PARADIGM study: A multicenter, randomized, phase III study of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) plus panitumumab or bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS776-TPS776 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takayuki Yoshino ◽  
Hiroyuki Uetake ◽  
Katsuya Tsuchihara ◽  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Kentaro Yamazaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS776 Background: Optimal combination of monoclonal antibody (anti-VEGF vs. anti-EGFR antibody) with standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients (pts) with RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains controversial. FIRE-3 study demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) with anti-EGFR over bevacizumab in pts with KRAS exon 2 wild type mCRC, while CALGB 80405 study did not. PARADIGM study is designed to compare panitumumab vs. bevacizumab combined with mFOLFOX6 in pts with RAS wild-type chemotherapy-naive mCRC. Methods: Eligible pts are aged 20-79 years with ECOG performance status (PS) 0-1 and histologically/cytologically confirmed RAS wild-type mCRC. 800 pts will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or bevacizumab, and stratified according to institution, age (20-64 vs. 65-79 years), and liver metastases (present vs. absent). Each treatment regimen includes oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, l-leucovorin 200 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) iv 400 mg/m2 at day 1, 5-FU civ 2400 mg/m2 at day 1-3, and either panitumumab 6 mg/kg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg at day 1 every two weeks. The primary endpoint is the OS; the study was designed to detect the OS hazard ratio of 0.76, with a one-sided type I error of 0.025 and 80% power. Secondary efficacy endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, duration of response, and curative resection rate. One interim analysis is planned for the OS when approximately 70% of the targeted 570 events has been observed. Exploratory endpoint is to investigate possible biomarkers including oncogenic mutations using tumor tissue and circulating tumor DNA (Study ID: NCT02394834). As of August 2015, 21 pts have been randomized and recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02394795.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab combined with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer based on the TAILOR trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e030738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huijuan Wang ◽  
Lingfei Huang ◽  
Peng Gao ◽  
Zhengyi Zhu ◽  
Weifeng Ye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

ObjectivesCetuximab plus leucovorin, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) is superior to FOLFOX-4 alone as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS wild-type (RAS wt mCRC), with significantly improved survival benefit by TAILOR, an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase III trial. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of these two regimens remains uncertain. The following study aims to determine whether cetuximab combined with FOLFOX-4 is a cost-effective regimen for patients with specific RAS wt mCRC in China.DesignA cost-effectiveness model combined decision tree and Markov model was built to simulate pateints with RAS wt mCRC based on health states of dead, progressive and stable. The health outcomes from the TAILOR trial and utilities from published data were used respectively. Costs were calculated with reference to the Chinese societal perspective. The robustness of the results was evaluated by univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ParticipantsThe included patients were newly diagnosed Chinese patients with fully RAS wt mCRC.InterventionsFirst-line treatment with either cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 or FOLFOX-4.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcomes are costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsBaseline analysis disclosed that the QALYs was increased by 0.383 caused by additional cetuximab, while an increase of US$62 947 was observed in relation to FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. The ICER was US$164 044 per QALY, which exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of US$28 106 per QALY.ConclusionsDespite the survival benefit, cetuximab combined with FOLFOX-4 is not a cost-effective treatment for the first-line regime of patients with RAS wt mCRC in China.Trial registration numberTAILOR trial (NCT01228734); Post-results.

Cetuximab metastatic colorectal cancer strategy (ERMES) study: A phase III randomized two arm study with FOLFIRI + cetuximab until disease progression compared to FOLFIRI + cetuximab for 8 cycles followed by cetuximab alone until disease progression in first-line treatment of patients with RAS and BRAF wild type metastatic colorectal cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS810-TPS810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmine Pinto ◽  
Nicola Normanno ◽  
Armando Orlandi ◽  
Evaristo Maiello ◽  
Domenico Bilancia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS810 Background: The optimal duration and content of first-line therapy in mCRC pts once they have achieved objective response is controversial. In the FIRE-3 trial, ETS was significantly associated with PFS and OS. Based on this evidence it can be hypothesized that once this goal has been achieved, further exposure to combined antineoplastic treatment may not result in improvement or preservation of such result but only in an increase of toxicity. We designed a strategy study to compare FOLFIRI + cetuximab until PD to FOLFIRI + cetuximab for 8 cycles followed by cetuximab alone until PD in first line treatment of RAS/BRAF WT mCRC pts. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial. Untreated and unresecteble RAS/BRAF WT mCRC pts were randomized 1:1 to receive Cetuximab (400 mg/mq w1 and then 250 mg/mq weekly) + FOLFIRI until PD (standard arm) or Cetuximab (400 mg/mq week 1 and then 250 mg/mq weekly) + FOLFIRI for 8 cycles followed by Cetuximab monotherapy until PD (experimental arm). Tumor assessment is planned every 8 weeks. The objective of the study is to demonstrate a not inferior efficacy and a better toxicity profile for the experimental treatment compared to the standard treatment. The co-primary endpoints are PFS and incidence of G 3-4 AEs. Secondary endpoints are OS, ORR, ETS (8 weeks) and safety. A prospective multiple gene mutation analysis by NGS of both tumor tissue and blood will be performed to find potential predictive factors and surrogate markers of treatment efficacy. The two co-primary endpoints will be compared between the two arms using a fixed-sequence testing procedure to control for the family-wise type I error rate of 0.05 in a strong sense. This sequence considers that a reduction of grade 3-4 AEs is only of relevance, if non-inferiority is shown regarding PFS. 600 evaluable pts will be enrolled and randomized. Study recruitment started on January 2015, currently 139 pts have been randomized. Clinical trial information: NCT02484833.

scholarly journals Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Treatment and RAS Mutations in Colorectal Cancer

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 692-700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Heinz-Josef Lenz ◽  
Claus-Henning Köhne ◽  
Volker Heinemann ◽  
Sabine Tejpar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Significant Benefit ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Ras Mutations ◽  
Kras Exon ◽  
First Line Treatment

Purpose The phase III CRYSTAL study demonstrated that addition of cetuximab to fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response in the first-line treatment of patients with KRAS codon 12/13 (exon 2) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Outcome was reassessed in subgroups defined by extended RAS mutation testing. Patients and Methods Existing DNA samples from KRAS exon 2 wild-type tumors from CRYSTAL study patients were reanalyzed for other RAS mutations in four additional KRAS codons (exons 3 and 4) and six NRAS codons (exons 2, 3, and 4) using beads, emulsion, amplification, and magnetics technology. No tissue microdissection was performed. A ≥ 5% mutant allele cutoff was used to call mutations. Results Mutation status was evaluable in 430 (64.6%) of 666 patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type tumors. Other RAS mutations were detected in 63 (14.7%) of 430 patients. In those with RAS wild-type tumors, a significant benefit across all efficacy end points was associated with the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI. In patients with other RAS tumor mutations, no difference in efficacy outcomes between treatment groups was seen. The safety profile in RAS subgroups was similar and in line with expectations. Conclusion In the first-line treatment of mCRC, patients with RAS wild-type tumors derived a significant benefit from the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI; patients with RAS tumor mutations did not. Molecular testing of tumors for all activating RAS mutations is essential before considering anti–epidermal growth factor receptor therapy, thereby allowing the further tailoring of cetuximab administration to maximize patient benefit.

scholarly journals Exploratory findings from a prematurely closed international, multicentre, academic trial: RAVELLO, a phase III study of regorafenib versus placebo as maintenance therapy after first-line treatment in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

ESMO Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. e000519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Cardone ◽  
Erika Martinelli ◽  
Teresa Troiani ◽  
Vincenzo Sforza ◽  
Antonio Avallone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

BackgroundIn patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the role of maintenance therapy after first-line treatment with chemotherapy plus antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (MoAb) is still an object of debate.MethodsWe assessed the efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a switch maintenance strategy after upfront 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus an anti-EGFR MoAb in patients with RAS WT mCRC. RAVELLO was a phase III, international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, academic trial. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival and toxicity. Regorafenib or placebo were administered daily for 3 weeks of 4-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, up to 24 months.ResultsThe study was stopped prematurely due to slow accrual and lack of funding after the randomisation of 21 patients: 11 in the regorafenib arm and 10 in the placebo arm. The small sample size precludes any statistical analysis. Toxicity was acceptable and consistent with the known regorafenib safety profile. Median PFS was similar in the two arms. However, a subgroup of patients treated with regorafenib experienced a remarkably long PFS. Three patients were progression free at 9 months in the regorafenib arm versus one patient in the placebo arm, whereas at 12 months two regorafenib-treated patients were still progression free versus none in the placebo arm.ConclusionRAVELLO trial demonstrated that growing financial and bureaucratic hurdles affect the feasibility of independent academic research. Although stopped prematurely and within the limited sample size, RAVELLO suggests that regorafenib has not a major activity in maintenance setting after upfront chemotherapy and anti-EGFR MoAb. However, a subgroup of patients experienced a remarkable long PFS, indicating that a better refinement of the patient population would help to identify subjects that might benefit from a regorafenib personalised approach in the switch maintenance setting.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Second-Line Treatment in RAS Wild-Type/Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the Precision Medicine Era

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (14) ◽  
pp. 7717
Author(s):  
Guido Giordano ◽  
Pietro Parcesepe ◽  
Giuseppina Bruno ◽  
Annamaria Piscazzi ◽  
Vincenzo Lizzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
First Line Treatment

Target-oriented agents improve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) survival in combination with chemotherapy. However, the majority of patients experience disease progression after first-line treatment and are eligible for second-line approaches. In such a context, antiangiogenic and anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) agents as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors have been approved as second-line options, and RAS and BRAF mutations and microsatellite status represent the molecular drivers that guide therapeutic choices. Patients harboring K- and N-RAS mutations are not eligible for anti-EGFR treatments, and bevacizumab is the only antiangiogenic agent that improves survival in combination with chemotherapy in first-line, regardless of RAS mutational status. Thus, the choice of an appropriate therapy after the progression to a bevacizumab or an EGFR-based first-line treatment should be evaluated according to the patient and disease characteristics and treatment aims. The continuation of bevacizumab beyond progression or its substitution with another anti-angiogenic agents has been shown to increase survival, whereas anti-EGFR monoclonals represent an option in RAS wild-type patients. In addition, specific molecular subgroups, such as BRAF-mutated and Microsatellite Instability-High (MSI-H) mCRCs represent aggressive malignancies that are poorly responsive to standard therapies and deserve targeted approaches. This review provides a critical overview about the state of the art in mCRC second-line treatment and discusses sequential strategies according to key molecular biomarkers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document