Phase 2 study of second-line FOLFIRI-aflibercept in prospectively stratified, RAS wild type, anti-EGFR resistant, metastatic colorectal cancer patients: The DISTINCTIVE trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15503-e15503
Author(s):  
Eleonora Lai ◽  
Fotios Loupakis ◽  
Pina Ziranu ◽  
Giuseppe Aprile ◽  
Alberto Zaniboni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Angiogenic Factors ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase 2 Study

e15503 Background: Data on anti-angiogenic second line treatment in RAS wild type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) progressing after first-line anti-EGFR drug are lacking and no validated biomarkers are available. We present the pre-planned interim analysis of the DISTINCTIVE trial (NCT04252456), a biologically enriched, prospectively stratified phase 2 study assessing the aflibercept use in this setting. Methods: RAS wt mCRC pts progressing after first line oxaliplatin-based + anti-EGFR therapy and candidates for second-line FOLFIRI/aflibercept are eligible for the DISTINCTIVE trial. Pts are prospectively allocated to a favorable (F) or unfavorable (U) prognostic group, according to Elisa-assessed baseline (BL) VEGFR2 plasma levels (PL). Other circulating angiogenic factors are evaluated at BL, first tumor assessment (TA1) and disease progression (PD). Primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) according to VEGFR2 levels. Secondary endpoints are OS, progression free survival (PFS), response rate, safety and angiogenic factors levels. Statistical analysis is performed with MedCalc (survival distribution: Kaplan-Meier; survival comparison: log-rank test; multivariate analysis: logistic regression). Sample size: 151 pts (one-sided test, α: 0.1, β: 0.2). Results: From 04/2018 to 06/2020, 73 pts were enrolled. Complete data from 44 pts were available for interim analysis. 33 pts (75%) achieved DCR (26 pts/59% SD, 7 pts/16% PR). Globally, median OS was 11.9 months (m) (95%CI 10 – 14.2). 24 (54.5%) pts were prospectively assigned to F group (VEGFR2 PL > 4 ng/ml) and 20 (45.5%) to U group (VEGFR2 PL ≤4 ng/ml). OS in F group was 13.1 m (95%CI 9.6 – 14.2) vs 11.9 m (95%CI 6.8 – 11.9) in U group (HR 0.76 p = 0.6218). PFS was 9.8 m [95%CI 5.7 – 24.2] in F group vs 4.2 m [95%CI 2.5 – 14.2] in U group (HR 0.41 p = 0.0105). We also found preliminary correlation with PD as shown in table. Conclusions: Interim analysis showed high activity of FOLFIRI/aflibercept in RAS WT anti-EGFR pretreated mCRC pts. VEGFR2 showed promising ability to predict aflibercept efficacy. Our data on circulating angiogenic biomarkers are likely to further compose the landscape of anti-angiogenic activity in mCRC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT04252456. [Table: see text]

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

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

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

scholarly journals A phase 2 study of panitumumab with irinotecan as salvage therapy in chemorefractory KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (5) ◽  
pp. 378-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Elez ◽  
Carles Pericay ◽  
Manuel Valladares-Ayerbes ◽  
Inmaculada Bando ◽  
Maria Jose Safont ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Salvage Therapy ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Phase 2 Study ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients ◽  
Kras Exon

scholarly journals Optimal Sequence and Second-Line Systemic Treatment of Patients with RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (21) ◽  
pp. 5166
Author(s):  
Chih-Chien Wu ◽  
Chao-Wen Hsu ◽  
Meng-Che Hsieh ◽  
Jui-Ho Wang ◽  
Min-Chi Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Optimal Sequence ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Although several sequential therapy options are available for treating patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the optimal sequence of these therapies is not well established. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies were performed, resulting from a search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases. Overall survival (OS) did not differ significantly in patients with RAS-WT failure who were administered a second-line regimen of changed chemotherapy (CT) plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) versus only changed CT, changed CT plus bevacizumab versus changed CT plus anti-EGFR, or changed CT versus maintaining CT plus anti-EGFR after first-line therapy with CT, plus bevacizumab. However, OS was significantly different with a second-line regimen that included changed CT plus bevacizumab, versus only changing CT. Analysis of first-line therapy with CT plus anti-EGFR for treatment of RAS-WT mCRC indicated that second-line therapy of changed CT plus an anti-EGFR agent resulted in better outcomes than changing CT without targeted agents. The pooled data study demonstrated that the optimal choice of second-line treatment for improved OS was an altered CT regimen with retention of bevacizumab after first-line bevacizumab failure. The best sequence for first-to-second-line therapy of patients with RAS-WT mCRC was cetuximab-based therapy, followed by a bevacizumab-based regimen.

Impact of Subsequent Therapies on Outcome of the FIRE-3/AIO KRK0306 Trial: First-Line Therapy With FOLFIRI Plus Cetuximab or Bevacizumab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Tumors in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (32) ◽  
pp. 3718-3726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik P. Modest ◽  
Sebastian Stintzing ◽  
Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal ◽  
Thomas Decker ◽  
Alexander Kiani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Subsequent Treatment ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

Purpose We investigated choice and efficacy of subsequent treatment, with special focus on second-line therapy, in the FIRE-3 trial (FOLFIRI plus cetuximab [arm A] or bevacizumab [arm B]) for patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Start of subsequent-line (second or third) therapy was defined as use of an antitumor drug that was not part of the previous regimen. We evaluated choice, duration, and efficacy of subsequent therapy and determined the impact of subsequent-line treatment on outcome of patients in FIRE-3. Results Of 592 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 414 (69.9%) received second-line and 256 (43.2%) received third-line therapy. In subsequent treatment lines, 47.1% of patients originally assigned to arm A received bevacizumab, and 52.2% originally assigned to arm B received either cetuximab or panitumumab. Oxaliplatin was subsequently used in 55.9% (arm A) and 53.2% (arm B) of patients. Second-line therapy was administered for a median duration of 5.0 versus 3.2 months (P < .001) in study arm A versus B. Progression-free (6.5 v 4.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.85; P < .001) and overall survival (16.3 v 13.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = .0021) from start of second-line therapy were longer in patients in arm A compared with arm B. Conclusion Our data suggest that the sequence of drug application might be more important than exposure to single agents. In patients with RAS wild-type tumors, first-line application of anti–epidermal growth factor receptor–directed therapy may represent a favorable condition for promoting effective subsequent therapy including antiangiogenic agents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document