Impact of second-line cetuximab-containing therapy in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the ITACa randomized clinical trial.
ABSTRACT: The ITACa trial was designed to define the role of cetuximab (Cet) and bevacizumab (Bev) in combination with standard chemotherapy (CT, FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4) as first- and second-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer. All patients with WT KRAS tumors who had been enrolled in the first-line trial were randomized onto two independent second-line trials: CT or CT?+?Cet (study 2A) and CT?+?Bev or CT?+?Bev?+?Cet (study 2B). Patients with mutated KRAS were not eligible for randomization and were treated with CT alone (study 2A) or CT?+?Bev (study 2B). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). 48 and 56 KRAS WT patients were randomized while 31 and 40 KRAS mutated patients were treated without randomization. Study 2A: median PFS was 3.4 (95%CI 2.3-4.6) and 6.2 (95%CI 4.3-7.8) months for the CT and CT?+?Cet arms, respectively, with a hazard ratio (HR)?=?0.64 (95%CI 0.35-1.16, p?=?0.144). Study 2B: median PFS was 7.7 (95%CI 4.1-10.1) and 4.9 (95%CI 3.2-7.0) months for CT?+?Bev and CT?+?Cet?+?Bev arms, respectively, with a HR?=?1.31 (95%CI 0.76-2.26, p?=?0.330). Notwithstanding limitations due to the small sample size, among patients with WT KRAS the addition of Cet to second-line CT increased PFS, whereas the addition of Cet to CT?+?Bev was associated with worse PFS.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Chemotherapy with biologics followed by liver surgery improves the resection rate and survival of patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). However, no prospective study has compared the outcomes of chemotherapy with bevacizumab (BEV) versus cetuximab (CET).<h4>Methods</h4>The ATOM study is the first randomised trial comparing BEV and CET for initially unresectable CRLM. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive mFOLFOX6 plus either BEV or CET. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).<h4>Results</h4>Between May 2013 and April 2016, 122 patients were enrolled. Median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI 9.2-13.3 months) in the BEV group and 14.8 months (95% CI 9.7-17.3 months) in the CET group (hazard ratio 0.803; P = 0.33). Patients with a smaller-number but larger-sized metastases did better in the CET group. In the BEV and CET groups, the response rates were 68.4% and 84.7% and the resection rates were 56.1% and 49.2%, respectively.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Although CET achieved a better response rate than BEV for patients with a small number of large liver metastases, both biologics had similar efficacy regarding liver resection and acceptable safety profiles. To achieve optimal PFS, biologics should be selected in accordance with patient conditions.<h4>Trial registration</h4>This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01836653), and UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR number UMIN000010209).
Project description:Background:The MAPK-interacting kinase 1 (MKNK1) is localized downstream of the RAS/RAF/ERK and the MAP3K1/MKK/p38 signaling pathway. Through phosphorylation MKNK1 regulates the function of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E, a key player in translational control, whose expression is often upregulated in metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC). Preclinical data suggest that MKNK1 increases angiogenesis by upregulating angiogenic factors. We therefore hypothesize that variations in the MKNK1 gene predict outcome in mCRC patients treated with first-line FOLFIRI and bevacizumab (bev). Patients and methods:A total of 567 patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC in the randomized phase III FIRE-3 and TRIBE trials treated with first-line FOLFIRI/bev (discovery and validation cohorts) or FOLFIRI and cetuximab (cet) (control cohort) were included in this study. Five single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the MAPK signaling pathway were analyzed. Results:AA genotype carriers of the MKNK1 rs8602 single-nucleotide polymorphism treated with FOLFIRI/bev in the discovery cohort (FIRE-3) had a shorter progression-free survival (PFS) than those harboring any C (7.9 versus 10.3?months, Hazard ratio (HR) 1.73, P?=?0.038). This association could be confirmed in the validation cohort (TRIBE) in multivariable analysis (PFS 9.0 versus 11.0?months, HR 3.04, P?=?0.029). Furthermore, AA carriers in the validation cohort had a decreased overall response rate (25% versus 66%, P?=?0.049). Conversely, AA genotype carriers in the control group receiving FOLFIRI/cet did not show a shorter PFS. By combining both FOLFIRI/bev cohorts the worse outcome among AA carriers became more significant (PFS 9.0 versus 10.5?months) in univariable (HR 1.74, P?=?0.015) and multivariable analysis (HR 1.76, P?=?0.022). Accordingly, AA carriers did also exhibit an inferior overall response rate compared with those harboring any C (36% versus 65%, P?=?0.005). Conclusion:MKNK1 polymorphism rs8602 might serve as a predictive marker in KRAS wild-type mCRC patients treated with FOLFIRI/bev in the first-line setting. Additionally, MKNK1 might be a promising target for drug development.
Project description:Bevacizumab, combined with platinum-based chemotherapy, has been widely used in the treatment of advanced-stage lung adenocarcinoma (LADC). Although KRAS (V-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog) mutation is the most common genetic alteration in human LADC and its role in promoting angiogenesis has been well established, its prognostic and predictive role in the above setting remains unclear. The association between KRAS exon 2 mutational status and clinicopathological variables including progression-free survival and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively) was retrospectively analyzed in 501 Caucasian stage IIIB-IV LADC patients receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (CHT) with or without bevacizumab (BEV). EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor)-mutant cases were excluded. Of 247 BEV/CHT and 254 CHT patients, 95 (38.5%) and 75 (29.5%) had mutations in KRAS, respectively. KRAS mutation was associated with smoking (p = 0.008) and female gender (p = 0.002) in the BEV/CHT group. We found no difference in OS between patients with KRAS-mutant versus KRAS wild-type tumors in the CHT-alone group (p = 0.6771). Notably, patients with KRAS-mutant tumors demonstrated significantly shorter PFS (p = 0.0255) and OS (p = 0.0186) in response to BEV/CHT compared to KRAS wild-type patients. KRAS mutation was an independent predictor of shorter PFS (hazard ratio, 0.597; p = 0.011) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.645; p = 0.012) in the BEV/CHT group. G12D KRAS-mutant patients receiving BEV/CHT showed significantly shorter PFS (3.7 months versus 8.27 months in the G12/13x group; p = 0.0032) and OS (7.2 months versus 16.1 months in the G12/13x group; p = 0.0144). In this single-center, retrospective study, KRAS-mutant LADC patients receiving BEV/CHT treatment exhibited inferior PFS and OS compared to those with KRAS wild-type advanced LADC. G12D mutations may define a subset of KRAS-mutant LADC patients unsuitable for antiangiogenic therapy with BEV.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The nucleotide excision repair (NER) pathway participates in platinum-induced DNA damage repair. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in miRNA-binding sites in the NER genes RPA2 and GTF2H1 are associated with the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Here, we analyzed whether RPA2 and GTF2H1 SNPs predict the efficacy of oxaliplatin in metastatic CRC (mCRC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Genomic DNA was extracted from blood samples from 457 patients with mCRC enrolled in the TRIBE trial, which compared first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (BEV) (n = 230, discovery cohort) and first-line FOLFIRI plus BEV (n = 227, control cohort). SNPs were analyzed by PCR-based direct sequencing. RESULTS:In the FOLFOXIRI + BEV-treated cohort expressing wild-type KRAS, progression-free survival (PFS) was shorter for the RPA2 rs7356 C/C variant subgroup than the any T allele subgroup in univariate analysis (9.1 versus 13.3 months respectively, hazard ratio (HR) 2.32, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07-5.03, p = 0.020) and this remained significant in multivariable analysis (HR 2.97, 95%CI: 1.27-6.94, p = 0.012). A similar trend was observed for overall survival. In contrast, patients expressing mutant RAS and RPA2 rs7356 C/C variant had longer PFS with FOLFOXIRI + BEV than with FOLFIRI + BEV (12.1 versus 7.6 months, HR 0.23, 95%CI: 0.09-0.62, p = 0.002) but no superiority of FOLFOXIRI + BEV was observed for the RAS mutant, RPA2 rs7356 any T variant subgroup (11.7 versus 9.6 months, HR 0.77, 95%CI: 0.56-1.07, p = 0.12) or the RAS wild-type, RPA2 rs7356 C/C variant subgroup. CONCLUSION:RPA2 SNPs may serve as predictive and prognostic markers of oxaliplatin responsiveness in a RAS status-dependent manner in mCRC patients receiving FOLFOXIRI + BEV.
Project description:The most favorable treatments for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC are less indicated. Forty-one studies were eligible for this Bayesian network secondary analysis. For PFS, erlotinib (Erlo)+bevacizumab (Bev) (HR 0.26, 95% CrI: 0.08-0.75 vs placebo), osimertinib (Osi) (HR 0.29, 0.11-0.70 vs placebo), and afatinib (Afa) were top-ranking individual treatments, while immunotherapy (IT)+anti-VEGFR (aVEGFR)+platinum-based therapy (Plat) (HR 0.42, 0.06-2.63 vs placebo), EGFR-TKI (ET)+aVEGFR (HR 0.35, 0.14-0.85 vs placebo), and ET+aVEGFR+Plat were top-ranking medication classes. For OS, Osi (HR 0.52, 0.10-2.00 vs placebo), cetuximab (Cet)+Bev+Plat (HR 0.51, 0.06-3.38 vs placebo), and cilengitide (Cil)+Cet+Plat were top-ranking individual treatments, while ET+aVEGFR+Plat, ET+Plat, and third-generation EGFR-TKI (3<sup>rd</sup> ET) were top-ranking medication classes. For PFS regarding the EGFR genomic aberration status, Erlo+Bev, Osi, and Afa were superior for exon 19 deletion status, whereas ET+Bev, Osi, and gefitinib (Gef)+pemetrexed (Peme) were excellent for exon 21 L858Arg mutation status. The results were consistent in terms of the ORR and DoR and remained robust across sensitivity analyses. However, Erlo + Bev had the most grade 3 or higher adverse events. Osi, Erlo+Bev, and Erlo+Bev+Plat are reasonably recommended to balance PFS and OS, but adverse events should be considered. IT+aVEGFR+Plat shows potential superiority, but more clinical evidence is needed.
Project description:Treatment options of locoregional recurrent head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) include both local strategies as surgery or re-radiotherapy and systemic therapy. In this prospective, multi-center, non-interventional study, patients were treated either with platinum-based chemotherapy and cetuximab (CT + Cet) or re-radiotherapy and cetuximab (RT + Cet). In the current analysis, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared in patients with locoregional recurrence. Four hundred seventy patients were registered in 97 German centers. After exclusion of patients with distant metastases, a cohort of 192 patients was analyzed (129 CT + Cet, 63 RT + Cet). Radiotherapy was delivered as re-irradiation to 70% of the patients. The mean radiation dose was 51.8 Gy, whereas a radiation dose of ≥60 Gy was delivered in 33% of the patients. Chemotherapy mainly consisted of cisplatin/5-flurouracil (40%) or carboplatin/5-flurouracil (29%). The median PFS was 9.2 months in the RT + Cet group versus 5.1 months in the CT + Cet group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.40, 95% CI, 0.27-0.57, <i>p</i> < 0.0001). Median OS was 12.8 months in the RT + Cet group versus 7.9 months in the CT + Cet group (hazard ratio for death, 0.50, 95% CI, 0.33-0.75, <i>p</i> = 0.0008). In conclusion, radiotherapy combined with cetuximab improved survival compared to chemotherapy combined with cetuximab in locally recurrent HNSCC.
Project description:Monoclonal antibodies like cetuximab, targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and bevacizumab, targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), are an integral part of treatment regimens for metastasized colorectal cancer. However, inhibition of the EGFR has been shown to protect human glioma cells from cell death under hypoxic conditions. In colon carcinoma cells, the consequences of EGFR blockade in hypoxia (e.g., induced by bevacizumab) have not been evaluated yet. LIM1215 and SW948 colon carcinoma and LNT-229 glioblastoma cells were treated with cetuximab, PD153035, and erlotinib and analyzed for cell density and viability. The sequential administration of either cetuximab followed by bevacizumab (CET->BEV) or bevacizumab followed by cetuximab (BEV->CET) was investigated in a LIM1215 (KRAS wildtype) and SW948 (KRAS mutant) xenograft mouse model. In vitro, cetuximab protected from hypoxia. In the LIM1215 model, a survival benefit with cetuximab and bevacizumab monotherapy was observed, but only the sequence CET->BEV showed an additional benefit. This effect was confirmed in the SW948 model. Our observations support the hypothesis that bevacizumab modulates the tumor microenvironment (e.g., by inducing hypoxia) where cetuximab could trigger protective effects when administered later on. The sequence CET->BEV therefore seems to be superior as possible mutual adverse effects are bypassed.
Project description:Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and bevacizumab plus chemotherapy were effective for EGFR-mutant patients. However, the appropriated treatment orders remained controvertible. We investigated the efficacy of treatment orders between bevacizumab plus chemotherapy and EGFR-TKIs for EGFR-mutant patients with advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma.This study involved 40 EGFR-mutant patients with advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma who were treated with bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (Bev + CP) and EGFR-TKIs in different treatment orders or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) in first-line setting. Seventeen patients were treated with Bev + CP and 10 cases with GP in first-line treatment. Thirteen patients received EGFR-TKIs after first-line Bev + CP regimen, while 13 patients were treated with first-line EGFR-TKIs. Progression-free survival (PFS), the response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.Median PFS of Bev + CP treatment was significantly longer in first-line than non-first-line settings (11.7 vs. 5.6 months, P = 0.003). Median OS was 37.8 months for EGFR-mutant patients with first-line Bev + CP followed by second-line EGFR-TKIs and 31.0 months for those with first-line EGFR-TKIs and non-first-line Bev + CP, respectively (P = 0.509). Median PFS was 11.7 (95% CI 10.6-12.8) months for Bev + CP group and 4.7 (95% CI 4.4-5.0) months for GP group with the hazard ratio of 0.17 (P = 0.001). ORR was 70.6 and 50.0% in the two groups, respectively (P = 0.415). However, there was no significant difference in median OS (33.7 vs 27.8 months, P = 0.293).First-line Bev + CP followed by EGFR-TKIs might possibly provide favorable prognosis for EGFR-mutant patients. Bev + CP regimen significantly prolonged PFS in first-line than non-first-line settings. These findings warrant further investigations.
Project description:<h4>Objectives</h4>We aimed to compare the economic value of chemotherapy plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (mAb) against chemotherapy with bevacizumab (Bev, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor mAb) as first-line treatment in KRAS wild-type (WT), pan-RAS WT and pan-RAS WT left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients from the Hong Kong societal perspective.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We developed Markov models and 10-year horizon to estimate costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR therapy against chemotherapy plus Bev in KRAS WT, pan-RAS WT, and pan-RAS WT left-sided mCRC. We considered two times of the local gross domestic product per capita (GDPpc) as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (2× GDPpc; US$97,832).<h4>Results</h4>Adding anti-EGFR mAb to chemotherapy provides additional 0.24 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.29), 0.32 (95% CI 0.27-0.37), and 0.57 (95% CI 0.49-0.63) QALY compared to adding Bev in KRAS WT, pan-RAS WT, and left-sided pan-RAS WT mCRC populations respectively. The corresponding ICER is US$106,847 (95% CI 87,806-134,523), US$88,565 (95% CI 75,678-105,871), US$76,537 (95% CI 67,794-87,917) per QALY gained, respectively.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Anti-EGFR therapy is more cost-effective than Bev as a first-line targeted therapy in left-sided pan-RAS WT and pan-RAS WT, with ICER <US$100,000/QALY, compared to KRAS WT mCRC population.
Project description:Background:Huangci Granule is a traditional Chinese medicine for treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Huangci Granule combination with chemotherapy and cetuximab (CET) or bevacizumab (BV) for treating mCRC. Methods:We performed a randomized, controlled, and double-blind trial and recruited patients with mCRC who were planned to undergo chemotherapy combined with CET or BV. The treatment group was treated with Huangci Granule, while the control group was treated with placebo. Continuous treatment until disease progression, death, intolerable toxicity or up to 6 months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoint was quality of life and safety. Result:320 patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment, including 200 first-line patients and 120 second-line patients. In the first-line treatment, the median PFS was 9.59 months (95% CI, 6.94-13.25) vs 6.89 months (95% CI, 4.99-9.52) in treatment group and control group (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.97; P = 0.027). Chinese medicine was an independent factor affecting the PFS. In the second-line treatment, the median PFS was 6.51 months (95% CI, 4.49-9.44) vs 4.53 months (95% CI, 3.12-6.57) in the treatment group and control group (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.95; P = 0.020). Compared with the control group, "role function," "social function," "fatigue," and "appetite loss" were significantly improved in the treatment (P < 0.05) and drug related grades 3 to 4 adverse events were less. Conclusion:Huangci Granule combined with chemotherapy and CET or BV can prolong the PFS of mCRC, improve the quality of life, reduce adverse reactions, and have good safety.