Exploratory biomarker findings from cohort 2 of MODUL: An adaptable, phase 2, signal-seeking trial of fluoropyrimidine + bevacizumab ± atezolizumab maintenance therapy for BRAFwt metastatic colorectal cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3570-3570
Author(s):  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Dirk Arnold ◽  
Michel Ducreux ◽  
Peter J. O'Dwyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Experimental Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
First Line Therapy

3570 Background: MODUL is an adaptable, phase 2, signal-seeking trial testing novel agents as first-line therapy for predefined subgroups of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previously reported findings demonstrated that adding atezolizumab to fluoropyrimidine (FP)/bevacizumab as first-line maintenance treatment after induction with FOLFOX + bevacizumab did not improve efficacy outcomes in BRAFwt mCRC. Given these efficacy results, exploratory assessments on tumour samples were conducted to provide insights into factors that might affect efficacy of maintenance treatment and provide guidance on appropriate therapeutic strategies for BRAFwt mCRC. Methods: In patients with BRAFwt tumours (Cohort 2), experimental treatment was FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab. Primary efficacy endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary endpoint. Archival tissue samples from 104 patients were analysed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) at HistoGeneX (PD-L1; CD8/GrB/FoxP3). SP142 antibody was used for PD-L1 IHC analysis, which evaluated PD-L1low (IC 0–1) vs PD-L1high (IC > 1) in correlation with PFS and OS in the control and experimental arms. CD8/GrB/FoxP3 triplex staining was also performed to evaluate potential correlations with efficacy. Results: 445 patients with BRAFwt mCRC were randomised (2:1 ratio) to maintenance treatment in Cohort 2. Archival samples from 104 patients were analysed: FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab (n = 82); FP/bevacizumab (n = 22). The biomarker evaluable population (BEP) for PD-L1 was n = 81 for FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab [PD-L1low n = 35 (43%); PD-L1high n = 46 (57%)] and n = 22 for FP/bevacizumab [PD-L1low n = 16 (72%); PD-L1high n = 6 (28%)]. The BEP for CD8/GrB was n = 50 for FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab and n = 16 for FP/bevacizumab. No difference in PFS or OS was observed in the FP/bevacizumab + atezolizumab vs FP/bevacizumab arms for PD-L1high [PFS: HR = 1.5 (95% CI 0.45−4.8), p = 0.51; OS: HR = 1.3 (95% CI 0.38−4.1), p = 0.71] or PD-L1low [PFS: HR = 0.92 (95% CI 0.47−1.8), p = 0.81; OS: HR = 0.78 (95% CI 0.4−1.5), p = 0.48]. Similar results were observed with CD8/GrBhigh [PFS: HR = 0.73 (95% CI 0.27−2.0), p = 0.55; OS: HR = 0.66 (95% CI 0.24−1.8), p = 0.44], CD8/GrBlow [PFS: HR = 1.0 (95% CI 0.42–2.5), p = 0.96; OS: HR = 0.73 (95% CI 0.3–1.8), p = 0.5], FoxP3high [PFS: HR = 0.97 (95% CI 0.37−2.5), p = 0.95; OS: HR = 0.95 (95% CI 0.36−2.5), p = 0.91] and FoxP3low [PFS: HR = 0.73 (95% CI 0.29−1.9), p = 0.53; OS: HR = 0.5 (95% CI 0.19−1.3), p = 0.18]. Conclusions: These findings suggest that PD-L1, CD8/GrB and FoxP3 might not be predictive biomarkers in BRAFwt mCRC. Further analyses are needed to further evaluate potential predictive and prognostic factors of response in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02291289.

scholarly journals FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab versus FOLFOX plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and ≥3 circulating tumour cells: the randomised phase III VISNÚ-1 trial

ESMO Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. e000944 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Aranda ◽  
Jose Maria Viéitez ◽  
Auxiliadora Gómez-España ◽  
Silvia Gil Calle ◽  
Antonieta Salud-Salvia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Purpose5-Fluorouracil/leucovorin, oxaliplatin, irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) plus bevacizumab is more effective than doublets plus bevacizumab as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, but is not widely used because of concerns about toxicity and lack of predictive biomarkers. This study was designed to explore the role of circulating tumour cell (CTC) count as a biomarker to select patients for therapy with FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab.Patients and methodsVISNÚ-1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase III study in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, metastatic colorectal carcinoma and ≥3 CTC/7.5 mL blood. Patients received bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan 165 mg/m2, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2 and 5-fluorouracil 3200 mg/m2) or FOLFOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 then 2400 mg/m2) by intravenous administration every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsThe intention-to-treat population comprised 349 patients (FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab, n=172; FOLFOX-bevacizumab, n=177). Median PFS was 12.4 months (95% CI 11.2 to 14.0) with FOLFOXIRI bevacizumab and 9.3 months (95% CI 8.5 to 10.7) with FOLFOX-bevacizumab (stratified HR, 0.64; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.82; p=0.0006). Grade≥3 adverse events were more common with FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab 85.3% vs 75.1% with FOLFOX-bevacizumab (p=0.0178). Treatment-related deaths occurred in 8 (4.7%) and 6 (3.4%) patients, respectively.ConclusionsFirst-line FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab significantly improved PFS compared with FOLFOX-bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and ≥3 CTCs at baseline, which indicate a poor prognosis. CTC count may be a useful non-invasive biomarker to assist with the selection of patients for intensive first-line therapy.

scholarly journals Protocol of the EFFORT study: a prospective study of FOLFIRI plus aflibercept as second-line treatment after progression on FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab or during maintenance treatment in patients with unresectable/metastatic colorectal cancer

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironaga Satake ◽  
Koji Ando ◽  
Eiji Oki ◽  
Mototsugu Shimokawa ◽  
Akitaka Makiyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is used as a first-line therapy for patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. However, there are no clear recommendations for second-line therapy after FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab combination. Here, we describe our planning for the EFFORT study to investigate whether FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for mCRC. Methods EFFORT is an open-label, multicenter, single arm phase II study to evaluate whether a FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for mCRC. Patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer who received FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as a first-line therapy will receive aflibercept and FOLFIRI (aflibercept 4 mg/kg, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 IV over 90 min, with levofolinate 200 mg/m2 IV over 2 h, followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion over 46 h) every 2 weeks on day 1 of each cycle. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). To achieve 80% power to show a significant response benefit with a one-sided alpha level of 0.10, assuming a threshold progression-free survival of 3 months and an expected value of at least 5.4 months, we estimated that 32 patients are necessary. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, overall response rate, safety, and exploratory biomarker analysis for differentiating anti-VEGF drug in 2nd-line chemotherapy for unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. Discussion This is the first study to investigate whether FOLFIRI plus aflibercept has efficacy following FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab for unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. Switching to a different type of anti-VEGF drug in second-line therapy after FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab appears to be an attractive treatment strategy when considering survival benefit. It is expected that this phase II study will prove the efficacy of this strategy and that a biomarker for drug selection will be discovered. Trial registration Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs071190003. Registered April 18, 2019.

Response-Independent Survival Benefit in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of N9741 and AVF2107

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Eric E. Hedrick ◽  
Robert D. Mass ◽  
Somnath Sarkar ◽  
Sam Suzuki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Tumor Response ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Study

PurposeIn the phase III study AVF2107g, bevacizumab (BV) demonstrated a survival benefit when added to irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL) in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In a parallel phase III study, Intergroup N9741, oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) also demonstrated a survival benefit compared with IFL. As these two superior therapies have differing mechanisms of action, we explored whether the improved survival associated with the superior therapy was dependent on tumor response.Patients and MethodsFor these retrospective, exploratory analyses, patients were defined as responders or nonresponders by whether complete or partial response was achieved with first-line therapy.ResultsCompared with IFL alone, BV plus IFL and FOLFOX each demonstrated statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) regardless of objective tumor response. BV-treated nonresponders had a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.63 (P = .0001) for PFS and 0.76 (P = .0188) for OS compared with IFL-treated nonresponders. FOLFOX-treated nonresponders had an HR of 0.75 (P = .0029) for PFS and 0.74 (P = .0030) for OS compared with IFL-treated nonresponders.ConclusionIn both AVF2107g and N9741, objective response did not predict the magnitude of PFS or OS benefit from the superior therapy; nonresponders, despite a poorer prognosis than responders, achieved extended PFS and OS from BV plus IFL or FOLFOX compared with IFL. On the basis of these data, tumor response in metastatic colorectal cancer is not a necessary factor for a therapy to provide benefit to an individual patient.

scholarly journals Genome Wide Association Study for Predictors of Progression Free Survival in Patients on Capecitabine, Oxaliplatin, Bevacizumab and Cetuximab in First-Line Therapy of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e0131091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Pander ◽  
Lieke van Huis-Tanja ◽  
Stefan Böhringer ◽  
Tahar van der Straaten ◽  
Hans Gelderblom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Genome Wide Association Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Genome Wide Association ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Genome Wide

Randomized Phase III Study of Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin Compared With Fluorouracil/Folinic Acid Plus Oxaliplatin As First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 2006-2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Cassidy ◽  
Stephen Clarke ◽  
Eduardo Díaz-Rubio ◽  
Werner Scheithauer ◽  
Arie Figer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Folinic Acid ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome ◽  
Grade 3

PurposeTo evaluate whether capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) is noninferior to fluorouracil. folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC).Patients and MethodsThe initial design of this trial was a randomized, two-arm, noninferiority, phase III comparison of XELOX versus FOLFOX-4. After patient accrual had begun, the trial design was amended in 2003 after bevacizumab phase III data became available. The resulting 2 × 2 factorial design randomly assigned patients to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to also receive either bevacizumab or placebo. We report here the results of the analysis of the XELOX versus FOLFOX-4 arms. The analysis of bevacizumab versus placebo with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is reported separately. The prespecified primary end point for the noninferiority analysis was progression-free survival.ResultsThe intent-to-treat population comprised 634 patients from the original two-arm portion of the study, plus an additional 1,400 patients after the start of the amended 2 × 2 design, for a total of 2,034 patients. The median PFS was 8.0 months in the pooled XELOX-containing arms versus 8.5 months in the FOLFOX-4–containing arms (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 97.5% CI, 0.93 to 1.16). The median overall survival was 19.8 months with XELOX versus 19.6 months with FOLFOX-4 (HR, 0.99; 97.5% CI, 0.88 to 1.12). FOLFOX-4 was associated with more grade 3/4 neutropenia/granulocytopenia and febrile neutropenia than XELOX, and XELOX with more grade 3 diarrhea and grade 3 hand-foot syndrome than FOLFOX-4.ConclusionXELOX is noninferior to FOLFOX-4 as a first-line treatment for MCRC, and may be considered as a routine treatment option for appropriate patients.

Pharmacogenomic and Pharmacoproteomic Studies of Cetuximab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Biomarker Analysis of a Phase I Dose-Escalation Study

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 1181-1189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Andres Cervantes ◽  
Fernando Rivera ◽  
Erika Martinelli ◽  
Federico Rojo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Dose Escalation Study ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Biomarker Analysis

PurposeThis study assessed biomarkers for cetuximab efficacy in tissue samples collected during a phase I dose-escalation study exploring every second week administration of cetuximab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Patients and MethodsSixty-two patients received cetuximab monotherapy for 6 weeks, followed by cetuximab plus infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan until disease progression. Patients in the control arm received cetuximab as a 400 mg/m2initial dose then 250 mg/m2per week; patients in the dose-escalation arms received 400 to 700 mg/m2every second week. Tumor and skin biopsies were taken for immunohistochemical and microarray expression analyses (tumor only) at baseline and week 4. Plasma was collected for proteomic analysis at baseline and week 4. KRAS tumor mutation status was assessed.ResultsIn subsets of paired skin samples from 35 patients, cetuximab treatment was associated with substantial downregulation of phospho(p)-EGFR, p-MAPK and proliferation and substantial upregulation of p27Kip1and p-STAT3 levels. No marked difference in these effects was noted for different schedules of administration and dose levels. In the cetuximab monotherapy phase, responses were seen only in patients whose tumors were wild-type for KRAS (eight of 29 v zero of 19 for KRAS mutant tumors; P = .015). Progression-free survival was longer for patients with KRAS wild-type compared with KRAS mutant tumors (log-rank P = .048). Genomics/proteomics analyses (42 and 45 patients, respectively) identified candidate biomarkers associated with response.ConclusionBiomarker analysis supported the functional equivalence of weekly and every second week administration of cetuximab and provided further confirmation that patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC were those most likely to benefit from cetuximab treatment.

scholarly journals Phase III study of regorafenib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in RAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer (RAVELLO trial).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS789-TPS789 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Martinelli ◽  
Teresa Troiani ◽  
Filippo Venturini ◽  
Andres Cervantes ◽  
Jean Yves Douillard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Phase Iii Study

TPS789 Background: Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has improved due to the introduction of more active chemotherapies (CT) and novel targeted agents that have significantly increased response rate (RR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Recently, CORRECT and CONCUR trials have demonstrated both activity and efficacy of regorafenib, a small multi-kinase inhibitor, as monotherapy in pretreated mCRC. The wide range of action of regorafenib makes it an ideal candidate for monotherapy in earlier disease treatment lines in which different pathways could be involved in the acquisition of resistance. To improve long term efficacy of first line therapy several therapeutic approaches of maintenance treatment have been explored in mCRC. Methods: RAVELLO is an academic randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center, phase III study designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of regorafenib as maintenance treatment after first line therapy. Eligible patients: pathologically confirmed mCRC RAS wild type (KRAS and NRAS genes) treated with a first line fluoropyrimidine-based CT in combination with an anti-EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) monoclonal antibody for a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 8 months, with a stratification by response to the first line treatment (complete response/partial response or stable disease). 480 patients will be enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive 160 mg regorafenib or placebo per os, every day for 3 weeks of every 4 weeks cycle, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint is PFS. With a two-tailed alpha error of 0.05, the study will have 90% power to detect a 3-month prolongation of median PFS from randomization (corresponding to a hazard ratio of progression of 0.67 with 6-month median PFS expected in the control arm). Secondary endopoint are OS, safety, and biomarker correlative studies. Currently, one patient has been enrolled and is on treatment. EudraCT number: 2013-005428-41. Clinical trial information: 2013-005428-41.

scholarly journals Axitinib and/or bevacizumab with modified FOLFOX-6 as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: A randomized phase 2 study

Cancer ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 119 (14) ◽  
pp. 2555-2563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey R. Infante ◽  
Tony R. Reid ◽  
Allen L. Cohn ◽  
William J. Edenfield ◽  
Terrence P. Cescon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Phase 2 Study ◽  
Randomized Phase 2

Cetuximab-based or bevacizumab-based first-line treatment in patients with KRAS p.G13D mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)? A meta-analysis of 54 cases.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 511-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volker Heinemann ◽  
Anke Reinacher-Schick ◽  
Sebastian Stintzing ◽  
Clemens Albrecht Giessen ◽  
Andrea Tannapfel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Treatment

511 Background: KRAS p.G13D mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been identified to represent a cetuximab-sensitive subtype of KRAS mutant mCRC. This analysis aims to answer the question whether first-line treatment of p.G13D mCRCs should contain cetuximab or bevacizumab. Methods: Fifty-four patients with p.G13D mutant mCRC were pooled in this analysis. All patients underwent systemic 1st-line treatment with a fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin/irinotecan that was combined with either cetuximab or bevacizumab. Results: Overall response rate was comparable between cetuximab- and bevacizumab-based regimens (58% vs 57%). Progression-free survival was comparable (8.0 months-cetuximab-group vs 8.7 months bevacizumab-group). Overall survival (OS) was longer in patients treated with cetuximab as first-line therapy (20.1 months vs 14.9 months). Logistic regressions modelling OS revealed oxaliplatin-based first-line treatment to correlate significantly with poor outcome (p=0.03). Moreover, a strong trend in favour of capecitabine compared to infusional 5-FU (p=0.06) was seen.. Responders among our cohort showed a benefit concerning PFS and OS undergoing cetuximab- but not bevacizumab-based regimen. Conclusions: This retrospective pooled analysis suggests that cetuximab-based first-line therapy in p.G13D mutant mCRC shows similar activity compared to bevacizumab-containing regimen. Infusional 5-FU and oxaliplatin may represent inferior options compared to capecitabine and irinotecan in p.G13D mutant mCRC 1st-line treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document