First-line mFOLFOX plus cetuximab followed by mFOLFOX plus cetuximab or single-agent cetuximab as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Phase II randomised MACRO2 TTD study

Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Versus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Therapy for RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase III ERMES Study

PURPOSE

The intensity of anti-EGFR-based first-line therapy for RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), once disease control is achieved, is controversial. A de-escalation strategy with anti-EGFR monotherapy represents a potential option to maintain efficacy while reducing cytotoxicity.

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, patients with untreated RAS/BRAF wt mCRC were randomly assigned to receive either fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan/cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) until disease progression (arm A) or FOLFIRI/Cet for eight cycles followed by Cet alone (arm B). The coprimary end points were a noninferior progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified per-protocol (mPP) population (>eight cycles) and a lower incidence of grade (G) 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for arm B compared with arm A.

RESULTS

Overall, 606 patients were randomly assigned, with 300 assigned to arm A and 306 to arm B. The median follow-up was 22.3 months. In the mPP population, 291 events occurred with a PFS of 10 versus 12.2 months for arms B and A, respectively (P of noninferiority = .43). In the intention-to-treatment (ITT, ≥one cycle) population, 503 events occurred with a PFS of 9 versus 10.7 months (P = .39). The overall survival was 35.7 versus 30.7 months (P = .119) and 31.0 versus 25.2 months (P = .32) in the mPP and ITT population, respectively. Arm B had lower G3-4 AEs during the maintenance period than arm A (20.2% v 35.1%).

CONCLUSION

The ERMES study did not demonstrate noninferiority of maintenance with Cet alone. Despite a more favorable safety profile, maintenance with single-agent Cet after induction with FOLFIRI/Cet cannot be recommended for all patients but could represent an option in selected cases.

Efficacy and Safety of Maintenance Therapy Using Cetuximab in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Retrospective Study

Purpose

Cetuximab (CET) combined with chemotherapy significantly improved the survival in RAS and RAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients, while clinical evidence was lacking on the use of maintenance therapy (MT). The study aimed to explore the role of maintenance therapy following Cetuximab + chemotherapy and the optimal Cetuximab-based maintenance therapy regimen.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data on the efficacy and safety of CET-based MT in patients with mCRC who achieved disease control after induction therapy.

Results

Eighty-one patients with mCRC who achieved disease control after CET + chemotherapy induction were enrolled. Overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.5 (95% CI = 8.8-12.2) months and median maintenance/observation PFS (mnPFS) was 6.0 (95% CI = 5.0-7.0) months. Among these 81 patients, 61 patients were prescribed MT (CET alone for 21 patients and CET + chemotherapy for 40 patients). Median PFS and mnPFS in the MT group were significantly longer than those for the non-MT group. Different MT regimens did not affect PFS and mnPFS significantly. Univariate and multivariate analysis demonstrated MT, complete response/partial response during induction therapy, and absence of peritoneal metastasis to be positively associated with longer PFS and mnPFS. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were tolerable during MT, and AE-related deaths were not observed.

Conclusion

MT with CET or CET + chemotherapy was an appropriate option following initial induction chemotherapy for patients with RAS and RAF wild-type mCRC. This strategy endowed survival benefits and a tolerable safety profile.

Efficacy of different maintenance strategies for RAS wild-type colorectal cancer: A network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

In metastatic RAS wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC), induction combination chemotherapy doublets (CT) with an anti-EGFR agent are considered the primary treatment. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative efficacy of different maintenance treatments for advanced RAS wild-type CRC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane, from database inception until December 2021 were used. Randomized clinical trials enrolling adults with advanced RAS wild-type CRC and providing overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) data PRISMA guidelines for NMA were followed. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Agents were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities.

RESULTS

A total of 7 randomized phase 2 trials were included (for a total of 1286 patients). Compared to depotentiation treatments, continuous CT + anti-EGFR was not significantly superior to other maintenance regimens for OS and was ranked as the best option for NMA (SUCRA p-score=0.69). Conversely, in the PFS analysis, single-agent fluoropyrimidines + anti-EGFR was ranked as the best treatment (SUCRA p-score=0.60).

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining chemotherapy doublet + anti-EGFR until progression appears to be the best first-line strategy in terms of OS for advanced unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC treatment. However, fluoropyrimidines single-agent + cetuximab or panitumumab represent a reasonable choice regarding PFS.

Maintenance strategies after anti-EGFR-based induction in metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In RAS wild type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) maintenance therapy after induction with fluoropyrimidine (FP)-based cytotoxic therapy (CT) plus anti-EGFR agents is controversial.

METHODS

Phase II-III randomized trials were included. Maintenance strategies considered were: observation, anti-EGFR or FP monotherapy, FP + anti-EGFR, doublet CT + anti-EGFR.

RESULTS

Maintenance with FP + anti-EGFR (HR 0.56, 95% CrI 0.36-0.89) showed the greatest PFS benefit compared to observation, ranking first on SUCRA analysis (96.4%). Considering OS, doublet CT+ anti-EGFR, FP + anti-EGFR and anti-EGFR monotherapy yielded similar results. For PFS, FP + anti-EGFR confirmed to be valuable in BRAF wt patients and left sided tumors. In left sided tumors, the OS benefit of adding CT was limited. FP plus anti-EGFR showed a favourable safety profile compared to doublet CT + anti-EGFR.

CONCLUSIONS

FP + anti-EGFR can be considered a valuable maintenance option in RAS wt mCRC. EGFR monotherapy can be considered, especially in left-sided tumors.

Optimizing the first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer represents an important oncological challenge both for its incidence, which makes it an important health problem, and for its biological complexity, which has made clinical results very difficult in terms of outcome for this category of patients. To date these diseases should not be treated as a single entity but it is necessary to distinguish colorectal cancers based on characteristics that nowadays are essential to have greater therapeutic benefits. These include the sideness of the disease, the state of microsatellites, the presence of prognostic and predictive mutations of response to treatments currently available in clinical practice, which are associated with new therapeutic targets. The greatest challenge in the future will be to circumvent the resistance mechanisms that make this disease very difficult to treat with good long-term results by studying effective combination treatments with a good toxicity profile. Once such combinations or targeted treatments are consolidated, it will be desirable to shift the best therapies to the first line treatment to make them immediately accessible to the patient. It will also be essential to refine the selection of patients who can benefit from these treatments.

Maintenance Therapy With Cetuximab After FOLFIRI Plus Cetuximab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The optimal maintenance strategy after induction chemotherapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains to be debated.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with single-agent cetuximab after FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) plus cetuximab induction therapy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The TIME (Treatment After Irinotecan-Based Frontline Therapy: Maintenance With Erbitux]) (PRODIGE 28 [Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive]-UCGI 27 [UniCancer GastroIntestinal Group]) phase 2 noncomparative, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 15, 2014, to November 23, 2018, among 139 patients with unresectable RAS wild-type mCRC. The cutoff date for analysis was July 21, 2022.

Interventions

After first-line induction therapy with 8 cycles of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, patients without disease progression were randomized (1:1) to biweekly maintenance with cetuximab or observation. On disease progression, the same induction regimen was recommended for 16 weeks followed by further maintenance with cetuximab or observation until disease progression under the full induction regimen.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the 6-month progression-free rate from randomization. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. An exploratory biomolecular analysis, using next-generation sequencing, investigated the putative prognostic value of the tumor mutation profile.

Results

Of 214 patients enrolled (141 men [65.9%]; median age, 67 years [range, 23-85 years]), 139 were randomized to receive cetuximab (n = 67; 45 men [67.2%]; median age, 64 years [range, 34-85 years]) or to be observed (n = 72; 50 men [69.4%]; median age, 68 years [23-85 years]). The 6-month progression-free rate was 38.8% ([26 of 67] 95% CI, 27.1%-51.5%) in the cetuximab group and 5.6% ([4 of 72] 95% CI, 1.5%-13.6%) in the observation group. At a median follow-up of 40.5 months (95% CI, 33.6-47.5 months), median progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.7-7.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.7 months) in the observation group. Median overall survival (OS) was 24.8 months (95% CI, 18.7-30.4 months) in the cetuximab group and 19.7 months (95% CI, 13.3-24.4 months) in the observation group. In an exploratory multivariate analysis, any tumor-activating mutation in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway genes was associated with shorter PFS from randomization regardless of treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.01-2.62]; P = .04). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 treatment-related toxic effect in the cetuximab group during maintenance therapy was rash (8 of 67 [11.9%]).

Conclusion and Relevance

The randomized clinical trial did not meet its primary end point but suggests clinically meaningful PFS and OS benefits associated with cetuximab maintenance therapy. However, maintenance cetuximab or treatment breaks after first-line combination FOLFIRI-cetuximab therapy seems inappropriate for patients with MAPK-mutated independently of the side of primary tumor. A more complete assessment of MAPK pathway mutations warrants further investigation to the refine treatment strategy for patients with RAS wild-type mCRC.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02404935.

Optimal maintenance strategy following FOLFOX plus anti-EGFR induction therapy in patients with RAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer: An individual patient data pooled analysis of randomised clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Anti-EGFR antibodies plus doublet chemotherapy is the standard of care in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No phase-3 level of evidence is available to guide treatment de-escalation after anti-EGFR-based first-line. Several randomised clinical trials investigated de-intensification strategies with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) and/or anti-EGFR.

METHODS

We performed an individual patient data pooled analysis of Valentino, Panama, MACRO-2, COIN-B trials including RAS wild-type mCRC patients who received first-line therapy with FOLFOX plus panitumumab or cetuximab followed by pre-specified maintenance strategy. Only patients who started maintenance according to the assigned arm were included. Patients were categorised by type of maintenance (i.e. 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR or 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the start of maintenance; toxicity was evaluated for the maintenance treatment period.

RESULTS

A total of 518 patients were included in the pooled analysis. Overall, 123, 185 and 210 patients received maintenance with 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR, 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR, respectively. Median PFS was 5.6, 6.0 and 9.0 (P = 0.009) and OS was 25.7, 24.0 and 28.0 months (P = 0.134) in 5-FU/LV, anti-EGFR and 5-FU/LV + anti-EGFR arms, respectively. Monotherapy maintenance (either 5-FU/LV or anti-EGFR) was inferior to combination in terms of PFS (hazard ratios [HR] 1.26, P = 0.016) and non-significantly trending also in OS (HR 1.20, P = 0.111). An increase of overall any grade and grade ≥ 3 AEs and selected AEs was reported in combination compared to either 5-FU/LV or anti-EGFR arms.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis including four randomised phase II supports the use of 5-FU/LV plus anti-EGFR as the preferred maintenance regimen. Data provide rational for a more individualised maintenance treatment approach based on tumour and patients features.

Progress of research on molecular targeted therapies for colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies, accounting for approximately 10% of global cancer incidence and mortality. Approximately 20% of patients with CRC present metastatic disease (mCRC) at the time of diagnosis. Moreover, up to 50% of patients with localized disease eventually metastasize. mCRC encompasses a complex cascade of reactions involving multiple factors and processes, leading to a diverse array of molecular mechanisms. Improved comprehension of the pathways underlying cancer cell development and proliferation, coupled with the accessibility of relevant targeted agents, has propelled advancements in CRC treatment, ultimately leading to enhanced survival rates. Mutations in various pathways and location of the primary tumor in CRC influences the efficacy of targeted agents. This review summarizes available targeted agents for different CRC pathways, with a focus on recent advances in anti-angiogenic and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents, BRAF mutations, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-associated targeted agents.

Maintenance therapy with Fluoropyrimidine and cetuximab or bevacizumab after first line FOLFOX-chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer according to RAS or BRAFV600E mutation status

PURPOSE

Fluoropyrimidine (FP) with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); however, oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy critically affects the quality of life of patients. Maintenance strategies with FP plus bevacizumab have been well-established; nonetheless, the real-world outcomes of maintenance therapy with FP and cetuximab are unclear. We investigated the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent maintenance therapy with cetuximab.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified and analyzed patients with mCRC who were treated between 2012 and 2021 with first-line oxaliplatin-based induction chemotherapy (IC) plus biologic agents (either cetuximab or bevacizumab), and underwent maintenance therapy (IC regimen without oxaliplatin) after IC.

RESULTS

In total, 19 patients who were treated with mFOLFOX6 (FP/leucovorin/oxaliplatin) with cetuximab, and 26 patients who were treated with mFOLFOX6 with bevacizumab were included. In the cetuximab group, all patients were KRAS-, NRAS-, and BRAF-wild type, whereas most patients in the bevacizumab group harbored KRAS or BRAFV600E or NRAS mutants. During the maintenance treatment, seven patients (four [21%] in the cetuximab group and three [11%] in the bevacizumab group) achieved partial response after achieving nadir during induction chemotherapy. The disease control rates of maintenance therapy were 79% and 74% in the cetuximab and bevacizumab groups, respectively. The median progression-free survival of maintenance therapy and overall survival was 5.98 months and 32.4 months in the cetuximab group, and 4.83 months and 25.6 months in the bevacizumab group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintenance therapy with FP plus biologic agents (either bevacizumab or cetuximab) is a feasible strategy for appropriate mCRC patients according to their RAS/BRAF status. Further large-scale randomized studies are needed to validate the efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-based maintenance therapy.

Health-related quality of life in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with fluorouracil and folinic acid with or without panitumumab as maintenance therapy: a prespecified secondary analysis of the PanaMa (AIO KRK 0212) trial

BACKGROUND

The PanaMa trial demonstrated significant benefit in progression-free survival with the addition of panitumumab (Pmab) to fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) as maintenance therapy following first-line induction therapy with FOLFOX/Pmab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report health-related quality of life (HRQOL) analyses from the PanaMa trial.

METHODS

HRQOL outcomes were evaluated using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) at every cycle of therapy until disease progression/death. HRQOL outcomes were mean and individual changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 from baselines (before induction therapy and before maintenance therapy) to each cycle of treatment. Comparative analyses were performed by randomisation status and treatment arm for induction- and maintenance-therapy, respectively. The trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01991873).

RESULTS

At least one HRQOL questionnaire was completed by a total of 349/377 (93%) patients who received induction therapy, and by 237/248 (96%) patients who were randomised and received maintenance therapy. During induction therapy, most HRQOL dimensions remained stable or showed improvement, while appetite loss and diarrhoea significantly deteriorated. During maintenance therapy, HRQOL dimensions remained stable, while those that deteriorated during induction therapy showed significant improvement, without significant differences between the treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance therapy improves HRQOL dimensions that initially deteriorated during induction therapy while stabilising HRQOL in other dimensions. The addition of Pmab to FU/FA as maintenance therapy in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs progression-free survival without negative impact on HRQOL.

Targeted Therapies in Colorectal Cancer: Recent Advances in Biomarkers, Landmark Trials, and Future Perspectives

In 2022, approximately 600,000 cancer deaths were expected; more than 50,000 of those deaths would be from colorectal cancer (CRC). The CRC mortality rate in the US has decreased in recent decades, with a 51% drop between 1976 and 2014. This drop is attributed, in part, to the tremendous therapeutic improvements, especially after the 2000s, in addition to increased social awareness regarding risk factors and diagnostic improvement. Five-fluorouracil, irinotecan, capecitabine, and later oxaliplatin were the mainstays of mCRC treatment from the 1960s to 2002. Since then, more than a dozen drugs have been approved for the disease, betting on a new chapter in medicine, precision oncology, which uses patient and tumor characteristics to guide the therapeutic choice. Thus, this review will summarize the current literature on targeted therapies, highlighting the molecular biomarkers involved and their pathways.

Consensus Molecular Subtypes as Biomarkers of Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Maintenance Therapy With or Without Panitumumab in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (PanaMa, AIO KRK 0212)

PURPOSE

Consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) were evaluated as prognostic and predictive biomarkers of patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) with or without panitumumab (Pmab) after Pmab + mFOLFOX6 induction within the randomized phase II PanaMa trial.

METHODS

CMSs were determined in the safety set (ie, patients that received induction) and full analysis set (FAS; ie, randomly assigned patients who received maintenance) and correlated with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since the start of induction or maintenance treatment and objective response rates (ORRs). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CI were calculated by univariate/multivariate Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 377 patients of the safety set, 296 (78.5%) had available CMS data: CMS1/2/3/4: 29 (9.8%)/122 (41.2%)/33 (11.2%)/112 (37.8%) and unclassifiable: 17 (5.7%). The CMSs were prognostic biomarkers in terms of PFS (P < .0001), OS (P < .0001), and ORR (P = .02) since the start of induction treatment. In FAS patients (n = 196), with CMS2/4 tumors, the addition of Pmab to FU/FA maintenance therapy was associated with longer PFS (CMS2: HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.95], P = .03; CMS4: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.38 to 1.03], P = .07) and OS (CMS2: HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52], P = .66; CMS4: HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96], P = .04). The CMS interacted significantly with treatment in terms of PFS (CMS2 v CMS1/3: P = .02; CMS4 v CMS1/3: P = .03) and OS (CMS2 v CMS1/3: P = .03; CMS4 v CMS1/3: P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The CMS had a prognostic impact on PFS, OS, and ORR in RAS wild-type mCRC. In PanaMa, Pmab + FU/FA maintenance was associated with beneficial outcomes in CMS2/4, whereas no benefit was observed in CMS1/3 tumors.

Chemotherapy Duration for Various Indications in Colorectal Cancer: a Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) has evolved and become more personalized during the past several years. For example, depotentiation/reduced duration of systemic therapies has proven to be beneficial in both advanced and early stages of the disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

In particular, recent randomized studies of stage III and high-risk stage II CRC showed that a shorter duration (3 months), when compared to the historical 6-month comparator, provides nearly similar overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). In the setting of advanced, inoperable CRC, a relatively short induction phase (six to eight cycles) followed by biological agents is the current standard of care in RAS wild-type (wt). versus RAS mutated cases. With regard to potentially operable stage IV disease (with the aim of converting liver metastases to operability), a relatively short number of cycles (four to six cycles) should be offered with re-staging and re-evaluation for surgery as soon as possible in most cases. For inoperable liver metastases, a relatively intensive triplet or doublet plus targeted therapy may attain conversion in some cases and may even result in cure. Rectal cancer treatment continues to be a complex disease in terms of treatment and oncological results. Recent data seem to showcase the benefits of more prolonged sequential strategies (total neoadjuvant therapy, all treatment delivered before surgery, to reduce the risk of distant metastases and local control). In recent years, different strategies regarding treatment intensity have been employed in CRC in adjuvant and metastatic setting. Introduction of triplets as first-line therapy for colon cancer and as induction phase for rectal cancer are now therapeutic options. Conversely in stage II disease or low-risk stage III resected CRC, a reduced chemotherapy length is a new standard of care.

New developments in targeted therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most lethal cancer worldwide and the prognosis of metastatic CRC (mCRC) remains poor. Recent advancements in translational research have led to the identification of several new therapeutic targets and improved the treatment outcome of patients with tumours harbouring BRAF V600E mutation, (HER2) ErBB2 alterations, NTRK gene fusions and KRAS(G12C) mutation. Improved understanding towards the mechanism of resistance to targeted therapy such as anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies and the evolving role of therapeutic monitoring with circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has enabled the longitudinal tracking of clonal evolution during treatment and the individualization of subsequent treatments. To broaden the community-based implementation of precision oncology in directing targeted therapies for patients with gastrointestinal cancers including mCRC, the feasibility of 'Master Protocols' that utilizes ctDNA-based genotyping platforms is currently being evaluated. Such protocols encompass both observational and interventional clinical trials of novel targeted therapies conducted within a large clinical trial network. In this review, we will discuss the latest developments in targeted therapies, and therapeutic strategies for overcoming acquired drug resistance in patients with mCRC.

Current concepts of anti-EGFR targeting in metastatic colorectal cancer

Anti-EGFR targeting is one of the key strategies in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). For almost two decades oncologists have struggled to implement EGFR antibodies in the mCRC continuum of care. Both sidedness and RAS mutational status rank high among the predictive factors for the clinical efficacy of EGFR inhibitors. A prospective phase III trial has recently confirmed that anti-EGFR targeting confers an overall survival benefit only in left sided RAS-wildtype tumors when given in first line. It is a matter of discussion if more clinical benefit can be reached by considering putative primary resistance mechanisms (e.g., HER2, BRAF, PIK3CA, etc.) at this early stage of treatment. The value of this procedure in daily routine clinical utility has not yet been clearly delineated. Re-exposure to EGFR antibodies becomes increasingly crucial in the disease journey of mCRC. Yet re- induction or re-challenge strategies have been problematic as they relied on mathematical models that described the timely decay of EGFR antibody resistant clones. The advent of liquid biopsy and the implementation of more accurate next-generation sequencing (NGS) based high throughput methods allows for tracing of EGFR resistant clones in real time. These displays the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of metastatic disease compared to the former standard radiographic assessment and re-biopsy. These techniques may move EGFR inhibition in mCRC into the area of precision medicine in order to apply EGFR antibodies with the increase or decrease of EGFR resistant clones. This review critically discusses established concepts of tackling the EGFR pathway in mCRC and provides insight into the growing field of liquid biopsy guided personalized approaches of EGFR inhibition in mCRC.

The Validity of Surrogate Endpoints in Sub Groups of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Defined by Treatment Class and KRAS Status

Background and Aim: Findings from the literature suggest that the validity of surrogate endpoints in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may depend on a treatments' mechanism of action. We explore this and the impact of Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) status on surrogacy patterns in mCRC. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for pharmacological therapies in mCRC. Bayesian meta-analytic methods for surrogate endpoint evaluation were used to evaluate surrogate relationships across all RCTs, by KRAS status and treatment class. Surrogate endpoints explored were progression free survival (PFS) as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS), and tumour response (TR) as a surrogate for PFS and OS. Results: 66 RCTs were identified from the systematic review. PFS showed a strong surrogate relationship with OS across all data and in subgroups by KRAS status. The relationship appeared stronger within individual treatment classes compared to the overall analysis. The TR-PFS and TR-OS relationships were found to be weak overall but stronger within the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor + Chemotherapy (EGFR + Chemo) treatment class; both overall and in the wild type (WT) patients for TR-PFS, but not in patients with the mutant (MT) KRAS status where data were limited. Conclusions: PFS appeared to be a good surrogate endpoint for OS. TR showed a moderate surrogate relationship with PFS and OS for the EGFR + Chemo treatment class. There was some evidence of impact of the mechanism of action on the strength of the surrogacy patterns in mCRC, but little evidence of the impact of KRAS status on the validity of surrogate endpoints.

Early onset metastatic colorectal cancer in patients receiving panitumumab-based upfront strategy: Overall and sex-specific outcomes in the Valentino trial

Anti-EGFRs plus doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Early-onset (EO) mCRC has an increasing incidence and its prognostic/predictive role and management is debatable. We performed a post hoc analysis of Valentino study, that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after FOLFOX/panitumumab induction. We assessed the safety and efficacy outcomes in patients stratified for age (<50/≥50 years old). We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL). In 229 patients enrolled, 35 (15%) had EO mCRC, with a higher rate of female sex (P = .020) and lower rate of primary tumor resection (P = .001). Median PFS and OS were 10.9 vs 10.8 months (P = .593) and 28.1 vs 27.5 months (P = .865) in patients <50 and ≥50 years old, respectively, with no significant impact of maintenance arm. ORR and disease control rate were 74% vs 65% (P = .337) and 97% vs 81% (P = .013) in patients <50 or ≥50 years old. In younger patients, a trend for increased chemotherapy-related AEs (peculiarly anemia) was shown, while significantly decreased EGFR-related hypomagnesemia and increased skin rash were reported. No significant differences in treatment intensity or QoL were observed. In patients with EO mCRC and RAS wild-type status, we found no differences in terms of survival outcomes based on age when selecting maintenance strategies. Management of treatment-related AEs should consider the differential toxicity profile of age and sex.

The Role of Anti-EGFR Monoclonal Antibody in mCRC Maintenance Therapy

Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) combined with chemotherapy in patients with RAS (rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) can alleviate and stabilize the disease, effectively prolong the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and improve the overall response rate (ORR), which is the first-line treatment standard scheme for RAS wild-type mCRC currently. However, whether anti-EGFR mAb can be used for the maintenance treatment after the first-line treatment of mCRC remains controversial. We reviewed the recent studies on anti-EGFR mAb. The contents include five parts, introduction, anti-EGFR mAb in mCRC and its status in first-line therapy, establishment of the maintenance treatment pattern after the standard first-line treatment for mCRC, research progress of anti-EGFR mAb in mCRC maintenance therapy, and conclusion. More studies support the maintenance treatment of anti-EGFR mAb, but some researchers raise the problems about high cost and drug resistance. Despite lack of the maintenance evidence of anti-EGFR mAb, especially lack of large-scale phase III prospective clinical trials, with the emergence of new evidence and more accurate screening of treatment-dominant groups, maintenance therapy with anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy or anti-EGFR mAb combined with fluorouracil-based schemes after first-line chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR mAb therapy might strive for more treatment opportunities, optimize treatment strategies and prolong treatment continuity, and finally, lead to more survival benefit for suitable patients.

Reinduction of an Anti-EGFR-based First-line Regimen in Patients with RAS Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Enrolled in the Valentino Study

Background

In patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), growing evidence supports anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) retreatment, whereas little is known on the outcomes of anti-EGFR-based reinduction therapy during the upfront strategy.

Methods

We included patients enrolled in the Valentino study who had disease progression and received at least one dose of post-progression therapy. The Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression were used for the survival analysis. When comparing the outcomes of anti-EGFR-based reinduction versus any second line, a propensity score–based matching was used.

Results

Liver-limited/single site of disease (P &lt; .001 and P = .002), left-sidedness (P = .029), surgery of metastases (P = .003), early tumor shrinkage, and deeper responses (P = .018 and P = .036) were associated with the use of anti-EGFR-based reinduction versus any other second line. All patients treated with reinduction had an anti-EGFR-free interval of at least 3 months. In the propensity score–matched population, progression-free survival (PFS) was similar in the 2 treatment groups, the overall survival (OS) was significantly longer for patients treated with reinduction (P = .029), and the response rate was higher in patients treated with reinduction (P = .033). An oxaliplatin-free interval ≥12 months, left-sidedness, and molecular hyperselection beyond RAS/BRAF were associated with significantly better outcomes after anti-EGFR-based reinduction.

Conclusions

Reinduction strategies with anti-EGFR-based regimens are commonly used in clinical practice. Our data highlight the importance of clinical–molecular selection for re-treatments and the need for prospective strategy trials in selected populations.

Retrospective analysis of the preparation and application of immunotherapy in cancer treatment (Review)

Monoclonal antibody technology plays a vital role in biomedical and immunotherapy, which greatly promotes the study of the structure and function of genes and proteins. To date, monoclonal antibodies have gone through four stages: murine monoclonal antibody, chimeric monoclonal antibody, humanised monoclonal antibody and fully human monoclonal antibody; thousands of monoclonal antibodies have been used in the fields of biology and medicine, playing a special role in the pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of disease. In this review, we compare the advantages and disadvantages of hybridoma technology, phage display technology, ribosome display technology, transgenic mouse technology, single B cell monoclonal antibody generation technologies, and forecast the promising applications of these technologies in clinical medicine, disease diagnosis and tumour treatment.

Panitumumab Plus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Versus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Alone as Maintenance Therapy in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized PANAMA Trial (AIO KRK 0212)

PURPOSE

The randomized PANAMA trial investigated the efficacy of panitumumab (Pmab) when added to maintenance therapy with fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Following first-line induction therapy with six cycles of FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab, responding patients (stable disease or partial or complete remission) were randomly assigned (1:1, open-label) to maintenance treatment with either FU/FA plus Pmab or FU/FA alone. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of progression-free survival (PFS, time from random assignment until progression or death) in favor of FU/FA plus Pmab with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, a power of 80%, and a significance level of 10%. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate of maintenance therapy, and toxicity. Survival end points were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test and Cox regressions. Dichotomous variables were compared by Fisher's exact test; odds ratios were indicated when appropriate. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01991873).

RESULTS

Overall, 248 patients were randomly assigned and received maintenance therapy with either FU/FA plus Pmab (125 patients) or FU/FA alone (123 patients). At data cutoff, with 218 events (of 218 needed), PFS of maintenance therapy was significantly improved with FU/FA plus Pmab (8.8 months v 5.7 months; HR, 0.72; 80% CI, 0.60 to 0.85; P = .014). Overall survival (event rate 54%) numerically favored the FU/FA plus Pmab arm (28.7 months v 25.7 months; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.18; P = .32). Objective response rates were 40.8% in patients receiving FU/FA plus Pmab versus 26.0% in patients receiving FU/FA alone (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.36; P = .02). The most frequent Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event grade ≥ 3 event during maintenance therapy was skin rash (7.2%).

CONCLUSION

In RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, maintenance therapy with FU/FA plus Pmab induced a significantly superior PFS compared with FU/FA alone. If active maintenance therapy is aspired following induction therapy with FU/FA and oxaliplatin plus Pmab, FU/FA plus Pmab appears to be the most favorable option.

Upfront primary tumour resection and survival in synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer according to primary tumour location and RAS status: Pooled analysis of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD)

INTRODUCTION

Retrospective studies and meta-analyses suggest that upfront primary tumour resection (UPTR) confers a survival benefit in patients with asymptomatic unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) undergoing chemotherapy, however a consensus of its role in routine clinical practice in the current era of targeted therapies is lacking. This retrospective study aimed to analyse the survival benefit of UPTR in terms of tumour location and mutational status, in patients with synchronous mCRC receiving chemotherapy and targeted therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Survival was analysed in a pooled cohort of synchronous mCRC patients treated with a first-line anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR inhibitor in seven trials of the Spanish TTD group, according to UPTR, tumour-sidedness and mutational profiling.

RESULTS

Of 1334 eligible patients, 642 (48%) had undergone UPTR. UPTR was associated with significantly longer overall survival (OS; 25.0 vs 20.3 months; HR 1.30, 95%CI 1.15-1.48; p < 0.0001). UPTR was associated with significant OS benefit in both left-sided (HR 1.38, 95%CI 1.13-1.69; p = 0.002) and right-sided (HR 1.39, 95%CI 1.00-1.94; p = 0.049) tumours, RASwt (HR 1.29, 95%CI 1.05-1.60; p = 0.016) and BRAFwt (HR 1.49, 95%CI 1.21-1.84; p = 0.0002) tumours, and treatment with anti-EGFRs (HR 1.47, 95%CI 1.13-1.92; p = 0.004) and anti-VEGFs (HR 1.25, 95%CI 1.08-1.44; p = 0.003). Multivariate analysis identified number of metastatic sites, RAS status, primary tumour location and UPTR as independent prognostic factors for OS.

CONCLUSION

Considering the selection bias inherent to this study, our results support UPTR before first-line anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF targeted therapy in right and left-sided asymptomatic unresectable synchronous mCRC patients. RAS/BRAF mutational status may also influence UPTR function.

Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies

In the era of rapid development of new, expensive cancer therapies, value frameworks have been developed to quantify clinical benefit (CB). We assessed the evolution of CB since the 2015 introduction of The American Society of Clinical Oncology and The European Society of Medical Oncology value frameworks. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing systemic therapies for solid malignancies from 2010 to 2020 were evaluated and CB (Δ) in 2010–2014 (pre-value frameworks (PRE)) were compared to 2015–2020 (POST) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QoL). In the 485 studies analyzed (12% PRE and 88% POST), the most common primary endpoint was PFS (49%), followed by OS (20%), RR (12%), and QoL (6%), with a significant increase in OS and decrease in RR as primary endpoints in the POST era (p = 0.011). Multivariable analyses revealed significant improvement in ΔOS POST (OR 2.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.26, p = 0.02) while controlling for other variables. After the development of value frameworks, median ΔOS improved minimally. The impact of value frameworks has yet to be fully realized in RCTs. Efforts to include endpoints shown to impact value, such as QoL, into clinical trials are warranted.

Post-Induction Management in Patients With Left-Sided RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated With First-Line Anti-EGFR-Based Doublet Regimens: A Multicentre Study

Background

Few data regarding post-induction management following first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-based doublet regimens in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are available.

Methods

This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians’ attitude, and the safety and effectiveness of post-induction strategies in consecutive patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen, who did not experience disease progression within 6 months from induction initiation, at 21 Italian and 1 Spanish Institutions. The measured clinical outcomes were: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events, and objective response rate (ORR).

Results

At the data cutoff, among 686 consecutive patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen from March 2012 to October 2020, 355 eligible patients have been included in the present analysis. Among these, 118 (33.2%), 66 (18.6%), and 11 (3.1%) received a maintenance with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5FU/LV)+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, and 5FU/LV, respectively, while 160 (45.1%) patients continued induction treatment (non-maintenance) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient decision, or completion of planned treatment. The median period of follow-up for the overall population was 33.7 months (95%CI = 28.9–35.6). The median PFS values of the 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, 5FU/LV, and non-maintenance cohorts were 16.0 (95%CI = 14.3–17.7, 86 events), 13.0 (95%CI = 11.4–14.5, 56 events), 14.0 (95%CI = 8.1–20.0, 8 events), and 10.1 months (95%CI = 9.0–11.2, 136 events), respectively (p < 0.001). The median OS values were 39.6 (95%CI = 31.5–47.7, 43 events), 36.1 (95%CI = 31.6–40.7, 36 events), 39.5 (95%CI = 28.2–50.8, 4 events), and 25.1 months (95%CI = 22.6–27.6, 99 events), respectively (p < 0.001). After adjusting for key covariates, a statistically significant improvement in PFS in favor of 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.44–0.77, p < 0.001) and anti-EGFR (HR = 0.71, 95%CI = 0.51–0.98, p = 0.039) compared to the non-maintenance cohort was found. Compared to the non-maintenance cohort, OS was improved by 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.38–0.81, p = 0.002) and, with marginal significance, by anti-EGFR (HR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.51–0.98, p = 0.051). No difference was found in ORR. Any grade non-hematological and hematological events were generally higher in the non-maintenance compared to the maintenance cohorts.

Conclusion

Among the treatment strategies following an anti-EGFR-based doublet first-line induction regimen in patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in a “real-life” setting, 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR resulted the most adopted, effective, and relatively safe regimen.

Impact of age and gender on the efficacy and safety of upfront therapy with panitumumab plus FOLFOX followed by panitumumab-based maintenance: a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the Valentino study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy outcome of elderly metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients fit enough to receive combination chemotherapy plus biological agents is an issue of growing interest. Also, gender-specific differential toxicity and efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-based upfront treatments need to be explored.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Valentino was a multicenter, randomized, phase II trial, investigating two panitumumab-based maintenance strategies following first-line panitumumab plus FOLFOX in RAS wild-type mCRC patients. We carried out a subgroup analysis, aimed at assessing the differences in efficacy, safety and quality of life (QoL) according to age (<70 versus ≥70 years) and gender (male versus female). Efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR); safety endpoints were rates of any grade and grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

No significant differences in terms of PFS, OS and ORR were observed between patients aged <70 or ≥70 years and the effect of the maintenance treatment arm on survival outcomes was similar in the two subgroups. The safety profile of both induction and maintenance treatment and the impact on QoL were similar in elderly and younger patients. No significant differences in PFS, OS, ORR or clinical benefit rate were observed according to gender. A significantly higher rate of overall grade 3/4 AEs (P = 0.008) and of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (P = 0.017), any grade and grade 3/4 neutropenia (P < 0.0001) and any grade conjunctivitis (P = 0.033) was reported in female as compared to male patients. Conversely, we reported a significantly higher incidence of any grade skin rash (P = 0.0007) and hypomagnesemia (P = 0.029) in male patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The upfront choice of an anti-EGFR-based doublet chemotherapy followed by a maintenance strategy represents a valuable option in RAS wild-type mCRC irrespective of gender and age, though a careful evaluation of patients to maximize the risk/benefit ratio is warranted.

Cetuximab Can Be an Effective and Low-Toxicity Maintenance Treatment Drug in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Study of Zhejiang Cancer Hospital

After initial treatment, maintenance therapy is now commonly used in mCRC patients, which can help patients live longer, have lower side effects, and higher quality of life. The maintenance treatment may include chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or combined with chemotherapy and targeted therapy. But the evidence of cetuximab maintenance is still scant. Methods: We collected real-world data of wild-type RAS unresectable mCRC patients who were treated with cetuximab-based chemotherapy as the first-line therapy between January 2013 and December 2018 at the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital (Hangzhou, China). Results: A total of 177 patients were ultimately included in the study, and 107 patients had progression information in medical records; all patients had survival data. The median OS was 40.9 ms, ORR was 14.7%, and DCR was 73.5%. The subgroup analysis showed that the mOS was better in maintenance patients than in non-maintenance patients (47.1 vs. 28.6 ms, p = 0.001), patients with primary tumor resection had better mOS than who did not (47.1 vs. 35.4 ms, p = 0.038). In those 107 patients who had progression information, the median PFS was 9 ms, the median OS was 42.6 ms, ORR was 18.7%, and DCR was 84.1%. The subgroup analysis showed that the mPFS and mOS were 11.6 and 47.1 ms, respectively, in the maintenance group, which were significantly better than 6.1 ms and 28.7 ms in the non-maintenance group (p = 0.025 and 0.017, respectively). The mPFS and mOS in patients with efficacy evaluation of CR + PR + SD were 10.3 and 47.1 ms, respectively, which is significantly better than 2.8 and 13.5 ms in the PD patients (p = 0.012 and <0.001, respectively). The mOS was best in only lung metastases patients (60.9 ms), then only liver metastases patients (47.1 ms), and then in both liver and lung metastases (42.6 ms); the mOS in patients with other organs metastases was the worst (22.4 ms), p = 0.022. The mOS in male individuals is better than that in female individuals, 60.99 vs. 29.1 ms, respectively, p = 0.042. The primary tumor site and primary tumor resection also affect the OS, primary tumor resection better than did not (not reach the end vs. 35.7 ms, p = 0.048), left side better than right side (47.1 vs. 16.6 ms, p < 0.001), which is consistent with the literature report. There was no statistical difference in other subgroups. Conclusion: For patients with all RAS wild-type and initially unresectable mCRC who experienced standard first-line cetuximab-based treatment and maintenance treatment that contained cetuximab can significantly improve the mPFS and mOS, and the observed toxicity was mostly mild too. So, we consider that cetuximab can be an effective and safety maintenance drug in mCRC patients.

First-Line Biological Agents Plus Chemotherapy in Older Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Pooled Analysis

BACKGROUND

Biologicals, in combination with chemotherapy, are recommended as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); however, evidence guiding the appropriate management of older patients with mCRC is limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes in older versus younger patients with mCRC who received first-line biological therapy.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis used pooled data from five trials undertaken by the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours. All were studies of adults with advanced CRC who received first-line treatment with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, cetuximab or panitumumab, stratified by age (≥ 65 vs. < 65 years). Endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety.

RESULTS

In total, 999 patients from five studies were included in the analysis: 480 (48%) were aged ≥ 65 years, and 519 (52%) were aged < 65 years. Median PFS did not differ significantly between patients aged ≥ 65 and < 65 years (9.9 vs. 9.4 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-1.17). Median OS was significantly shorter in older than in younger patients (21.3 vs. 25.0 months; HR 1.21; 95% CI 1.04-1.41). There was no significant difference between older and younger patients in ORR (59 vs. 62%). Patients aged ≥ 65 years experienced significantly more treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (61.67%) than did patients aged < 65 years (45.86%).

CONCLUSIONS

Biologicals plus chemotherapy is an effective first-line treatment option for selected patients aged ≥ 65 years with mCRC and has a manageable safety profile and efficacy comparable to that observed in younger patients.

Molecular Genetics and the Role of Molecularly Targeted Agents in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in the world. It is the third most common malignancy and fourth leading cancer-related deaths worldwide. In the USA, CRC is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in both men and women. It is caused by genetic components and potential environmental factors such as consumption of processed meat, red meat, animal fats, low fiber intake, and obesity. Despite the utilization of effective screening modalities and guidelines in the USA, a significant number of patients are diagnosed with advanced, metastatic disease at the time of presentation to the physician. Recent advances in the understanding of molecular medicine with subsequent development and incorporation of newer therapeutic agents into current chemotherapeutic regimens have improved outcomes; however, the management of metastatic CRC remains challenging, particularly for the treating oncologists.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on CRC mainly related to molecular genetics, targeted biologic agents, and published clinical trials. We also searched and reviewed ongoing clinical trials from Clinicaltrials.gov.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Alterations in several oncogenes are associated with CRC, among those RAS, BRAF, and HER2 are of current clinical importance. Chemotherapy drugs, along with vascular endothelial growth factor or epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies, are proven to be efficient with manageable toxicity profiles in metastatic CRC. Additional researches on Her-2-directed therapy, BRAF-targeted agents, immunotherapeutic, and newer molecularly targeted agents are needed for further improvement in outcome.

GUCY2C as a biomarker to target precision therapies for patients with colorectal cancer

Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most-deadly malignancies worldwide. Current therapeutic regimens for CRC patients are relatively generic, based primarily on disease type and stage, with little variation. As the field of molecular oncology advances, so too must therapeutic management of CRC. Understanding molecular heterogeneity has led to a new-found promotion for precision therapy in CRC; underlining the diversity of molecularly targeted therapies based on individual tumor characteristics.

Areas covered

We review current approaches for the treatment of CRC and discuss the potential of precision therapy in advanced CRC. We highlight the utility of the intestinal protein guanylyl cyclase C (GUCY2C), as a multi-purpose biomarker and unique therapeutic target in CRC. Here, we summarize current GUCY2C-targeted approaches for treatment of CRC.

Expert opinion

The GUCY2C biomarker has multi-faceted utility in medicine. Developmental investment of GUCY2C as a diagnostic and therapeutic biomarker offers a variety of options taking the molecular characteristics of cancer into account. From GUCY2C-targeted therapies, namely cancer vaccines, CAR-T cells, and monoclonal antibodies, to GUCY2C agonists for chemoprevention in those who are at high risk for developing colorectal cancer, the utility of this protein provides many avenues for exploration with significance in the field of precision medicine.

First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): Quality and Clinical Benefit Overview

Different strategies of maintenance therapy (sequential CT, intermittent CT, intermittent CT and MAbs, or de-escalation MAbs monotherapy) after first-line treatment are undertaken. Many randomized clinical trials (RCT), which evaluated these approaches, suffer from incorrect design, heterogenous primary endpoints, inadequate size, and other methodology flaws. Drawing any conclusions becomes challenging and recommendations are mainly vague. We evaluated those studies from another perspective, focusing on the design quality and the clinical benefit measure with a more objective and accurate methodology. These data allowed a clearer and more exact overview of the statement in maintenance treatment.

How we treat metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. About 20% of patients suffer from metastatic disease at diagnosis, while about one-third of patients treated with curative intent relapsed. In these patients, an accurate staging allows to plan a treatment strategy within a multidisciplinary team in order to achieve predefined goals. Patient's clinical features, tumour characteristics and molecular profile (RAS/BRAF and microsatellite instability (MSI) status) should be considered during the treatment choice. Combination of chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) plus biological agents (antiepidermal growth factor receptor or antiangiogenic drugs) in addition to surgery, could give a chance of cure in resectable or potentially resectable tumours. However, in never resectable tumours, disease control and prolonging survival should be the goal to achieve simultaneously with control of symptoms. In addition to standard therapies, especially in case of unresectable oligometastatic disease, several local ablative treatment are available. In later lines, when improving quality of life become predominant, regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil demonstrated survival benefit, while re-challenge therapies represent an option only in selected patients. In patients with BRAFV600E-mutant tumour or with MSI, new therapies showed survival gain and probably will be a new piece in the treatment algorithm.

Health-related quality of life in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with panitumumab-based first-line treatment strategy: A pre-specified secondary analysis of the Valentino study

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QoL) patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data from pivotal first-line trials in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are poor. The Valentino study showed that de-escalation to single-agent panitumumab after 4-month induction with panitumumab-FOLFOX is inferior to panitumumab-5-FU/LV in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC, although slightly reducing toxicity. We report QoL, a secondary end-point.

METHODS

PROs were assessed by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 (QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-CR29, EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaires, at baseline and every 8 weeks until disease progression. First two evaluations correspond to induction treatment (identical in both arms), while subsequent to maintenance. To describe QoL changes over time, mean changes from baseline at each time point were calculated in overall population. To compare maintenance between two arms, mean changes and proportion of improved/stable/worse patients versus baseline were compared for each item.

RESULTS

In arm A/B, 91.5%/92.0% of enrolled patients completed questionnaires at baseline. No significant differences in the two arms were reported in compliance, baseline scores and mean changes versus baseline for the three questionnaires during maintenance (24/32/40 weeks). Overall, mean changes versus baseline showed an early deterioration during induction with partial recovering during maintenance for global QoL, functional scales and several symptoms/items of QLQ-C30 (fatigue, nausea/vomiting, appetite loss, diarrhoea) and QLQ-CR29 (body image, dry mouth, hair loss, taste, faecal incontinence, sore skin), and EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score.

CONCLUSION

In patients with RAS wild-type mCRC, induction with oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy plus anti-EGFRs induces a transient significant QoL deterioration. After induction phase, treatment deintensification determines an overall recovery of health-related QoL, besides the expected prevention of oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity.

Effect of Reduced-Dose Capecitabine Plus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Fluorouracil-based chemotherapy combined with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor/vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is the standard first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer followed by low-intensity maintenance therapy to balance the clinical efficacy and adverse effects (AEs). However, there have been concerns about the AEs of capecitabine plus cetuximab as a maintenance therapy in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the biological activity and safety of capecitabine plus cetuximab as a novel maintenance therapy for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This phase 2 prospective clinical trial was conducted from April 29, 2016, to April 29, 2019, at 5 centers in China. Patients diagnosed as having RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer were recruited to receive fluorouracil-based cytotoxic agents combined with cetuximab followed by capecitabine plus cetuximab for maintenance therapy. Forty-seven patients with histologically confirmed metastatic colorectal cancer and genetic test results showing a wild-type RAS were enrolled in maintenance therapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Induction therapy for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer was 8 to 12 cycles of fluorouracil-based chemotherapy combined with cetuximab. After stable disease status or better was achieved, reduced-dose capecitabine plus cetuximab was administered for maintenance therapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was progression-free survival during maintenance therapy. The secondary end points were total progression-free survival, overall survival, quality of life, safety, and toxic effects of treatment.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were enrolled in maintenance therapy, with a median age of 52 years (range, 25-81 years) and 32 (68%) of them being men. The median maintenance progression-free survival was 7.2 (95% CI, 5.8-8.6) months. The median progression-free survival was 12.7 (95% CI, 11.8-15.4) months. The median overall survival was 27.4 (95% CI, 21.4-35.5) months. Grade 3 to 4 AEs during induction therapy included neutropenia (4 patients [9%]), diarrhea (4 patients [9%]), nausea or vomiting (3 patients [6%]), rash acneiform (10 patients [21%]), and hand-foot syndrome (8 patients [17%]). Grade 3 to 4 AEs during maintenance therapy included diarrhea (2 patients [4%]), rash acneiform (8 patients [17%]), and hand-foot syndrome (5 patients [11%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Reduced-dose capecitabine plus cetuximab after initial chemotherapy is a novel maintenance therapy for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer that achieved good outcomes and tolerable nonserious AEs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02717923.

Cetuximab Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Unresectable Wild-Type RAS and BRAF Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Single-Institute Prospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI (leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) is the preferred first-line therapy for RAS and BRAF wild-type (RBWT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). To counter chemotherapy-induced side effects, use of maintenance therapy is suggested. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of cetuximab maintenance therapy in patients after effective completion of first-line induction therapy.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled untreated patients with mCRC RBWT who received first-line cetuximab plus FOLFIRI therapy. Following this, patients with treatment response either entered observation (stop treatment) or maintenance treatment 1 (cetuximab plus irinotecan) groups. After 6-12 cycles of maintenance treatment 1, patients entered maintenance treatment 2 (cetuximab only). If a patient progressed on maintenance 2, cetuximab plus FOLFIRI was reintroduced. The primary end point was failure-free survival (FFS), whereas the secondary end points included disease control rate (DCR), objective remission rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS). Safety events were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 79 enrolled patients, 72 completed first-line treatment effectively (DCR 91.1%, ORR 63.9%) and 44 entered maintenance 1 [median PFS 1 (mPFS, maintenance 1) 6.1 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.0-6.2; DCR 56.8%; ORR 22.7%]. Of them, 21 entered maintenance treatment 2 (mPFS2 8.7 months, 95% CI 3.3-14.1; DCR 28.6%; ORR 4.8%). Median FFS (mFFS) was significantly longer in the maintenance 1 group compared with the observation group [12.7 vs. 3.0 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.202, 95% CI 0.111-0.369; P < 0.001]. Overall, mFFS was 19.0 and 9.3 months in maintenance and observation groups, respectively (HR 0.211, 95% CI 0.117-0.380; P < 0.001). Rash acneiform, mucositis, and asthenia were commonly observed adverse events during maintenance treatment.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance treatment with cetuximab after first-line therapy significantly improved FFS, with an acceptable safety profile in untreated patients with mCRC RBWT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered, 2019/10/02, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR number 1900026360.

Risk factors for developing cardiac toxicities in cancer patients treated with panitumumab combination therapy

Aim: To evaluate the incidence and risk of cardiac toxicities associated with panitumumab in advanced cancer of Caucasian patients. Materials & methods: The incidence of cardiac toxicity was assessed by simple incidence rates and rates per 100 person-years. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was conducted. Results: Panitumumab-containing therapy significantly increased the risk of developing cardiac arrhythmias (p = 0.036), but not for any cardiac event (p = 0.24) or ischemic event (p = 0.087). The absolute rate of developing cardiac arrhythmia was 10.0 events versus 7.5 events per 100 person-years. Pre-existing hypertension (p = 0.033), history of cardiac disease (p = 0.055) or panitumumab usage (p = 0.046) were risk factors for cardiac arrhythmias. Conclusion: The addition of panitumumab to chemotherapy increases the risk of developing cardiac arrhythmia, but not for any cardiac toxicity or ischemic events.

A Retrospective Exploration of Targeted Maintenance Therapy in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Based on the Background of Chinese Patient Assistance Program

Background: Maintenance therapy with bevacizumab (Bev) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) provides progression-free survival (PFS) benefits. However, the role of maintenance therapy with an anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody has not been established.

Methods: Eligible CRC patients were assigned to maintenance therapy with cetuximab (Cet; Cet group) or Bev (Bev group). PFS, the duration of maintenance therapy, and safety were analyzed. Cox multivariate regression analyses were performed to determine independent prognostic factors.

Results: A total of 143 eligible patients were assigned to the Cet (n = 79) or Bev (n = 64) groups. In the Cet group, all patients had KRAS wild-type. The baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups, except for a higher percentage of patients with a left-sided primary tumor in the Cet group than in the Bev group (86.1 vs. 62.5%, P < 0.0001). The median PFS was not significantly different between the Cet group and the Bev group: 5.9 months (95% CI 2.30–9.50) vs. 7.0 months (95% CI 3.69–10.31) (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.77–1.79, P = 0.45). The median duration of maintenance therapy in the Cet group was shorter than that in the Bev group: 4.0 months (95% CI 1.94–5.99) vs. 4.8 months (95% CI 2.68–6.98) (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61–1.33; P = 0.59). The subgroup analyses showed that the median PFS for the first maintenance therapy and the second maintenance therapy were 3.2 months (95% CI 1.69–4.78) and 5.2 months (95% CI 1.58–8.83), respectively (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.44–1.81; P = 0.75).

Conclusions: This study suggests that maintenance therapy with Cet or Bev can be considered an appropriate option following induction chemotherapy for selected patients with advanced CRC. Multiple maintenance therapy seems to confer survival benefits in advanced CRC. Maintenance therapy with Cet after first-line induction chemotherapy seems to be associated with greater survival benefits.

Update on optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer from the AGITG expert meeting: ESMO congress 2019

Introduction: Outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer are improving, due to the tailoring of therapy enabled by better understanding of clinical behavior according to molecular subtype.Areas covered: A review of the literature and recent conference presentations was undertaken on the topic of systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This review summarizes expert discussion of the current evidence for therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on molecular subgrouping.Expert opinion: EGFR-targeted and VEGF-targeted antibodies are now routinely incorporated into treatment strategies for mCRC. EGFR-targeted antibodies are restricted to patients with extended RAS wild-type profiles, with evidence that they should be further restricted to patients with left-sided tumors. Clinically distinct treatment pathways based on tumor RAS, BRAF, HER2 and MMR status, are now clinically applicable. Evidence suggests therapy for additional subgroups will soon be defined; the most advanced being for patients with KRAS G12 C mutation and gene TRK fusion defects.

Comprehensive review of targeted therapy for colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most lethal and prevalent malignancies in the world and was responsible for nearly 881,000 cancer-related deaths in 2018. Surgery and chemotherapy have long been the first choices for cancer patients. However, the prognosis of CRC has never been satisfying, especially for patients with metastatic lesions. Targeted therapy is a new optional approach that has successfully prolonged overall survival for CRC patients. Following successes with the anti-EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) agent cetuximab and the anti-angiogenesis agent bevacizumab, new agents blocking different critical pathways as well as immune checkpoints are emerging at an unprecedented rate. Guidelines worldwide are currently updating the recommended targeted drugs on the basis of the increasing number of high-quality clinical trials. This review provides an overview of existing CRC-targeted agents and their underlying mechanisms, as well as a discussion of their limitations and future trends.

The Role of Maintenance Strategies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

In metastatic colorectal cancer, induction combination chemotherapy with a targeted agent is considered the mainstay of treatment. Multiple randomized clinical trials have examined different strategies of continuing cytotoxic therapy until progression compared with a period of either observation or the use of various maintenance agents. However, those randomized clinical trials have shown inconsistent efficacy results that make it challenging to draw any conclusion on which strategy is preferred. Therefore, a network meta-analysis is helpful to compare different agents across randomized clinical trials.

Objective

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different treatment strategies for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Evidence Review

MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized clinical trials evaluating different strategies for patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. Trials of interest included those including patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated with an initial period of cytotoxic chemotherapy (with or without a biologic) and then switched to one of the following strategies: observation; maintenance with bevacizumab (Bev), fluoropyrimidine (FP), or both (FP + Bev); or continuing the induction regimen until progression. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Network meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects consistency model to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Agents were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Higher SUCRA scores correspond to greater efficacy. Initial analysis was performed on December 18, 2018. An updated search was performed in April 2019, and no additional studies were added.

Findings

Twelve trials at low risk of bias (5540 patients; age range, 23-85 years; 64.4 % male) were included. Network meta-analysis showed no benefit of continuing full cytotoxic chemotherapy until progression vs observation in terms of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.46-1.09) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.07). Compared with observation, maintenance therapy showed a PFS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.77) but not an OS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-1.01). All maintenance strategies (FP, FP + Bev, and Bev) showed significant improvement in PFS vs observation. On SUCRA analysis, maintenance treatment (FP or FP + Bev) had the highest likelihood of achieving improved PFS (67.1% for FP, 99.8% for FP + Bev, and 36.5% for Bev) and OS (81.3% for FP, 73.2% for FP + Bev, and 32.6% for Bev).

Conclusions and Relevance

For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, there is no benefit to continuing the full induction regimen until progression, without a period of either observation or maintenance treatment. A maintenance strategy with a fluoropyrimidine, with or without the addition of bevacizumab, is preferred. However, given the lack of a clear OS benefit, shared decision-making should include observation as an acceptable alternative.

A study of capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to conventional chemotherapy as maintenance strategy in responders after induction therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

The aim of this study is to demonstrate that capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to capecitabine conventional chemotherapy as maintenance treatment, in patients who have responded to 16–18 weeks first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Methods

The study design is a prospective, randomized, open label, phase II clinical trial. Those patients with mCRC who respond well after 16–18 weeks of standard doublet chemotherapy as induction may be enrolled into this study, and randomly assigned to the capecitabine metronomic group or standard dosage group. The duration of disease control after randomization and progression-free survival after enrollment are the primary endpoints. Overall survival, safety, and quality of life are the secondary endpoints. The sample size required to achieve the research objectives of this project is 79 patients in each group. The study recently started on 1 January 2018, and will last for 36 months.

Discussion

This project is intended to study the efficacy and safety of capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy in the maintenance treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, and to explore the strategy of “low toxicity, high efficiency, economy, and individualization”, which is suitable for China’s national conditions and pharmacoeconomics. It has great prospects for clinical application and a clear socioeconomic value.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03158610. Registered on 15 May 2017.

Maintenance treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: in search of the best strategy

Over the last 2 decades, the standard fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy backbone for metastatic colorectal cancer has been complemented by the addition of novel biological agents, achieving impressive increases in 5-year survival rates. Nonetheless, these new combinations have also entailed increases in toxicity, leading to evaluation of de-escalated chemotherapy regimens and "drug holiday" periods in attempts to reduce side effects and optimise quality of life without impairing efficacy. Here, we review the current and emerging evidence for maintenance schedules with chemotherapy and targeted agents, versus continuous treatment after induction treatment, in metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Meta-Analysis of 5-Fluorouracil-Based Chemotherapy Combined With Traditional Chinese Medicines for Colorectal Cancer Treatment

This meta-analysis evaluates the clinical evidence for the addition of traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based regimens for colorectal cancer (CRC) in terms of tumor response rate (TRR). Five electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of 5-FU-based chemotherapy combined with TCMs compared to the same 5-FU-based regimen. Forty-five randomized controlled trials were involved in this study, and all the data were analyzed by Stata software (version 14.0). Our results suggested that the TRR of the group with TCMs combined with 5-FU-based regimens was higher than that in the group with 5-FU regimens alone (risk ratio [RR] 1.36 [1.25-1.49], I² = 0%). Furthermore, both nonoral administration (RR 1.51 [1.29-1.76], I² = 0%) and oral administration (RR 1.31 [1.18-1.45], I² = 0%) of TCMs showed benefits to the CRC treatment. Further sensitivity analysis of specific plant-based TCMs found that fuling, sheshecao, banzhilian, eshu, baizhu, huangqi, yiyiren, and dangshen had significantly higher contributions to the results of the risk ratio. Therefore, TCMs may have the potential to improve the efficacy of 5-FU-based chemotherapy for CRC.

Targeting EGFR and RAS/RAF Signaling in the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: From Current Treatment Strategies to Future Perspectives

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and RAS/RAF signaling pathway plays pivotal roles in tumor progression via proliferation, survival, invasion, and immune evasion. Two anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and panitumumab, have become essential components in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Treatment with these anti-EGFR antibodies has shown definite benefits when administered in all treatment lines and is strongly recommended as the preferred regimen to prolong survival, especially when administered in the first- and third-lines. Recent efforts have revealed not only mechanisms responsible for resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies, including expanded RAS mutations as a negative predictive biomarker, but also the possibility of continuing anti-EGFR antibody treatment in combination with chemotherapy. Furthermore, the challenges associated with the pharmaceutical development of treatments for patients with mutant-type BRAF mCRC are ongoing. In this review, we provide an overview of the EGFR and RAS/RAF signaling pathway and antitumor activity, focusing on practical aspects such as established treatments including patient selection, treatment strategies, and future perspectives for drug development targeting the EGFR and RAS/RAF signaling pathway.

Maintenance Therapy With Panitumumab Alone vs Panitumumab Plus Fluorouracil-Leucovorin in Patients With RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Few studies are available on the role of maintenance strategies after induction treatment regimens based on anti-epidermal growth factor receptors, and the optimal regimen for an anti-epidermal growth factor receptors-based maintenance treatment in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer is still to be defined.

Objective

To determine whether maintenance therapy with single-agent panitumumab was noninferior to panitumumab plus fluorouracil and leucovorin after a 4-month induction treatment regimen.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This open-label, randomized phase 2 noninferiority trial was conducted from July 7, 2015, through October 27, 2017, at multiple Italian centers. Patients with RAS wild-type, unresectable metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma who had not received previous treatment for metastatic disease were eligible. Induction therapy consisted of panitumumab plus FOLFOX-4 (panitumumab, 6 mg/kg, oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m2 at day 1, leucovorin calcium, 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil, 400-mg/m2 bolus, followed by 600-mg/m2 continuous 24-hour infusion at days 1 and 2, every 2 weeks). Cutoff date for analyses was July 30, 2018.

Interventions

Patients were randomized (1:1) to first-line panitumumab plus FOLFOX-4 for 8 cycles followed by maintenance therapy with panitumumab plus fluorouracil-leucovorin (arm A) or panitumumab (arm B) until progressive disease, unacceptable toxic effects, or consent withdrawal. The minimization method was used to stratify randomization by previous adjuvant treatment and number of metastatic sites.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The prespecified primary end point was 10-month progression-free survival (PFS) analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis with a noninferiority margin of 1.515 for the upper limit of the 1-sided 90% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) of arm B vs A.

Results

Overall, 229 patients (153 male [66.8%]; median age, 64 years [interquartile range (IQR), 56-70 years]) were randomly assigned to arm A (n = 117) or arm B (n = 112). At a median follow-up of 18.0 months (IQR, 13.1-23.3 months]), a total of 169 disease progression or death events occurred. Arm B was inferior (upper limit of 1-sided 90% CI of the HR, 1.857). Ten-month PFS was 59.9% (95% CI, 51.5%-69.8%) in arm A vs 49.0% (95% CI, 40.5%-59.4%) in arm B (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.11-2.07; P = .01). During maintenance, arm A had a higher incidence of grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events (36 [42.4%] vs 16 [20.3%]) and panitumumab-related adverse events (27 [31.8%] vs 13 [16.4%]), compared with arm B.

Conclusions and Relevance

In patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, maintenance therapy with single-agent panitumumab was inferior in terms of PFS compared with panitumumab plus fluorouracil-leucovorin, which slightly increased the treatment toxic effects.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02476045.

SAPPHIRE: a randomised phase II study of planned discontinuation or continuous treatment of oxaliplatin after six cycles of modified FOLFOX6 plus panitumumab in patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin (LV) and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) plus panitumumab therapy is a commonly used first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the long-term administration of oxaliplatin is associated with peripheral neuropathy (PN). We investigated whether the planned discontinuation of oxaliplatin after FOLFOX plus panitumumab therapy can maintain efficacy and reduce PN incidence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients with RAS wild-type mCRC, aged ≥20 years, were enrolled and received six cycles of modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) plus panitumumab as induction therapy. Patients who completed induction therapy without progression were randomised to mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab (group A) or to 5-FU/LV plus panitumumab (group B). The primary end-point was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 9 months after randomisation. The secondary end-points were PFS, overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF), response rate (RR) and safety.

RESULTS

In total, 164 patients were enrolled; of whom, 113 patients were then randomised (group A, n = 56; group B, n = 57). The median follow-up after randomisation was 19.6 months. The PFS rates at 9 months and median PFS were 46.4% (80% confidence interval [CI], 38.1-54.9) and 9.1 months (95% CI, 8.6-11.1) in group A, compared with 47.4% (80% CI, 39.1-55.8) and 9.3 months (95% CI, 6.0-13.0) in group B, respectively. RR, OS and TTF were also similar in both groups. Grade ≥2 PN incidence was lower in group B (9.3%) than in group A (35.7%).

CONCLUSION

Planned discontinuation of oxaliplatin after six cycles of mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab is a potential treatment option in patients with mCRC, achieving similar efficacy while reducing oxaliplatin-associated PN compared with mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02337946.

Exploratory findings from a prematurely closed international, multicentre, academic trial: RAVELLO, a phase III study of regorafenib versus placebo as maintenance therapy after first-line treatment in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

In patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the role of maintenance therapy after first-line treatment with chemotherapy plus antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (MoAb) is still an object of debate.

Methods

We assessed the efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a switch maintenance strategy after upfront 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus an anti-EGFR MoAb in patients with RAS WT mCRC. RAVELLO was a phase III, international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, academic trial. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival and toxicity. Regorafenib or placebo were administered daily for 3 weeks of 4-week cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, up to 24 months.

Results

The study was stopped prematurely due to slow accrual and lack of funding after the randomisation of 21 patients: 11 in the regorafenib arm and 10 in the placebo arm. The small sample size precludes any statistical analysis. Toxicity was acceptable and consistent with the known regorafenib safety profile. Median PFS was similar in the two arms. However, a subgroup of patients treated with regorafenib experienced a remarkably long PFS. Three patients were progression free at 9 months in the regorafenib arm versus one patient in the placebo arm, whereas at 12 months two regorafenib-treated patients were still progression free versus none in the placebo arm.

Conclusion

RAVELLO trial demonstrated that growing financial and bureaucratic hurdles affect the feasibility of independent academic research. Although stopped prematurely and within the limited sample size, RAVELLO suggests that regorafenib has not a major activity in maintenance setting after upfront chemotherapy and anti-EGFR MoAb. However, a subgroup of patients experienced a remarkable long PFS, indicating that a better refinement of the patient population would help to identify subjects that might benefit from a regorafenib personalised approach in the switch maintenance setting.

Treatment sequencing in metastatic colorectal cancer

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains incurable in most cases, but survival has improved with advances in cytotoxic chemotherapy and targeted agents. However, the optimal use and sequencing of these agents across multiple lines of treatment is unclear. Here, we review current treatment approaches and optimal treatment sequencing across the first-, second- and third-line settings in mCRC, including biological aspects affecting sequencing and rechallenge. Effective first-line therapy is a key determinant of treatment outcomes and should be selected after considering both clinical factors and biological markers, notably RAS and BRAF. The second-line regimen choice depends on the systemic therapies given in first-line. Anti-angiogenic agents (e.g. bevacizumab, ramucirumab and aflibercept) are indicated for most patients, whereas epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors do not improve survival in the second-line setting. Molecular profiling is important in third-line treatment, with options in RAS wild-type patients including EGFR inhibitors (cetuximab or panitumumab), regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil. Immunotherapy with pembrolizumab or nivolumab ± ipilimumab may be considered for patients with high microsatellite instability disease. Targeting HER2/neu amplification shows promise for the subset of CRC tumours displaying this abnormality. Sequencing decisions are complicated by the potential for any treatment break or de-escalation to evoke a distinct clinical progression type. Ongoing trials are investigating the optimal sequencing and timing of therapies for mCRC. Molecular profiling has established new targets, and increasing knowledge of tumour evolution under drug pressure will possibly impact on sequencing.