Immunochemotherapy with Fludarabine (F), Cyclophosphamide (C), and Rituximab (R) (FCR) Versus Fludarabine and Cyclophosphamide (FC) Improves Response Rates and Progression-Free Survival (PFS) of Previously Untreated Patients (pts) with Advanced Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 325-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hallek ◽  
Guenter Fingerle-Rowson ◽  
Anna- Maria Fink ◽  
Raymonde Busch ◽  
Jiri Mayer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Study Medication ◽  
First Line ◽  
Binet Stage ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Introduction: Previous phase II studies have suggested that a combination of FCR may increase the outcome of both untreated and relapsed CLL pts. In order to validate this concept the German CLL study group (GCLLSG) initiated a multicentre, multinational phase III trial, CLL8, to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of FCR versus FC for the first-line treatment of pts with advanced CLL. Methods and Patients: 817 pts with good physical fitness as defined by a cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) score (Extermann et al., JCO 1998) of up to 6 and a creatinine clearance (cr cl) □d 70 ml/min were enrolled between July 2003 and March 2006. Pts were randomly assigned to receive 6 courses of either FC (N=409; F 25mg/m2 i.v. d1–3 and C 250 mg/m2 i.v. d1–3; q 28 days) or FC plus R (N=408; 375 mg/m2 i.v. d 0 at first cycle and 500 mg/m2 d1 all subsequent cycles; q 28 days). Both treatment arms were well balanced with regard to age, stage, genomic aberrations and VH status. 64% were Binet B, 32% Binet C and 5% Binet A. The median age was 61 years (range 30 to 81), the median CIRS score was 1 (range 0–8). The overall incidences of trisomy 12 and abnormalities of 13q, 11q23, and 17p13 detected by FISH were 12%, 57%, 25%, and 8%, respectively, with no statistically significant differences between treatment arms. A mean number of 5.2 courses was given in the FCR arm versus 4.8 courses in the FC arm (p=0.006). 74% (FCR) and 67% (FC) of pts received 6 cycles. Dose was reduced by more than 10% in at least one treatment course in 43% (FCR) and 30% (FC) of pts, and in 21% (FCR) and 17% (FC) of all treatment courses given. 17 pts did not receive any study medication, 10 due to violation of enrolment criteria (4 decreased renal function, 2 active secondary malignancies, 2 active infections, 1 autoimmune thrombocytopenia, 1 pt not requiring treatment), 3 due to withdrawal of consent, 2 due to worsened concomitant diseases. 2 pts were lost before start of treatment. 56 pts were not evaluable for response: 17 did not receive any study medication, 16 withdrew consent before interim staging, 7 due to violation of enrolment criteria, 4 discontinued treatment due to toxicity and 12 due to early death (caused by toxicity, progression or secondary malignancy). Prophylactic use of antibiotics or growth factors was not generally recommended in the protocol. Results: At the time of analysis, June 2008, the median observation time was 25.5 months (mo). 761 pts (FCR 390; FC 371) were evaluable for response, 787 pts (FCR 400; FC 387) for PFS and all for OS. The overall response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in the FCR arm (95%; 370/390) compared to FC (88%; 328/371 (p=0.001). The complete response rate of the FCR arm was 52% as compared to 27.0% in the FC arm (p<0.0001). PFS was 76.6% at 2 years in the FCR arm and 62.3% in the FC arm (p<0.0001). There was a trend for an increased OS rate in the FCR arm (91% vs 88% at 2 years p=0.18). Hazard Ratio for PFS was 0.59, for OS 0.76. The largest benefit for FCR was observed in Binet stage A and B with regard to CR, ORR and PFS (A: p=0.01, B: p<0.0001). FCR treatment was more frequently associated with CTC grade 3 and 4 adverse events (47% of FC vs 62% of FCR treated pts). Severe hematologic toxicity occurred in 55% (FCR) versus 39% (FC) of all patients. Significant differences were observed for neutropenia (FCR 33,6%; FC 20,9% p=0.0001) and leukocytopenia (FCR 24%; FC 12,1% p<0.0001) but not for thrombocytopenia (FCR 7,4%; FC 10,8% p=0.09) and anemia (FCR: 5,4% FC 6,8% p=0.42). The incidence of CTC grade 3 or 4 infections was not significantly increased in the FCR arm (18,8% versus 14,8% in the FC arm, p=0.68). Tumor lysis syndrome (FCR 0,2% FC 0,5%) and cytokine release syndrome (FCR 0,2% FC 0,0%) were rarely observed in both arms. Treatment related mortality occurred in 2.0% in the FCR and 1.5% in the FC arm. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate factors predicting outcome. Amongst these variables age, sex, Binet stage, CIRS score, renal function (cr cl < 70 ml/min) were independent prognostic factors predicting OS or PFS. Conclusion: Treatment with FCR chemoimmunotherapy improves response rates and PFS when compared to the FC chemotherapy. FCR caused more neutropenia/leukopenia without increasing the incidence of severe infections. These results suggest that FCR chemoimmunotherapy might become the new standard first-line treatment for physically fit CLL patients.

Comparison of Oral Capecitabine Versus Intravenous Fluorouracil Plus Leucovorin as First-Line Treatment in 605 Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results of a Randomized Phase III Study

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 2282-2292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo M. Hoff ◽  
Rafat Ansari ◽  
Gerald Batist ◽  
John Cox ◽  
Walter Kocha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Oral Capecitabine ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

PURPOSE: To compare the response rate, efficacy parameters, and toxicity profile of oral capecitabine with bolus intravenous (IV) fluorouracil plus leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively randomized 605 patients to treatment with oral capecitabine for 14 days every 3 weeks or 5-FU/LV by rapid IV injection daily for 5 days in 4-week cycles. RESULTS: The overall objective tumor response rate among all randomized patients was significantly higher in the capecitabine group (24.8%) than in the 5-FU/LV group (15.5%; P = .005). In the capecitabine and 5-FU/LV groups, median times to disease progression were 4.3 and 4.7 months (log-rank P = .72), median times to treatment failure were 4.1 and 3.1 months (P = .19), and median overall survival times were 12.5 and 13.3 months (P = .974), respectively. Capecitabine, compared with bolus 5-FU/LV treatment, produced a significantly lower incidence (P < .0002) of diarrhea, stomatitis, nausea, and alopecia. Patients treated with capecitabine also displayed lower incidences of grade 3/4 stomatitis and grade 3/4 neutropenia (P < .0001) leading to significantly less neutropenic fever/sepsis. Grade 3 hand-foot syndrome (P < .00001) and grade 3/4 hyperbilirubinemia were the only toxicities more frequently associated with capecitabine than with 5-FU/LV treatment. CONCLUSION: Oral capecitabine was more active than 5-FU/LV in the induction of objective tumor responses. Time to disease progression and survival were at least equivalent for capecitabine compared with the 5-FU/LV arm. Capecitabine also demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits over bolus 5-FU/LV in terms of tolerability.

FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (bev) versus FOLFIRI plus bev as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC): Results of the phase III randomized TRIBE trial.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 336-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fotios Loupakis ◽  
Chiara Cremolini ◽  
Gianluca Masi ◽  
Sara Lonardi ◽  
Vittorina Zagonel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Peripheral Neurotoxicity ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

336 Background: First-line FOLFOXIRI demonstrated superior activity and efficacy compared to FOLFIRI. Moreover, the outcome is improved by the addition of bev to first-line doublets. A phase II study of FOLFOXIRI/bev showed promising activity and manageable toxicities. The present trial compared FOLFOXIRI/bev to FOLFIRI/bev as first-line treatment in unresectable mCRC. Methods: Eligibility criteria included: measurable and unresectable mCRC, age 18-75 years, no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease. Patients (pts) were randomized to either FOLFIRI/bev (bev 5 mg/kg, irinotecan 180 mg/sqm, l-LV 200 mg/sqm, 5FU bolus 400 mg/sqm, 5FU infusion 2400 mg/sqm over 48h q2w, arm A) or FOLFOXIRI/bev (bev 5 mg/kg, irinotecan 165 mg/sqm, oxaliplatin 85 mg/sqm, l-LV 200 mg/sqm, 5FU infusion 3200 mg/sqm over 48h q2w, arm B). Treatment was planned for a maximum of 12 cycles followed by maintenance with bev and 5FU until progression. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Between July 2008 and May 2011, 508 pts were randomized among 35 italian centers. Pts characteristics were (arm A/arm B): median age 60/61 yrs, ECOG PS 1-2 11%/10%, synchronous metastases 81%/79% multiple sites of disease 74%/70%. At a median follow-up of 20.9 months 391 pts have progressed. The study met its primary endpoint: FOLFOXIRI/bev significantly increased PFS (median 9.5 vs 11.9 months, HR 0.72 [95%CI:0.59-0.87], p=0.001). Response rate was also significantly increased (53% vs 64%, p=0.015). Main per patient toxicities were (arm A/arm B): grade 3-4 diarrhea 10%/18%, grade 3-4 vomiting 3%/4%, grade 3-4 stomatitis 4%/8%, grade 3-4 peripheral neurotoxicity 0%/5%, grade 3-4 neutropenia 20%/49%, febrile neutropenia 6%/8%, hypertension 2%/4%, thromboembolic events 7%/7%, bleeding 1%/1%. Deaths within 60 days were 3% and 4%. Conclusions: FOLFOXIRI/bev significantly increases PFS and response rate compared to FOLFIRI/bev. Chemotherapy- and bev-related toxicities occur with the expected incidence. Clinical trial information: NCT00719797.

Phase III Multicenter Randomized Trial of Oxaliplatin Added to Chronomodulated Fluorouracil–Leucovorin as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Giacchetti ◽  
B. Perpoint ◽  
R. Zidani ◽  
N. Le Bail ◽  
R. Faggiuolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
First Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

PURPOSE: To study how adding oxaliplatin (l-OHP) to chronomodulated fluorouracil (5-FU)–leucovorin (LV) affected the objective response rate, as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients from 15 institutions in four countries were randomly assigned to receive a 5-day course of chronomodulated 5-FU and LV (700 and 300 mg/m2/d, respectively; peak delivery rate at 0400 hours) with or without l-OHP on the first day of each course (125 mg/m2, as a 6-hour infusion). Each course was repeated every 21 days. Response was assessed by extramural review of computed tomography scans. RESULTS: Grade 3 to 4 toxicity from 5-FU–LV occurred in ≤ 5% of the patients (≤ 1% of the courses). Grade 3 to 4 diarrhea occurred in 43% of the patients given l-OHP (10% of the courses), and less than 2% of the patients had severe hematotoxicity. Thirteen percent of the patients had moderate functional impairment from peripheral sensory neuropathy. Sixteen percent of the patients receiving 5-FU–LV had an objective response (95% confidence interval [CI], 9% to 24%), compared with 53% of those receiving additional l-OHP (95% CI, 42% to 63%) (P < .001). The median progression-free survival time was 6.1 months with 5-FU–LV (range, 4.1 to 7.4 months) and 8.7 months (7.4 to 9.2 months) with l-OHP and 5-FU–LV (P = .048). Median survival times were 19.9 and 19.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: By chronomodulating 5-FU–LV, we were able to add l-OHP without compromising dose-intensities. l-OHP significantly improved the antitumor efficacy of this regimen.

JUPITER-02: Randomized, double-blind, phase III study of toripalimab or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA2-LBA2
Author(s):  
Rui-hua Xu ◽  
Hai-Qiang Mai ◽  
Qiu-Yan Chen ◽  
Dongping Chen ◽  
Chaosu Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

LBA2 Background: Gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) chemotherapy is the standard 1st line treatment for locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic (r/m) NPC. Toripalimab, a humanized IgG4K monoclonal antibody specific for PD-1, provided durable responses in patients (pts) with r/m NPC as monotherapy in the ≥2nd line setting (POLARIS-02 study). The results of JUPITER-02, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded Phase III trial of toripalimab in combination with GP chemotherapy as first-line treatment for r/m NPC are summarized. Methods: Pts with advanced NPC with no prior chemotherapy in the r/m setting were randomized (1:1) to receive toripalimab 240 mg or placebo d1 in combination with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 d1, d8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 d1 every 3 weeks (Q3W) for up to 6 cycles, followed by monotherapy with toripalimab or placebo Q3W until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or completion of 2 years of treatment. Stratification factors were ECOG PS (0 vs. 1) and extent of disease (recurrent vs. primary metastatic) at enrollment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and response were assessed by independent review committee (IRC) per RECIST v1.1. The primary endpoint was PFS by IRC in the ITT population. Secondary end points included ORR, DOR and OS. There was one prespecified interim analysis of PFS at 130 PFS events with a planned final analysis at 200 PFS events. Results: 289 pts were randomized: 146 to the toripalimab arm and 143 to the placebo arm. By May 30, 2020 as the interim analysis cutoff date, the median treatment duration was 39 weeks in the toripalimab arm and 36 weeks in the placebo arm. A significant improvement in PFS was detected for the toripalimab arm compared to the placebo arm (HR = 0.52 [95% CI: 0.36-0.74] two-sided p = 0.0003), with median PFS of 11.7 vs. 8.0 months. The 1-year PFS rates were 49% and 28% respectively. An improvement in PFS was observed across relevant subgroups, including all PD-L1 subgroups. The ORR was 77.4% vs. 66.4% (P = 0.033) and the median DOR was 10.0 vs. 5.7 months (HR = 0.50 [95% CI: 0.33-0.78]). As of Jan 15, 2021, OS was not mature, with 25 deaths in the toripalimab arm and 35 in the placebo arm (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.41-1.14], P = 0.14). The incidence of Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (89.0% vs 89.5%); AEs leading to discontinuation of toripalimab/placebo (7.5% vs 4.9%); and fatal AEs (2.7% vs 2.8%) were similar between two arms; however, immune-related (irAEs) (39.7% vs. 18.9%) and Grade ≥3 irAEs (7.5% vs. 0.7%) were more frequent in the toripalimab arm. Conclusions: The addition of toripalimab to GP chemotherapy as 1st-line treatment for pts with advanced NPC provided superior PFS and ORR and longer DOR than GP alone with a manageable safety profile. These results support the use of toripalimab with GP chemotherapy as the new standard care for this population. Clinical trial information: NCT03581786.

Chemoimmunotherapy With Fludarabine (F), Cyclophosphamide (C), and Rituximab (R) (FCR) Versus Bendamustine and Rituximab (BR) In Previously Untreated and Physically Fit Patients (pts) With Advanced Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL): Results Of a Planned Interim Analysis Of The CLL10 Trial, An International, Randomized Study Of The German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG)

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 526-526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Eichhorst ◽  
Anna-Maria Fink ◽  
Raymonde Busch ◽  
Elisabeth Lange ◽  
Hubert Köppler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Severe Neutropenia ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Introduction FCR is the current standard first line treatment regimen in advanced CLL (Hallek et al., Lancet, 2010), but is associated with significant side effects. The GCCLSG initiated an international phase III study in order to test the non-inferiority regarding efficacy and potentially better tolerability of BR compared to FCR in first-line therapy of physically fit pts without del(17p). Methods and Patients 688 CLL pts from 158 sites in five countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark and Czech Republic) were screened centrally for immunophenotype, genomic aberrations by FISH, IGHV sequenzing, comorbidity burden and renal function. 564 CLL pts with CIRS score ≤ 6, creatinine clearance > 70 ml/min and without del(17p) were enrolled between October 2008 and June 2011. Pts were randomly assigned to receive 6 courses of either FCR (N= 284; F 25mg/m2 i.v. d1–3, C 250 mg/m2 i.v. d1–3, R 375 mg/m2 i.v. d 0 at first cycle and 500 mg/m2 d1 all subsequent courses; q 28 days) or BR (N=280; B 90mg/m2 i.v. d1+2, R 375 mg/m2 i.v. d 0 at first cycle and 500 mg/m2 d1 all subsequent courses; q 28 days). The intent-to-treat population consisted of 561 pts, because three patients were excluded due to deferred treatment (1 pt decision, 1 treatment before randomization, 1 misdiagnosis). 22 % were Binet A, 38 % Binet B and 40 % Binet C. The median age was 62 years (yrs) (range 33 to 82), median CIRS score 2 (range 0-6). There were significantly more pts with unmutated IGVH in the BR arm (68%) in comparison to the FCR arm (55%; p=0.003). All other characteristics including median age were well balanced. A mean number of 5.27 courses was given in the FCR arm versus 5.41 courses in the BR arm (p=0.022). 70.6% (FCR) and 80.3% (BR) of pts received 6 courses (p=0.008). Dose was reduced by more than 10% in 27.3% (FCR) and 31.6% (BR) of all courses given (p = 0.012). Results The median observation time was 27.9 months (mo) in all pts alive. While response evaluation was missing in 14 pts, 547 pts (274 FCR; BR 273) were evaluable for response and all 561 pts (282 FCR; 279 BR) for progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS) and OS. The overall response rate was identical in both arms with 97.8% (p=1.0). The complete response rate (CRR) (confirmed by central immunhistology) with FCR was 47.4% as compared to 38.1% with BR (p=0.031). MRD data were available at interim analysis from 192 pts (99 FCR; 93 BR) of the first 300pts. 71.7% of pts in the FCR and 66.7% in the BR arms achieved MRD-levels below 10-4 in peripheral blood at final staging (p=0.448). The complete MRD data set will be available by November. PFS was 85.0% at 2 yrs in the FCR arm and 78.2% in the BR arm (p=0.041). EFS was 82.6% at 2 yrs in the FCR arm and 75.7% in the BR arm (p=0.037).There was no difference in OS rate for the FCR vs BR arm (94.2% vs 95.8% at 2 years p=0.593). Hazard Ratio for PFS, EFS and OS was 1.385, 1.375 and 0.842 respectively. PFS was assessed in pts < 65 yrs and ≥ 65 yrs. While there was a significant difference in pts < 65 yrs between both treatment arm (median PFS for BR 36.5 mo vs not reached for FCR; p=0.016), the difference disappeared in elderly pts (not reached vs. 45.6 mo; p=0.757). A multivariate analysis including treatment arm, Binet stage, age, sex, comorbidity, serum TK, serum beta2-microglobulin (Beta2M), del(11q) and IGHV status identified treatment arm, Beta2M, del(11q) and IGHV as independent prognostic factors for PFS and EFS. FCR treated pts had significantly more frequent severe, CTC grade 3 to 5, adverse events during the whole observation period (90.8% vs 78.5%; p<0.001). Especially severe hematotoxicity was more frequent in the FCR arm (90.0% vs 66.9%, p<0.001). The higher rate of severe neutropenia (81.7% vs 56.8%, p<0.001) resulted in a significantly higher rate of severe infections (39.0% vs 25.4%, p=0.001) in the FCR arm, especially in the elderly (FCR: 47.4% vs BR: 26.5%; p=0.002). Treatment related mortality occurred in 3.9% (n=11) in the FCR and 2.1% (n=6) in the BR arm. Conclusion The results of this planned interim analysis show that FCR seems more efficient than BR in the first-line treatment of fit CLL pts with regard to higher CRR, as well as longer PFS and EFS. These advantages might be balanced by a higher rate of severe adverse events, in particular neutropenia and infections, associated with FCR. In light of these results, no firm recommendation of one regimen over the other can be given at the present time regarding the first-line use in CLL pts with good physical fitness. Disclosures: Eichhorst: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gregor:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Travel Support Other; Mundipharma: Travel Support, Travel Support Other. Plesner:Mundipharma: Research Funding. Trneny:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fischer:Roche: Travel grants Other; Mundipharma: Travel grants, Travel grants Other. Kneba:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. Wendtner:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kreuzer:Roche: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria. Stilgenbauer:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Travel grants Other; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Böttcher:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hallek:Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

Randomized phase III study of irinotecan and 5-FU/FA with or without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): The CRYSTAL trial

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4000-4000 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Van Cutsem ◽  
M. Nowacki ◽  
I. Lang ◽  
S. Cascinu ◽  
I. Shchepotin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Skin Reactions ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
First Line Treatment

4000 Background: Cetuximab in combination with irinotecan-based regimens has proven activity in previously-treated patients (pts) with mCRC. The present trial investigated the effectiveness of cetuximab in combination with standard FOLFIRI compared with FOLFIRI alone in the first-line treatment of pts with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-expressing mCRC. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive either cetuximab (400 mg/m2 initial dose then 250 mg/m2/week [w]) plus FOLFIRI q 2 w (irinotecan 180 mg/m2, FA 400 mg/m2, 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2, 5-FU infusion 2,400 mg/m2 over 46 hours) (Group A) or FOLFIRI alone (Group B). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), disease control rate and safety. 633 events were required to statistically differentiate PFS between groups with 80% power. Results: Between August 2004 and October 2005, 1,217 pts were randomized, 608 to Group A and 609 to Group B (60% male, median age 61 [19–84], ECOG performance status: 0=54%; 1=43.5%; 2=3.5%). Median PFS was significantly longer for Group A compared to Group B (8,9 months [8 - 9,5] for Group A vs. 8 months [7.6 - 9] for Group B, p=0.036). Response Rate was also significantly increased by cetuximab (46.9% vs. 38.7%, p=0.005). Treatment was generally well tolerated with neutropenia (26.7% Group A, 23.3% Group B), diarrhea (15.2% and 10.5% respectively) and skin reactions (18.7% and 0.2% respectively) being the most common grade 3/4 adverse events. Conclusions: Cetuximab in combination with FOLFIRI significantly increases response rate and significantly prolongs PFS in the first-line treatment of pts with mCRC, reducing the relative risk of progression by approximately 15%. Treatment-related side effects of cetuximab in combination with FOLFIRI were as expected, with diarrhea being moderately and skin reactions significantly more frequent as compared to FOLFIRI alone. [Table: see text]

Capecitabine and irinotecan (XELIRI) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): A systematic review of controlled clinical trials

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15100-e15100
Author(s):  
S. Sukumaran ◽  
N. Pavlakis ◽  
K. B. Pittman ◽  
K. Patterson ◽  
T. J. Price
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii ◽  
First Line Treatment

e15100 Background: Irinotecan and 5-Fluorouracil based combination is an effective regimen for mCRC. Capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine, is a convenient alternative to intravenous 5- Fluorouracil. This study aims to systematically review all published and unpublished controlled phase II and III trials of XELIRI combination, used in first line treatment of mCRC, reported from 2000–2008, to describe its efficacy and safety. Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and proceedings from ASCO, ESMO and WGIC was conducted. The primary end point was response rate (RR), secondary endpoints include: time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: Thirty non-randomised phase II trials (n = 1380) along with 6 randomised phase II and 3 phase III trials, were included (pooled n = 1478). The daily dose of capecitabine ranged from 1,800 mg/m2 to 2,500 mg/m2 for 7 to 14 days per cycle and the dose of irinotecan varied from 180mg/m2 to 350 mg/m2, over a 3 week period per cycle. Amongst the non-randomised studies, the median patient age was 61 years (53–72).The median RR was 46.75% (25–78%). The median reported TTP was 7.9 months (mo) (5- 9.9 mo) and the median OS was 15.6 months (7–24.8 mo). Grade 3–4 toxicity incidence was: diarrhoea (21.5%), neutropenia (12%), vomiting (12.5%), fatigue (6%) and Hand-foot syndrome (6%). The pooled incidence of febrile neutropenia was 2.5%. Amongst the randomised trials, the comparator regimens were XELOX or FOLFIRI. Median age was 65 years (61–74). RR for XELIRI was 39% (34–56%) compared to 47% (27–61.8%) for the non XELIRI comparator arms. Median reported TTP was 8.2 mo (5.7–12.5 mo) for the XELIRI arms and 9.2 mo for the comparator arms. Conclusions: XELIRI is an effective and feasible regime in the first line management of mCRC. However the optimal role of this combination remains to be established. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals First Line Treatment with Bendamustine in Selected Non Hodgkin's Lymphoma Patients: Prospective Experience in Tuscany Region

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 5451-5451
Author(s):  
Luigi Rigacci ◽  
Benedetta Puccini ◽  
Roberta Della Seta ◽  
Enrico Capochiani ◽  
Lorenzo Iovino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Complete Remission ◽  
Standard Therapy ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Indolent Lymphomas ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Bendamustine was introduced in Italy from 2008 and it was used as salvage therapy in patients pretreated, particularly in indolent lymphomas. Before approval as first-line treatment by the National Health System, starting from 2011 and thanks to our regional regulation, was possible to use Bendamustine in first line therapy as ‘off-label’ drug. The aim of this study was to collect all consecutive patients treated in first line with Bendamustine in 7 Tuscany centers. From June 2011 to December 2012, 72 patients were prospectively included in the study. Diagnosis was: Lymphocytic lymphoma in 25 patients (34%), Follicular lymphoma in 18 (25%), Diffuse large B cell lymphoma in 11 (15%), Mantle cell lymphoma in 10 (14%), Lymphoplasmocytic lymphoma in 5 (7%) and MALT in 3 (5%). Thirty-nine patients were treated with Bendamustine 90 mg/m2 for two days, 28 with 70 mg/m2 and 5 with 120 mg/m2. The analyzed population must be considered negatively selected as such was not proposed the standard therapy. Moreover the data coming from literature and the experience in pre-treated patients increased the interest of clinicians for this drug. In 14 patients Bendamustine was used alone, in 56 in combination with Rituximab or other drug. The overall median age was 69 years (range 45-89), in DLBCL was 81 years and 78 years in MCL. Considering the advanced age of this population we applied the geriatric score assessment and 25% of patients were unfit or frail. The median number of cycles performed was 4 (range 2 - 6). All patients but 2 were evaluable for response, 35 obtained a complete remission, 27 a partial remission considering the intention to treat the overall response rate was 86%, stable disease in 2 patients, progressive disease in 6 patients and not evaluable in 2 patients. According to histotype to note that all but two indolent lymphoma obtained a response; in aggressive lymphomas 4/11 DLBCL and 5/9 MCL reached a complete remission but 4 DLBCL and 2 MCL experienced rapid progression of the disease. Treatment was well tolerated, we observed: grade 3-4 neutropenia in 18 patients, no grade 3-4 anemia or thrombocytopenia. According to extrahematological toxicity was reported only grade 3-4 infection in 3 patients no other grade 3-4 toxicities were reported. Skin rush grade 1 was reported in in 5 patients. No toxic deaths were observed. After a median follow-up of 18 months the overall survival was 83%; 10 patients died all due to progressive disease. Progression free survival, after a median observation period of 12 months, was 60%; sixty-two patients are alive, 31 in continuous complete remission, 3 relapsed and 28 with disease under control. In conclusion in this ‘real life’ negatively selected population, the use of Bendamustine showed a very high response rate particularly in indolent lymphomas, promising results, also, are observed in aggressive lymphoma suggesting that this drug can be used with interesting result in elderly patients who can not receive the standard therapy. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Addition of Rituximab to Salvage Chemotherapy in Aggressive CD20+ Lymphoma Prior to Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT): A Cohort Comparison from the NCIC CTG Study LY.12

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 1712-1712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tara Baetz ◽  
Bingshu E Chen ◽  
Stephen Couban ◽  
C. Tom Kouroukis ◽  
Rena Buckstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Salvage Chemotherapy ◽  
Salvage Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Primary Therapy ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Background: The addition of rituximab (R) to salvage chemotherapy has been shown to improve response rates and proportion of patients subsequently transplanted with Aggressive CD 20+ Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma who were previously R naïve. It is unknown if this benefit would be seen in the era of patients requiring ASCT who had previously been treated with R + chemotherapy. Methods: The NCIC CTG study LY.12 is a phase III study that evaluated gemcitabine, dexamethasone and cisplatin (GDP) as a salvage regimen compared with dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin (DHAP), and demonstrated that GDP was non-inferior with respect to response rate and showed similar results for rates of transplantation and event-free survival (Crump et al, ASH 2012; in press JCO 2014). In addition GDP resulted in less toxicity and was highly cost effective compared to DHAP. Between Aug 2003 and Oct 2011, 619 patients (pts) were accrued; 414 had CD 20+ lymphoma and received R with their initial treatment. Ninety six pts were accrued between 2003-05 and received GDP or DHAP without R; following a protocol amendment in 2005, 318 pts received R on day 1 of each cycle of salvage chemotherapy. We compared these two cohorts to determine whether there is a benefit to adding R to DHAP or GDP in those pts who have relapsed or are refractory (stable disease or progressive disease) after R containing first-line treatment. Response assessment by CT scan was performed following two cycles of salvage treatment. Subsequent mobilization, choice of high-dose chemotherapy regimen and use of post-transplant radiation were at investigator discretion. Results: Of the 414 pts in this analysis, median age was 55.7 years (range 18-71); 78% had diffuse large B cell lymphoma and 14.5% transformed from indolent lymphoma; 35% were refractory to first line treatment and 46.9% had relapsed within 1 year; 34.5% had IPI score 3 or higher at study enrolment. 41.3% of pt had an elevated LDH and 33.1% had B symptoms prior to salvage therapy. Most had no prior radiation treatment (78.7%). Equal number of pts in the R+ and R- groups received DHAP as GDP as salvage chemotherapy. The R- group was slightly younger (53.7 vs 56 years, P=0.03), had a higher ECOG Performance status >1 (19.8% vs 11.6%, P=0.041) and a higher proportion of pts relapsing within 1 year of R-CHOP (59.4% vs 43.1%, P=0.002). The rate of CR/Cru (15.7% vs 4.2%, p = 0.0032) and overall RR (45.6% vs 25%, P=0.0003) were significantly better in the R+ group. The transplantation rate was significantly greater in the R+ group 165/318 versus the R- group 30/96 (51.9% vs. 31.3%; P=0.0004). Multivariate analysis revealed that response rate was significantly higher in those receiving R with salvage, longer remission after primary therapy and without B symptoms at relapse. We were unable to detect differences in EFS and OS between the groups who received or did not receive R (4 year EFS 22 vs. 20%, HR = 0.85, P=0.26; 4 year OS 35 vs 31%, HR = 0.83, P=0.18). Conclusion: Although this is a retrospective analysis, these data suggest that in patients with relapsed/refractory CD20+ aggressive lymphoma, the addition of rituximab to subsequent salvage treatment improves RR and the proportion of patients proceeding to ASCT. Additional strategies are required to improve outcomes post-ASCT. Disclosures Baetz: Roche: Consultancy; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Meyer:Celgene: Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document