP)/bevacizumab as first-line maintenance treatment after induction with FOLFOX + bevacizumab did not improve efficacy outcomes in BRAFwt mCRC. Given these efficacy results, exploratory assessments on tumour samples were conducted to provide insights into factors that might affect efficacy of maintenance treatment and provide guidance on appropriate therapeutic strategies for BRAFwt mCRC. Methods: In patients with BRAFwt tumours (Cohort 2), experimental treatment was FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab. Primary efficacy endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary endpoint. Archival tissue samples from 104 patients were analysed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) at HistoGeneX (PD-L1; CD8/GrB/FoxP3). SP142 antibody was used for PD-L1 IHC analysis, which evaluated PD-L1low (IC 0–1) vs PD-L1high (IC > 1) in correlation with PFS and OS in the control and experimental arms. CD8/GrB/FoxP3 triplex staining was also performed to evaluate potential correlations with efficacy. Results: 445 patients with BRAFwt mCRC were randomised (2:1 ratio) to maintenance treatment in Cohort 2. Archival samples from 104 patients were analysed: FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab (n = 82); FP/bevacizumab (n = 22). The biomarker evaluable population (BEP) for PD-L1 was n = 81 for FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab [PD-L1low n = 35 (43%); PD-L1high n = 46 (57%)] and n = 22 for FP/bevacizumab [PD-L1low n = 16 (72%); PD-L1high n = 6 (28%)]. The BEP for CD8/GrB was n = 50 for FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab and n = 16 for FP/bevacizumab. No difference in PFS or OS was observed in the FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab vs FP/bevacizumab arms for PD-L1high [PFS: HR = 1.5 (95% CI 0.45−4.8), p = 0.51; OS: HR = 1.3 (95% CI 0.38−4.1), p = 0.71] or PD-L1low [PFS: HR = 0.92 (95% CI 0.47−1.8), p = 0.81; OS: HR = 0.78 (95% CI 0.4−1.5), p = 0.48]. Similar results were observed with CD8/GrBhigh [PFS: HR = 0.73 (95% CI 0.27−2.0), p = 0.55; OS: HR = 0.66 (95% CI 0.24−1.8), p = 0.44], CD8/GrBlow [PFS: HR = 1.0 (95% CI 0.42–2.5), p = 0.96; OS: HR = 0.73 (95% CI 0.3–1.8), p = 0.5], FoxP3high [PFS: HR = 0.97 (95% CI 0.37−2.5), p = 0.95; OS: HR = 0.95 (95% CI 0.36−2.5), p = 0.91] and FoxP3low [PFS: HR = 0.73 (95% CI 0.29−1.9), p = 0.53; OS: HR = 0.5 (95% CI 0.19−1.3), p = 0.18]. Conclusions: These findings suggest that PD-L1, CD8/GrB and FoxP3 might not be predictive biomarkers in BRAFwt mCRC. Further analyses are needed to further evaluate potential predictive and prognostic factors of response in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02291289.

Tumor bulk as a prognostic biomarker and predictor of benefit from anti-EGFR therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Analysis of 476 patients from the ARCAD Clinical Trials Program.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 108-108
Author(s):  
Benjamin Adam Weinberg ◽  
Manel Rakez ◽  
Benoist Chibaudel ◽  
Tim Maughan ◽  
Richard Adams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Lung Metastases ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Study Results

108 Background: Primary tumor sidedness has emerged as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Tumor bulk has also been postulated to predict response to anti-EGFR therapy. We sought to evaluate the role of tumor bulk as a predictive biomarker to anti-EGFR therapy in pts with left- (LS) and right-sided (RS) mCRC. Methods: Data from 476 pts with mCRC enrolled across 2 first-line trials of anti-EGFR plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy were pooled. Pts were included if there was available information on tumor sidedness and tumor bulk. All were KRAS wild-type and BRAF wild-type or unknown BRAF status. The right colon was defined as the cecum through the transverse colon, and the left colon as the splenic flexure through the rectum. Tumor bulk was the mean tumor size of target lesions at baseline, bulky defined as > 3.5 cm. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusting for performance status (PS), platelet count, primary tumor (PT) resection, number of metastatic sites, and stratified by study. Results: Pts with bulky tumors (211, 44%) had higher PS, white blood cell and platelet counts, higher CEA, fewer sites of metastatic disease, more liver than lung metastases, and fewer had PT resection. OS and PFS medians in months (mos) are presented in the table with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). Bulky tumors had inferior median OS compared with non-bulky (mOS, 17.9 vs. 21.3 mos, HRadj 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.69, P = 0.016) although median PFS was similar (mPFS, 8.6 vs. 8.7 mos, HRadj 1.15, 95% CI 0.92-1.42, P = 0.21). Conclusions: Tumor bulk is an independent prognostic factor for OS in KRAS wild-type and BRAF wild-type or unknown BRAF status pts. Pts with non-bulky RS tumors have survival outcomes similar to pts with bulky LS tumors. Although the mPFS for pts with RS tumors treated with anti-EGFR therapy was the lowest across subgroups, this finding was not statistically significant. Further research is warranted into whether pts with bulky RS tumors benefit from anti-EGFR therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT00182715, NCT00640081. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Randomized Phase II Study of SOX+B-mab Versus SOX+C-mab in Patients With Previously Untreated Recurrent Advanced Colorectal Cancer With Wild-Type KRAS (MCSGO-1107 Study)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yujiro Nishizawa ◽  
Naotsugu Haraguchi ◽  
Hirotoshi Kim ◽  
Yoshihito Ide ◽  
Ken Nakata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Early Tumor ◽  
Patient Prognosis ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

Abstract Background: Although chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has improved, the standard chemotherapy regimens for patients with RAS wild-type mCRC remain debated.Methods: This randomized phase II, open-label, multicenter study compared the efficacy and safety of S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX)+bevacizumab (B-mab) with SOX+cetuximab (C-mab) in patients with previously untreated recurrent advanced CRC with wild-type KRAS. Between February 2012 and October 2016, 45 patients were enrolled.Results: Overall response rates were 59.1% and 43.5% (p=0.29) and disease control rates were 90.9% and 91.3% (p=0.96) in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 25.3 and 15.5 months (HR=0.607, p=0.167) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 11.7 and 5.5 months (HR=0.558, p=0.077) in the SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab groups, respectively. The OS and PFS of patients with early tumor shrinkage (ETS) were not significantly different in the SOX+B-mab group. However, they were significantly better when ETS was ≥20 in the SOX+C-mab group (p=0.032 and p=0.003, respectively).Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of SOX+B-mab and SOX+C-mab for wild-type KRAS recurrent advanced CRC as first-line chemotherapy were almost the same. Consideration of the treatment strategy based on ETS may improve patient prognosis, especially in patients receiving the SOX+C-mab regimen.Trial registration: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000006706)Date of registration: NOV/11/2011URL of trial registry record:https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000007920

A study of Capecitabine Metronomic Chemotherapy is noninferior to Conventional Chemotherapy as Maintenance Strategy in Responders After Induction Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Shi ◽  
Tao Ma ◽  
Wenqi Xi ◽  
Jingling Jiang ◽  
Junwei Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
High Efficiency ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Metronomic Chemotherapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Standard Dosage

Abstract Background: The aim of this study is to demonstrate that capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to capecitabine conventional chemotherapy as maintenance treatment, who have responded to 16-18 weeks first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: The study design is a prospective, randomized, open label, phase II clinical trial. Those mCRC patients who respond well after 16-18 weeks of standard doublet chemotherapy as induction may enrolled into this study, randomly divided into capecitabine metronomic group or standard dosage group. The duration of disease control after randomization and progression free survival from enrollment are primary endpoints. Meanwhile, the overall survival, safety and quality of life are secondary endpoints. The sample size required to achieve the research objectives of this project is 79 cases in each group. The study recently started on 29-01-2018, and will last for 36 months. Discussion: This project intends to study the efficacy and safety of capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy in the maintenance treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, and to explore the strategy of "low toxicity, high efficiency, economy and individualization" which is suitable for China's national conditions and pharmacoeconomics. It has great clinical application prospects and clear socio-economic value.

scholarly journals Cetuximab versus bevacizumab maintenance following prior 8-cycle modified FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab in Asian postmenopausal women with treatment-naive KRAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (9) ◽  
pp. 030006052093044
Author(s):  
Baomin Chen ◽  
Donghua Zheng ◽  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Cuiping Huang ◽  
Junxing Ye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Clinical Endpoints ◽  
Treatment Naïve

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of cetuximab (CE) versus bevacizumab (BE) maintenance treatment after prior 8-cycle modified 5-fluorouracil, folinate, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) plus CE induction therapy in treatment-naive KRAS and BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods From 2012 to 2017, prospectively maintained databases were reviewed to assess Asian postmenopausal women with treatment-naive KRAS and BRAF wt mCRC who underwent modified FOLFOXIRI plus CE induction therapy, followed by CE or BE maintenance until disease progression or death. Co-primary clinical endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results A total of 222 women were included (CE n = 110 and BE n = 112). At a median follow-up of 27.0 months (interquartile range, 6.5–38.6 months), median PFS was 21.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.4–24.4) and 17.7 months (95% CI 11.3–19.0) for CE and BE groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.31, 95% CI 0.15–0.46); median OS was 26.0 months (95% CI 23.4–28.7) and 22.7 months (95% CI 21.2–24.3) for CE and BE groups, respectively (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11–0.37). Conclusions CE maintenance treatment is more poorly tolerated but has a slightly more modest survival benefit compared with BE maintenance treatment in mCRC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document