scholarly journals First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): Quality and Clinical Benefit Overview

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 470
Author(s):  
Marta Martín-Richard ◽  
Maria Tobeña
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Design Quality ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
First Line Treatment

Different strategies of maintenance therapy (sequential CT, intermittent CT, intermittent CT and MAbs, or de-escalation MAbs monotherapy) after first-line treatment are undertaken. Many randomized clinical trials (RCT), which evaluated these approaches, suffer from incorrect design, heterogenous primary endpoints, inadequate size, and other methodology flaws. Drawing any conclusions becomes challenging and recommendations are mainly vague. We evaluated those studies from another perspective, focusing on the design quality and the clinical benefit measure with a more objective and accurate methodology. These data allowed a clearer and more exact overview of the statement in maintenance treatment.

Cetuximab metastatic colorectal cancer strategy (ERMES) study: A phase III randomized two arm study with FOLFIRI + cetuximab until disease progression compared to FOLFIRI + cetuximab for 8 cycles followed by cetuximab alone until disease progression in first-line treatment of patients with RAS and BRAF wild type metastatic colorectal cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS810-TPS810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmine Pinto ◽  
Nicola Normanno ◽  
Armando Orlandi ◽  
Evaristo Maiello ◽  
Domenico Bilancia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS810 Background: The optimal duration and content of first-line therapy in mCRC pts once they have achieved objective response is controversial. In the FIRE-3 trial, ETS was significantly associated with PFS and OS. Based on this evidence it can be hypothesized that once this goal has been achieved, further exposure to combined antineoplastic treatment may not result in improvement or preservation of such result but only in an increase of toxicity. We designed a strategy study to compare FOLFIRI + cetuximab until PD to FOLFIRI + cetuximab for 8 cycles followed by cetuximab alone until PD in first line treatment of RAS/BRAF WT mCRC pts. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial. Untreated and unresecteble RAS/BRAF WT mCRC pts were randomized 1:1 to receive Cetuximab (400 mg/mq w1 and then 250 mg/mq weekly) + FOLFIRI until PD (standard arm) or Cetuximab (400 mg/mq week 1 and then 250 mg/mq weekly) + FOLFIRI for 8 cycles followed by Cetuximab monotherapy until PD (experimental arm). Tumor assessment is planned every 8 weeks. The objective of the study is to demonstrate a not inferior efficacy and a better toxicity profile for the experimental treatment compared to the standard treatment. The co-primary endpoints are PFS and incidence of G 3-4 AEs. Secondary endpoints are OS, ORR, ETS (8 weeks) and safety. A prospective multiple gene mutation analysis by NGS of both tumor tissue and blood will be performed to find potential predictive factors and surrogate markers of treatment efficacy. The two co-primary endpoints will be compared between the two arms using a fixed-sequence testing procedure to control for the family-wise type I error rate of 0.05 in a strong sense. This sequence considers that a reduction of grade 3-4 AEs is only of relevance, if non-inferiority is shown regarding PFS. 600 evaluable pts will be enrolled and randomized. Study recruitment started on January 2015, currently 139 pts have been randomized. Clinical trial information: NCT02484833.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document