9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Tumor response of FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab versus bevacizumab in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: The subgroup-analysis of DEEPER trial (JACCRO CC-13).

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          109

          Background: Triplet regimen, FOLFOXIRI, combined with bevacizumab (bev) or panitumumab has been shown to be superior in terms of early tumor shrinkage and depth of response (DpR) compared to doublet combinations in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We performed a randomized phase II study, DEEPER trial (JACCRO CC-13)[NCT02515734], to investigate the efficacy and safety of cetuximab (cet) vs. bevacizumab (bev) in combination with modified (m)-FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan 150 mg/m 2, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2, 5-FU 2400 mg/m 2) in previously untreated mCRC patients with RAS wild-type tumors (Tsuji A, et al. ASCO 2021). Methods: The primary endpoint was DpR during the entire course. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate, R0 resection rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. A post-hoc subgroup analysis by PS, tumor sidedness, age, and location of metastases was performed to evaluate the efficacy of triplet plus cet vs. bev regimen. Results: A total of 359 patients were enrolled between July 2015 and June 2019. For the full analysis set (median age 65y, 64% male, PS0/1: 91%/9%, left/right primary: 83%/17%), 173 and 175 patients were randomly assigned to the cet and bev arms, respectively. Median DpR was 57.4% vs. 46.0% ( p = 0.001), and the ORR was 69.1% vs. 71.7% ( p = 0.60), in cet vs. bev, respectively. The subgroup analysis was present in the table. There was no significant difference in terms of ORR and R0 resection rate between groups according to PS, tumor sidedness, age, and liver metastases (LM). In patients with only LM, the R0 resection rate of cet vs. bev was 25.0% vs. 14.8% ( p = 0.21). Conclusions: The m-FOLFOXIRI plus cet showed to be significantly superior to the m-FOLFOXIRI plus bev in terms of DpR in first-line treatment for RAS wild-type mCRC. The better DpR of m-FOLFOXIRI plus cet was evident for RAS wild-type mCRC patients with left-sided tumors, LM or under 70 years old. Clinical trial information: UMIN000018217.[Table: see text]

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Journal of Clinical Oncology
          JCO
          American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
          0732-183X
          1527-7755
          February 01 2022
          February 01 2022
          : 40
          : 4_suppl
          : 109
          Affiliations
          [1 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital, Kobe, Japan;
          [2 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Kagawa University Hospital, Takamatsu, Japan;
          [3 ]Department of Surgery, Gifu Prefectural General Medical Center, Gifu, Japan;
          [4 ]Department of Surgical Oncology, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan;
          [5 ]Digestive Disease Center, Showa University Northern Yokohama Hospital, Yokohama, Japan;
          [6 ]Department of Clinical Oncology, Akita University, Graduate School of Medicine, Akita, Japan;
          [7 ]Department of Surgery, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Amagasaki, Japan;
          [8 ]Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Nakadori General Hospital, Akita, Japan;
          [9 ]Department of Digestive Surgery, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Japan;
          [10 ]Department of Surgery, Hyogo Prefectural Nishinomiya Hospital, Nishinomiya, Japan;
          [11 ]Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University Itabashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan;
          [12 ]Division of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Hokkaido Cancer Center, Sapporo, Japan;
          [13 ]Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Sano Hospital, Kobe, Japan;
          [14 ]Division of Medical Oncology, Showa University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan;
          [15 ]Department of Clinical Oncology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, CA, Japan;
          [16 ]Division of Medical Oncology, Showa University Fujigaoka Hospital, Yokohama, Japan;
          [17 ]Aizawa Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aizawa Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan;
          [18 ]Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;
          [19 ]Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan;
          Article
          10.1200/JCO.2022.40.4_suppl.109
          8fbd1c10-0f0c-40eb-b72b-141643f97cdf
          © 2022
          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article