CanStem303C trial: A phase III study of napabucasin (BBI-608) in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin, irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in adult patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS3619-TPS3619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Manish A. Shah ◽  
Takayuki Yoshino ◽  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Julien Taieb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Cancer Stem Cells ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Location ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Line Of Therapy

TPS3619 Background: Cancer stem cells are considered to be fundamentally important for resistance to therapy, recurrence and metastasis. Napabucasin is a first-in-class cancer stemness inhibitor in development identified by its ability to inhibit STAT3-driven gene transcription and spherogenesis of cancer stem cells (Li et al, PNAS 112(6):1839, 2015). Preclinically, napabucasin sensitizes cancer cells to chemotherapeutics, including 5-FU and irinotecan. Encouraging anticancer activity in advanced CRC was observed in a phase Ib/II (Bendell et al, GI ASCO 2017) study of 63 pts with disease control rate (DCR) of 93% (28/30) and overall response rate (ORR) of 33% (10/30) in FOLFIRI-naïve pts who have had an on-study RECIST evaluation. On the basis of these data, a phase III trial is being conducted in North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. Methods: This study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02753127) will assess the efficacy of napabucasin+FOLFIRI vs FOLFIRI in pts with mCRC (n = 1250). Addition of bevacizumab (bev) is permissible per investigator choice. Pts must have failed 1 prior line of therapy with oxaliplatin and a fluoropyrimidine +/- bev for metastatic disease. Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive napabucasin 240 mg PO BID plus FOLFIRI bi-weekly, or FOLFIRI bi-weekly (bev may be added to FOLFIRI by investigator choice) and stratified by geography, time to progression on 1st-line therapy, RAS mutation status, bev as part of study treatment and primary tumor location. Treatment will continue until disease progression, or another discontinuation criterion. Primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) in the general study population (ITT) (HR 0.80 for OS improvement from 12.54 to 15.68 months); secondary endpoints include OS in the biomarker positive (biomarker+) population, progression free survival (PFS) in the ITT population, PFS in biomarker+ population, ORR and DCR in the ITT and in biomarker+ populations, safety and quality of life. Also, blood and tumor archival tissue will be assessed for PK and biomarker analyses. Global enrollment is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02753127.

CanStem111P trial: A phase III study of napabucasin (BBI-608) plus nab-paclitaxel (nab-PTX) with gemcitabine (gem) in adult patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4148-TPS4148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab ◽  
Chung-Pin Li ◽  
Takuji Okusaka ◽  
Bert H. O'Neil ◽  
Michele Reni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Cancer Stem Cells ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Chemotherapeutic Agents ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Study Population

TPS4148 Background: Cancer stem cells are considered to be fundamentally important for resistance to therapy, recurrence and metastasis. Napabucasin is a first-in-class cancer stemness inhibitor identified by its ability to inhibit STAT3-driven gene transcription and spherogenesis of cancer stem cells (Li et al, PNAS 112(6):1839, 2015). Preclinical studies suggest that napabucasin sensitizes heterogeneous cancer cells to chemotherapeutic agents, including nab-PTX and gem. Encouraging anticancer activity in mPDAC was observed in a phase Ib (El-Rayes et al, ASCO 2016) study of 37 pts, reporting 93% (28/30) disease control rate (DCR) and 50% (15/30) overall response rate (ORR), with 1 complete and 14 partial responses and prolonged disease control ( > 24 wks) in 57% (17/30) of pts who have had a RECIST evaluation. On the basis of these data, a phase III trial is being conducted in North America, Europe, Australia and Asia. Methods: This study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02993731) will assess the efficacy of napabucasin+nab-PTX+gem vs nab-PTX+gem in pts with mPDAC (n = 1132). Pts must have been diagnosed with mPDAC < 6 weeks prior to randomization and not have received treatment for metastatic disease. Pts are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive napabucasin 240 mg PO twice daily continuously plus nab-PTX+gem IV weekly for 3 out every 4 weeks, or nab-PTX+gem IV weekly for 3 out every 4 weeks. Pts will be stratified by geography, performance status and presence of liver metastases. Treatment will continue until disease progression, death, intolerability or patient/investigator decision to stop. Primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) in the general study population (HR 0.80 for OS improvement from 8.5 to 10.63 months); secondary endpoints include progression free survival (PFS), OS and PFS in the biomarker positive sub-population, ORR and DCR, safety and quality of life. In addition, blood and tumor archival tissue will be assessed for pharmacokinetic and biomarker analyses. Global enrollment is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02993731.

scholarly journals Pain Progression at Initiation of Cabazitaxel in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC): A Post Hoc Analysis of the PROSELICA Study

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1284
Author(s):  
Nicolas Delanoy ◽  
Debbie Robbrecht ◽  
Mario Eisenberger ◽  
Oliver Sartor ◽  
Ronald de Wit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiological Progression ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Psa Response ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Psa Progression ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Post Hoc

Background: In the PROSELICA phase III trial (NCT01308580), cabazitaxel 20 mg/m2 (CABA20) was non-inferior to cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 (CABA25) in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel (DOC). The present post hoc analysis evaluates how the type of progression at randomization affected outcomes. Methods: Progression type at randomization was defined as follows: PSA progression only (PSA-p; no radiological progression (RADIO-p), no pain), RADIO-p (±PSA-p, no pain), or pain progression (PAIN-p, ±PSA-p, ±RADIO-p). Relationships between progression type and overall survival (OS), radiological progression-free survival (rPFS), and PSA response (confirmed PSA decrease ≥ 50%) were analyzed. Results: All randomized patients (n = 1200) had received prior DOC, and 25.7% had received prior abiraterone or enzalutamide. Progression type at randomization was evaluable in 1075 patients (PSA-p = 24.4%, RADIO-p = 20.8%, PAIN-p = 54.8%). Pain progression was associated with clinical and biological features of aggressive disease. Median OS from CABA initiation or date of mCRPC diagnosis, all arms combined, was shorter in the PAIN-p group than in the RADIO-p or the PSA-p groups (12.0 versus 16.8 and 18.4 months, respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, all arms combined, PAIN-p was an independent predictor of poor OS (HR = 1.44, p < 0.001). PSA response, rPFS, and OS were numerically higher with CABA25 versus CABA20 in patients with PAIN-p. Conclusions: This post hoc analysis of the PROSELICA phase III study shows that pain progression at initiation of CABA in mCRPC patients previously treated with DOC is associated with a poor prognosis. Disease progression should be carefully monitored, even in the absence of PSA rise.

Nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) or NIVO plus chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo as first-line (1L) treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): First results of the CheckMate 648 study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA4001-LBA4001
Author(s):  
Ian Chau ◽  
Yuichiro Doki ◽  
Jaffer A. Ajani ◽  
Jianming Xu ◽  
Lucjan Wyrwicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tumor Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
First Results ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Previously Treated Patients

LBA4001 Background: NIVO demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) vs chemo in previously treated patients (pts) with ESCC (ATTRACTION-3). We report OS and progression-free survival (PFS) from CheckMate 648, the first global phase III study to evaluate both an immuno-oncology (I-O)/chemo combination and an I-O/I-O combination in advanced ESCC. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC were enrolled regardless of tumor cell PD-L1 expression. Pts were randomized to NIVO (240 mg Q2W) + chemo (fluorouracil + cisplatin Q4W), NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), or chemo alone. Primary endpoints for both comparisons were OS and PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%. Hierarchically tested secondary endpoints included OS and PFS in all randomized pts. Results: 970 pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo, NIVO + IPI, and chemo arms (49% with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%). With 13 months (mo) minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI led to statistically significant improvement in OS vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% and all randomized pts (Table). Statistically significant PFS benefit was also observed for NIVO + chemo vs chemo (HR 0.65 [98.5% CI 0.46–0.92]; P = 0.0023) in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%. PFS in NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% did not meet the prespecified boundary for significance. The objective response rate (per BICR) was 53% (NIVO + chemo), 35% (NIVO + IPI), and 20% (chemo) in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% and in all randomized pts was 47%, 28%, and 27%, respectively; longer median (95% CI) duration of response was observed vs chemo for pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%: 8.4 (6.9–12.4), 11.8 (7.1–27.4), and 5.7 (4.4–8.7) mo and for all randomized pts: 8.2 (6.9–9.7), 11.1 (8.3–14.0), and 7.1 (5.7–8.2) mo, respectively. No new safety signals were identified (Table). Conclusions: NIVO plus chemo and NIVO plus IPI both demonstrated superior OS vs chemo, along with durable objective responses and acceptable safety, in pts with advanced ESCC, and each represents a potential new 1L treatment option. Clinical trial information: NCT03143153. [Table: see text]

Vandetanib versus erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of at least one prior cytotoxic chemotherapy: A randomized, double-blind phase III trial (ZEST)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8009-8009
Author(s):  
R. B. Natale ◽  
S. Thongprasert ◽  
F. A. Greco ◽  
M. Thomas ◽  
C. M. Tsai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Equivalent Efficacy ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

8009 Background: Vandetanib is a once-daily oral inhibitor of VEGFR, EGFR and RET signaling. This phase III study compared the efficacy of vandetanib vs erlotinib in patients (pts) with advanced, previously treated NSCLC. Methods: Eligible pts (stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, PS 0–2, 1–2 prior chemotherapies; all histologies permitted) were randomized 1:1 to receive vandetanib 300 mg/day or erlotinib 150 mg/day until progression/toxicity. The primary objective was to show superiority in progression-free survival (PFS) for vandetanib vs erlotinib. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), time to deterioration of symptoms (TDS; EORTC QoL Questionnaire) and safety. Results: Between Oct 06-Nov 07, 1240 pts (mean age 61 yrs; 38% female; 22% squamous) were randomized to receive vandetanib (n=623) or erlotinib (n=617). Baseline characteristics were similar in both arms. Median duration of follow-up was 14 months, with 88% pts progressed and 67% dead. There was no difference in PFS for pts treated with vandetanib vs erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95.22% CI 0.87–1.10; P=0.721), and no difference in the secondary endpoints of OS (HR 1.01, 95.08% CI 0.89–1.16; P=0.830), ORR (both 12%) and TDS (pain: HR 0.92, P=0.289; dyspnea: HR 1.07, P=0.407; cough: HR 0.94, P=0.455). A preplanned non-inferiority analysis for PFS and OS demonstrated equivalent efficacy for vandetanib and erlotinib. The adverse events (AEs) observed for vandetanib were generally consistent with previous NSCLC studies with vandetanib 300 mg. There was a higher incidence of some AEs (any grade) with vandetanib vs erlotinib, including diarrhea (50% vs 38%) and hypertension (16% vs 2%); rash was more frequent with erlotinib (38% vs 28%). The overall incidence of CTCAE grade ≥3 AEs was also higher with vandetanib (50% vs 40%). The incidence of protocol-defined QTc prolongation in the vandetanib arm was 5%. Conclusions: The study did not meet its primary objective of demonstrating PFS prolongation with vandetanib vs erlotinib in pts with previously treated advanced NSCLC. However, vandetanib and erlotinib showed equivalent efficacy for PFS and OS in a preplanned non-inferiority analysis. [Table: see text]

Final results from study 181: Randomized phase III study of FOLFIRI with or without panitumumab (pmab) for the treatment of second-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 387-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto F. Sobrero ◽  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Timothy Jay Price ◽  
Yevhen Hotko ◽  
Andres Cervantes-Ruiperez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Event Rates

387 Background: In the primary analysis of study 181, pmab+FOLFIRI significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs FOLFIRI as second-line therapy in patients (pts) with wild-type (WT) KRAS mCRC. Here, we report the results of a prespecified final descriptive analysis planned for 30 months (mos) after the last pt was enrolled. Methods: Pts were randomised 1:1 to pmab 6.0 mg/kg Q2W+FOLFIRI (Arm 1) vs FOLFIRI alone (Arm 2). Pts had one prior fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimen for mCRC and ECOG 0-2. The co-primary endpoints were PFS (central assessment) and OS, and were independently tested. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), and safety. KRAS status was determined by a blinded central lab. Results: 1,186 pts were randomised and received treatment (tx): 591 in Arm 1, 595 In Arm 2. 1,083/1,186 pts (91%) had KRAS results. Adverse event rates were consistent with the primary analysis. Results are shown in the table . Conclusions: In Arm 1, PFS (standard and on-treatment definition) and ORR were improved, and there was a trend toward improved OS in pts with WT KRAS mCRC. The large proportion of pts receiving post-progression anti-EGFR therapy may have affected the ability to observe a difference in OS between the tx arms. In pts with MT KRAS there was no difference in efficacy. KRAS testing is critical to select appropriate pts for tx with pmab. [Table: see text]

Molecular marker assessments for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and histoscore (H-score) in the phase III SELECT trial.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8052-8052
Author(s):  
Edward S. Kim ◽  
Sreenivas Chittoor ◽  
Craig H. Reynolds ◽  
Lorinda Simms ◽  
Scott Saxman
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Egfr Expression ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Previously Treated Patients ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Epidermal Growth ◽  
Select Trial

8052 Background: SELECT was a phase III study that investigated whether the addition of cetuximab (C) to pemetrexed (P) improved outcome in previously treated patients (pts) with recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Clinical results have been reported previously and demonstrated that adding C to P did not improve progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). H-score has been reported to be a potential predictor of outcome for C therapy. Prespecified biomarker analyses, including EGFR IHC and H-score, are reported here. Methods: EGFRexpression in tumor tissue was not required for eligibility; however, tissue was collected and analyzed for EGFR expression by IHC using standard methods. In addition, H-score evaluation was performed by trained central pathologists and correlated with clinical outcome using a predefined cutoff for “low” and “high” of <200 and ≥200, respectively. Results: A total of 449 (IHC) and 406 (H-score) pt specimens were evaluable. Demographics for pts with tissue available for EGFR analysis were similar to the overall population. For IHC+ pts (n=396), median PFS for C+P was 3.02 months (95% CI, 2.76–3.45) compared with 2.99 months (95% CI, 2.63–4.14) for P (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.83–1.24]; p=.86). For pts with low H-score (N=99 [C+P] and N=111 [P]), median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.8–3.2) with C+P and 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.6–4.1) with P (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.84–1.46]; P=.48); median OS was 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.3–8.6) with C+P and 6.6 months (95% CI, 4.7–9.2) with P (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.72–1.27]; P=.76). Among pts with high H-scores (N=101 [C+P] and N= 95 [P]), median PFS was 3.2 months (95% CI, 2.7–4.6) with C+P and 3.7 months (95% CI, 1.7–4.5) with P (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.77–1.37]; P=.86); median OS was 7.7 months (95% CI, 6.5–10.9) with C+P and 8.0 months (95% CI, 7.0–9.1) with P (HR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.86–1.57]; P=.32). Conclusions: EGFR H-score was not predictive of benefit for the addition of C to P in this population of pts with NSCLC. There was also no treatment effect in the IHC+ group. Clinical trial information: NCT00095199.

MetGastric: A randomized phase III study of onartuzumab (MetMAb) in combination with mFOLFOX6 in patients with metastatic HER2-negative and MET-positive adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4155-TPS4155 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Cunningham ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Manish A. Shah ◽  
Florian Lordick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Resistance Mechanisms ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Prognostic Features ◽  
Tumor Invasiveness ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Secondary Analyses ◽  
Phase Iii Study

TPS4155 Background: Dysregulation of the HGF/MET pathway in patients with gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) is associated with diminished survival and poor prognostic features, such as nodal and organ metastasis, disease stage and tumor invasiveness. Preclinical data suggest that inhibition of the HGF/MET axis may increase the anti-tumor properties of platinum agents by overcoming HGF-mediated resistance mechanisms. Overexpression and inappropriate activation of the MET pathway has been shown to promote peritoneal metastasis in murine models of GEC. Overexpression of HGF or MET has also been linked to metastatic spread to the liver and peritoneum in patients with GEC. Clinical studies suggest that antibody-based inhibitors of the HGF/MET pathway are active in GEC. Onartuzumab, a monovalent monoclonal antibody, specifically binds to the MET receptor preventing HGF binding thereby inhibiting signal transduction. The most commonly reported adverse events associated with onartuzumab are grade 1–3 peripheral edema, hypoalbuminemia and fatigue. Methods: MetGastric is a randomized placebo-controlled, international phase III study in patients with previously untreated metastatic GEC. Only patients with tumors classified as both HER2-negative and MET-positive (by IHC) are eligible. Patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive mFOLFOX6 plus onartuzumab or mFOLFOX6 plus placebo. A maximum of 12 cycles of mFOLFOX6 are permitted. Onartuzumab or placebo will be continued until disease progression. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall response rate, safety and correlative biomarker studies. Primary and secondary analyses will include all randomized patients, analyzed according to treatment arm assignment and MET IHC score. Safety will be assessed in all patients who receive at least one dose of study treatment. This study is open for accrual. Clinical trial information: NCT01662869.

SPIRITT (study 20060141): A randomized phase II study of FOLFIRI with either panitumumab (pmab) or bevacizumab (bev) as second-line treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with wild-type (WT) KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 454-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Randolph Hecht ◽  
Allen Lee Cohn ◽  
Shaker R. Dakhil ◽  
Mansoor N. Saleh ◽  
Bilal Piperdi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Grade 5 ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Previously Treated

454 Background: Pmab has demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with WT KRAS mCRC as 2nd-line tx in a phase III trial comparing pmab + FOLFIRI vs FOLFIRI alone. Here, we describe the results of SPIRITT, a multicenter, randomized phase II study evaluating pmab + FOLFIRI and bev + FOLFIRI in pts with WT KRAS mCRC previously treated with a 1st-line bev + oxaliplatin (Ox)-based chemotherapy regimen. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to pmab 6.0 mg/kg + FOLFIRI Q2W or to bev 5.0 or 10.0 mg/kg + FOLFIRI Q2W. Eligibility criteria included: WT KRAS mCRC, ECOG ≤ 1, no prior irinotecan or anti-EGFR tx, and tx failure of prior 1st-line bev + Ox-based therapy (≥ 4 cycles). The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. No formal hypothesis was tested. Results: 182 pts with WT KRAS mCRC were randomized. All pts received tx. Efficacy results are shown (table). Worst grade of 3/4 adverse events (AE) occurred in 78% of pts in the pmab + FOLFIRI arm and 65% in the bev + FOLFIRI arm. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 7% of pts in the pmab + FOLFIRI arm and 7% in the bev + FOLFIRI arm. Tx discontinuation due to any AE was 29% in the pmab + FOLFIRI arm and 25% in the bev + FOLFIRI arm. Conclusions: In this estimation study of pts with WT KRAS mCRC that previously received bev + Ox-based tx, the PFS hazard ratio (HR) was 1.01 (95% CI: 0.68 - 1.50). The OS HR was 1.06 (95% CI: 0.75 - 1.49). The observed ORR was higher in the pmab + FOLFIRI arm. 54% of bev + FOLFIRI pts received subsequent anti-EGFR tx. The safety profile for both arms was similar to previously reported studies. Tx discontinuation rates due to AEs were similar between the arms. Clinical trial information: NCT00418938. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III study of panitumumab (pmab) vs. cetuximab (cmab) in chemorefractory wild-type (WT) KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Outcomes by hypomagnesemia (hypomag) in ASPECCT.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 705-705
Author(s):  
Timothy Jay Price ◽  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
Stefano Cascinu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Dose Modifications ◽  
Kras Exon

705 Background: ASPECCT met its primary endpoint of non-inferiority of overall survival (OS) of pmab vs. cmab. We evaluate outcomes by hypomag, an on-treatment, anti-EGFR related adverse event that develops due to the inhibition of EGFR function. Conflicting reports have suggested hypomag is associated with survival. Methods: Patients with previously treated WT KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of OS. Progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were secondary endpoints. Patients were categorized ± any grade hypomag during the study and data analyzed by treatment arm. Analysis of Mg supplementation during hypomag was not conducted. Results: 999 patients were randomized and treated: 499 pmab, 500 cmab. Any grade hypomag was 28.8% and grade ≥3 was 7.3% in the pmab arm vs. 18.9% and 2.6% in the cmab arm, respectively. Median time to first hypomag onset was 82 days in the pmab arm and 57 days in the cmab arm. In the pmab arm, 1.0% of patients discontinued treatment and 5% of patients had dose modifications due to hypomag vs. <0.5% and 3% in the cmab arm, respectively. Results are shown (Table). Conclusions: In ASPECCT, rates of hypomag were higher in the pmab vs. the cmab arm. Patients who developed any grade hypomag with pmab or cmab had higher ORR, PFS, and OS compared with those patients who did not. Clinical trial information: NCT00788957. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III study comparing FOLFOX + bevacizumab versus folfoxiri + bevacizumab (BEV) as 1st line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with ≥3 baseline circulating tumor cells (bCTCs).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3507-3507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier Sastre ◽  
Jose María Vieitez ◽  
Maria Auxilidora Gomez-España ◽  
Silvia Gil Calle ◽  
Antonieta Salud Salvia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Adequate Treatment ◽  
Poor Prognostic Factor ◽  
Efficacy Analysis ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Group A ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Group B

3507 Background: FOLFOXIRI+BEV has demonstrated a survival benefit compared with FOLFIRI plus BEV (TRIBE Lancet Oncol 2015) in first-line mCRC. Nevertheless, due to its safety profile, this schedule is not recommended for all pts. In addition, we have showed that the detection of ≥3 bCTCs is a poor prognostic factor for survival (MACRO The Oncologist 2012). The VISNU-1 trial compares FOLFOX + BEV vs FOLFOXIRI + BEV in pts with mCRC and ≥3 bCTCs. Progression-free survival (PFS) is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Methods: This is an open, multicentric, randomized phase III trial. Patients with mCRC younger than 70 years, ECOG 0-1 were randomized to FOLFOX+BEV (arm A) or FOLFOXIRI+BEV (arm B), stratified per KRAS mutation (mutated vs WT) and number of involved organs (1 vs >1). Results: 349 pts were included in the ITT population; 177 in group A and 172 in group B. Characteristics of the pts, molecular profiling and safety analysis have been previously presented at ASCO 2018 and showed that this schedule had an acceptable toxicity profile. Efficacy analysis in the ITT population is shown in the table. Conclusions: In this population with very bad prognosis, our study met its primary endpoint. Pts who received FOLFOXIRI + Bev benefit for a statistically significative PFS and ORR. OS showed a trend of benefit in the experimental arm. According to these results, FOLFOXIRI-Bev could be considered an adequate treatment option for pts with mCRC and ≥3 bCTCs. Clinical trial information: 2012-000846-37. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document