Evaluation of EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22 in a phase II, placebo-controlled trial of rilotumumab (R) plus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX) in patients (pts) with locally advanced (LA) or metastatic (m) gastric (G) or esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15046-e15046
Author(s):  
Spiros Tzivelekis ◽  
Elwyn Loh ◽  
Meghan Gallagher ◽  
Arie Barlev ◽  
Timothy Iveson
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
First Line Treatment

e15046 Background: To select a patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instrument for use in a pivotal G/EGJ cancer study, we evaluated the characteristics of two quality of life (QoL) questionnaires in a phase II trial of R (a fully human monoclonal antibody that neutralizes HGF, the MET receptor ligand) or placebo + ECX in the first-line treatment of 121 pts with LA or mG/EGJ cancer. The trial showed trends for improved survival in the R arms, especially in pts with METHigh(> 50% cells +ve). Methods: Discriminant validity of EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22 was assessed by mean baseline (BL) scores grouped by ECOG PS 0 or ≥1. Responsiveness was assessed by longitudinal analyses of mean PRO score changes from BL by change in ECOG PS (better, no change, or worse). Results: Questionnaire completion was ≥ 60% for cycles 1-5. QLQ-C30 scores at BL had good discriminant validity by ECOG PS: ≥1 corresponded to lower QoL. QLQ-C30 was responsive to change from BL: higher mean QLQ-C30 scores were associated with improved ECOG PS. In contrast, QLQ-STO22 scores had poor discriminant validity and poor responsiveness to change from BL. Results were consistent across treatment arms, the intent-to-treat population, and MET expression groups. Conclusions: EORTC QLQ-C30, a global measure of QoL, correlates well with ECOG PS and is a valid and responsive QoL measure in this pt population. QLQ-STO22 is more specific for stomach-related symptoms and did not correlate with ECOG PS. QLQ-C30 will be included in a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of R + ECX for the first-line treatment of MET+ve LA or mG/EGJ cancer (NCT01697072). Clinical trial information: NCT00719550. [Table: see text]

The cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab in first-line for metastatic triple negative breast cancer is heavily linked to PD-L1 level

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110194
Author(s):  
Jacopo Giuliani ◽  
Beatrice Mantoan ◽  
Andrea Bonetti
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Pivotal Phase ◽  
First Line Treatment

The present analysis was conducted to assess the pharmacological costs of atezolizumab as first-line treatment in triple negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Pivotal phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT) was considered. Nine hundred and two patients were included. Differences in costs between the 2 arms (atezolizumab plus nabpaclitaxel versus placebo plus nab-paclitaxel) was 17 398 €, with a cost of 7564 €per month of OS-gain in the overall population and 2485 €per month of OS-gain in PD-L1-positive (≥1) population. Combining pharmacological costs of drugs with the measure of efficacy represented by the OS, atezolizumab could be considered cost-effective in first-line treatment for triple-negative mBC only in PD-L1-positive population, but a reduction of costs is mandatory.

Randomized, Controlled Trial of Irinotecan Plus Infusional, Bolus, or Oral Fluoropyrimidines in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results From the BICC-C Study

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (30) ◽  
pp. 4779-4786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles S. Fuchs ◽  
John Marshall ◽  
Edith Mitchell ◽  
Rafal Wierzbicki ◽  
Vinod Ganju ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
First Line Treatment

PurposeThis phase III study compared the safety and efficacy of the following three different irinotecan-containing regimens in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: irinotecan plus infusional fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV) (FOLFIRI), irinotecan plus bolus FU/LV (mIFL), and irinotecan plus oral capecitabine (CapeIRI).Patients and MethodsA total of 430 previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients were randomly assigned to receive FOLFIRI (n = 144), mIFL (n = 141), or CapeIRI (n = 145). Patients were concurrently randomly assigned to a double-blind treatment with celecoxib or placebo. After a protocol amendment, an additional 117 patients were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI+Bev; n = 57) or mILF plus bevacizumab (mIFL+Bev; n = 60), whereas the CapeIRI arm was discontinued. The primary study end point was progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary end points of overall survival (OS), response rate, and toxicity.ResultsMedian PFS was 7.6 months for FOLFIRI, 5.9 months for mIFL (P = .004 for the comparison with FOLFIRI), and 5.8 months for CapeIRI (P = .015). Median OS was 23.1 months for FOLFIRI, 17.6 months for mIFL (P = .09), and 18.9 months for CapeIRI (P = .27). CapeIRI was associated with higher rates of severe vomiting, diarrhea, and dehydration. After the amendment to add bevacizumab, the median survival time has not yet been reached for FOLFIRI+Bev and was 19.2 months for mIFL+Bev (P = .007). FOLFIRI+Bev was associated with a higher rate of ≥ grade 3 hypertension than mIFL+Bev.ConclusionFOLFIRI and FOLFIRI+Bev offered superior activity to their comparators and were comparably safe. An infusional schedule of FU should be the preferred irinotecan-based regimen in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer.

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.

Multicenter phase II clinical trial of everolimus in Japanese patients with unresectable or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) after failure of treatment with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 455-455
Author(s):  
Seiichiro Ozono ◽  
Masafumi Oyama ◽  
Masahiro Nozawa ◽  
Kiyohide Fujimoto ◽  
Ken Kishida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
Line Setting

455 Background: Everolimus has shown the efficacy and the safety in the phase III trial (RECORD-1) in patients with mRCC after failure of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-TKI. However, 26% of patients received two TKIs (sunitinib and sorafenib) as previous therapy in RECORD-1. In addition, as pre-treatment before TKI, 65% of patients received cytokine therapy and 13% of patients received chemotherapy. Therefore, there is still no clear evidence of everolimus as second line setting after failure of 1st-line TKI therapy. Methods: This study is an open-label, multi-center, single-arm, phase II trial. Primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints are overall survival, objective response rate, time-to-treatment-failure, safety and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30, FKSI-DRS, EQ-5D). Key eligibility criteria are RCC with clear cell component, patients who received one TKI as first line therapy, patients who did not receive cytokine and chemotherapy and ECOG performance status 0-1. Results: 57 patients were enrolled from 02/11 to 12/12. Median age was 63 years, common sites of metastasis were lung (32.7%) and bone (12.2%), 79.6% had previous nephrectomy, previous TKI therapy were sunitinib (69.4%), sorafenib (22.4%) and axitinib (8.2%). Median PFS was 4.4 months (95% confidence interval: 3.7-6.0). 8.2% had partial response and 57.1% had stable disease according to RECIST v.1.0. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) of all grades was 95.9%. Major AEs were stomatitis (49.0%), hypertriglyceridemia (26.5%) and hypercholesterolemia (24.5%). Serious AEs were stomatitis (10.2%), interstitial lung disease (6.1%) and rash (6.1%). There were no treatment related deaths. All QOL scores were not changed at 2 months, while dyspnea and global health scores of EORTC QLQ-C30 and FKSI-DRS score were worsened at 4 months. Conclusions: This study is a first report of everolimus as second line setting after failure of 1st-line TKI. Further study and long-term follow-up would be warranted. Clinical trial information: UMIN000004742.

Phase II study of genexol (paclitaxel) and carboplatin as first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 17049-17049
Author(s):  
C. Kim ◽  
S. Bae ◽  
N. Lee ◽  
K. Lee ◽  
S. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Dose Reduction ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Metastatic Nsclc ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
First Line Treatment

17049 Background: Genexol is a polymeric micelle loaded paclitaxel without Cremophor EL (CrEL). CrEL has been shown to cause hypersentivity reaction and neuropathy. To evaluate and efficacy, we conducted a phase II study of CrEL-free paclitaxel (genexol) and carboplatin in patients (pts) of advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Methods: Eligibility criteria included: stage IIIB or IV NSCLC without previous chemotherapy and radiotherapy; written informed consent; measurable lesion; age 18–75; ECOG PS 0–3; adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function; and no CNS disease. The patients received genexol 225 mg/m2 IV on day 1, followed by carboplatin AUC = 6 IV on day 1 every 3 weeks. Primary end points are response and toxicity. Response evaluations were performed after cycles 2, 4, and 6 of chemotherapy according to the RECIST criteria. Results: 36 pts were enrolled between November 2002 and November 2005. Pts characteristics: median age 63 years (range 45–73), median ECOG PS 1 (range 0–3), 13 stage IIIB and 23 IV, 21 adenocarcinoma and 14 squamous cell carcinoma, and 1 large cell carcinoma. At present, 30 pts were evaluable for response and toxicity. Meidan number of treatment cycles was 4 (range 1–6). Seven pts needed dose reduction. Thirteen pts achieved partial response and 13 pts had stable disease. The response rate 43.3%. Grade (gr) 4 neutropenia occurred in 11 pts (36.7%). Gr 1/2 sensory neuropathy occurred in 13 pts (43.3%) and gr 3/4 sensory neuropathy occurred in 5 pts (50%) among 10 pts over 65 year old. Other toxicities included neutropenic fever in 9 pts (30%), gr 4 thrombocytopenia 3 patients (10%), gr 2 hepatic dysfunction 3%, and gr 3 fatigue 10%. Treatment related mortality was not occurred. Complete analysis will be presented. Conclusions: In this trial, the combination of genexol and carboplatin showed a significant activity with acceptable and manageable toxicities as first line treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC and dose reduction needed in older patients. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Phase I study of the IXO regimen, irinotecan (I), capecitabine (X), oxaliplatin (O), as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: Final survival results

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4082-4082
Author(s):  
J. Maroun ◽  
D. Jonker ◽  
C. Cripps ◽  
R. Goel ◽  
T. Asmis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
First Line Treatment

4082 Background: This study was designed to determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and efficacy of the IXO regimen when used as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: Patients with ECOG PS 0–2, histologically proven, chemo-naïve, non-resectable mCRC were eligible. Phase I starting doses were as follows: I (180 mg/m2 i.v.) d1, X (850 mg/m2 bid orally) d2–15, O (85 mg/m2 i.v.) d1; q3w. Dose escalation (3+3 design) was based on toxicity observed at previous dose levels (DL) until DLT and the MTD were reached. Results: 39 pts (31 male/8 female, median age 58 years, ECOG PS 0–1 in 37, 95%) received a median of 11 cycles (range 1–34) at 8 DLs. 39 pts were evaluable for toxicity. The most common grade 3/4 hematological adverse events (AEs) were granulocytopenia (60%) and fever/febrile neutropenia (18%). The most common grade 3 non-hematological AEs were diarrhea (15%), vomiting (10%), fatigue (8%). No grade 3/4 neuropathy was reported. DLTs: 1 DLT was observed at each of the first 4 DLs, no DLTs at DL5 & 6, 1 at DL7 and 2 at DL8. MTD was reached at DL8. The recommended phase II dose (DL7) is as follows: I (160 mg/m2), X (950 mg/m2), O (100 mg/m2). Efficacy: 38 pts are evaluable for efficacy. The RR is 74% (95% CI 60–89), including 4 CRs, 25 PRs and 6 SDs. The disease control rate is 90% (95% CI 80–100). 10 (26%) pts had subsequent liver surgery with curative intent; 1 had lung resection. Median progression-free survival was 12.3 months (95% CI, 8–17). Overall median survival was 26.4 months (95% CI, 13–36). Conclusions: Diarrhea is the main DLT. Severe neutropenia was of short duration and manageable. The IXO regimen is well tolerated and highly effective as first-line treatment for mCRC. It appears to be particularly effective in downsizing of initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. A phase II study to confirm the efficacy/safety of IXO in combination with bevacizumab (Avastin) is ongoing. Supported by: Hoffmann La-Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer Canada. [Table: see text]

Cetuximab combined with infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/FA) and oxaliplatin in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): A pooled analysis of COIN and OPUS study data.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3574-3574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Taïeb ◽  
Tim Maughan ◽  
Carsten Bokemeyer ◽  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Thomas Brodowicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
First Line Treatment

3574 Background: Infusional 5-FU/FA + oxaliplatin is a widely used schedule in the first-line treatment of mCRC. In the randomized phase II OPUS study, the addition of cetuximab to one such regimen (FOLFOX4) significantly improved response and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with KRAS wild-type (wt) mCRC. However, in the randomized phase III COIN study, a benefit for the addition of cetuximab to first-line fluoropyrimidine (administered as either infusional 5-FU or capecitabine) + oxaliplatin was not confirmed in pts with KRAS wt tumors. Methods: A pooled study-based analysis of treatment outcome in pts with KRAS wt tumors from the OPUS study and COIN subgroup who received infusional 5-FU/FA + oxaliplatin (as the OxMdG regimen) was carried out using a random effects model. Outcome in the pooled analysis was considered in the context of other randomized studies investigating first-line chemotherapy regimens +/- cetuximab in pts with mCRC. Results: The pooled KRAS wt population included 179 pts from the OPUS study and 244 from the OxMdG subgroup of the COIN study. A benefit for the addition of cetuximab to infusional 5-FU/FA was suggested for response (odds ratio 1.87, 95% CI 1.07–3.28) and PFS (hazard ratio, HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52–0.92) but overall survival (OS) did not show a statistically significant improvement (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.73–1.11). These response and PFS data are similar to those of the KRAS wt population of the CRYSTAL study investigating infusional 5-FU/FA and irinotecan +/- cetuximab (response: odds ratio 2.07, 95% CI 1.52–2.83; PFS: HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56–0.87) whereas the improvement in OS was statistically significant in that study (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67–0.95). Similar efficacy of FOLFOX + cetuximab and FOLFIRI + cetuximab in the first-line treatment of mCRC was also suggested by data from the randomized phase II CORE 1.2.001 and CELIM studies. Overall, the safety profile of infusional 5-FU/FA and oxaliplatin + cetuximab was found to be acceptable and manageable. Conclusions: The pooled analysis supports the use of cetuximab combined with infusional 5-FU/FA and oxaliplatin in the first-line treatment of KRAS wt mCRC.

Lenalidomide, Adriamycin and Dexamethasone (RAD) As An Induction Regimen In Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma – Interim Results From a German Multicenter Phase II Trial

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1987-1987 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Knop ◽  
Christian Langer ◽  
Monika Engelhardt ◽  
Lars O Muegge ◽  
Wolf Roesler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Background Induction triplets utilizing at least one of the “novel drugs” and steroids with or without chemotherapy are considered current standard of care in newly diagnosed, symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM). Medically fit patients (pts) remain candidates for subsequent autologous (auto) stem cell transplant (SCT) while use of allogeneic (allo) SCT remains a matter of debate. As we had previously shown the RAD regimen to be well tolerated and highly effective in relapsed and relapsed/refractory MM, we evaluated this combination in first-line treatment. Methods The current phase II trial (DSMM XII) was designed to include a total of 190 pts up to 65 years of age with symptomatic MM. Four 4-week cycles of RAD (lenalidomide 25 mg/day, d 1-21; adriamycin 9 mg/m² as 24-hour infusion, d1-4; oral dexamethasone 40 mg, d1-4 and 17-20; pegfilgrastim 6 mg, d 6) preceded stem cell chemomobilization. Low-molecular weight heparin for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) was mandatory. Pts received either tandem auto SCT (melphalan 200 mg/m²; Mel200) or auto followed by allo SCT. Allo SCT (preparative regimen: treosulfan/fludarabine) was reserved for pts featuring at least one cytogenetic or serologic risk factor who had a matched sibling or unrelated donor available. Lenalidomide maintenance was administered for one year following both tandem auto and auto/allo SCT. This is the second pre-planned interim safety and efficacy analysis. Results Eighty-nine pts with a median age of 54 (range, 30-65) years, who were recruited between August 2009 and October 2010, are evaluable. Fifty pts (56.2%) had ISS stage II/III disease and in all except three, molecular cytogenetic analysis was performed. Incidences of chromosomal abnormalities were as follows: deletion of (del) 13q, 24.7%; translocation t(4;14), 12.4%; t(14;16), 3.4%; and del 17p, 5.6%. Treatment-related mortality with RAD induction was 0% while 61.8% of pts had treatment-emergent SAEs. Seventeen pts (19%) experienced neutropenia of grades 1 to 4. Incidences of severe (grades 3/4) and febrile neutropenia were 5.6 and 1%, respectively. Seven pts each (8%) had pneumonia and VTE, respectively. Post-RAD-induction CR/sCR and at least VGPR rates were 9% and 47.2%, respectively. All 78 pts with at least stable disease successfully mobilized stem cells. Overall response rate (at least partial response, PR) following first SCT on an intention-to-treat basis was 83%. Twelve pts each (13.5%) achieved centrally confirmed complete response (CR) or stringent (s)CR, respectively, and 54 pts (60.7%) had at least very good PR (VGPR). Conclusions This interim analysis shows RAD to be very well tolerated and effective in first line treatment of symptomatic MM. Mel200 further increased rates of deep response (at least VGPR) achieved by RAD induction. We are currently comparing this regimen to bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) in a phase III trial. Disclosures: Knop: Celgene GmbH: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide and doxorubicin in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Engelhardt:MSD, Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding. Einsele:Celgene GmbH: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bargou:Celgene GmbH: Research Funding.

Phase II Trial of Cetuximab in Combination With Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin in the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (33) ◽  
pp. 5225-5232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Eduardo Díaz-Rubio ◽  
Andrés Cervantes ◽  
Yves Humblet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Study ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
First Line Treatment

PurposeThis phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of cetuximab combined with standard oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in the first-line treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor–expressing metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Patients and MethodsThe activity of cetuximab plus oxaliplatin was investigated in colon cancer cell lines and xenograft models. In the clinical study, patients with mCRC received on day 1 of a 14 day cycle, cetuximab (initial dose 400 mg/m2during week 1, then 250 mg/m2weekly) followed by FOLFOX-4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m2on days 1 and 2, followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m2bolus then 600 mg/m2intravenous infusion during 22 hours on days 1 and 2).ResultsThe preclinical studies confirmed the supra-additive activity of cetuximab to oxaliplatin. In the clinical study, 43 patients were included, with a median age of 65 years (range, 43 to 78 years). Response rates (RRs) were 79% (unconfirmed) and 72% (confirmed), with 95% disease control. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median duration of response were 12.3 and 10.8 months, respectively. Ten patients (23%) underwent resection with curative intent of previously unresectable metastases. After a median follow-up of 30.5 months, median overall survival (mOS) was 30.0 months. Cetuximab did not increase the characteristic toxicity of FOLFOX-4 and was generally well tolerated.ConclusionCetuximab in combination with FOLFOX-4 is a highly active first-line treatment for mCRC, showing encouraging RR, mPFS, and mOS values. The treatment resulted in a high resectability rate, which could potentially result in an improved cure rate. This combination is under phase III development.

scholarly journals Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Docetaxel Plus Bevacizumab or Placebo As First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Uterine Leiomyosarcoma: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. 1180-1185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martee L. Hensley ◽  
Austin Miller ◽  
David M. O'Malley ◽  
Robert S. Mannel ◽  
Kian Behbakht ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Uterine Leiomyosarcoma ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology Group ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Purpose Fixed-dose rate gemcitabine plus docetaxel achieves objective response in 35% of patients with uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS). This study aimed to determine whether the addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine-docetaxel increases progression-free survival (PFS) in uLMS. Patients and Methods In this phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients with chemotherapy-naive, metastatic, unresectable uLMS were randomly assigned to gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab or gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo. PFS, overall survival (OS), and objective response rates (ORRs) were compared to determine superiority. Target accrual was 130 patients to detect an increase in median PFS from 4 months (gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo) to 6.7 months (gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab). Treatment effects on PFS and OS were described by hazard ratios (HRs), median times to event, and 95% CIs. Results In all, 107 patients were accrued: gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo (n = 54) and gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab (n = 53). Accrual was stopped early for futility. No statistically significant differences in grade 3 to 4 toxicities were observed. Median PFS was 6.2 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo versus 4.2 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab (HR, 1.12; P = .58). Median OS was 26.9 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo and 23.3 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab (HR, 1.07; P = .81). Objective responses were observed in 17 (31.5%) of 54 patients randomly assigned to gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo and 19 (35.8%) of 53 patients randomly assigned to gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab. Mean duration of response was 8.6 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel plus placebo versus 8.8 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel plus bevacizumab. Conclusion The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine-docetaxel for first-line treatment of metastatic uLMS failed to improve PFS, OS, or ORR. Gemcitabine-docetaxel remains a standard first-line treatment for uLMS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document