Quality of Life (Qol) in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Mcrc) Receiving Maintenance Therapy After First-Line Inductive Treatment: a Qol Sub-Analysis of the Aio Krk 0207 Phase III Trial

PURPOSE Despite extensive randomized evidence supporting the use of treatment breaks in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), they are not universally offered to patients despite improvements in quality of life without detriment to overall survival (OS). FOCUS4-N was set up to explore the impact of oral maintenance therapy in patients who are responding to first-line therapy. METHODS FOCUS4 was a molecularly stratified trial program that registered patients with newly diagnosed mCRC. The FOCUS4-N trial was offered to patients in whom a targeted subtrial was unavailable or biomarker tests failed. Patients were randomly assigned using a 1:1 ratio between maintenance capecitabine and active monitoring (AM). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary outcomes including OS toxicity and tolerability. RESULTS Between March 2014 and March 2020, 254 patients were randomly assigned (127 to capecitabine and 127 to AM) across 88 UK sites. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was strong evidence of efficacy for PFS (hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.75; P < .0001), but no significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.27; P = .66) was observed. Compliance with treatment was good, and toxicity from capecitabine versus AM was as expected with grade ≥ 2 fatigue (25% v 12%), diarrhea (23% v 13%), and hand-foot syndrome (26% v 3%). Quality of life showed little difference between the groups. CONCLUSION Despite strong evidence of disease control with maintenance therapy, OS remains unaffected and FOCUS4-N provides additional evidence to support the use of treatment breaks as safe management alternatives for patients who are stable or responding to first-line treatment for mCRC. Capecitabine without bevacizumab may be used to extend PFS in the interval after 16 weeks of first-line therapy.

Download Full-text

Bevacizumab (Bev) with or without erlotinib as maintenance therapy, in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Exploratory analysis according to KRAS status in the gercor DREAM phase III trial.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.448 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽

pp. 448-448

Author(s):

Benoit Samson ◽

Christophe Tournigand ◽

Werner Scheithauer ◽

Gérard Lledo ◽

Frédéric Viret ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽

Kinase Inhibitor ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Phase Iii ◽

First Line ◽

Cutaneous Toxicity ◽

Phase Iii Trial ◽

Kras Status

448 Background: In the GERCOR-DREAM trial, maintenance therapy (MT) with bev + EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib (E) after a first-line Bev-based induction therapy (IT) in pts with mCRC significantly improved PFS compared with bev alone. Here we explore the influence of KRAS status on erlotinib efficacy. Methods: Pts with previously untreated and unresectable mCRC were eligible. After a Bev-based IT with FOLFOX or XELOX or FOLFIRI, pts without disease progression were randomized to MT between Bev alone (Bev 7.5 mg/kg q3w; arm A) or Bev+E (Bev 7.5 mg/kg q3w, E 150 mg/day continuously; arm B). KRAS determination was established by local assessment in each center. Results: Among the 452 randomized patients, KRAS status was available in 403 pts (89%): 234 pts (58%) KRAS wt and 169 pts (42%) KRAS mut. Clinical characteristics were similar between both populations. For the whole population of randomized patients (n=452), median PFS from inclusion were 9.33m and 10.55m in arm A and B, respectively (HR=0.76 [0.61-0.94], p=0.011). For KRAS wt population, median PFS from inclusion was 9.66 m and 10.94 m in arm A and B, respectively (HR=0.80 [0.59-1.08], p=0.141). For KRAS mut population, median PFS from inclusion was 9.79 m and 9.79 m in arm A and B, respectively (HR=0.86 [0.61-1.22], p=0.393). In KRAS wt pts treated with erlotinib, cutaneous toxicity was predictive of PFS: mPFS was 9.66m in pts with grade 0 (n=101) and 10.91m in pts with grade ≥1 (n=114) (HR=0.69 [0.51-0.95], p=0.0186). Conclusions: The addition of erlotinib to bevacizumab as maintenance treatment in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer significantly improves progression-free survival from inclusion. However, in both wt and mut KRAS pts, difference was not statistically significant. Unlike anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, the addition of erlotinib to bevacizumab does not appear to be antagonist in KRAS mutant patients. Clinical trial information: NCT00265824.

Download Full-text