scholarly journals Subgroup analysis of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with regorafenib (REG) in the CORRECT trial who had progression-free survival (PFS) longer than 4 months.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 710-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Alfredo Falcone ◽  
Yves Humblet ◽  
Olivier Bouche ◽  
Laurent Mineur ◽  
...  

710 Background: In the CORRECT phase III trial (NCT01103323), the multikinase inhibitor REG significantly improved overall survival (OS) and PFS vs placebo in patients with mCRC who had disease progression after other standard therapies (HR for OS: 0.77; 1-sided p =0.0052; Grothey 2013). A post-hoc exploratory subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate patients in the REG treatment group who had a PFS longer than 4 months (long-PFS) defined as patients who progressed, died, or discontinued treatment for other reasons after 4 months. Methods: Of the505 patients randomized to REG in CORRECT, 98 (19.4%) were classified as having a long-PFS benefit. Baseline characteristics, safety, and dosing parameters were analyzed descriptively. Results: The long-PFS subpopulation was representative of the overall study population (Table). Long-PFS patients received a median of 6 cycles of REG (1-12), 92% received ≥5 cycles, and 20% had > 8 cycles. Overall 34% of patients had dose reductions and 87% had dose interruptions. The actual mean daily dose was 139 mg and the mean percent of the planned dose was 81%. Adverse events (AE) of any grade were experienced by all long-PFS patients, and the most common grade ≥3 AEs were hand-foot skin reaction (20%), hypertension (17%), diarrhea (17%), and fatigue (16%). Conclusions: A subset of 98 (19.4%) patients treated with REG in the CORRECT study had a PFS > 4 months, confirming the clinical benefit and tolerability of REG as a treatment option for patients with mCRC. Prospective validation of these findings in conjunction with biomarker analysis from real-life clinical experience is needed. Clinical trial information: NCT01103323. [Table: see text]

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3636-3636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric van Cutsem ◽  
Alberto Sobrero ◽  
Salvatore Siena ◽  
Alfredo Falcone ◽  
Marc Ychou ◽  
...  

3636 Background: In the CORRECT phase III trial, the multikinase inhibitor REG demonstrated significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival vs placebo (Pla) in patients (pts) with mCRC whose disease progressed on other standard therapies. The most frequent REG-related grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) of interest were hand–foot skin reaction (HFSR), fatigue, diarrhea, hypertension, and rash/desquamation. We explored whether the impact of REG in pts aged ≥65 years differed from that in younger patients. Methods: Pts with mCRC progressing following all other available therapies were randomized 2:1 to receive REG 160 mg once daily (n=505) or Pla (n=255) for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. The dose could be modified to manage AEs. The primary endpoint was OS. We report efficacy, safety, and dosing data from REG recipients by age. Results: The REG treatment group included 309 pts <65 years (307 evaluable for safety) and 196 pts ≥65 years (193 evaluable for safety). The OS hazard ratio (REG/Pla) was 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–0.91) in pts <65 years and 0.86 (95% CI 0.61–1.19) in pts ≥65 years (interaction p-value = 0.405). Median OS was 6.7 vs 5 months for REG vs Pla in pts <65 years, and 6.0 vs 5.6 months, respectively, in pts ≥65 years. Most pts experienced drug-related AEs (<65 years: 93.8%; ≥65 years: 91.7%). The rates of grade ≥3 REG-related AEs of interest and dose modifications are shown in the Table. In pts <65 years vs ≥65 years, median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of REG was 7.6 weeks (6.6–15.4) vs 7.1 weeks (5.1–17.2), median (IQR) daily REG dose was 160.0 mg (134.6–160.0) vs 160.0 mg (137.5–160.0), and median (IQR) proportion of planned REG dose was 83.3% (65.7–100.0) vs 78.6% (66.7–100.0), respectively. Conclusions: In the CORRECT trial, REG demonstrated an OS benefit in pts <65 years and ≥65 years. Safety and tolerability of REG appeared to be similar in both age subgroups. Clinical trial information: NCT01103323. [Table: see text]


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3502-3502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Alberto F. Sobrero ◽  
Salvatore Siena ◽  
Alfredo Falcone ◽  
Marc Ychou ◽  
...  

3502 Background: Regorafenib (REG) is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor. The CORRECT trial was conducted to evaluate REG in patients (pts) with mCRC who had progressed after all approved standard therapies. Methods: Enrollment criteria included documented mCRC and progression during or ≤3 months after last standard therapy. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive best supportive care plus either REG (160 mg od po, 3 wks on/1 wk off) or placebo (PL). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, disease control rate, safety and quality of life (QoL). Efficacy analyses across prespecified subgroups were evaluated using univariate Cox regression. Results: 760 pts were randomized (REG: 505; PL: 255). The OS primary endpoint was met at a preplanned interim analysis. OS and PFS were significantly improved in REG arm compared to PL arm: hazard ratio (HR) for OS 0.77 (95% CI 0.64-0.94, 1-sided p=0.0052), median OS 6.4 vs 5.0 mos; HR for PFS 0.49 (95% CI 0.42-0.58, 1-sided p<0.000001), median PFS 1.9 vs 1.7 mos. Comparable OS and PFS benefits were observed in exploratory subgroup analyses by region, age, time from diagnosis of mCRC to randomization, prior lines of treatment, and KRAS status (shown in table). The most common grade 3+ AEs related to REG were hand-foot skin reaction (16.6%), fatigue (9.6%), hypertension (7.2%), diarrhea (7.2%) and rash/desquamation (5.8%). QoL data will be presented. Conclusions: REG demonstrated statistically significant improvement in OS and PFS over PL, as well as comparable efficacy benefits across pt subgroups analyzed. [Table: see text]


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA385-LBA385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Alberto F. Sobrero ◽  
Salvatore Siena ◽  
Alfredo Falcone ◽  
Marc Ychou ◽  
...  

LBA385 Background: Regorafenib (BAY 73-4506) is an oral multikinase inhibitor of a broad range of angiogenic, oncogenic, and stromal kinases. The phase III CORRECT trial was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of regorafenib in pts with mCRC who had progressed after all approved standard therapies. Methods: Enrollment criteria included documented mCRC and progression during or ≤3 months after last standard therapy. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive regorafenib (160 mg od po, 3 weeks on/1 week off) plus BSC, or placebo (PL) plus BSC. Pts continued on treatment until progression, death, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), safety, and quality of life. Results: From May 2010 to March 2011, 760 pts were randomized (regorafenib: 505; PL: 255). Baseline characteristics were balanced between two arms. Preliminary results are available from a pre-planned formal interim analysis. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.773 (95% CI: 0.635, 0.941; 1-sided p=0.0051). Median OS was 6.4 mos (95% CI: 5.9, 7.3) for regorafenib and 5.0 mos (95% CI: 4.4, 5.8) for PL. The estimated HR for PFS was 0.493 (95% CI: 0.418, 0.581; 1-sided p < 0.000001). Median PFS was 1.9 mos (95% CI: 1.88, 2.17) for regorafenib and 1.7 mos (95% CI: 1.68, 1.74) for PL. ORR was 1.6% for regorafenib and 0.4% for PL. DCR was 44% for regorafenib and 15% for PL (p < 0.000001). Since the prespecified OS efficacy boundary was crossed (nominal α: 0.0093), the Data Monitoring Committee recommended to unblind the study and pts on PL were allowed to cross over to regorafenib. The most frequent grade 3+ AEs in the regorafenib arm were hand-foot skin reaction (17%), fatigue (15%), diarrhea (8%), hyperbilirubinemia (8%), and hypertension (7%). Updated results will be presented. Conclusions: Statistically significant benefit in OS and PFS was observed for regorafenib over PL in pts with mCRC who have failed all approved standard therapies. No new or unexpected safety signal was found.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3551-3551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Liping Huang ◽  
Andrea Wagner ◽  
Eric Van Cutsem

3551 Background: Cutaneous toxicity is a known adverse effect of multikinase inhibitors and has been associated with clinical outcomes (Granito 2016). In the phase 3 CORRECT trial (NCT01103323), the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib significantly improved overall survival (OS) vs placebo in patients with mCRC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% CI 0.64, 0.94; 1-sided P = 0.0052). This retrospective analysis explored whether HFSR was associated with outcomes in CORRECT. Methods: Patients randomized to receive regorafenib 160 mg/day during the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle were divided into subgroups based on whether or not they had HFSR. Estimates of OS and progression-free survival (PFS) (95% CI) were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Patients who were randomized, but not treated, were included in the no HFSR group for the analysis of survival. Results: Of the 505 randomized patients, 500 received at least one dose of regorafenib. Among the treated patients, 47% (n = 235) had HFSR of any grade and 17% (n = 83) had HFSR grade 3. Of the patients who had HFSR, 69% (n = 162) had their first HFSR event (any grade) during the first treatment cycle. There was some imbalance in baseline characteristics between groups (Table). Survival was improved in patients who had HFSR at any time vs those who did not (Table). The OS benefit was also observed in patients who had the first HFSR event during Cycle 1 vs those who did not (median OS 7.2 vs 5.7 months; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51, 0.87). Conclusions: This post-hoc exploratory analysis suggests that patients who had HFSR had a greater treatment benefit from regorafenib. Since HFSR and survival are post-baseline assessments, results may be confounded by baseline factors or other unknown factors. Clinical trial information: NCT01103323. [Table: see text]


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 887-895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Catalano ◽  
Giandomenico Roviello ◽  
Raffaele Conca ◽  
Alberto D’Angelo ◽  
Valeria Emma Palmieri ◽  
...  

Background: The phase III MPACT trial demonstrated the superiority of gemcitabine (Gem) combined with Nab-paclitaxel (Nab-P) versus gemcitabine alone in previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of Gem/Nab-P in routine clinical practice. Methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, patients with metastatic PDAC receiving firstline treatment with a combination of gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel were included in a multicentre retrospective observational study. Exploratory analyses of efficacy, and prognostic and predictive markers, were performed. Results: The cohort comprised 115 patients (median age 65 [range 50-84] years) with good performance status (ECOG PS 0-1). The median overall survival (OS) was 11 months (95% CI; 9-13) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6 months (95% CI 5-7). Partial response and stable disease were achieved in 44 and 30 patients, respectively, yielding an overall disease control rate (DCR) of 64.3%. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicity frequency was 22.61% for neutropenia, 5.22% for anemia, and 3.48% for thrombocytopenia. Grade 3 asthenia was recorded in 2.61% of patients. No grade 4 non-hematological events were reported. Dose reduction was necessary in 51.3% of the patients. Conclusions: Our results confirm the efficacy and safety of a first-line regimen comprising gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel in metastatic PDAC in a real-life population.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 439-439
Author(s):  
Mustapha Ali Tehfe ◽  
Scot D. Dowden ◽  
Hagen F. Kennecke ◽  
Robert Hassan El-Maraghi ◽  
Bernard Lesperance ◽  
...  

439 Background: Weekly nab-P + Gem is a new option for first-line treatment (Tx) of mPC. In the MPACT trial, nab-P/Gem demonstrated superior overall survival (OS; primary endpoint) vs Gem alone as first-line Tx of mPC (Table). Here we report a subgroup analyses evaluating the efficacy and safety outcomes with nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone from the Canadian cohort of the MPACT trial. Methods: Previously untreated pts (N = 861) with mPC were randomized 1:1 (stratified by Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS], region, and the presence of liver metastases) to receive nab-P 125 mg/m2 + Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle or Gem 1000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 weeks followed by 1 week of rest (cycle 1) and then days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (cycle ≥ 2). Results: 63 pts from Canada enrolled in the MPACT trial. Baseline pt characteristics were well balanced. Median age was 61 years and KPS was similar for both groups and comparable to the intent-to-treat (ITT) populations. Primary lesion in the pancreatic head was more common among pts in the nab-P + Gem vs Gem arm (55% vs 30%); use of biliary stent was similar (33% nab-P + Gem; 27% Gem). Median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were longer with nab-P + Gem vs Gem (Table). Median Tx duration was 4.2 mo with nab-P + Gem vs 3.2 mo with Gem. Use of subsequent therapy was 30% in the nab-P + Gem arm vs 43% in the Gem arm. The median relative dose intensity for Gem was similar in each arm (81% nab-P + Gem vs 85% Gem). The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs for nab-P + Gem vs Gem were neutropenia (22% vs 10%), fatigue (34% vs 33%), and neuropathy (25% vs 0%). Conclusions: Canadian pts participating in MPACT were similar to the ITT population and nab-P + Gem was well tolerated and showed improved median OS, PFS, and ORR vs Gem alone, although not statistically significant (likely due to the small number of pts). Clinical trial information: NCT00844649. [Table: see text]


2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 289-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Ito ◽  
T. Okusaka ◽  
M. Ikeda ◽  
T. Tajima ◽  
A. Kasuga ◽  
...  

289 Background: Everolimus demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in PFS over placebo in a multi-national, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial in patients with advanced low- or intermediate-grade pNET with disease progression within the prior 12 months (RADIANT-3) (Ann Oncol [2010] 21[suppl 6]: NP doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq340). Forty patients were enrolled from Japanese sites and randomized (n=23: everolimus; n=17: placebo) in that study. The purpose of this report is to investigate the efficacy and safety in the Japanese subgroup. Methods: Subgroup analysis for the Japanese patients was performed comparing the efficacy and safety between everolimus 10mg/d orally plus best supportive care (BSC) and matching placebo plus BSC. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The safety was evaluated based on the incidence of adverse events (AEs). Results: Treatment with everolimus resulted in a significant prolongation by 16.62 months in median PFS (19.45 months for everolimus, 2.83 months for placebo), with 81% reduction in the hazard ratio of progression/death (HR 0.19 [95% CI: 0.08, 0.48]; one-sided unstratified log-rank test: p<.001). The most common AE was stomatitis (73.9% everolimus vs 23.5% placebo); mostly grade 1/2. Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 69.5% of the everolimus arm and 29.4% of the placebo arm, and amongst the most frequent included (% in everolimus vs % in placebo): neutropenia (17.4% vs 3%); anemia (8.7% vs 0%); pneumonitis (8.7% vs 0%); leukopenia (8.7% vs 0%). The remainder of grade 3/4 AEs was less than 3%. Median duration of exposure to everolimus was 57 weeks vs 47 weeks on placebo. Treatment discontinuation for AEs was 17% in the everolimus arm vs 0% in the placebo arm. Conclusions: Everolimus demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS over placebo in Japanese patients. Everolimus was well tolerated in Japanese patients, and no new safety concerns were noted. This result suggests that everolimus can be a standard treatment for Japanese patients with advanced pNET. [Table: see text]


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA3-LBA3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Kun-Huei Yeh ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Lin Shen ◽  
Jaffer A. Ajani ◽  
...  

LBA3 Background: The prognosis for patients with AGC after failure of first-line chemotherapy is poor. Currently, there is no level 1 evidence established for second-line treatment. EVE inhibits the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway, a key regulator of cell proliferation, metabolism, and angiogenesis, and has shown efficacy against AGC in preclinical and phase I/II studies. Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study, patients age ≥18 years with confirmed AGC and disease progression after 1 or 2 lines of systemic chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to oral EVE 10 mg/d plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo (PBO) plus BSC. Randomization was stratified by region (Asia vs rest of world) and previous lines of chemotherapy (1 vs 2). Study drug was discontinued upon progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. The final analysis was performed when 526 deaths occurred. Results: A total of 656 patients from 23 countries were enrolled from Jul 2009 to Dec 2010; 439 were randomized to EVE, 217 to PBO. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms; 73.6% were men, 55.3% were enrolled in Asia, 47.7% received 1 previous line of chemotherapy, and 50.6% had a gastrectomy. Median OS was 5.39 months with EVE vs 4.34 months with PBO (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75-1.08; P=0.1244). Median PFS per local investigator assessment was 1.68 months with EVE vs 1.41 months with PBO (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.78; p<0.0001). Six-month PFS estimates were 12.0% with EVE and 4.3% with PBO. OS and PFS results were consistent across the various subgroups. ORR (95% CI) was 4.5% (2.6%-7.1%) with EVE vs 2.1% (0.6%-5.3%) with PBO. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were anemia (16.0% with EVE vs 12.6% with PBO), decreased appetite (11.0% vs 5.6%), and fatigue (7.8% vs 5.1%). Conclusions: EVE monotherapy did not significantly improve OS in patients with AGC previously treated with 1 or 2 lines of systemic chemotherapy. EVE did improve PFS. Results for OS and PFS were consistent across the various subgroups. The safety profile was consistent with that previously observed with EVE.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20033-e20033
Author(s):  
Sanjiv S Agarwala ◽  
Scott Whiting ◽  
Gary Binder ◽  
Evan Hersh

e20033 Background: A recent phase III trial of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P, 130 nm albumin-bound paclitaxel) vs dacarbazine (DTIC) in mM demonstrated a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS). An economic analysis was applied to the results of this trial. Methods: Chemotherapy naive stage IV mM patients received nab-P 150 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks or DTIC 1000 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. 529 patients were randomized to nab-P (n = 264) or DTIC (n = 265). The primary endpoint was independently assessed PFS, with overall survival (OS) as a secondary endpoint. Costs of nab-P and DTIC were taken from published 2013 Medicare reimbursement rates. A literature review identified costs for expected adverse events (AE), administration, and recently approved mM treatments. Results: In the intent-to-treat population, median PFS was 4.8 and 2.5 months in the nab-P and DTIC arms, respectively (HR: 0.792; P = 0.044). Median OS at the time of an interim analysis was 12.8 months with nab-P and 10.7 months with DTIC (HR: 0.831; P = 0.094; determination of ultimate statistical significance is pending full analysis at study conclusion). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs were neuropathy (nab-P: 25% vs DTIC: 0%) and neutropenia (nab-P: 20% vs DTIC: 10%). Grade 4 neutropenia rates were similar between arms (nab-P: 3% vs DTIC: 4%). Median time to neuropathy improvement by >1 grade was 28 days. Median treatment duration was 3 months with nab-P vs 2.1 months with DTIC. Incremental costs per patient were $23,359 ($24,663 for nab-P vs $1,304 for DTIC) including drug, infusion, and AE management costs. These costs compare favorably to incremental costs of over $50,000 for newly approved therapies with similar median OS gains vsDTIC. Conclusions: nab-P is the only chemotherapy in a phase III trial to demonstrate a significant and clinically meaningful delay in disease progression over dacarbazine. Total costs are attractive in the context of other agents recently approved for mM. Further analysis is merited when final OS is available. Clinical trial information: NCT00864253.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8528-8528
Author(s):  
Hartmut Goldschmidt ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Katja C. Weisel ◽  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Martha Lacy ◽  
...  

8528 Background: RRMM patients (pts) who fail lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT) have poor prognosis. High-risk cytogenetics predict shorter survival. POM + LoDEX has demonstrated efficacy in pts with prior LEN and BORT and high-risk cytogenetics. MM-003 is an open-label, multicenter, phase III trial comparing POM + LoDEX vs. HiDEX in RRMM pts who failed LEN and BORT treatment (Tx) and have progressed on their last therapy. Methods: Pts must have been refractory to the last prior Tx (progressive disease [PD] during or within 60 days) and failed LEN and BORT after ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of each (alone or in combination). Randomization was 2:1 to POM 4 mg D1–21 + DEX 40 mg (20 mg for pts aged > 75 y) weekly; or DEX 40 mg (20 mg for pts aged > 75 y) D1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 (28-day cycles). Tx continued until PD or unacceptable adverse events (AEs). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included OS and AEs. This analysis examined pts meeting modified high-risk cytogenetic criteria—del(17p13) and/or t(4p16/14q32). Results: 302 pts received POM + LoDEX, and 153 pts received HiDEX. 225 and 107 pts, respectively, were evaluable for cytogenetics. Baseline characteristics were similar. Median PFS and OS were significantly longer with POM + LoDEX vs. HiDEX, regardless of cytogenetic risk (Table). The most common grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia, anemia, and infection (Table). Discontinuation due to AE was low: 4% vs. 6% (high risk) and 10% vs. 4% (standard risk). Conclusions: Median PFS and OS were significantly longer with POM + LoDEX vs. HiDEX in pts with cytogenetically-defined high-risk disease, consistent with results from the intent-to-treat population. Tolerability was acceptable. POM + LoDEX should be considered a new Tx option in pts failing LEN and BORT. Clinical trial information: NCT01311687. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document