Clinical outcomes of sunitinib (Su) for patients (pts) with desmoid tumors (DT).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11052-11052
Author(s):  
Salvatora tindara Miano ◽  
Guido Francini ◽  
Serenella Civitelli ◽  
Roberto Petrioli ◽  
Edoardo Francini
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Radiological Progression ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

11052 Background: The incidence of DT is steadily increasing in pts affected by familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and represents the first cause of death for pts who underwent preventive proctocolectomy. Currently, there is no standard therapy for DT and Tamoxifen (20 mg once daily) + Meloxicam (15 mg once daily) (TM) is the most commonly used regimen in clinical routine. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of Su, the most active PDGFR TKI, as first-line therapy for pts with DT. Methods: In this phase II IRB approved prospective study, pts with progressive, symptomatic, or recurrent DT were randomized to receive either Su (52 mg once daily) or TM. The primary end point was progression-free survival, defined as time from treatment start to clinical or radiological progression, whichever came first, at 2 years (2yr-PFS). Secondary endpoints were rates of objective response (OR), evaluated per RECIST criteria version 1.1, time to OR (ttOR), and toxicity. Adverse events (AE) were assessed per NCI-CTCAE version 4.02. Results: Of the 32 pts enrolled, 22 received Su and 10 TM. In both groups, median age at diagnosis was 43.5 years No OR was observed in the TM group. In the Su group, 17 pts had a partial response and 5 stable disease and the ORR was 75% (95% CI, 50 to 100). At a median follow-up of 27 months, the 2yr-PFS was 81% (95% CI, 69-96) and 36% (95% CI, 22-57) in the Su cohort and TM cohort, respectively (HR = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05- 0.31; P<0.001). The median ttOR among pts who had an OR was 24 months. In the TM group, no toxicity was observed. The most frequently reported AE in the Su group were grade 1 or 2 hypothyroidism (73%), fatigue (67%), hypertension (55%), and diarrhea (51%). (HR: 0.260; p = 0.0035). All AE responded to dose reduction (37.5 mg). Conclusions: In a cohort of pts with progressive, recurrent, or symptomatic DT, Su seems to be well tolerated and improve 2yr-PFS and OR rate compared with TM therapy. Further prospective studies with larger samples are needed to verify these results.

Subgroup analysis from JAVELIN Renal 101: Outcomes for avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 544-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Matthew T. Campbell ◽  
Boris Y. Alekseev ◽  
Motohide Uemura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

544 Background: In the ongoing phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial, progression-free survival (PFS) was longer (median, 13.8 vs 8.4 mo; hazard ratio, 0.69; p=0.0001) and the objective response rate (ORR) was higher (51% vs 26%) with A + Ax vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report outcomes from an analysis of several prespecified subgroups. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A (10 mg/kg) IV every 2 weeks + Ax (5 mg) PO twice daily or S (50 mg) PO once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). Primary and key secondary endpoints were PFS per independent review committee (IRC; RECIST v1.1) and OS in patients with PD-L1+ tumors (≥1% of immune cells) and in patients irrespective of PD-L1 expression; other secondary endpoints included OR per IRC (RECIST v1.1). Results: A total of 886 patients were randomized; 560 (63%) had PD-L1+ tumors. At data cut-off (Jun 2018), median follow-up was 12.0 vs 11.5 mo for A + Ax vs S groups. The table shows PFS and ORR by MSKCC and IMDC risk groups (F, favorable; I, intermediate; P, poor) and PD-L1 subgroup. Similar results for prognostic risk were seen in patients with PD-L1+ tumors. Outcome data (including PFS2) for additional clinical subgroups by baseline demographics and features will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006. Conclusions: A + Ax demonstrated PFS and OR benefit across all prognostic risk groups and PD-L1 subgroups vs S in aRCC.[Table: see text]

Efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) by number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 302-302
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive

302 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) benefit across IMDC risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and poor) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report efficacy of A + Ax vs S by number of IMDC risk factors (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4-6) and target tumor sites (1, 2, 3, and ≥4) at baseline from the second interim analysis of overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1) and OS were assessed. Results: At data cut-off (Jan 2019), median (m) follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by number of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline. A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across subgroups. Conclusions: With extended follow-up, A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across the number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in aRCC. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

Prevalence and outcomes of patients (pts) with EGFR S492R ectodomain mutations in ASPECCT: Panitumumab (pmab) vs. cetuximab (cmab) in pts with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 740-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Jay Price ◽  
Kathryn Newhall ◽  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Droplet Pcr ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

740 Background: Mutations resistant to anti-EGFR treatment (tx), beyond those in RAS, have been reported and include EGFR S492R. We report results for pts with EGFR S492R mutations in the phase 3 ASPECCT trial. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. Crossover was not allowed. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. EGFR S492R was evaluated by digital droplet PCR in plasma samples collected pre-tx and post-tx (safety follow-up 4 wks after the last dose). Outcomes were analyzed by EGFR S492 status. Results: Of 999 pts randomized and treated, post-tx samples were available for EGFR S492 assessment from 53% of pts (261/496) in the pmab arm and 57% of pts (285/503) in the cmab arm. EGFR S492R was detected in 1% of pts in the pmab arm and 16% of pts in the cmab arm in post-tx samples. EGFR S492R was not detected in pre-tx samples. Results are shown (table). Conclusions: In a retrospective analysis of pts with available samples from ASPECCT, 16% of pts in the cmab arm and 1% of pts in the pmab developed EGFR S492R mutations. Pts with EGFR S492R in the cmab arm had longer tx duration before progressive disease (PD) and appeared to have worse OS vs pts with wild-type S492 in the cmab arm. Clinical trial information: NCT01001377. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Efficacy of First-Third generation EGFR inhibitor combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced lung adenocarcinoma in a real-world setting

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-Wei Chen Ming-Wei Chen ◽  
An-Tai He . ◽  
Yi Pei .
Keyword(s):  
Lung Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Egfr Mutations ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Mean Survival Time ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
To Receive

Abstract BackgroundTo explore the optimal treatment strategy for patients who harbor sensitive EGFR mutations, a head-to-head study was performed to compare chemotherapy and gefitinib-erlotinip, osimertinib treatment in combination or with either agent alone as first-line therapy, in terms of efficacy and safety.MethodsA total of 200 untreated patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma who harbored sensitive EGFR mutations were randomly assigned to receive gefitinib-erlotinip combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin group, gefitinib-erlotinip osimertinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin group, pemetrexed plus carboplatin alone group, or gefitinib-erlotinip alone group, osimertinib alone group.ResultsThe progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in the gefitinib-erlotinip combination group Mean Survival Time PFS 22.00 month,95%CI[16.29,27.70] and osimertinib gefitinib-erlotinip combination group Mean Survival Time PFS 40.00 month,95%CI[28.12,51.87]was longer than that of patients in the chemotherapy alone group PFS10,81 months, 95% CI,[ 8.99–12.64],gefitinib-erlotinip alone group PFS14.00 month.95%CI[11.98-20.01], osimertinib alone group PFS 26.66 month 95%CI[24.77-29.22].The gefitinib-erlotinip osimertinib combinational resulted in longer overall survival (OS) than chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.46, p = 0.016) or gefitinib-erlotinip alone (HR = 0.36, p = 0.01). osimertinib alone (HR = 0.26, p = 0.01).ConclusionsOur finding suggested that treatment with pemetrexed plus carboplatin combined with gefitinib-erlotinip and pemetrexed plus carboplatin combined with gefitinib-erlotinip osimertinib group could provide better survival benefits for patients with lung adenocarcinoma harboring sensitive EGFR mutations.

Efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid (S/R) metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 66-66
Author(s):  
Ziad Bakouny ◽  
Sarah Abou Alaiwi ◽  
Amin Nassar ◽  
John A. Steinharter ◽  
Xiao X. Wei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Logistic Regressions

66 Background: Patients with mRCC with S/R components tend to have a poor prognosis with few therapeutic options available. Recent data suggest that immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies may be especially effective for these patients. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of ICI-based therapies in patients with S/R mRCC. Methods: We retrospectively assessed objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) & overall survival (OS) of patients with S/R mRCC treated at our institution with first-line ICI-based therapies and compared these to those of patients treated with first-line non-ICI-based therapies. Univariable and multivariable (adjusted for IMDC group) Cox and logistic regressions were performed. Results: 92 patients (70 S, 9 R, and 13 S&R) patients were included, of which 74 with a clear-cell component. For all patients (regardless of therapy), 74 (80.4%) patients experienced a PFS event (progression or death) and 52 (56.5%) died at 25.3 months (m) median follow-up. Overall median PFS was 5.3 m (95% CI= 3.4–7.2) and 24 m OS rate was 39.5% (27.4–51.7). Out of 78 patients in whom response was evaluable, ORR was 30.8% (20.4–41.2). Patients treated with ICI-based therapies had significantly better ORR, PFS, and OS on multivariable analysis (table). Conclusions: mRCC patients with S/R components have significantly better ORR, PFS, and OS with first-line ICI-based compared to non-ICI-based therapies. These data support the use of ICI-based therapies for patients with S/R mRCC. [Table: see text]

Results of a phase II study of capecitabine-based doublets in the treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e11538-e11538
Author(s):  
Ying Fan ◽  
Binghe Xu ◽  
Yuqian Liao ◽  
Fei Ma ◽  
Peng Yuan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cytotoxic Agents ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Setting ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

e11538 Background: It is extremely important to identify proper cytotoxic agents for TNBC which had limited choices except chemotherapy. Capecitabine are well established as a major chemotherapeutic agent in metastatic setting. The efficacy of capecitabine-based chemotherapy has not been prospectively studied in TNBC and data remains scant. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy of capecitabine-based doublets in the treatment of metastatic TNBC. Methods: Eligible metastatic TNBC women with measurable diseases were recruited to receive either TX regimen (docetaxel 75mg/m2 iv d1 plus capecitabine 1000mg/m2 bid, d1-14,q3w) or NX regimen (vinorelbine 25mg/m2 iv d1, 8 plus capecitabine 1000mg/m2 bid, d1-14, q3w) at the discretion of physicians for up to 6 cycles, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate and secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS). Results: 45 mTNBC patients, 27 in TX and 18 in NX were recruited, mostly (73.3%) as 1st line and the remaining as the 2nd line. The total objective response rate was 20.0% and clinical benefit rate was 62.2%. After a median follow-up of 28 months, PFS was 5.2 months (95%CI, 4.1-6.3mons) and OS was 18.2months (95%CI, 8.7-27.7mons). Almost half of the patients (22/45) progressed during treatment or within one month of the treatment discontinuation. PFS was significantly longer if patients got CR/PR (9.6 vs 4.3mons, P=0.015). When comparing two doublets, the response rate was numerically but not statistically lower in TX group than in NX group (14.8% vs 27.8%, P=0.449). Similarly, no difference was found in either PFS (4.9 vs 5.2 mons, P=0.483) or OS (21.5 vs 18.3 mons, P=0.964) between two regimens. Conclusions: Although the overall survival seems to be reasonable, efficacy of capecitabine-contained TX or NX regimen was relatively poor in terms of tumor remission and progression free survival in mTNBC patients, suggesting capecitabine may have limited potency in this subtype. These two combinations may be considered to be acceptable but may not be recommended as prior choice for mTNBC patients.

Objective response rate and progression-free survival as surrogate endpoints for overall survival and the impact of crossover and unbalanced post-progression treatments: A systematic review and meta-analysis in first-line therapy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9049-9049
Author(s):  
Boris Pfeiffer ◽  
Mahmoud Hashim ◽  
Monica Duran ◽  
Maarten Postma ◽  
Bart Heeg
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Surrogate Endpoints ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

9049 Background: Correlations between overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) or progression-free survival (PFS) are poor. We aimed to evaluate the impact of crossover and unbalanced subsequent treatments on ORR and PFS as surrogate endpoints for OS in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving first-line therapy. Methods: A systematic literature review of randomized clinical trials of systemic treatment for patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC receiving first-line therapy was performed. Weighted (by trial size) linear regression models were fitted with the absolute difference in ORR or median PFS as an independent variable and the absolute difference in median OS as a dependent variable. The analysis was repeated in predefined subsets based on crossover and balance of post-progression therapies. Surrogate threshold effect (STE) was estimated using prediction intervals. Results: 317 trials (78,644 patients) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. In all treatment arms, the mean ORR, median PFS, and median OS were 28.2% (standard deviation (SD) = 12.4%), 5.1 months (SD = 2.1), and 10.4 months (SD = 2.5), respectively. ORR and PFS had weak (R = 0.351; 95% CI: 0.251-0.443) and (R = 0.397; 95% CI: 0.267-0.512) associations with OS, respectively. However, within phase III trials that did not allow crossover and reported balanced post-progression treatments, both ORR and PFS had stronger associations with OS (ORR and OS: R = 0.601, 95% CI: 0.399-0.747; PFS and OS: R = 0.695, 95% CI: 0.446-0.844). STE estimation indicated that trials that show statistically significant treatment effect size of ≥43% ORR or ≥3.2 median PFS months can be expected to show significant OS benefit with sufficient certainty. Conclusions: Surrogacy of ORR and PFS for OS might be better estimated in trials that do not allow crossover and report balanced post-progression treatments. Presented STE calculation can be used to estimate the expected effect on OS when either ORR or PFS are used as primary endpoints.

Consolidation with Alemtuzumab Improves Progression-Free Survival in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) in First Remission - Long-Term Follow-Up of a Randomized Phase III Trial of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG).

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 33-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Schweighofer ◽  
M. Ritgen ◽  
B. Eichhorst ◽  
R. Busch ◽  
M. Kneba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Abstract Purpose: Alemtuzumab (MabCampath) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets the CD52 antigen, which is highly expressed on most human B and T lymphocytes. Alemtuzumab has shown considerable activity in both relapsed/refractory CLL and in the frontline treatment setting. In a recent study, treatment with single-agent alemtuzumab induced MRD-negative remissions in 20% of patients with relapsed/refractory CLL (Moreton et al JCO 2005;23:2971–2979). Other studies suggest that MRD negativity can also be attained when alemtuzumab is administered as consolidation for patients with CLL who achieve incomplete initial responses to chemotherapy. Here, we report our long-term experience within a randomized phase III trial that investigates the role of alemtuzumab for consolidation therapy in patients with previously untreated CLL. Methods: Pts in complete or partial remission after induction chemotherapy, with either fludarabine (F) or fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide (FC), were randomized to receive either alemtuzumab 30 mg, 3 times a week for ≤12 wks or no further treatment. Of 21 eligible pts, who had responded to induction with F or FC (1 CR, 1 nPR, 9 PRs), 11 pts (median age: 60 years) randomized to receive alemtuzumab consolidation and 10 to the observation arm. Pts in the alemtuzumab arm received standard premedication and infection prophylaxis with famciclovir and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Results: After a median follow-up of 48 months, calculated from time of randomization within this consolidation trial, progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly improved for pts who received alemtuzumab consolidation compared to those who received no further treatment (median PFS not reached versus 20.6 months, P = 0.004). PFS from the beginning of induction therapy with F or FC is also significantly greater for patients in the alemtuzumab consolidation arm versus the observation arm. So far, 3 of 11 pts presented with disease progression after alemtuzumab consolidation compared with 8/10 progressing pts in the observation arm. Differences in PFS between both arms were not associated with disease stage before first line treatment, type of first line chemotherapy (F vs. FC) or response status before initiation of consolidation therapy (CR vs. nPR vs. PR). Correlations between achievement of MRD negative responses and PFS is still under investigation and is planned for presentation. With the exception of 2 patients (1 pt in each arm) all patients remain alive. The study was stopped prematurely due to severe infections (7 CTC III infections, which included 4 CMV reactivations, 1 CTC IV infection) in 7/11 patients being treated with alemtuzumab. However, these infections were successfully treated, not associated with the cumulative dose of alemtuzumab, and no late complications of consolidation therapy have been observed. Conclusions: Although based on few pts due to incomplete accrual, long-term PFS was significantly prolonged in patients with CLL receiving alemtuzumab consolidation after first line chemotherapy with F or FC. An ongoing phase I/II trial of the GCLLSG (CLL2i) is currently evaluating the optimal dose and schedule of alemtuzumab in CLL pts after fludarabine-based chemotherapy.

Multicenter phase II study of cetuximab plus docetaxel in 84 patients with recurrent or metastatic, platinum-pretreated SCCHN

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6048-6048 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. K. Knoedler ◽  
T. Gauler ◽  
A. Matzdorff ◽  
O. Jordan ◽  
M. Schroeder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitivity ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
To Receive

6048 Background: Cetuximab and docetaxel are both active in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We investigated the efficacy of cetuximab plus docetaxel as second-line treatment in platinum-pre-treated patients with recurrent and or metastatic SCCHN. Methods: 84 patients were enrolled and received cetuximab (initial dose of 400 mg/m2, followed by subsequent weekly doses of 250 mg/m2) and docetaxel (35 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 of a 4-week cycle) for a maximum of 6 cycles. Patients with stable disease continued to receive cetuximab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate according to RECIST criteria. Secondary endpoints were response rate in relation to platinum sensitivity, progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. Results: According to RECIST there were 10 PR (12%) and 23 SD (27%), resulting in a disease control rate of 39%. Response to protocol treatment was unrelated to previous platinum sensitivity. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.1) and median overall survival was 7 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 8.5). The duration on protocol treatment exceeded 12 months in 6 (8%) patients. Grade III/IV toxicities included gastric perforation (n = 1), pneumonia (n = 7), mucositis and skin toxicities. Conclusions: Cetuximab plus docetaxel was an active second-line treatment regimen with acceptable toxicity in patients with platinum-pretreated SCCHN. The responsiveness was independent of previous platinum sensitivity. [Table: see text]

Pharmacoeconomic analysis for K-Ras status–based decisions for first-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 438-438
Author(s):  
Cristobal Belda
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Ras Status

438 Background: Personalized medicine is a challenge for current oncology practice. Nowadays there are no pharmacoeconomic analyses in Spain dealing with the clinical and financial impact secondary to K-Ras based decisions for first-line therapy in mCRC patients. So, this study was aimed to assess the cost- effectiveness of K-Ras status based decisions in first- line therapy of mCRC patients in comparison with non- K-Ras based selection of available therapies. Methods: K-Ras mutation prevalence and efficacy of available therapies (measured as response rate and progression free survival) were extracted from randomized clinical trials (RCT) that allowed on-label use of accessible drugs in Spain. Then, we have simulated all possibilities of combination therapies for first-line mCRC based on K-Ras status (wild- type vs mutated) and confronted with all therapies that could be chosen in absence of K-Ras analysis. Prices for all drugs in Spain were used to assume the best- value for each drug including all possibilities to reduce pharmacy costs. For first line, median duration of therapy reported by RCT was used to calculate the final budget. 70 kg and 1.7 m were used as reference for patients dose calculations. Results: First-line therapy that includes a biological drug in absence of K-Ras status based decisions implies an incremental cost per 1% of increased response rate of 1,237 euros for irinotecan based doublets and 3,193 euros for oxaliplatin based doublets. On the opposite, K-Ras based decisions reduce costs per objective response by 69% and 35% for irinotecan and oxaliplatin- based schedules in K-Ras wild-type population incorporating cetuximab as biological agent. These data mimic all calculi based on incremental costs secondary to improved progression free survival measured as HR when all scenarios without prior determination of K-Ras status were confronted with K-Ras based decisions. Conclusions: K-Ras based decisions reduces costs per objective response as well as per improved progression free survival. The most cost- effective scenario among all simulated was cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy for patients that harbor wt K-Ras mCRC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document