FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab for advanced colorectal cancer: final survival and per-protocol analysis of FIRE-3, a randomised clinical trial.
Adult
Aged
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Bevacizumab
/ therapeutic use
Camptothecin
/ analogs & derivatives
Cetuximab
/ therapeutic use
Colorectal Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Drug Administration Schedule
Fluorouracil
/ therapeutic use
Genes, ras
Humans
Intention to Treat Analysis
Leucovorin
/ administration & dosage
Middle Aged
Progression-Free Survival
Journal
British journal of cancer
ISSN: 1532-1827
Titre abrégé: Br J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370635
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2021
02 2021
Historique:
received:
24
04
2020
accepted:
08
10
2020
revised:
17
09
2020
pubmed:
7
11
2020
medline:
11
6
2021
entrez:
6
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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. NCT00433927.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33154570
doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-01140-9
pii: 10.1038/s41416-020-01140-9
pmc: PMC7851157
doi:
Substances chimiques
Bevacizumab
2S9ZZM9Q9V
Cetuximab
PQX0D8J21J
Leucovorin
Q573I9DVLP
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Camptothecin
XT3Z54Z28A
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT00433927']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
587-594Références
Van Cutsem, E., Cervantes, A., Adam, R., Sobrero, A., Van Krieken, J. H., Aderka, D. et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann. Oncol. 27, 1386–1422 (2016).
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw235
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Colon cancer available at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/colon.pdf . Version 2. (2018).
Stintzing, S., Modest, D. P., Rossius, L., Lerch, M. M., von Weikersthal, L. F., Decker, T. et al. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a post-hoc analysis of tumour dynamics in the final RAS wild-type subgroup of this randomised open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 17, 1426–1434 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30269-8
Heinemann, V., von Weikersthal, L. F., Decker, T., Kiani, A., Vehling-Kaiser, U., Al-Batran, S. E. et al. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 15, 1065–1075 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70330-4
Therasse, P., Arbuck, S. G., Eisenhauer, E. A., Wanders, J., Kaplan, R. S., Rubinstein, L. et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92, 205–216 (2000).
doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205
Eisenhauer, E. A., Therasse, P., Bogaerts, J., Schwartz, L. H., Sargent, D., Ford, R. et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer 45, 228–247 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
Schwartzberg, L. S., Rivera, F., Karthaus, M., Fasola, G., Canon, J. L., Hecht, J. R. et al. PEAK: a randomized, multicenter phase II study of panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 2240–2247 (2014).
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.2473
Heinemann, V., Rivera, F., O’Neil, B. H., Stintzing, S., Koukakis, R., Terwey, J. H. et al. A study-level meta-analysis of efficacy data from head-to-head first-line trials of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus bevacizumab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 67, 11–20 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.07.019
Van Cutsem, E., Kohne, C. H., Hitre, E., Zaluski, J., Chang Chien, C. R., Makhson, A. et al. Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 1408–1417 (2009).
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805019
Van Cutsem, E., Rivera, F., Berry, S., Kretzschmar, A., Michael, M., DiBartolomeo, M. et al. Safety and efficacy of first-line bevacizumab with FOLFOX, XELOX, FOLFIRI and fluoropyrimidines in metastatic colorectal cancer: the BEAT study. Ann. Oncol. 20, 1842–1847 (2009).
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp233
Douillard, J. Y., Oliner, K. S., Siena, S., Tabernero, J., Burkes, R., Barugel, M. et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1023–1034 (2013).
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305275
Holch, J. W., Ricard, I., Stintzing, S., Modest, D. P. & Heinemann, V. The relevance of primary tumour location in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of first-line clinical trials. Eur. J. Cancer 70, 87–98 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.10.007
Arnold, D., Lueza, B., Douillard, J. Y., Peeters, M., Lenz, H. J., Venook, A. et al. Prognostic and predictive value of primary tumour side in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy and EGFR directed antibodies in six randomized trials. Ann. Oncol. 28, 1713–1729 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx175
Heinemann, V., Stintzing, S., Modest, D. P., Giessen-Jung, C., Michl, M. & Mansmann, U. R. Early tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Eur. J. Cancer 51, 1927–1936 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.06.116
Boeckx, N., Koukakis, R., Op de Beeck, K., Rolfo, C., Van Camp, G., Siena, S. et al. Primary tumor sidedness has an impact on prognosis and treatment outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from two randomized first-line panitumumab studies. Ann. Oncol. 28, 1862–1868 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx119
Modest, D. P., Stintzing, S., von Weikersthal, L. F., Decker, T., Kiani, A., Vehling-Kaiser, U. et al. Impact of subsequent therapies on outcome of the FIRE-3/AIO KRK0306 trial: first-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in patients With KRAS wild-type tumors in metastatic colorectal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 3718–3726 (2015).
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.2887
Bennouna, J., Hiret, S., Bertaut, A., Bouche, O., Deplanque, G., Borel, C. et al. Continuation of bevacizumab vs cetuximab plus chemotherapy after first progression in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: The UNICANCER PRODIGE18 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 5, 83–90 (2019). e-pub ahead of print 2018/11/14.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4465
Derangere, V., Fumet, J. D., Boidot, R., Bengrine, L., Limagne, E., Chevriaux, A. et al. Does bevacizumab impact anti-EGFR therapy efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer? Oncotarget 7, 9309–9321 (2016).
doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.7008
Lenz, H. J. Outcome in the CALGB 80405. Presentation at ESMO 2016 Congress, special session ‘Right or left metastatic colon cancer: will the side change your treatment?’ (Copenhagen, Denmark, 10 October 2016). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology 2016; Version 2 (March 2018).
Venook, A. P., Niedzwiecki, D., Innocenti, F., Fruth, B., Greene, C., O’Neil, B. H. et al. Impact of primary (1°) tumor location on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 3504–3504 (2016).
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.3504
Tejpar, S., Stintzing S., Ciardiello F., Tabernero J., Van Cutsem E., Beier F. et al. Prognostic and predictive relevance of primary tumor location in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: retrospective analyses of the CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 Trials. JAMA Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3797 (2016).
Yoshino, T., Arnold, D., Taniguchi, H., Pentheroudakis, G., Yamazaki, K., Xu, R. H. et al. Pan-Asian adapted ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a JSMO-ESMO initiative endorsed by CSCO, KACO, MOS, SSO and TOS. Ann. Oncol. 29, 44–70 (2018).
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx738