Systemic chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (New EPOC): long-term results of a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.
Aged
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Capecitabine
/ administration & dosage
Cetuximab
/ administration & dosage
Colorectal Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Female
Fluorouracil
/ administration & dosage
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Irinotecan
/ administration & dosage
Leucovorin
/ administration & dosage
Liver Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
/ drug therapy
Oxaliplatin
/ administration & dosage
Prognosis
Survival Rate
Journal
The Lancet. Oncology
ISSN: 1474-5488
Titre abrégé: Lancet Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100957246
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
08
08
2019
revised:
06
11
2019
accepted:
14
11
2019
pubmed:
6
2
2020
medline:
7
7
2020
entrez:
5
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis showed a significant reduction in progression-free survival in patients allocated to cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with those given chemotherapy alone. The focus of the present analysis was to assess the effect on overall survival. New EPOC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13, and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases and a WHO performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. Randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer, and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m Between Feb 26, 2007, and Oct 12, 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or without cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out 5 years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol, at a median follow-up of 66·7 months (IQR 58·0-77·5). Median progression-free survival was 22·2 months (95% CI 18·3-26·8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15·5 months (13·8-19·0) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17, 95% CI 0·87-1·56; p=0·304). Median overall survival was 81·0 months (59·6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55·4 months (43·5-71·5) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (HR 1·45, 1·02-2·05; p=0·036). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of preoperative response or pathological resection status between groups. Five deaths might have been treatment-related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were: neutrophil count decreased (26 [19%] of 134 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 21 [15%] of 137 in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group), diarrhoea (13 [10%] vs 14 [10%]), skin rash (one [1%] vs 22 [16%]), thromboembolic events (ten [7%] vs 11 [8%]), lethargy (ten [7%] vs nine [7%]), oral mucositis (three [2%] vs 14 [10%]), vomiting (seven [5%] vs seven [5%]), peripheral neuropathy (eight [6%] vs five [4%]), and pain (six [4%] vs six [4%]). Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival in some studies in patients with advanced, inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant disadvantage in terms of overall survival. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting. Cancer Research UK.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis showed a significant reduction in progression-free survival in patients allocated to cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with those given chemotherapy alone. The focus of the present analysis was to assess the effect on overall survival.
METHODS
New EPOC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13, and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases and a WHO performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. Randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer, and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m
FINDINGS
Between Feb 26, 2007, and Oct 12, 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or without cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out 5 years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol, at a median follow-up of 66·7 months (IQR 58·0-77·5). Median progression-free survival was 22·2 months (95% CI 18·3-26·8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15·5 months (13·8-19·0) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17, 95% CI 0·87-1·56; p=0·304). Median overall survival was 81·0 months (59·6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55·4 months (43·5-71·5) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (HR 1·45, 1·02-2·05; p=0·036). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of preoperative response or pathological resection status between groups. Five deaths might have been treatment-related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were: neutrophil count decreased (26 [19%] of 134 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 21 [15%] of 137 in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group), diarrhoea (13 [10%] vs 14 [10%]), skin rash (one [1%] vs 22 [16%]), thromboembolic events (ten [7%] vs 11 [8%]), lethargy (ten [7%] vs nine [7%]), oral mucositis (three [2%] vs 14 [10%]), vomiting (seven [5%] vs seven [5%]), peripheral neuropathy (eight [6%] vs five [4%]), and pain (six [4%] vs six [4%]).
INTERPRETATION
Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival in some studies in patients with advanced, inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant disadvantage in terms of overall survival. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting.
FUNDING
Cancer Research UK.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32014119
pii: S1470-2045(19)30798-3
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30798-3
pmc: PMC7052737
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Oxaliplatin
04ZR38536J
Capecitabine
6804DJ8Z9U
Irinotecan
7673326042
Cetuximab
PQX0D8J21J
Leucovorin
Q573I9DVLP
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase III
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
398-411Subventions
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
ID : 10549
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
ID : 7275
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/M016587/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/M018423/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Investigateurs
Alaaeldin Shablack
(A)
Ann O'Callaghan
(A)
Margaret Anne Moody
(MA)
Alex Allen
(A)
Alison Brewster
(A)
Alison Brown
(A)
Astrid Mayer
(A)
Brian Davidson
(B)
Chan Ton
(C)
Charles Wilson
(C)
Charles Lowdell
(C)
Charlotte Rees
(C)
Christopher Baughan
(C)
Clare Barlow
(C)
Colin Purcell
(C)
David Smith
(D)
David Tsang
(D)
Ewan Brown
(E)
Georgina Walker
(G)
Hassan Malik
(H)
Iain Cameron
(I)
Luke Nolan
(L)
Marcia Hall
(M)
Marjorie Tomlinson
(M)
Mark Hill
(M)
Mark Peterson
(M)
Meg Finch-Jones
(M)
Nagappan Kumar
(N)
Nariman Karanjia
(N)
Nasim Ali
(N)
Nigel Heaton
(N)
Nua Chan Ton
(NC)
Paul Ross
(P)
Raaj Praseedom
(R)
Robert Thomas
(R)
Sally Clive
(S)
Sarah Slater
(S)
Sarah Smith
(S)
Satvinder Mudan
(S)
Satya Bhattacharya
(S)
Sharadah Essapen
(S)
Sherif Raouf
(S)
Stephen Fenwick
(S)
Susan Cleator
(S)
Tom Diamond
(T)
Vanessa Potter
(V)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Références
Lancet Oncol. 2014 May;15(6):601-11
pubmed: 24717919
Br J Cancer. 2014 Feb 4;110(3):648-55
pubmed: 24335920
Lancet. 2008 Mar 22;371(9617):1007-16
pubmed: 18358928
Ann Oncol. 2011 Jul;22(7):1535-1546
pubmed: 21228335
Br J Cancer. 2016 Aug 9;115(4):420-4
pubmed: 27434036
Lancet. 2011 Jun 18;377(9783):2103-14
pubmed: 21641636
Ann Surg. 2012 Mar;255(3):534-9
pubmed: 22314329
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Oct 20;27(30):5068-74
pubmed: 19738126
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Aug 1;25(22):3230-7
pubmed: 17664471
J Clin Oncol. 2011 May 20;29(15):2011-9
pubmed: 21502544
JAMA. 2012 Apr 4;307(13):1383-93
pubmed: 22474202
Ann Oncol. 2017 Aug 1;28(8):1713-1729
pubmed: 28407110
JAMA Oncol. 2016 May 1;2(5):633-642
pubmed: 26867820
N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 12;369(11):1023-34
pubmed: 24024839
Ann Oncol. 2014 Jul;25(7):1346-1355
pubmed: 24718886
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Feb;16(2):79-80
pubmed: 30575801
Clin Epidemiol. 2012;4:283-301
pubmed: 23152705
Oncotarget. 2017 Sep 27;8(55):93856-93866
pubmed: 29212194
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Jun 15;20(12):3338-47
pubmed: 24771647
N Engl J Med. 2009 Apr 2;360(14):1408-17
pubmed: 19339720
Clin Trials. 2010 Jun;7(3):197-208
pubmed: 20423925
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jul;15(8):862-73
pubmed: 24928083
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Nov 1;28(31):4697-705
pubmed: 20921465
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jul;14(8):749-59
pubmed: 23725851