A randomised,open-label phase II trial of afatinib versus cetuximab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Department of Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Canada;2. Department of Medical Oncology, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia;3. Queen''s University, NCIC CTG, Kingston, Canada;4. Department of Medical Oncology, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide;5. Department of Medical Oncology Austin Health, Melbourne;6. Department of Medical Oncology, University of Western Australia, Perth;7. Department of Oncology, Cabrini Medical Centre, Melbourne;8. Department of Medical Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney;9. Department of Medical Oncology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Footscray, Australia;10. St. Joseph''s Hospital, Toronto;11. BCCA, Surrey;12. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Toronto East General Hospital, Toronto;13. Division of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Mt. Sinai Hospital, Toronto;14. Moncton Hospital, Moncton, Canada;15. University of Sydney, Sydney;16. Division of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia;17. Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto;18. Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Canada |
| |
Abstract: | PurposeThis randomised phase II trial aimed to compare efficacy of the irreversible ErbB family blocker, afatinib, with cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma (mCRC) with progression following oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based regimens. Efficacy in patients with KRAS mutations was also evaluated.Patients and methodsPatients with KRAS wild-type tumours were randomised 2:1 to afatinib (40 mg/day, increasing to 50 mg/day if minimal toxicity) or cetuximab weekly (400 mg/m2 loading dose, then 250 mg/m2/week) according to number of previous chemotherapy lines. All patients with KRAS-mutated tumours received afatinib. Primary end-points were objective response (OR) for the wild-type group and disease control for the KRAS-mutated group. Secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsPatients with KRAS wild-type tumours (n = 50) received afatinib (n = 36) or cetuximab (n = 14). Unconfirmed and confirmed ORs were 3% and 0% for afatinib versus 20% and 13% for cetuximab (odds ratio: 0.122 [P = 0.0735] and <0.001, respectively). Median PFS was 46.0 and 144.5 days for afatinib and cetuximab, respectively. Median OS was 355 days with afatinib but not reached for cetuximab. In the KRAS-mutated group (n = 41), five (12%) patients achieved confirmed disease control (stable disease; P = 0.6394 [comparison versus 10%]); no ORs were reported. Median PFS and OS were 41.0 and 173 days, respectively. Most frequent treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea and rash across groups.ConclusionsThe efficacy of afatinib was inferior to cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC. In patients with KRAS-mutated tumours, disease control was modest with afatinib. Afatinib had a manageable safety profile. |
| |
Keywords: | Afatinib Cetuximab Colorectal cancer KRAS mutations |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|