1
|
Lorenzen S, Thuss-Patience P, Pauligk C, Gökkurt E, Ettrich T, Lordick F, Stahl M, Reichardt P, Sökler M, Pink D, Probst S, Hinke A, Goetze TO, Al-Batran SE. FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second-line therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma with or without prior docetaxel - results from the phase II RAMIRIS Study of the German Gastric Cancer Study Group at AIO. Eur J Cancer 2022; 165:48-57. [PMID: 35202974 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2021] [Revised: 12/30/2021] [Accepted: 01/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ramucirumab and paclitaxel is the standard second-line therapy in patients with metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. We report the efficacy and safety analyses of FOLFIRI and ramucirumab versus paclitaxel and ramucirumab after the failure of a platinum- and fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy. METHODS This multicenter, investigator initiated, phase II trial randomised patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma to either FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab (RAM) (arm A) or paclitaxel plus RAM (arm B). The primary end-point was 6-month overall survival (OS) rate, with a proportion of ≥65% in arm A considered a positive signal for further investigation. RESULTS 111 patients (65% of patients had prior docetaxel) were enrolled and 110 patients qualified for ITT population (arm A, 72; arm B, 38). The study did not meet the primary end-point for the comparison with historical control, as 6-month OS rate in the FOLFIRI plus RAM arm was 54% (95% CI 44-67). In between arm comparison, OS was similar (hazard ratio, HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.62-1.52]), while objective response rates (ORRs) and PFS were numerically better in arm A versus arm B (HR for PFS 0.73; ORR, 22% versus 11%). These differences were largely attributed to favourable efficacy results for arm A in docetaxel-pretreated patients (HR, 0.49; ORR, 25% versus 8%). In the safety population (n = 106), grade 3-5 adverse events were similar between arms (arm A, 75%; arm B, 68%). CONCLUSION The RAMIRIS trial demonstrated feasibility of FOLFIRI plus RAM. While the study was formally negative, it provided a signal to further investigate this combination for the group of patients with previous docetaxel therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03081143.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvie Lorenzen
- Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, III. Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, München, Germany.
| | - Peter Thuss-Patience
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin/Campus Virchow Klinikum (CVK), Med. Klinik M. S. Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie (CC14), Berlin, Germany
| | - Claudia Pauligk
- Institut für Klinische Krebsforschung IKF GmbH am Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Eray Gökkurt
- Hämatologisch-Onkologische Praxis Eppendorf (HOPE), Facharztzentrum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Thomas Ettrich
- Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Klinik für Innere Medizin I, Ulm, Germany
| | - Florian Lordick
- Department of Oncology, Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Pulmonology, and Infectious Diseases, University Cancer Center Leipzig (UCCL), Leipzig University Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Michael Stahl
- Evang. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Klinik für Internistische Onkologie und Hämatologie, Essen, Germany
| | - Peter Reichardt
- HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Klinik für Interdisziplinäre Onkologie, Sarkomzentrum Berlin-Brandenburg, Berlin, Germany
| | - Martin Sökler
- Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Medizinische Klinik II, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Daniel Pink
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin C, Hämatologie und Onkologie, Transplantationszentrum, Palliativmedizin, Universität Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany; Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Sarkomzentrum Berlin-Brandenburg, HELIOS Klinikum Bad-Saarow, Bad Saarow, Germany
| | - Stefan Probst
- Klinikum Bielefeld Mitte, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie U. Palliativmedizin, Bielefeld, Germany
| | - Axel Hinke
- CCRC Cancer Clinical Research Consulting, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Thorsten O Goetze
- Institut für Klinische Krebsforschung IKF GmbH am Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany; Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Salah E Al-Batran
- Institut für Klinische Krebsforschung IKF GmbH am Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany; Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Immunotherapy and tumor microenvironment have been at the forefront of cancer research over the past several decades. Here, we will review the role of immunotherapy in advanced gastroesophageal cancers including targeted antibodies, immunomodulating agents, vaccines, oncolytic virus therapy, and adoptive immunotherapy, and discuss the future direction for immunotherapy in this population. RECENT FINDINGS Targeted antibodies are already standard-of-care. An anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody is currently FDA approved for second-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic ESCC, as well as beyond second-line treatment of advanced G/GEJ cancers, and recent data suggests it may be considered in first-line treatment of advanced G/GEJ cancers. Combination therapies such as immunotherapy plus chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, vaccines, oncolytic viral therapy, and adoptive immunotherapy in varying combinations are currently under active investigation. Several trials are ongoing and are hoped to reach more efficacious and individualized treatment options in advanced gastroesophageal cancer, where novel treatment options are desperately needed.
Collapse
|