Cetuximab in combination with irinotecan/5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) (FOLFIRI) in second and third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Safety and efficacy analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3558-3558
Author(s):  
D. M. Smith ◽  
J. Legoux ◽  
R. Brunet ◽  
X. Adhoute ◽  
J. Blanc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Primary Tumour ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Acneiform Eruption ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

3558 Background: The Folfiri regimen demonstrated high efficacy and favorable safety profile compared to irinotecan plus bolus 5-FU/FA (IFL regimen) or irinotecan alone. Folfiri is a standard option in first line treatment of mCRC. Cetuximab, an IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which is commonly expressed in mCRC, is approved in France in combination with irinotecan after failure of an irinotecan-based therapy. We have prospectively evaluated the combination cetuximab-FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC refractory to FOLFIRI administered in first line treatment. Methods: Patients with EGFR-expressing mCRC, who progressed following first line treatment with FOLFIRI regimen were eligible for this study. Treatment consisted of cetuximab (initial dose 400 mg/m2 followed by 250mg/m2/week) combined with FOLFIRI (given every 2 weeks: irinotecan 180 mg/m2, FA 400 mg/m2 and 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 2400 mg/m2/46-h infusion) until either disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tumor reponse was assessed by CT scan every 2 months (OMS criteria), and adverses events were registered. Results: 41 patients where included from 09/2004 to 11/2005. 78% Male/ 22% Female, mean age 63 years, median KPS 80, 68% colon primary tumour. 5 patients were treated in second line, 24 patients in third line and 12 in fourth line or more. 40 patients are evaluable for response. They were 8 objective responses (20%) and 11 patients with stable disease (27.5%). The median progression free survival was 4,3 months and the median overall survival was 5 months. 61 % of the 41 patients experienced grade 3–4 adverses events, the most frequent of which were leucopenia (16%), asthenia (9%), vomiting and diarrhoea (5%), and acneiform skin rash in 11 patients (24%), severe xerosis (7%). 6/11 patients who experienced acneiform eruption grade 3 were alive at 12 months. Conclusions: The combination of cetuximab with FOLFIRI demonstrated promising efficacy and acceptable safety profile without increasing chemotherapy adverse reactions. A prospective randomised trial would confirm the advantage of FOLFIRI over irinotecan alone in combination with cetuximab. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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.

Comparative Safety Analysis of Currently Approved Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibodies for First Line Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5587-5587
Author(s):  
Mkaya Mwamburi ◽  
Vasudha Bal ◽  
Teresa Cascella ◽  
Anshul Shah ◽  
Merena Nanavaty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Cost Implications ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Introduction: Treatment of CLL has advanced tremendously in the past decade with significant extension of life expectancy in patients diagnosed with the disease. Three anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAB) combinations approved for previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients are obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (OBI-CHL), ofatumumab-chlorambucil (OFA-CHL), and rituximab-chlorambucil (RTX-CHL), have comparable efficacy but varying safety profiles in pivotal trials. Grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs), including infusion-related reactions (IRRs), neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, and infections differ by each mAB. Grade 3-4 AEs, defined as requiring hospitalization or life-threatening, result in reductions in patient quality of life (QoL) and bear cost implications. We sought to compare the safety of the IV-administered anti-CD20 mABs in the first-line treatment of CLL and to evaluate the respective QoL and economic implications of these AEs. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library for the time period of 2010-2016 and in conference proceedings of ASH, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the European Hematology Association (EHA) for 2014-2016. Search was limited to clinical trials conducted on humans and published in English language. The IRRs were compared directly as CHL is administered orally. A Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMA) was conducted with data from phase 3 trials using SAS® (v9.3) to compare grade 3-4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, and infections associated with the three anti-CD20 mABs. A pooled analysis of data from phase 2 trials and cohort studies was conducted using MedCalc® version 16.2.1. Analyses were also conducted to estimate the potential impact of the AEs of respective anti-CD20 mABs on QoL and cost of care based on the NMA results and previously published estimates of utilities associated with CR (0.780), PR (0.790), SD/PD (0.760); disutilities associated with IRR (-0.11), neutropenia (-0.09), thrombocytopenia (-0.05), anemia (-0.09), and infections (-0.20); and costs associated with episodes of IRR ($4,482), neutropenia ($5,406), thrombocytopenia ($12,621), anemia ($8,894), and infections ($7,163) in CLL. Results: Of the 86 studies screened, 10 studies were included. Direct comparison showed that the rate of IRRs in OBI-CHL, OFA-CHL, and RTX-CHL were 21%, 10%, and 4%, respectively. Risks for neutropenia were lower for OFA-CHL compared to OBI-CHL (OR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.12-4.59) and similar to RTX-CHL (1.08; 0.20-5.82); for thrombocytopenia were lower for OFA-CHL compared to OBI-CHL (0.16; 0.02-1.33) and to RTX-CHL (0.49; 0.06-4.15); for anemia were lower for OFA-CHL compared to OBI-CHL (0.80; 0.21-3.06) and similar to RTX-CHL (1.08; 0.24-4.64); and for infections OFA-CHL, OBI-CHL (1.00; 0.15-6.74) and RTX-CHL (0.86; 0.15-4.43) were similar. The pooled analyses of AEs observed in phase 2 / cohort studies revealed similar trends when assessed. The mean pre-progression QoL utilities associated with OBI-CHL, OFA-CHL, and RTX-CHL weighted by rates of AEs, utilities associated with respective response rates to treatments, and disutilities of the respective AEs were 0.772, 0.761, and 0.748 respectively. The total cost of treating AEs per 1,000 patients on OFA-CHL, OBI-CHL and RTX-CHL were $3.9M, $8.0M and $4.2M, respectively. Conclusion: The safety profile was most desirable for OFA-CHL, followed by RTX-CHL and OBI-CHL. Though RTX-CHL had the lowest rate of grade 3-4 IRR, OFA-CHL had the better grade 3-4 hematologic safety profile compared to OBI-CHL and RTX-CHL. As efficacy of CLL treatments has improved substantially, safety of treatments is increasingly important particularly on the impact of QoL. In addition, in the cost-conscious payer environment, selecting drugs with a better safety profile and lower cost implications is vital. Our findings demonstrate that better safety profile is associated with less impact on QoL and lower costs. We found that for every 1,000 patients covered by a payer, safety alone can save an excess of $4M based on regimen choice. Fewer incidences of AEs also results in better adherence and reduction in treatment interruption or discontinuation. Safety with the QoL and cost implications should be taken into consideration to maximize the overall benefits of the treatment to CLL patients. Disclosures Mwamburi: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Bal:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Cascella:Novartis Oncology: Employment. Shah:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Nanavaty:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Gala:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy.

Preliminary results from a phase II study of infusional 5-FU, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3579-3579 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kopetz ◽  
J. L. Abbruzzese ◽  
C. Eng ◽  
R. B. Adinin ◽  
J. Morris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Curative Surgery ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Preliminary Results ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

3579 Background: Irinotecan (I) plus bolus 5-FU (F) and leucovorin (L) comprise the IFL regimen, a very active treatment in mCRC when combined with bevacizumab (B). The response rate (RR) for IFL-B given as first-line treatment is 45%, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 10.6 months and a median survival of 20.3 months. The IFL regimen is now considered inferior to infusional 5-FU regimens, such as FOLFIRI, which have less toxicity and improved efficacy. Methods: We designed a 43 patient (pt), single-arm phase II trial of FOLFIRI-B with B (5mg/kg), I (180mg/m2), bolus of F (400mg/m2) and L (400mg/m2) followed by a 46-hour infusion of F (2400mg/m2), with a primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS). Chemotherapy naïve mCRC patients (pts) with adequate organ function and performance status 0–2 received B alone on Day minus 14, starting FOLFIRI + B on Day 1. DCE-MRI and laboratory correlates were completed before and after B alone and cycle 1. Once cycle is equivalent to two weeks. Results: 21 pts, median age 59 y/o (range 26–75), M:F = 15:6, 4 with prior F in adjuvant setting, have been enrolled to date. 20 pts are evaluable for response. One pt is too early. A total of 215 cycles have been administered (median 11). Median PFS has not been reached after a median follow-up of 8 months. By intent-to-treat analysis, there were 14 PRs (70%), and 5 (25%) pts with stable disease observed (including 1 unconfirmed PR). PRs were observed from 9 to 35 weeks after the first cycle (median: 18 weeks). 9 pts remain on treatment (1–12 months); 12 pts are off study (3 for progressive disease, 1 withdrew, 4 sent for curative surgery, 2 for toxicity, 2 sent for surgery unrelated to cancer). Toxicity included 10 cases of grade 3 neutropenia, including 1 febrile neutropenia, 4 venous thrombi, and 6 cases of hypertension requiring medication change. One pt included in the analysis developed peritonitis, considered a possible microperforation, after B alone and never received FOLFIRI. No ≥ grade 3 diarrhea was observed. Analysis of correlative studies will be presented at a later date. Conclusion: Our preliminary results indicate that FOLFIRI-B is well tolerated and an excellent choice as a first-line treatment for mCRC. [Table: see text]

Chemotherapy efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with adjuvant or first-line FOLFOX-based chemotherapy.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15048-e15048
Author(s):  
Emmanuelle Samalin ◽  
Tien Tuan Nguyen ◽  
Simon Thezenas ◽  
Fabienne Portales ◽  
Thibault Mazard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Primary Tumour ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Left Colon ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Chemotherapy Efficacy ◽  
Group 1

e15048 Background: Efficacy results of Folfox or Folfiri chemotherapies (CT) are not different as 1st line in mCRC patients, alone or with targeted therapies. No data reported on progression-free survival (PFS) of 1st line Folfiri after Folfox-based adjuvant CT and of 2nd line Folfiri-based CT after a Folfox-based 1st line. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of a Folfiri-based CT after adjuvant or 1stline Folfox-based treatment. Methods: 210 of 568 pts from a mCRC database were retrospectively selected and divided in 2 cohorts: pts who received adjuvant Folfox then Folfiri as 1st line treatment (n = 76, AdjF) and those treated with Folfox as 1st line treatment then Folfiri 2nd line (n = 134, FFox). PFS1 was the time from beginning of Folfox to 1st progression and PFS2 the time from the Irinotecan-based CT to 2ndprogression. Results: Median age was 62 (22-80). 49.3% pts had synchronous liver (72%) metastases. Primary tumour was right and left colon in 22% and 70% patients. Primary tumour was resected in 91% pts (98.7% and 86.6% in the AdjF and FFox groups, p= 0.003). KRASand BRAF-mutated status were found in 21.8% and 4.7% pts. In the AdjF group, pts received Folfiri as 1st line combined with Bevacizumab (Beva) or anti-EGFR therapy (Cetuximab or Panitumumab) in 70% and 13% cases. In the FFox group, 1st line Folfox-based CT was associated with Beva and anti-EGFRs in 7 and 6% pts, and 2ndline Folfiri-based CT with Beva or Aflibercept in 51 and 4% pts, and with anti-EGFRs in 7.5%. Median duration of a therapeutic line was 5 months (0-29.8). Grade 3-4 toxicities were for the AdjF and FFox groups respectively, diarrhea 13/15%, neutropenia (febrile) 16(7)/37%(1%) and neuropathy 24/18%. Response rates were 55.3% and 68.7% in the AdjF and FFox groups. Median PFS1 were 14 (95%CI:10-16) and 10 (95%CI:8-11) months in the AdjF and FFox groups, and PFS2 10 (95%CI:8-11) and 7 (95%CI:6-9) months, respectively. Median overall survival was 43 (95%CI:39-50) and 33 months (95%CI:26-36) respectively. Conclusions: Results in terms of survival are in favor of the AdjFFox group. It would be interesting to identify a subgroup of pts rapidly progressing after adjuvant Folfox, who might show the same profile than pts in the FFox group.

scholarly journals Comparison between the three oxaliplatin-based regimens with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 687-687
Author(s):  
Yoshihito Ohhara ◽  
Mitsukuni Suenaga ◽  
Satoshi Matsusaka ◽  
Eiji Shinozaki ◽  
Nobuyuki Mizunuma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome ◽  
Chemotherapeutic Treatment ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

687 Background: XELOX (capecitabine/L-OHP) therapy that includes orally administered fluoropyrimidine instead of infusional fluorouracil (5-FU) was approved for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Sep 2009 in Japan. A pivotal trial (NO16966 study) demonstrated the non-inferiority of XELOX to FOLFOX (5-FU/L-OHP/LV) and the superiority of those L-OHP-based regimens plus bevacizumab (BV) to those without in the first-line treatment of mCRC. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of XELO+BV compared with FOLFOX4 or mFOLFOX6 plus BV in the first-line treatment for mCRC patients at a single institute. Methods: Between Jun 2007 and Nov 2008, 85 patients received FOLFOX4+BV (FF4 arm), between Dec 2008 and Sep 2009, 40 patients received mFOLFOX6+BV (FF6 arm), and between Oct 2009 and Sep 2010, 60 patients received XELOX+BV (XELOX arm). The best overall responses were evaluated using RECIST 1.0 during chemotherapeutic treatment, and adverse events were graded according to CTCAE ver.3.0. Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: Characteristics of patients of FF4 arm, FF6 arm, and XELOX arm were below: median age, 60 yr vs. 62 yr vs. 60.5 yr; gender (male), 48.2 % vs. 62.5 % vs. 58.3%. The overall response rates (CR+PR) were 61.1 %, 72.5 %, and 75 % (95% CI; 50.6-71.8%, 58.0-87.0%, and 63.7-86.3%). Median PFS were 17.0 months, 15.5 months, and 14.4 months, respectively (cut-off: Aug 31, 2011). There were no statistical significances not only between FF4 arm and FF6 arm (log-rank; p=0.641), but also between XELOX arm and FF4+FF6 (FOLFOX) arm (log-rank; p=0.138). FOLFOX arm was associated with higher incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia than XELOX arm. Grade3 diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome (HFS) were more frequent in XELOX arm. Conclusions: This study suggests that XELOX arm was equal to FOLFOX arm, regardless of regimen, in tumor response and PFS. Further follow-up is necessary to confirm the benefit on survival.

Phase II trial of combined chemotherapy with irinotecan, S-1, and bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Update analysis—Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG) trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3593-3593
Author(s):  
Satoshi Yuki ◽  
Yoshito Komatsu ◽  
Takuto Miyagishima ◽  
Takashi Kato ◽  
Kazuteru Hatanaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

3593 Background: The FIRIS study (Muro K et al. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:853–860) previously demonstrated the non-inferiority of Irinotecan plus S-1(IRIS) to FOLFIRI for metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC), with progression-free survival (PFS) as the primary endpoint. We previously reported that IRIS plus bevacizumab(IRIS/bev) is very effective as first-line treatment (Komatsu Y et al. ESMO 2010). We now report the updated results of this study. Methods: Eligible patients had to have mCRC with a confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, an age of >20 years, ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1, and no history of prior chemotherapy. S-1 40-60 mg twice daily p.o. was given on days 1-14 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg i.v. were given on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. The secondary endpoints included overall response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: The target number of 53 patients was enrolled as of March 2009. The results are reported for 52 patients with evaluable lesions. The clinical characteristics of the patients were as follows. The median age was 63.5 years (range, 48 to 82). The male:female ratio was 3:2. The performance status on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale was 0. In January 2012, on safety analysis, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was 27%. The incidences of other grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions were as follows: diarrhea, 17%; anorexia, 4%; stomatitis, 2%; hypertension, 21%; and gastrointestinal perforation, 0%. The overall response rate was 63.5%. Three patients had complete response. Thirty patients had partial response, 16 had stable disease, none had progressive disease, and 3 were not evaluable. Median progression-free survival was 17.0 months and median survival time was 39.6 months. Conclusions: IRIS/Bev is a remarkably active and generally well-tolerated first-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Randomized control trial comparing this regimen with oxaliplatin containing regimen(XELOX or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab) is being planned.

Phase II study of infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4089-4089 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kopetz ◽  
K. Y. Glover ◽  
C. Eng ◽  
R. A. Wolff ◽  
D. Z. Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

4089 Background: When compared to bolus 5-fluorouracil (F), leucovorin (L), and irinotecan (I) regimens such as IFL, the infusional F, L, I regimen (FOLFIRI) resulted in a improved toxicity profile with a response rate (RR) of 35% and median progression free survival (PFS) of 6.7 months. When combined with bevacizumab (B) as first-line treatment, IFL demonstrated improved activity with a RR of 45% and a median PFS of 10.6 months. Combining FOLFIRI and B may further improve the efficacy. Methods: We designed a single-arm, phase II trial of FOLFIRI+B with B (5mg/kg), I (180mg/m2), bolus of F (400mg/m2) and L (400mg/m2) with a 46-hour infusion of F (2400mg/m2) every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was PFS. Chemotherapy naïve mCRC patients (pts) with a performance status of 0–2 received B alone on Day -14, starting FOLFIRI+B on Day 1. Proteomic and radiographic correlative studies were completed and will be reported separately. Results: N=41 pts, median age 56 y/o (range 26–78), M:F = 16:25, 5 pts with prior adjuvant therapy, were enrolled from 1/2005 to 1/2007. A total of 502 cycles have been administered (median = 12). The median PFS is 12.6 months. Response rate by intention-to-treat analysis was 62% (24 pts), with 33% stable disease (13 pts). Responses occurred after a median of 4 months of therapy. Fifteen pts remain on treatment; 26 pts are off study: 7 for progressive disease, 2 withdrew consent, 7 for toxicity and 2 for surgery unrelated to cancer. Eight pts were removed from the study for metastasectomies. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities included 17 occurrences of grade = 3 neutropenia, including 1 grade 4 febrile neutropenia, 4 grade 4 pulmonary emboli, 2 grade 3 hand-foot syndrome, and 1 grade 3 diarrhea. One pt included in the analysis developed a possible microperforation, manifested by peritonitis, after B alone and never received FOLFIRI. Conclusion: FOLFIRI+B is well-tolerated and efficacious, with an impressive PFS that compares favorably to historical controls. This regimen is an excellent choice as a first-line treatment for mCRC. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoki Mita ◽  
Takuji Iwashita ◽  
Shinya Uemura ◽  
Kensaku Yoshida ◽  
Yuhei Iwasa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

FOLFIRINOX (FX) and gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been reported as effective regimens for unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). FX may be more effective but is also associated with more adverse events (AEs). Therefore, first-line treatment with FX followed by second-line GnP may be appropriate. Aims: To assess the safety and efficacy of second-line GnP for patients with APC after first-line FX failure. Methods: This study was a multicenter prospective phase II study evaluating second-line GnP in patients with APC after failed first-line FX. The primary endpoint was response rate (RR), and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and the frequency and degree of adverse events (AEs). Results: Thirty patients (14 male; median age, 64 years) were enrolled. The RR was 13.3%, with a median follow-up time of 9.3 months. The median OS and PFS were 7.6 and 3.8 months, respectively. From the beginning of first-line treatment, the median OS and PFS were 14.2 and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 AEs were seen in 70% of patients. Conclusion: Second-line GnP after FX failure for patients with APC could be more effective than GEM alone. Further comparison studies are warranted.

MFOLFOX6 with oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy and oral S-1 maintenance therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: CCOG-0704 study.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 569-569
Author(s):  
G. Nakayama ◽  
Y. Kodera ◽  
H. Yokoyama ◽  
N. Okuda ◽  
T. Fujii ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Stop And Go ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

569 Background: In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a combination of leucovorin and fluorouracil with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is one of the standard first-line regimen. The cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin often requires therapy to be stopped in patients who are still responding. The aim of this study was to evaluate modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) with the intermittent oxaliplatin treatment and maintenance therapy with S-1, oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, in the first-line treatment of mCRC. Methods: Thirty patients with untreated mCRC were treated with six cycles of mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 and 5-fluorouracil continuous 2400 mg/m2, every 2 weeks) followed by maintenance therapy with oral S-1 (S-1 80- 120mg/body days 1-28, every 6 weeks). Reintroduction of mFOLFOX6 was scheduled after four cycles of S-1 or tumor progression. The primary study end point was duration of disease control (DDC). Results: Twenty of the 30 patients (66.7%) who achieved responses or stabilizations received S-1 maintenance therapy. mFOLFOX6 was reintroduced in thirteen patients (43.0%). Median DDC was 9.3 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months. Overall response rates and disease control rates were 40.0% and 86.6% for the initial mFOLFOX6, 25.0% and 55.0% for S-1 maintenance therapy and 23.1% and 76.9% for mFOLFOX6 reintroduction. Twenty-eight patients (93.3%) had peripheral neuropathy during treatment, but grade 3 neurotoxicity was observed in only 1 patient (3.3%). Conclusions: The planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy with oral S-1 maintenance therapy was feasible first-line treatment for Japanese mCRC patients. Further prospective randamized control study is warranted. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A randomized phase II study comparing oral S-1 plus 24-hour infusion of irinotecan (Iri) and bevacizumab (Bev) with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 613-613
Author(s):  
Sotaro Sadahiro ◽  
Toshiyuki Suzuki ◽  
Akira Tanaka ◽  
Kazutake Okada ◽  
Gota Saito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive ◽  
First Line Treatment

613 Background: FOLFOX or FOLFIRI plus Bev is a first-line treatment for MCRC. Recent studies have confirmed that oral S-1 combined with Iri and Bev is equivalent to FOLFIRI plus Bev. Iri is usually administered as a short-term 90-min. infusion. However, the cytocidal activity is S-phase specific, and carboxylesterases, that convert Iri into SN-38, are less likely to become saturated when Iri is given as a long-term infusion. Therefore, a low dose of Iri given as a long-term infusion is expected to enhance antitumor activity. We conducted a randomized phase II study to compare this regimen with FOLFIRI plus Bev. Methods: The subjects comprised 120 chemotherapy-naïve patients with MCRC. The study group received 24-hr infusion of Iri at a dose of 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, combined with oral S-1 80 mg/m2 on days 1 to 14. The FOLFIRI group received Iri at a dose of 150 mg/m2, 5-FU given at a dose of 400 mg/m2 as a bolus injection and at a dose of 2400 mg/m2 as a 46 hr-infusion, 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin on days 1 and 15. Bev was given at a dose of 5.0 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 in both groups. Treatment was repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the 1 y progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were PFS, response rates (RR), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). Results: From October 2013 through December 2017, a total of 61 patients assigned to receive IRIS plus Bev (the A group) and 59 patients assigned to receive FOLFIRI plus Bev (the B group) were included in the analysis. The 1y RFS was 37.3% in the A group and 17.0% in the B group (p = 0.0281). The PFS was 10.2 mon in the A group and 10.0 mon in the B group, and the median OS was 27.0 mon and 28.6 mon, respectively (p = 0.26, p = 0.68). RR was significantly higher in the A group (87.0%) than in the B group (61.7%) (p = 0.005). The main grade 3 or 4 AEs were neutropenia (27.8%) and diarrhea (11.1%) in the A group and neutropenia (23.4%) and leukopenia (6.4%) in the B group. Conclusions: Our results showed that Iri, given biweekly as a 24-hour infusion in combination with oral S-1 and Bev, is a highly effective and well-tolerated regimen for the first-line treatment of MCRC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000014664.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document