scholarly journals Efficacy of Panitumumab and Cetuximab in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Previously Treated with Bevacizumab; a Combined Analysis of Individual Patient Data from ASPECCT and WJOG6510G

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 1715
Author(s):  
Hiroya Taniguchi ◽  
Takeharu Yamanaka ◽  
Daisuke Sakai ◽  
Kei Muro ◽  
Kentaro Yamazaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Clinical Trial Registration ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Previously Treated

Background: Phase-III ASPECCT and randomised phase-II WJOG6510G trials demonstrated the noninferiority of panitumumab, when compared with cetuximab, for overall survival in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: The subgroup that received bevacizumab either prior to panitumumab or cetuximab monotherapy (ASPECCT) or in combination with irinotecan (WJOG6510G) was included. Multivariate Cox models were created, including the treatment arms as covariates together with patient, disease and treatment characteristics. Results: We included 185 and 189 patients in the panitumumab and cetuximab arms, respectively. The median overall survival was 12.8 and 10.1 months [p = 0.0031; log-rank test, stratified by trial; hazard ratio (HR), 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.58–0.90], and the median progression-free survival was 4.7 and 4.1 months, in the panitumumab and cetuximab arms, respectively (p = 0.0207; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64–0.97). The treatment regimen was an independent prognostic factor of overall survival (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54–0.87; p = 0.0013). Conclusions: Panitumumab significantly prolonged the overall survival and progression-free survival, when compared with cetuximab in the cohort that previously received bevacizumab in the included studies. Clinical Trial Registration: ASPECCT trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01001377) and WJOG6510G trial registered with UMIN-CTR (UMIN000006643).

Addition of Aflibercept to Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Improves Survival in a Phase III Randomized Trial in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Previously Treated With an Oxaliplatin-Based Regimen

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (28) ◽  
pp. 3499-3506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Radek Lakomy ◽  
Hans Prenen ◽  
Jana Prausová ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Growth Factor ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Previously Treated

Purpose Treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) commonly involves a fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimen such as infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, often combined with bevacizumab or an epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody. We studied the effect of adding the novel antiangiogenic agent aflibercept (also known as ziv-aflibercept in the United States) to FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin, including patients who received prior bevacizumab. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive aflibercept (4 mg/kg intravenously; 612 patients) or placebo (614 patients) every 2 weeks in combination with FOLFIRI. Treatment was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival. Results Adding aflibercept to FOLFIRI significantly improved overall survival relative to placebo plus FOLFIRI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.817; 95.34% CI, 0.713 to 0.937; P = .0032) with median survival times of 13.50 versus 12.06 months, respectively. Aflibercept also significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.661 to 0.869; P < .0001), with median PFS times of 6.90 versus 4.67 months, respectively. The effects on overall survival and PFS exhibited a consistent trend across prespecified subgroup analyses, including bevacizumab pretreated patients. Response rate was 19.8% (95% CI, 16.4% to 23.2%) with aflibercept plus FOLFIRI compared with 11.1% (95% CI, 8.5% to 13.8%) with placebo plus FOLFIRI (P = .0001). Adverse effects reported with aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI included the characteristic anti–vascular endothelial growth factor effects and also reflected an increased incidence of some chemotherapy-related toxicities. Conclusion Aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI conferred a statistically significant survival benefit over FOLFIRI combined with placebo in patients with mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin.

Is RECIST-defined progression free-survival a meaningful endpoint in the era of immunotherapy?

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 488-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sukhvinder Johal ◽  
Irene Santi ◽  
Justin Doan ◽  
Saby George
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Tumor Regression ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Apparent Lack ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Treatment Beyond Progression ◽  
Significant Difference

488 Background: Progression-free survival (PFS) is often used as a primary endpoint in oncology clinical trials as a surrogate for overall survival. Traditionally, the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) have defined disease progression as a significant increase in the size of tumor lesions and the development of new lesions. However, some patients starting immunotherapy have shown initial increased size of tumor lesions followed by tumor regression, due to the unique mechanism of action of immunotherapies. This initial “pseudo-progression” could be classified inaccurately as disease progression, as evidenced by benefit from the treatment beyond progression approach ( JAMA Oncol 2016). The phase III CheckMate 025 trial of nivolumab versus everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma allowed treatment beyond progression if there was investigator-assessed clinical benefit and tolerability. The purpose of our study was to test if treatment duration for an immunotherapy was different from RECIST-defined PFS, and as such, could potentially explain the apparent lack of correlation between RECIST progression and overall survival shown in CheckMate 025. Methods: Using 1-year data from CheckMate 025, Kaplan–Meier methodology was used to estimate the median duration of PFS and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD). Stratified log-rank test was used to assess the difference in treatments. Results: For all patients, the median PFS with nivolumab was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.7–5.4 months) and median TTD was 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.6–7.7 months). For everolimus, the median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.7–5.5 months) and median TTD was 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.7–4.6 months). Conclusions: Patients in CheckMate 025 had significantly longer survival with nivolumab than with everolimus, but with similar PFS. Our analysis demonstrated that while PFS was similar to TTD with everolimus, there was a significant difference between the 2 measures for nivolumab, suggesting that RECIST-defined PFS may not be the proper endpoint to define progression for immunotherapies. Further evaluation of the association of TTD and other immune-related progression endpoints with overall survival is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT01668784.

scholarly journals Bevacizumab in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. 47-53
Author(s):  
S Whyte ◽  
A Pandor ◽  
M Stevenson ◽  
A Rees
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Open Label Study ◽  
Free Survival

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer based on the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. Evidence was available in the form of one phase III, multicentre, multinational, randomised, open-label study (NO16966 trial). This two-arm study was originally designed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of oral capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) compared with 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)-4 in adult patients with histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer who had not previously been treated. Following randomisation of 634 patients, the open-label study was amended to include a 2 × 2 factorial randomised (partially blinded for bevacizumab) phase III trial with the coprimary objective of demonstrating superiority of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone. Measured outcomes included overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, adverse effects of treatment and health-related quality of life. The manufacturer’s primary pooled analysis of superiority (using the intention-to-treat population) showed that after a median follow-up of 28 months, the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared with chemotherapy alone in adult patients with histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer who were not previously treated [median progression-free survival 9.4 vs 7.7 months (absolute difference 1.7 months); hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 97.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.87; p = 0.0001; median overall survival 21.2 vs 18.9 months (absolute difference 2.3 months); HR 0.83, 97.5% CI 0.74 to 0.93; p = 0.0019]. The NO16966 trial was of reasonable methodological quality and demonstrated a significant improvement in both progression-free survival and overall survival when bevacizumab was added to XELOX or FOLFOX. However, the size of the actual treatment effect of bevacizumab is uncertain. The ERG believed that the modelling structure employed was appropriate, but highlighted several key issues and areas of uncertainty. At the time of writing, NICE was yet to issue the guidance for this appraisal.

Effect of baseline carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level on overall survival (OS) in NAPOLI-1 trial: A phase III study of MM-398 (nal-IRI), with or without 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV), versus 5-FU/LV in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPAC) previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 425-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-Tzong Chen ◽  
Jens T Siveke ◽  
Andrea Wang-Gillam ◽  
Richard Hubner ◽  
Shubham Pant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Treatment Effect ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Previously Treated

425 Background: CA19-9 has been shown to correlate with response to therapy and OS in patients with mPAC. NAPOLI-1, a randomized phase 3 study evaluated nal-IRI, a nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan, with or without 5-FU/LV vs 5-FU/LV in patients with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly improved OS (primary endpoint) vs 5-FU/LV (6.1 mo vs 4.2 mo; unstratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67; P = 0.012). CA19-9 response (≥50% decline from baseline) was superior with nal-IRI+5FU/LV compared with 5-FU/LV (29% vs 9%; P=0.0006). Nal-IRI alone did not show a statistical improvement in survival. Methods: Patients with a recorded baseline CA19-9 measurement were divided into quartiles to evaluate the treatment effect pattern of CA19-9 from nal-IRI+5-FU/LV and 5-FU/LV arms. Quartile ranges were based on 404 available CA19-9 values from randomized patients (N=417). Unstratified Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate HRs and corresponding 95% CIs. Effect of baseline CA19-9 on time to response, progression-free survival, and response will be presented. Results: Of patients randomized to receive nal-IRI+5-FU/LV (n = 117) or 5-FU/LV enrolled contemporaneously (n = 119), 218 received study drug and had a baseline CA19-9 measurement. Results show a greater treatment effect on OS with higher CA19-9 level relative to 5-FU/LV. Conclusions: In patients with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy, nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly improved OS supported by progression free survival and objective response rate. The CA19-9 serum level can provide important information with regards to overall survival. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

On-treatment progression-free survival analysis of ziv-aflibercept/FOLFIRI treatment within 28 days of end of treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: Updated efficacy results from the VELOUR study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3573-3573
Author(s):  
David Ferry ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Tormod Kyrre Guren ◽  
Jayesh Desai ◽  
Luis Marcelo Villanueva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Free Survival

3573 Background: The phase III VELOUR study demonstrated that adding the novel antiangiogenic agent ziv-aflibercept (known as aflibercept outside the United States) to FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with oxaliplatin significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate vs placebo/FOLFIRI. We performed an additional analysis of PFS “on-treatment,” censoring events that occurred more than 28 days after last treatment dose. Methods: Patients were randomized to receive ziv-aflibercept 4 mg/kg or placebo every 2 weeks in combination with FOLFIRI. An independent review committee determined progression based on radiologic review. PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, with censoring of events after the last dose plus 28 days. Treatment groups were compared using a log-rank test and were stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and prior bevacizumab therapy. Hazard ratio (HR) and confidence interval (CI) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard model. Results: On-treatment analysis showed significantly increased PFS for patients treated with ziv-aflibercept/FOLFIRI compared with placebo/FOLFIRI (Table). More patients were censored in the ziv-aflibercept arm due to adverse events. Conclusions: The on-treatment PFS analysis demonstrates a significantly improved treatment effect of the addition of ziv-aflibercept to FOLFIRI (HR=0.55) over what was observed in the primary analysis suggesting that continuing treatment with ziv-aflibercept up to disease progression provides additional benefit. Clinical trial information: NCT00561470. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Binimetinib, Encorafenib, and Cetuximab Triplet Therapy for Patients With BRAF V600E–Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Safety Lead-In Results From the Phase III BEACON Colorectal Cancer Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (17) ◽  
pp. 1460-1469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Sanne Huijberts ◽  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Rona Yaeger ◽  
Pieter-Jan Cuyle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Braf V600e ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Free Survival

PURPOSE To determine the safety and preliminary efficacy of selective combination targeted therapy for BRAF V600E–mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the safety lead-in phase of the open-label, randomized, three-arm, phase III BEACON Colorectal Cancer trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02928224; European Union Clinical Trials Register identifier: EudraCT2015-005805-35). PATIENTS AND METHODS Before initiation of the randomized portion of the BEACON Colorectal Cancer trial, 30 patients with BRAF V600E–mutant mCRC who had experienced treatment failure with one or two prior regimens were to be recruited to a safety lead-in of encorafenib 300 mg daily, binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, plus standard weekly cetuximab. The primary end point was safety, including the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities. Efficacy end points included overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS Among the 30 treated patients, dose-limiting toxicities occurred in five patients and included serous retinopathy (n = 2), reversible decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (n = 1), and cetuximab-related infusion reactions (n = 2). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were fatigue (13%), anemia (10%), increased creatine phosphokinase (10%), increased AST (10%), and urinary tract infections (10%). In 29 patients with BRAF V600E–mutant tumors (one patient had a non– BRAF V600E–mutant tumor and was not included in the efficacy analysis), the confirmed overall response rate was 48% (95% CI, 29.4% to 67.5%), median progression-free survival was 8.0 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 9.3 months), and median overall survival was 15.3 months (95% CI, 9.6 months to not reached), with median duration of follow-up of 18.2 months (range, 16.6 to 19.8 months). CONCLUSION In the safety lead-in, the safety and tolerability of the encorafenib, binimetinib, and cetuximab regimen is manageable and acceptable for initiation of the randomized portion of the study. The observed efficacy is promising compared with available therapies and, if confirmed in the randomized portion of the trial, could establish this regimen as a new standard of care for previously treated BRAF V600E–mutant mCRC.

scholarly journals FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab for advanced colorectal cancer: final survival and per-protocol analysis of FIRE-3, a randomised clinical trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volker Heinemann ◽  
Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal ◽  
Thomas Decker ◽  
Alexander Kiani ◽  
Florian Kaiser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Primary Tumour ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Borderline Resectable ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Protocol Population

Abstract Background Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI improved overall survival compared with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in FIRE-3, but no corresponding benefit was found for progression-free survival. This analysis aimed to determine whether cetuximab improves response and survival versus bevacizumab among response-evaluable patients receiving first-line FOLFIRI for RAS wild-type mCRC and the effect of primary tumour side on outcomes. Methods The intent-to-treat population included 593 patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type mCRC. Further testing identified 400 patients with extended RAS wild-type disease; of these, 352 (88%) who received ≥3 cycles of therapy and had ≥1 post-baseline scan were evaluable for response and constituted the per-protocol population (169 cetuximab and 183 bevacizumab). Patients received 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) with either weekly cetuximab or biweekly bevacizumab given on day 1 of each 14-day cycle until response, progression or toxicity occurred. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) in the per-protocol population. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The effect of primary tumour location was evaluated. Results Median OS in the RAS wild-type population was 31 vs 26 months in the cetuximab and bevacizumab groups, respectively (HR 0.76, P = 0.012). In the per-protocol population, outcomes favoured cetuximab for ORR (77% vs 65%, P = 0.014) and median OS (33 vs 26 months, HR 0.75, P = 0.011), while PFS was comparable between groups. The advantage of cetuximab over bevacizumab occurred only in patients with left-sided primary tumours. Conclusions FOLFIRI plus cetuximab resulted in a significantly higher ORR and longer OS compared to FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab among patients with left-sided tumours. The superior response associated with cetuximab may particularly benefit patients with symptomatic tumours or borderline-resectable metastases. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00433927.

Bevacizumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Study

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 2013-2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard B. Saltz ◽  
Stephen Clarke ◽  
Eduardo Díaz-Rubio ◽  
Werner Scheithauer ◽  
Arie Figer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC).Patients and MethodsPatients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsA total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials.ConclusionThe addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.

On-treatment progression-free survival analysis of aflibercept-FOLFIRI treatment within 28 days of progression in metastatic colorectal cancer: Updated efficacy results from the VELOUR study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 469-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Raymond Ferry ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Tormod Kyrre Guren ◽  
Jayesh Desai ◽  
Luis Marcelo Villanueva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Free Survival

469 Background: The phase III VELOUR study demonstrated that adding the novel antiangiogenic agent aflibercept (known as ziv-aflibercept in the United States) to FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with oxaliplatin significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate versus placebo-FOLFIRI. We performed an additional analysis of PFS “on-treatment,” censoring events that occurred more than 28 days after last treatment dose. Methods: Patients were randomized to receive aflibercept 4 mg/kg or placebo every 2 weeks in combination with FOLFIRI. An independent review committee determined progression based on radiologic review. PFS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, with censoring of events after the last dose plus 28 days. Treatment groups were compared using a log-rank test stratified by ECOG performance status and prior bevacizumab therapy. Hazard ratio (HR) and confidence interval (CI) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard model. Results: On-treatment PFS results are shown in the Table. Patients on aflibercept-FOLFIRI showed significantly increased on-treatment PFS compared with patients on placebo-FOLFIRI. More patients were censored in the aflibercept arm due to adverse events, thus decreasing the number of events. Conclusions: On-treatment PFS with aflibercept-FOLFIRI was significantly increased compared with placebo-FOLFIRI, which is consistent with the PFS benefit observed in the primary analysis. Clinical trial information: NCT00561470. [Table: see text]

Real-world safety and effectiveness of regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer: the French CORRELATE cohort

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Philippe Metges ◽  
Dominique Genet ◽  
David Tougeron ◽  
Catherine Ligeza ◽  
Michel Ducreux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Grade 3

Aim: We report real-world evidence with regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer from the French cohort of the international, prospective, observational CORRELATE study. Patients & methods: Patients receiving regorafenib according to French health authority approval were included. The primary end point was treatment-emergent adverse events. Overall survival and progression-free survival were secondary end points. Results: Two hundred and forty-two patients (61% male, median age: 66 years) were enrolled. The most common grade ≥3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events were hand–foot skin reaction (10.3%), asthenia/fatigue (9.9/1.2%) and hypertension (6.2%). Median overall survival and progression-free survival were 6.8 (95% CI: 6.3–7.6) and 2.8 months (95% CI: 2.6–3.0), respectively. Conclusion: The real-world safety and effectiveness data of regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer in France align with findings from Phase III clinical trials and the global CORRELATE population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document