A randomized phase II study of mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab versus mFOLFOX6 plus cetuximab for previously untreated, liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer that is unsuitable for resection (ATOM trial).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 734-734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroyuki Uetake ◽  
Yasunori Emi ◽  
Takeharu Yamanaka ◽  
Kei Muro ◽  
Eiji Oki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Liver Resection ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Two Agents ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
Ecog Ps

734 Background: It is still a topic of ongoing debate as to which of the two agents, anti-VEGF antibody or anti-EGFR antibody, is more effective in patients with KRAS Exon 2 or RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the first-line setting. ATOM is a multicenter, randomized trial comparing mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (Bmab arm) with mFOLFOX6 plus cetuximab (Cmab arm) in patients with liver-limited metastases unsuitable for upfront resection. Methods: Patients with previously untreated mCRC were eligible if they had ≥5 liver-limited metastatic lesions and/or had liver-limited metastases with the maximum lesion diameter of > 5cm. Patients with KRAS Exon2-wild were registered but after Jan 2015 limited to those with all RAS-wild. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), which was defined as the time from randomization to disease progression, recurrence after resection by surgery, or death from any cause (Central review). Key secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), liver resection rate, and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 122 pts were enrolled between May 2013 and April 2016. Of 116 eligible (59 in the Cmab arm and 57 in the Bmab arm), median age was 65/64 in the Cmab/Bmab arm; ECOG PS 0, 86/89%; all RAS wt, 98/95%; left-sided primary tumor, 76/84%. Efficacy results were summarized in the table. With a median follow-up of 24.3 months, the median PFS was 15.0 months in Cmab arm and 11.6 months in the Bmab arm with a hazard ratio of 0.803 (95%CI, 0.513–1.256), whereas ORR was 86% in the Cmab arm and 68% in the Bmab arm. Liver resection rate was 49% and 56% in the Cmab arm and the Bmab arm, respectively. Conclusions: In patients considered unsuitable for upfront resection of liver-limited metastasis, the two agents showed a similar efficacy. OS result will be presented elsewhere. Clinical trial information: NCT01836653. [Table: see text]

A retrospective cohort study evaluating the safety and efficacy of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (HGCSG1503): Analysis of cases of prior regorafenib.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 832-832
Author(s):  
Atsushi Ishiguro ◽  
Satoshi Yuki ◽  
Hiroshi Nakatsumi ◽  
Takuro Saiki ◽  
Yasushi Tsuji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Initial Starting

832 Background: The J003 trial and RECOURSE trial revealed the safety and efficacy of TAS-102 for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In March 2014, TAS-102 was approved in Japan. However, in these pivotal trials, there were few cases in which regorafenib was administered as prior treatments, and also there were few reports on the effectiveness and safety of TAS-102 after administration of regorafenib. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 126 patients who received TAS-102 after administration of regorafenib in the multi-institutional retrospective study (HGCSG1503). This study was analyzed by CTCAE v4.0 for adverse events (AEs), RECIST v1.1 for response rate (RR)/disease control rate (DCR), and Kaplan-Meier method for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Patients characteristics were as follows; male/female 75/51, median age 66.5 (range 38-84), ECOG PS (0/1/2/3) 48/64/12/2, KRAS Exon2 wild/mutant 64/60 (2 patients; KRAS Exon2 was not tested). The initial starting dose was 70 mg/m2 (n = 100, 79.4%) and reduced dose (n = 26, 20.6%). Dose reductions were required in 30 patients (30.9%). The common ≥grade 3 AEs were neutrophil count decreased (45.1%), white blood cell decreased (34.9%), and anemia (28.6%). RR and DCR were 0% and 36.5%, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 2.1 and 5.7 months. In the analysis on the relationship between ECOG PS 0-1 and PS 2-3, median PFS was 2.2 vs. 1.4 months (HR 2.187, p = 0.008), and MST was 6.5 vs. 2.7 months (HR 2.424, p = 0.002). Conclusions: In this analysis, TAS-102 after administration of regorafenib in the real-world clinical practice showed similar efficacy and safety to the pivotal clinical trials, except for patients with PS 2-3. Clinical trial information: 000020551.

Ziv-aflibercept: A novel angiogenesis inhibitor for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 70 (21) ◽  
pp. 1887-1896 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clement Chung ◽  
Nisha Pherwani
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Angiogenesis Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Patient Response ◽  
Line Setting

Abstract Purpose The pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety, and administration of ziv-aflibercept in combination therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are reviewed. Summary Ziv-aflibercept (Zaltrap, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and sanofi-aventis) is a novel recombinant fusion protein that targets the angiogenesis signaling pathway of tumor cells by blocking vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors that play a key role in tumor growth and metastasis; it is a more potent VEGF blocker than bevacizumab. Ziv-aflibercept is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in combination with fluorouracil, irinotecan, and leucovorin (the FOLFIRI regimen) for second-line treatment of patients with mCRC who have disease progression during first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. A Phase III trial demonstrated that relative to FOLFIRI therapy alone, the use of ziv-aflibercept was associated with significantly improved patient response, overall survival, and progression-free survival in patients with good performance status at baseline, including some who had received prior bevacizumab therapy. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse effects associated with ziv-aflibercept use in clinical studies were neutropenia, hypertension, and diarrhea; the U.S. product labeling warns of potential hemorrhage and other treatment-related risks. Conclusion Current clinical data are insufficient to directly compare ziv-aflibercept and bevacizumab when used with standard combination chemotherapy as first- or second-line regimens for mCRC. The role of ziv-aflibercept is currently limited to the second-line setting in combination with irinotecan-based regimens in mCRC patients who have not received irinotecan previously. The role of ziv-aflibercept in chemotherapy for other tumor types is yet to be determined.

Safety, efficacy, and time to clinical response with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI regimen in metastatic colorectal cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15138-e15138
Author(s):  
S. Tomao ◽  
G. Spinelli ◽  
L. Rossi ◽  
G. Pasciuti ◽  
G. Arcangeli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Ps

e15138 Background: Bevacizumab (BEV) has shown clinical activity in metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC)and randomised phase III trials have demonstrated that this agent significantly improves overall and/or progression-free survival when added to first-line irinotecan based chemotherapy (CT) regimens. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of BEV plus FOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5- fluorouracil, and leucovorin) as first line treatment in 27 consecutive metastatic colorectal cancer cases, with the primary end point to calculate the median time to clinical response with this chemotherapeutic schedule. Methods: Between October 2007 and January 2008 we collected the data on 27 patients with mCRC treated with first line chemotherapy with BEV plus FOLFIRI. Elegibility criteria had to be: mCRC; no prior CT for metastatic disease; ECOG PS 0/1, adequate organ function; no CNS metastases. The treatment consisted of a minimum of six cycles of irinotecan plus infusional 5-FU/LV according to the classical FOLFIRI schedule; BEV (5mg/kg) was given on day 1 with CT and then every 2 weeks until disease progression. Safety and response were assessed at the time of first CT and every 4 weeks thereafter. Results: 27 pts were evaluable (male 18; median age 61 years (range 45–77), ECOG PS 0: 52%, PS 1: 48%. The sites of metastases were: liver (15 pts), lung (5 pts), liver and lung (5 pts), peritoneal wall (2 pts).Median follow-up was 18 weeks. Two patients had complete response(CR) and 13 pts partial response (PR), with an overall response rate of 57.7%. Five patients had stable disease and 6 patients showed progressive disease. A clinical benefit was demonstrated in 77 % of pts. We observed a median time to clinical response of 11 weeks, evaluated with tumor markers and with CT/NMR/US examinations. A grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was detected in 39% of pts and grade 2 or 3 hypertension in 9%. We did’nt observe cases of thrombosis, bleeding and gastrointestinal perforation, sometimes related to the use of BEV. Conclusions: In this little experience the efficacy and safety of BEV associated with FOLFIRI schedule, a first line therapy in mCRC,is consistent with results from other previous studies, showing moreover a short time to clinical response with this association. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Randomized, phase II study of bevacizumab with mFOLFOX6 or FOLFOXIRI in patients with initially unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer: Resectability and safety in OLIVIA.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3619-3619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Gruenberger ◽  
John A. Bridgewater ◽  
Ian Chau ◽  
Pilar Garcia Alfonso ◽  
Michel Rivoire ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Remnant Liver ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
Open Label ◽  
R1 Resection ◽  
Unresectable Liver Metastases ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Hepatic Lesions ◽  
Ecog Ps

3619^ Background: Patients (pts) with unresectable colorectal cancer liver-only metastases (CLMs) may become resectable after downsizing by chemotherapy (CT) and biologic therapy. Although biologics are thought to improve overall response rate (ORR), the optimal combination of a biologic and CT for resectability remains uncertain. Methods: This open-label, multinational study randomized pts with unresectable CLMs to bevacizumab (BEV) plus mFOLFOX6 or FOLFOXIRI q2w. Resectability was assessed by interdisciplinary review. Unresectability was defined as ≥1 of the following: no possibility of upfront R0/R1 resection of all hepatic lesions, <30% estimated residual liver after resection, or disease in contact with major vessels of the remnant liver. The primary end point was overall resection rate (R0/R1/R2). Results: From 10/2008 to 12/2011, 80 pts were randomized to mFOLFOX6-BEV (n=39) or FOLFOXIRI-BEV (n=41). Pt characteristics were male (46% vs 71%), aged ≥60 y (36% vs 63%), ECOG PS of 1 (23% vs 37%), and ≥5 target CLMs (49% vs 49%) in the mFOLFOX6-BEV and FOLFOXIRI-BEV arms, respectively. Resection rate, ORR, and progression-free survival (PFS) data are shown (Table). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 84% and 95% of pts receiving mFOLFOX6-BEV and FOLFOXIRI-BEV, respectively, and included neutropenia (35% vs 48%; febrile, 8% vs 13%) and diarrhea (14% vs 28%). Conclusions: The results suggest that FOLFOXIRI-BEV improves resection rates, ORR, and long-term outcomes vs mFOLFOX6-BEV in pts with initially unresectable CLMs. CT- and BEV-related AEs occurred with the expected incidence and were manageable. FOLFOXIRI-BEV should be evaluated further as an effective regimen to downsize CLMs. Clinical trial information: NCT00778102. [Table: see text]

A phase II trial of salvage treatment with gemcitabine and S-1 combination in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 488-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sun Jin Sym ◽  
Junshik Hong ◽  
Hee Kyung Ahn ◽  
Jinny Park ◽  
Eun Kyung Cho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Ecog Ps

488 Background: We conducted a phase II trial of gemcitabine with S-1 to evaluate the activity and toxicity of such a combination in heavily pre-treated patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who have progressed after treatment with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin and irinotecan. Methods: 34 pts were enrolled, with the following characteristics: 17 (50%) females, median age 57 years (28-72), 28 (82%) ECOG PS 0-1. S-1 was given orally (30 mg/m2) b.i.d for 14 consecutive days and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) was given on days 1 and 8, every 21 days, until disease progression and for a maximum of 9 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Results: The median number of cycles was four (range 1-9). ORR was 14.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-26.6) and disease control rate was 58.8% (95% CI 42.2-75.3) with five partial responses and fifteen stable diseases. Median duration of disease control was 5.1 months (95% CI 3.3-7.0). Median progression-free survival was 3.2 months (95% CI 2.3-4.1) and median overall survival was 11.8 months (95% CI 7.0-16.5). Grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (12%), anemia (12%), thrombocytopenia (3%) and diarrhea (3%). Conclusions: Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 was well tolerated and efficacious for heavily pre-treated mCRC pts, and could be an alternative for pts with good PS but no further treatment options.

Randomized trial of irinotecan and cetuximab with or without vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (SWOG S1406).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3505-3505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Kopetz ◽  
Shannon L McDonough ◽  
Heinz-Josef Lenz ◽  
Anthony Martin Magliocco ◽  
Chloe Evelyn Atreya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Skin Toxicity ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Type 1 Error ◽  
Clinical Benefits ◽  
Poor Outcomes ◽  
Ecog Ps

3505 Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) with BRAFV600 mutations have poor outcomes with standard of care chemotherapy and rarely respond to the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. In preclinical models, blockade of BRAFV600 by vemurafenib (V) causes feedback upregulation of EGFR, whose signaling activities can be impeded by cetuximab (C) with anti-tumor activity augmented by irinotecan (I). Methods: Pts with BRAFV600 mutated and extended RAS wild-type mCRC were randomized to irinotecan (180 mg/m2 IV every 14 days) and cetuximab (500 mg/m2 IV every 14 days) with or without vemurafenib (960 mg PO twice daily). Eligible pts had ECOG PS ≤1, and had received 1 or 2 prior regimens with no prior anti-EGFR agents. Randomization was stratified for prior irinotecan. Crossover from the control arm (IC) to the experimental arm (VIC) was allowed after documented progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS, investigator assessed), with 90% power to detect a HR of 0.5, with two-sided type 1 error of 5%. Results: 106 pts were enrolled (99 eligible, 49 in the experimental arm) from 12/2014 to 4/2016, with median age 62 years, 59% female, and 39% with prior irinotecan therapy. PFS was improved with the addition of vemurafenib (HR 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 0.66, P < 0.001) with median PFS of 4.4 (95% CI 3.6 – 5.7) mos vs 2.0 (95% CI 1.8 – 2.1) months. Response rate was 16% vs 4% (P = 0.08), with disease control rate of 67% vs 22%. In pts with no prior irinotecan, median PFS was 5.7 (95% CI 3.0-6.1) months in the VIC arm vs 1.9 (95% CI 1.7 – 2.1) months in the IC arm. Grade 3/4 adverse events higher in the VIC arm included neutropenia (28% vs 7%), anemia (13% vs 0%), and nausea (15% vs 0%). There was no increase in skin toxicity or fatigue. 23 pts (46%) in the IC arm crossed over at the time of progression, with median PFS from crossover of 6.0 months (95% CI 3.7 – 7.4). Overall survival (OS) data will be mature for ASCO 2017. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the clinical benefits of the VIC triplet (vemurafenib, cetuximab, and irinotecan) in pts with treatment-refractory BRAFV600 mutated mCRC, and support VIC as a potential new treatment option in this molecular subset. Clinical trial information: NCT02164916.

Efficacy of panitumumab plus irinotecan versus cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with wild-type KRAS exon2 metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with bevacizumab within 6 months.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 800-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaori Hayashi ◽  
Seiichiro Mitani ◽  
Hiroya Taniguchi ◽  
Satoshi Hamauchi ◽  
Keiji Sugiyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Short Interval ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Interval Methods ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Ecog Ps

800 Background: The ASPECCT study showed panitumumab (Pmab) is non-inferior to cetuximab (Cmab) for chemotherapy-refractory and intolerant wild-type (WT) KRAS exon2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In the subgroup analysis, Pmab provided more favorable outcomes than Cmab for patients (pts) previously treated with bevacizumab (Bmab). However, some reports suggested that anti-EGFR antibody (anti-EGFR) efficacy was reduced when received within 6 months of last administration of Bmab. In this study, we aim to evaluate the difference in efficacy between Pmab and Cmab in pts who received prior Bmab and were treated with anti-EGFR after a short interval. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated pts treated with anti-EGFR and irinotecan (IRI) after failure of Bmab, fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and IRI at two institutions. The main inclusion criteria were WT KRAS exon2 mCRC, ECOG PS 0-2, and no prior administration of anti-EGFR within 6 months after Bmab. Results: From Sep. 2008 to Mar. 2016, 124 consecutive pts met the inclusion criteria (Pmab/Cmab, 30/94). Pts’ characteristics were as follows (Pmab/Cmab): median age (range): 63/62 (38-76/27-82); male, 63%/72%; ECOG PS 0, 43%/27%; PS1, 57%/66%; PS2 0%/7%; tumor in left colon, 87%/76%; histology (por, muc), 10%/16%; ≥2 metastases, 67%/66%; ≥1 subsequent therapy, 73%/63%. Overall response and disease control rates in Pmab/Cmab were 31%/26% and 69%/67%, respectively. In Pmab/Cmab, the median overall survival was 15.8/12.2 months (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.4-0.97; P=0.04) and the median progression-free survival was 6.5/5.5 months (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.49-1.16, P=0.20). The adjusted HR with 10 covariates such as age, gender, PS, tumor location, histology, primary tumor resection, number of metastatic sites, liver limited disease, time from diagnosis of metastasis and initiation date of anti-EGFR plus IRI was 0.61 for PFS (p=0.1) and 0.61 for OS (p=0.04). Conclusions: Pmab plus irinotecan showed favorable outcomes compared with Cmab plus irinotecan in pts with WT KRAS exon2 mCRC within 6 months between the last administration of Bmab and initial anti-EGFR.

scholarly journals A meta-analysis comparing regorafenib with TAS-102 for treating refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 030006052092640
Author(s):  
Guan-Li Su ◽  
Yuan-Yuan Wang ◽  
Jin-Cheng Wang ◽  
Hao Liu
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome

Objective We performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and toxicity of regorafenib and TAS-102. Methods Electronic databases were searched to identify studies comparing the efficacy and safety of regorafenib and TAS-102 in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer using pooled analyses. Results Three clinical trials were included in this analysis. Regarding the reasons for treatment discontinuation, regorafenib was significantly associated with disease progression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.21–0.50) and adverse events (OR = 4.38, 95% CI = 2.69–7.13). However, overall (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.81–1.17) and progression-free survival (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.86–1.18) did not significantly differ between the groups. The most common treatment-related adverse events in the regorafenib group were neutropenia (OR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.03–0.11), hand–foot syndrome (OR = 50.34, 95% CI = 10.44–242.84), and liver dysfunction (OR = 34.51, 95% CI = 8.30–143.43). Conversely, the incidence of thrombocytopenia did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions Regorafenib and TAS-102 have similar efficacy but different adverse event profiles. Differences in the toxicity profiles of the two drugs will help guide treatment selection.

A randomized phase III trial of S-1/oxaliplatin (SOX) plus bevacizumab versus 5-FU/l-LV/oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) plus bevacizmab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: The SOFT study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3519-3519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daisuke Takahari ◽  
Yasuhide Yamada ◽  
Hiroshi Matsumoto ◽  
Hideo Baba ◽  
Kazuhiro Yoshida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
P Value ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps

3519 Background: Several studies of oxaliplatin plus S-1 combination therapy (SOX) conducted in Asia have shown promising efficacy and safety for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), suggesting the potential to replace mFOLFOX6. We performed a randomized phase III trial to determine whether SOX plus bevacizmab (SOX+Bev) is non-inferior to mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizmab (mFOLFOX6+Bev) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: The SOFT study was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial. Chemotherapy-naïve patients (pts) with mCRC, an ECOG PS of 0-1, and adequate organ functions were randomized to receive either mFOLFOX6+Bev (5 mg/kg of bevacizumab, followed by 200 mg/m2 of l-leucovorin given simultaneously with 85 mg/m2 of oxaliplatin, followed by a 400 mg/m2 bolus of 5-FU on day 1 and then 2,400 mg/m2 of 5-FU over 46 h, every 2 weeks) or SOX+Bev (7.5 mg/kg of bevacizumab, 130 mg/m2 of oxaliplatin on day 1, and 40−60 mg of S-1 twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by a 1-week rest). The primary endpoint was PFS. A sample size of 225 pts per group was estimated to be necessary based on a median PFS of 10.0 months in each group and an 80% power to demonstrate non-inferiority of SOX+Bev with a 2.5-month margin (hazard ratio, HR = 1.33) and a 2-sided alpha of 0.05. Results: A total of 512 pts were enrolled from February 2009 to March 2011. Data were analyzed after confirming >388 events as planned. Demographic factors were well balanced. Pts received a median of 12 cycles (1 cycle = 2 weeks) of mFOLFOX6+Bev and 8 cycles (1 cycle = 3 weeks) of SOX+Bev (range: 1−16). Median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI: 10.7−13.2) with mFOLFOX6+Bev and 11.7 months (95% CI: 10.7−12.9) with SOX+Bev. The adjusted HR for PFS was 1.043 (95% CI: 0.860−1.266), and the p value for non-inferiority was 0.0139. Response rate was 62.7% with mFOLFOX6+Bev and 61.5% with SOX+Bev. Grade 3/4 toxicities (%) with mFOLFOX6+Bev/SOX+Bev were leukopenia 8.4/2.4, neutropenia 33.7/8.8, anorexia 1.2/5.2, and diarrhea 2.8/9.2. Conclusions: SOX+Bev is non-inferior to mFOLFOX6+Bev with respect to PFS as 1st-line treatment for mCRC and thus can replace mFOLFOX6+Bev. Clinical trial information: JapicCTI-090699.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document