A Phase II Trial of FOLFOX6 and Cetuximab in the First-line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

IntroductionThis phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of cetuximab combined with FOLFOX6 (leucovorin [LV] 5-fluorouracil [5-FU]/oxaliplatin) in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer.Patients and MethodsPatients with locally advanced or metastatic CRC who had received no previous therapy for advanced disease were treated with cetuximab at a loading dose of 400 mg/m² followed by 250 mg/m² weekly and a FOLFOX6 regimen every 2 weeks consisting of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², LV 400 mg/m², and 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m² followed by 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m² over 46 hours.ResultsA total of 82 eligible patients were enrolled; epidermal growth factor receptor expression was positive in 67 patients. The overall response rate was 44.8%. In addition, 30 patients (44.8%) in the evaluable population experienced stable disease. Median time to progression or death was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.0-11.3 months), and median survival was 21.7 months (95% CI, 17.5-27.8 months). Patients who experienced skin toxicity had a statistically significant and longer median survival time than those patients with no skin toxicity (P = .0001). The most commonly observed toxicities were neutropenia (65%), fatigue (56.3%), diarrhea (53.8%), nausea (50%), acneiform rash (41.3%), and stomatitis (35%).ConclusionOur results demonstrate that cetuximab can be safely combined with FOLFOX6 for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC). The efficacy parameters are similar to other first-line regimens in mCRC. Because of the emergence of KRAS as a predictive marker, this regimen has promise in KRAS wild-type mCRC.     

Modified FOLFOX6 with oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy and oral S-1 maintenance therapy in advanced colorectal cancer: CCOG-0704 study

Background

A combination of fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is an established first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin often requires therapy to be discontinued while the patient is still responding. A strategy to stop FOLFOX, deliver 5-FU/LV as a maintenance therapy and reintroduce FOLFOX was found to be equivalent in terms of efficacy while neurotoxicity was substantially reduced. The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility of a stop-and-go strategy with S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, as a maintenance therapy administered between modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) as a first-line treatment of mCRC.

Methods

Thirty patients with untreated mCRC were treated with six cycles of mFOLFOX6 followed by maintenance therapy with oral S-1. Reintroduction of mFOLFOX6 was scheduled after four cycles of S-1 or upon tumor progression. The primary endpoint was duration of disease control (DDC).

Results

Twenty-one of the 30 patients who achieved responses or stabilizations received S-1 maintenance therapy. mFOLFOX6 was reintroduced in 15 patients. Median DDC and progression-free survival were 9.3 and 7.9?months, respectively. The response rates and disease control rates were 40.0 and 86.6% for the initial mFOLFOX6, 23.8 and 57.1% for S-1 maintenance therapy and 20.0 and 73.3% for mFOLFOX6 reintroduction, respectively. Twenty-eight patients (93.3%) had peripheral neuropathy, but grade 3 neurotoxicity was observed in only 1 patient (3.3%).

Conclusion

The planned oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy with oral S-1 maintenance therapy was feasible as a first-line treatment for Japanese mCRC patients. Further prospective randomized control study is warranted.     

A randomized controlled trial of fluorouracil plus leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin combinations in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Three agents with differing mechanisms of action are available for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin. In this study, we compared the activity and toxicity of three different two-drug combinations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had not been treated previously for advanced disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were concurrently randomly assigned to receive irinotecan and bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (IFL, control combination), oxaliplatin and infused fluorouracil plus leucovorin (FOLFOX), or irinotecan and oxaliplatin (IROX). The primary end point was time to progression, with secondary end points of response rate, survival time, and toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 795 patients were randomly assigned between May 1999 and April 2001. A median time to progression of 8.7 months, response rate of 45%, and median survival time of 19.5 months were observed for FOLFOX. These results were significantly superior to those observed for IFL for all end points (6.9 months, 31%, and 15.0 months, respectively) or for IROX (6.5 months, 35%, and 17.4 months, respectively) for time to progression and response. The FOLFOX regimen had significantly lower rates of severe nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, and dehydration. Sensory neuropathy and neutropenia were more common with the regimens containing oxaliplatin. CONCLUSION: The FOLFOX regimen of oxaliplatin and infused fluorouracil plus leucovorin was active and comparatively safe. It should be considered as a standard therapy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.     

A four-arm, randomized, multicenter phase II trial of oxaliplatin combined with varying schedules of 5-fluorouracil as first-line therapy in previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin combined with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), with or without leucovorin (LV), is effective and well tolerated for first-line therapy of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there is no consensus as to which oxaliplatin/5-FU-containing regimen is superior in the first-line setting. This randomized, multicenter phase II trial was designed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of 4 different oxaliplatin/5-FU regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated metastatic CRC (mCRC; n = 129) were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment regimens: (1) continuous 5-FU infusion plus oxaliplatin (n = 23); (2) weekly 5-FU bolus with LV plus oxaliplatin (n = 40); (3) oxaliplatin with 2-day infusion 5-FU/LV (FOLFOX4, n = 41); and (4) chronomodulated 5-FU plus oxaliplatin (n = 25). RESULTS: Overall response rates, after expert assessment, ranged from 24% to 34%, and median progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 6 months to 8 months. Although no significant differences in efficacy were detected in pairwise comparisons of the 4 different regimens, patients randomized to FOLFOX4 had the highest response rate and longest PFS. The FOLFOX4 regimen was also associated with the lowest incidence of severe (grade 3/4) toxicity, with the exception of cumulative peripheral neurotoxicity. CONCLUSION: This randomized phase II trial provides evidence that oxaliplatin/5-FU regimens are effective and well tolerated for first-line therapy of previously untreated mCRC. The FOLFOX regimens are now an established standard for CRC.     

Optimizing palliative treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in the era of biologic therapy

Over the past decade, new cytotoxic and biologic therapies beyond the old standard-of-care, biomodulated fluorouracil (5-FU), have become available for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The introductions of irinotecan (Camptosar), oxaliplatin (Eloxatin), and bevacizumab (Avastin) have prolonged survival, but the optimal use of these new therapies remains to be determined. Issues remain regarding management of toxicities, treatment of elderly patients or those with poor performance status, and the duration of treatment with front-line therapy. This article reviews recent and ongoing studies of newer therapies in an effort to determine the best use of these drugs in the treatment of mCRC. Current data support the front-line use of bevacizumab added to either 5-FU/leucovorin alone or 5-FU/leucovorin in combination with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX/bevacizumab) or irinotecan (FOLFIRI/bevacizumab). If oxaliplatin is used in first-line therapy, oxaliplatin should be discontinued before the development of severe neurotoxicity and be reintroduced or replaced with irinotecan on disease progression. Definitive conclusions on the sequence and duration of front-line therapy and the most effective strategy to ameliorate toxicity await results of ongoing prospective clinical trials.     

Adaptation of International Guidelines for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Asian Consensus

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most common cancers worldwide, but marked epidemiological differences exist between Asian and non-Asian populations. Hence, a consensus meeting was held in Hong Kong in December 2012 to develop Asia-specific guidelines for the management of metastatic CRC (mCRC). A multidisciplinary expert panel, consisting of 23 participants from 10 Asian and 2 European countries, discussed current guidelines for colon or rectal cancer and developed recommendations for adapting these guidelines to Asian clinical practice. Participants agreed that mCRC management in Asia largely follows international guidelines, but they proposed a number of recommendations based on regional ‘real-world’ experience. In general, participants agreed that 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) infusion regimens in doublets can be substituted with UFT (capecitabine, tegafur-uracil) and S1 (tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine and oxonic acid), and that the monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab are recommended for KRAS wild type tumors. For KRAS mutant tumors, bevacizumab is the preferred biological therapy. FOLFOX (folinic acid, 5-FU, and oxaliplatin) is preferred for initial therapy in Asian patients. The management of mCRC is evolving, and it must be emphasized that the recommendations presented here reflect current treatment practices and thus might change as more data become available.     

FOLFOX4 With Cetuximab vs. UFOX With Cetuximab as First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized Phase II FUTURE Study

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX4, comprising infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) and oxaliplatin, with cetuximab compared with UFOX, comprising UFT, an oral prodrug of 5-FU, LV, and oxaliplatin, with cetuximab as first-line treatment for mCRC.Patients and MethodsPatients, unselected by tumor KRAS status, were randomized 1:1 to FOLFOX4 with cetuximab or UFOX with cetuximab. Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included tumor response, overall survival, and safety. Outcome according to KRAS mutation status was investigated.ResultsRecruitment was curtailed at 302 patients after reporting of the importance of tumor KRAS mutation status for cetuximab activity. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. PFS was significantly longer in the FOLFOX4 with cetuximab group compared with UFOX with cetuximab group (median 8.2 vs. 6.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.89; P = .0048). The response rate was also significantly greater in the FOLFOX4 with cetuximab group (51.3% vs. 37.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11-2.78; P = .0160), although overall survival was comparable. In the KRAS wild type subgroup, efficacy outcomes were similar to those in the intention-to-treat population. Side effect profiles were manageable and consistent with expectations.ConclusionIn the first-line treatment of mCRC, UFOX with cetuximab had an acceptable safety profile but inferior activity compared with FOLFOX4 with cetuximab in relation to PFS and response. The regimens were comparable with regard to overall survival.     

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer with Severe Liver Dysfunction Successfully Treated Using FOLFOX Therapy

Introduction

The liver is the most frequent site of metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC), and extensive liver metastases often cause severe secondary liver dysfunction. However, whether chemotherapy for metastatic CRC with severe liver dysfunction offers any clinical benefit is unclear since patients in this setting are typically excluded from clinical trials.

Discussion

We report herein a case of metastatic sigmoid colon cancer with severe liver dysfunction that was successfully treated using infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX). FOLFOX was effective and well tolerated in the present case, and subsequent addition of bevacizumab to FOLFOX after disease progression was similarly feasible.     

RAC1b overexpression correlates with poor prognosis in KRAS/BRAF WT metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with first-line FOLFOX/XELOX chemotherapy

IntroductionChemotherapy is the principal treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. RAC1b, a RAC1 spliced variant, is over-expressed in colorectal cancer (CRC), and impairs apoptosis by activation of nuclear-factor-KB. Since RAC1b has been associated with the BRAF^V600E mutation, associated with poor prognosis in CRC, we evaluated the role of RAC1b expression as a predictor of chemotherapy efficacy in mCRC.MethodsWe analysed KRAS and BRAF mutation, microsatellite instability and RAC1b expression in 157 mCRC patients treated with FOLFOX/XELOX in first-line therapy.ResultsKRAS mutations were detected in 46 patients (34%), 10 patients were BRAF mutant (7%) and 79 were WT for both, KRAS and BRAF (59%). RAC1b overexpression was found in 30 patients (19%). In the multivariate analysis, BRAF mutational status was a poor prognostic factor for overall survival (OS); hazard ratio (HR), 2.78 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.35–5.72; p = 0.0057). RAC1b overexpression was a poor survival factor for OS (HR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.2–4.59; p = 0.01) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.2–4.78; p = 0.01) in KRAS/BRAF WT mCRC patients.ConclusionsRAC1b overexpression constitutes a marker of poor prognosis in KRAS/BRAF WT mCRC patients treated with first-line FOLFOX/XELOX therapy.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer

ObjectiveTo investigate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin) compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).DesignA semi-Markov model was constructed from a French health collective perspective, with health states related to first-line treatment (progression-free), disease progression with and without subsequent active treatment, resection of metastases, disease-free after successful resection and death.MethodsParametric survival analyses of patient-level progression-free and overall survival data from the only head-to-head clinical trial of panitumumab and bevacizumab (PEAK) were performed to estimate transitions to disease progression and death. Additional data from PEAK informed the amount of each drug consumed, duration of therapy, subsequent therapy use, and toxicities related to mCRC treatment. Literature and French public data sources were used to estimate unit costs associated with treatment and duration of subsequent active therapies. Utility weights were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials in the first-, second- and third-line settings. A life-time perspective was applied. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsBased on a head-to-head clinical trial that demonstrates better efficacy outcomes for patients with wild-type RAS mCRC who receive panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6, the incremental cost per life-year gained was estimated to be €26,918, and the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was estimated to be €36,577. Sensitivity analyses indicate the model is robust to alternative parameters and assumptions.ConclusionsThe incremental cost per QALY gained indicates that panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 represents good value for money in comparison to bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 and, with a willingness-to-pay ranging from €40,000 to €60,000, can be considered cost-effective in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC.     

Current status of second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

Decisions regarding the optimal systemic therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have become more complex with the identification and development of multiple effective agents for this disease. Multiple treatment options are now available in the second-line setting for patients with metastatic CRC who have progressed despite prior chemotherapy. The exact choice of second-line therapy depends on the first-line treatment that was administered. Irinotecan as a salvage therapy for patients with metastatic CRC who have progression following front-line 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapies was confirmed in a number of phase II/III studies. Many patients who received irinotecan/5-FU-based therapy as first-line treatment benefit from the combination of oxaliplatin and 5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFOX) in terms of response, time to progression, and relief of tumor-related symptoms. Other considerations include the integration of targeted therapies into chemotherapy regimens. The results of a randomized phase II trial have demonstrated that the addition of cetuximab to irinotecan in patients with irinotecan-resistant tumors represents another active treatment option for these patients. The activity of bevacizumab as part of second-line therapy is currently under investigation and results from phase III trials are expected within the next year. In summary, the availability of 5 drugs that are active in CRC provides us, for the first time, with choice--and dilemma--regarding optimal second-line therapy in patients with metastatic CRC.     

Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the phase II BEVACOLOR study

BackgroundThis prospective phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy regimens commonly used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).MethodsPatients with mCRC who progressed or relapsed after first-line oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based treatment received bevacizumab 2.5 mg/kg/week plus chemotherapy until disease progression. The primary endpoint was disease-control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.ResultsFifty-three patients (66% men; median age, 62 years old) received second-line bevacizumab plus folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI; 57%), folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX; 26%), irinotecan (15%), or capecitabine plus irinotecan (XELIRI; 2%). The DCR was 87% (95% CI, 77%-97%); ORR was 32% (95% CI, 19%-46%). Median PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.8-7.8 months) and median OS 19.3 months, (95% CI, 14.2-25.1 months).The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (21%), diarrhea (15%), asthenia, and vomiting (9% each). Five patients (9%) had grade 3/4 targeted toxicities: grade 3 hypertension (n = 2), grade 3 venous thromboembolism (n = 2), and grade 4 arterial thromboembolism (n = 1). None of these events led to death during the study.ConclusionBevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy is highly active in patients with mCRC and has an acceptable safety profile.     

Updated efficacy and toxicity analysis of irinotecan and oxaliplatin (IROX) : intergroup trial N9741 in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Efficacy and toxicity of oxaliplatin (Eloxatin; Sanofi-Aventis, Paris, France) combined with irinotecan (IROX) were examined in 383 patients enrolled on the IROX arm of Intergroup Study N9741. METHODS: This IROX regimen was oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) and irinotecan 200 mg/m(2) administered every 3 weeks. The relation between adverse events on IROX to selected characteristics was analyzed. Time to progression (TTP), response rate, and overall survival for patients treated with IROX compared with patients treated with oxaliplatin with 5- fluorouracil (FOLFOX) were updated in this article. RESULTS: Grade >or=3 gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities were common with 39% patients experiencing neutropenia, 28% diarrhea, and 21% vomiting. Patients ages >70 years experienced higher rates of grade >or=3 toxicity, with significantly higher rates of grade >or=3 hematologic toxicities (P = .02). Long-term toxicity was uncommon, and nearly all cases of grade >or=3 neurotoxicity resolved within 10 months. Fifty-two percent of patients required dose reductions for adverse events, and 26% experienced 119 hospitalizations related to complications of treatment or their disease, with 5 treatment-related deaths. This analysis confirmed prior findings that FOLFOX is superior to IROX in terms of response rate (43% vs 36%, p = 0.002), TTP (9.2 months vs 6.7 months, P < .0001), and overall survival (19.5 months vs 17.3 months, P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: IROX was found to be less active than FOLFOX but with a similar toxicity profile except in patients ages >70 years. Although IROX may be considered in patients intolerant of 5-FU or in patients known to have a dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency, it should be used with caution in older patients.     

Chemotherapy permits resection of metastatic colorectal cancer: experience from Intergroup N9741.

BACKGROUND: Fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin and irinotecan combinations improve time to tumor progression (TTP), objective response and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). Here we identify and describe patients treated on Intergroup study N9741 who initially had inoperable MCRC, but who obtained sufficient chemotherapeutic benefit to allow removal of their metastatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient research records in study arms (A) irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (LV) (IFL, n = 264), (F) oxaliplatin/5-FU/LV (FOLFOX4, n = 267) and (G) oxaliplatin/irinotecan (IROX, n = 265) were reviewed. TTP and median OS were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-four (3.3%) of 795 randomized patients underwent curative metastatic disease resection [hepatectomy, 16; radiofrequency-ablation (RFA), six; lung resection, two]. Twenty-two out of 24 (92%) resected patients received an oxaliplatin-based regimen (FOLFOX4, 11; IROX, 11). Seven patients (29.2%) remain disease-free; relapses occurred mainly in the resected organ. Median OS in resected patients is 42.4 months, and median TTP is 18.4 months. All six patients treated with RFA have recurred. Four out of five (80%) patients who received chemotherapy following resection are disease-free. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of metastatic disease after chemotherapy is possible in a small but important subset of patients with MCRC, particularly after receiving an oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy regimen, with encouraging OS and TTP observed in these highly selected patients.     

Incidence and evolution of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral sensory neuropathy in diabetic patients with colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of three phase III studies

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to determine whether the presence of diabetes mellitus (DM) influences the incidence, severity, and/or course of peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN) after oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) therapy in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).MethodsA retrospective pooled analysis incorporating three phase III studies was conducted: Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer (MOSAIC) (adjuvant treatment; stage II/III colon cancer), EFC4584 (second-line treatment; metastatic CRC), and EFC2962 (first-line treatment; metastatic CRC). Patients were ineligible for the studies if they had known PSN (EFC4584) or PSN grade ≥1 (MOSAIC and EFC2962) at baseline. The incidence of PSN was evaluated retrospectively in patient subgroups with or without DM at baseline that received FOLFOX. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to assess the probability of PSN with increasing cumulative oxaliplatin dose.ResultsOf 1587 patients enrolled across the three studies, 135 (8.5%) had DM at baseline. The incidence of PSN (non-DM/DM) was 45.0%/46.7% (grade 1), 28.6%/26.7% (grade 2), and 13.0%/12.6% (grade 3). The probability of PSN by cumulative dose of oxaliplatin was similar in DM and non-DM patients.ConclusionsThis retrospective analysis indicates that oxaliplatin-based therapy does not influence the incidence, severity, or time to onset of PSN in asymptomatic DM patients with CRC who meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials.     

A Phase II Study of Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil,Leucovorin, and High-Dose Capecitabine in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PurposeCapecitabine has shown similar efficacy to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU); a regimen containing 2 weeks of capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CapOx) has demonstrated noninferiority to infusional 5-FU/oxaliplatin/leucovorin (FOLFOX) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This phase II study explores the efficacy and safety of a 2-day course of oxaliplatin/capecitabine (2DOC), with oxaliplatin given on day 1 and capecitabine given orally every 8 hours in high doses over 6 doses, mimicking FOLFOX6.Patients and MethodsThis phase II study was conducted by the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center. Eligible patients with mCRC received oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² intravenously (I.V.) over 2 hours followed by leucovorin 20 mg/m² I.V. bolus and 5-FU 400 mg/m² I.V. bolus on day 1 and day 15. Capecitabine was administered at 1500 mg/m² orally every 8 hours over 6 doses starting on day 1 and day 15.ResultsA total of 45 patients were enrolled; 44 were evaluated for response. Seventeen patients (39%) had objective responses. Median time to progression was 6.8 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 17.5 months. The most common side effects were grade 1/2 neuropathy, fatigue, and nausea. Severe hand-foot syndrome (HFS) was rare.ConclusionThe overall response rate with the 2DOC regimen is similar to published CapOx regimens, and time to progression and OS are similar. The incidence of HFS, diarrhea, and mucositis were lower compared with published results of 2-week schedules of capecitabine. The 2DOC regimen merits further study as a more convenient regimen than infusional 5-FU with less HFS when compared with a 2-week administration of capecitabine.     

Individual Fluorouracil Dose Adjustment in FOLFOX Based on Pharmacokinetic Follow-Up Compared With Conventional Body-Area-Surface Dosing: A Phase II,Proof-of-Concept Study

BackgroundTo compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacokinetically (PK) guided fluorouracil (5-FU) dose adjustment vs. standard body-surface-area (BSA) dosing in a FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin) regimen in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Patients And MethodsA total of 118 patients with mCRC were administered individually determined PK-adjusted 5-FU in first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy. The comparison arm consisted of 39 patients, and these patients were also treated with FOLFOX with 5-FU by BSA. For the PK-adjusted arm 5-FU was monitored during infusion, and the dose for the next cycle was based on a dose-adjustment chart to achieve a therapeutic area under curve range (5-FU^{ODPM Protocol}).ResultsThe objective response rate was 69.7% in the PK-adjusted arm, and median overall survival and median progression-free survival were 28 and 16 months, respectively. In the traditional patients who received BSA dosage, objective response rate was 46%, and overall survival and progression-free survival were 22 and 10 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicity was 1.7% for diarrhea, 0.8% for mucositis, and 18% for neutropenia in the dose-monitored group; they were 12%, 15%, and 25%, respectively, in the BSA group.ConclusionsEfficacy and tolerability of PK-adjusted FOLFOX dosing was much higher than traditional BSA dosing in agreement with previous reports for 5-FU monotherapy PK-adjusted dosing. Analysis of these results suggests that PK-guided 5-FU therapy offers added value to combination therapy for mCRC.     

Sequencing of Antiangiogenic Agents in the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Significant advances have been made with respect to our understanding of the critical role of agents targeting angiogenic pathways in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The approval of 3 agents that target angiogenic signaling, bevacizumab, ziv-aflibercept, and regorafenib, provides strong evidence that angiogenesis is an important process in mCRC. The addition of bevacizumab to combination chemotherapy in the first- and second-line treatment of mCRC has resulted in meaningful improvement in overall and progression-free survival. The standard of care for mCRC has evolved to incorporate cytotoxic chemotherapy as the backbone regimens (eg, FOLFOX [folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin], FOLFIRI [folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan]) with or without bevacizumab, and epidermal growth factor receptor–targeted therapies (eg, cetuximab, panitumumab) in the setting of wild-type KRAS. The development of ziv-aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI has improved clinical efficacy in the second-line treatment of mCRC. Regorafenib, a small-molecule multikinase inhibitor, has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as single-agent therapy in the treatment of refractory and progressive mCRC. Each of these agents has been integrated into an evidence-based—albeit, still evolving—treatment continuum for initial treatment, treatment after first progression, and treatment after second progression. However, the most effective strategy for the use of these agents, and others in development remains unclear. This review provides an overview of the current clinical evidence for the use of antiangiogenic agents targeting in the treatment of mCRC.     

Cetuximab continuation after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (CAPRI-GOIM): a randomized phase II trial of FOLFOX plus cetuximab versus FOLFOX

BackgroundCetuximab plus chemotherapy is a first-line treatment option in metastatic KRAS and NRAS wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. No data are currently available on continuing anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy beyond progression.Patients and methodsWe did this open-label, 1:1 randomized phase II trial at 25 hospitals in Italy to evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab plus 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) as second-line treatment of KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic CRC patients treated in first line with 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab. Patients received FOLFOX plus cetuximab (arm A) or FOLFOX (arm B). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Tumour tissues were assessed by next-generation sequencing (NGS). This report is the final analysis.ResultsBetween 1 February 2010 and 28 September 2014, 153 patients were randomized (74 in arm A and 79 in arm B). Median PFS was 6.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.7–8.0] versus 4.5 months (95% CI 3.3–5.7); [hazard ratio (HR), 0.81; 95% CI 0.58–1.12; P = 0.19], respectively. NGS was performed in 117/153 (76.5%) cases; 66/117 patients (34 in arm A and 32 in arm B) had KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA wild-type tumours. For these patients, PFS was longer in the FOLFOX plus cetuximab arm [median 6.9 (95% CI 5.5–8.2) versus 5.3 months (95% CI 3.7–6.9); HR, 0.56 (95% CI 0.33–0.94); P = 0.025]. There was a trend in better overall survival: median 23.7 [(95% CI 19.4–28.0) versus 19.8 months (95% CI 14.9–24.7); HR, 0.57 (95% CI 0.32–1.02); P = 0.056].ConclusionsContinuing cetuximab treatment in combination with chemotherapy is of potential therapeutic efficacy in molecularly selected patients and should be validated in randomized phase III trials.     

Influence of first line chemotherapy strategy depending on primary tumor location in metastatic colorectal cancer

BackgroundPrimary tumor location (PTL) is a major prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with left side which present better prognosis than right sided. Uncertainty exists regarding comparative effectiveness of irinotecan or oxaliplatin doublet in mCRC in function of PTL.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective comparing clinical outcomes from both regimens in function of sidedness. Patients with newly diagnosed mCRC candidates to first-line chemotherapy were selected. Clinical outcomes were assessed and stratified by tumor location (left, right and rectal) and type of treatment.ResultsOverall, 702 patients met the inclusion criteria. Primary colon cancer was right-sided in 248 (35.3%) patients, left-sided in 296 (42.2%) and rectal in 158 (22.5%) patients. Whatever PTL monochemotherapy give poor progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Triplet give better PFS and OS only for rectal cancer. When looking at doublet in first line. Folinic acid, 5FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) give better PFS in rectal cancer [PFS of 21.2 (95% CI: 14.9–NR) versus 12.2 (95% CI: 10.1–13.4) months for the folinic acid, 5FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) group, P=0.009] and at trend for better PFS in right side tumor [14.9 (95% CI: 8.8–20.8) versus 11.3 (95% CI: 8.4–13.2) months for the FOLFOX group. P=0.0755]. No difference was observed in term of OS.Conclusionsour results support that either FOLFIRI or FOLFOX regimens give similar efficacy in both left and right metastatic colic cancer. FOLFIRI and FOLFIRINOX regimens might be preferred for metastatic rectal carcinoma.