Commentary on a Phase III Trial of Bevacizumab plus XELOX or FOLFOX4 for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The NO16966 Trial

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 261-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Preeta Tyagi ◽  
Axel Grothey
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
First Line Treatment

scholarly journals Randomized phase III trial of S-1 versus capecitabine in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: SALTO study by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 1288-1293 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.J.M. Kwakman ◽  
L.H.J. Simkens ◽  
J.M. van Rooijen ◽  
A.J. van de Wouw ◽  
A.J. ten Tije ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Cancer Group ◽  
First Line Treatment

Updated Survival Analysis of the Randomized Phase III Trial of S-1 Versus Capecitabine in the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. e229-e230
Author(s):  
Johannes J.M. Kwakman ◽  
Erik van Werkhoven ◽  
Lieke H.J. Simkens ◽  
Johan M. van Rooijen ◽  
Yes A.J. van de Wouw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Cancer Group ◽  
First Line Treatment

Sequential first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer with capecitabine, irinotecan, and bevacizumab: Capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) versus capecitabine, irinotecan plus bevacizumab (CAPIRI-Bev): The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 randomized, phase III trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS3639-TPS3639
Author(s):  
Clemens Albrecht Giessen ◽  
Dominik Paul Modest ◽  
Sebastian Stintzing ◽  
Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal ◽  
Ursula Vehling-Kaiser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Cytotoxic Agents ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Time To Failure ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS3639 Background: Several randomized trials have indicated that combination chemotherapy applied in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) does not significantly improve overall survival when compared to the sequential use of cytotoxic agents (CAIRO, MRC Focus, FFCD 2000-05). The present study investigates the question in bevacizumab-based first-line treatment including escalation- and de-escalation strategies. Methods: The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01249638) is a two-arm, multicenter, open-label randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of Cape-Bev versus CAPIRI-Bev in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, ECOG PS 0-1, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 bid for 14d (d1-14) plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm A) or capecitabine 800 mg/m2 BID for 14d (d1-14), irinotecan 200 mg/m2 (d1) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm B). Patients included into this trial are required to consent to the analysis of tumor tissue and blood for translational investigations. In Arm A, treatment escalation from Cape-Bev to CAPIRI-Bev is recommended in case of progressive disease (PD). In Arm B, de-escalation from CAPIRI-Bev to Cape-Bev is possible after 6 months of treatment or in case of irinotecan-associated toxicity. Re-escalation to CAPIRI-Bev after PD is possible. The primary endpoint is time to failure of strategy (TFS). Secondary endpoints are ORR, OS, PFS, safety and quality of life. Conclusion: The AIO KRK 0110 trial is designed for patients with disseminated, but asymptomatic mCRC who are not potential candidates for surgical resection of metastasis. Two bevacizumab-based strategies are compared: one starting as single-agent chemotherapy (Cape-Bev) allowing escalation to CAPIRI-Bev and another starting with CAPIRI-Bev and allowing de-escalation to Cape-Bev and subsequent re-escalation if necessary. By January 2012, 79 of planned 516 patients have been enrolled.

Phase III Trial of Cetuximab With Continuous or Intermittent Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX) Versus FLOX Alone in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The NORDIC-VII Study

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15) ◽  
pp. 1755-1762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjell Magne Tveit ◽  
Tormod Guren ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Per Pfeiffer ◽  
Halfdan Sorbye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Kras Mutations ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
First Line Treatment

Purpose The NORDIC-VII multicenter phase III trial investigated the efficacy of cetuximab when added to bolus fluorouracil/folinic acid and oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX), administered continuously or intermittently, in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The influence of KRAS mutation status on treatment outcome was also investigated. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive either standard Nordic FLOX (arm A), cetuximab and FLOX (arm B), or cetuximab combined with intermittent FLOX (arm C). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS), response rate, R0 resection rate, and safety were secondary end points. Results Of the 571 patients randomly assigned, 566 were evaluable in intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. KRAS and BRAF mutation analyses were obtained in 498 (88%) and 457 patients (81%), respectively. KRAS mutations were present in 39% of the tumors; 12% of tumors had BRAF mutations. The presence of BRAF mutations was a strong negative prognostic factor. In the ITT population, median PFS was 7.9, 8.3, and 7.3 months for the three arms, respectively (not significantly different). OS was almost identical for the three groups (20.4, 19.7, 20.3 months, respectively), and confirmed response rates were 41%, 49%, and 47%, respectively. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumors, cetuximab did not provide any additional benefit compared with FLOX alone. In patients with KRAS mutations, no significant difference was detected, although a trend toward improved PFS was observed in arm B. The regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion Cetuximab did not add significant benefit to the Nordic FLOX regimen in first-line treatment of mCRC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document