Dataset Information

Consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) of colorectal cancer (CRC) and first-line efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in the FIRE3 (AIO KRK-0306) trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:FIRE-3 compared first-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab in 592 KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) are grouping CRC samples according to their gene-signature in four different subtypes. Relevance of CMS for the treatment of mCRC has yet to be defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS:In this exploratory analysis, patients were grouped according to the previously published tumor CRC-CMSs. Objective response rates (ORR) were compared using chi-square test. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) times were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimation, log-rank tests. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated according to the Cox proportional hazard method. RESULTS:CMS classification could be determined in 438 out of 514 specimens available from the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n?=?592). Frequencies for the remaining 438 samples were as follows: CMS1 (14%), CMS2 (37%), CMS3 (15%), CMS4 (34%). For the 315 RAS wild-type tumors, frequencies were as follows: CMS1 (12%), CMS2 (41%), CMS3 (11%), CMS4 (34%). CMS distribution in right- versus (vs) left-sided primary tumors was as follows: CMS1 (27% versus 11%), CMS2 (28% versus 45%), CMS3 (10% versus 12%), CMS4 (35% versus 32%). Independent of the treatment, CMS was a strong prognostic factor for ORR (P?=?0.051), PFS (P?

SUBMITTER: Stintzing S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6927316 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) of colorectal cancer (CRC) and first-line efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in the FIRE3 (AIO KRK-0306) trial.

Stintzing S S Wirapati P P Lenz H-J HJ Neureiter D D Fischer von Weikersthal L L Decker T T Kiani A A Kaiser F F Al-Batran S S Heintges T T Lerchenmüller C C Kahl C C Seipelt G G Kullmann F F Moehler M M Scheithauer W W Held S S Modest D P DP Jung A A Kirchner T T Aderka D D Tejpar S S Heinemann V V

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 20191101 11

<h4>Background</h4>FIRE-3 compared first-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab in 592 KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) are grouping CRC samples according to their gene-signature in four different subtypes. Relevance of CMS for the treatment of mCRC has yet to be defined.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>In this exploratory analysis, patients were grouped according to the previously published tumor CRC- ...[more]

PMID: 31868905

Similar Datasets

Project description:Several randomized trials have indicated that combination chemotherapy applied in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) does not significantly improve overall survival when compared to the sequential use of cytotoxic agents (CAIRO, MRC Focus, FFCD 2000-05). The present study investigates the question whether this statement holds true also for bevacizumab-based first-line treatment including escalation- and de-escalation strategies.The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 trial is a two-arm, multicenter, open-label randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) versus capecitabine plus irinotecan plus bevacizumab (CAPIRI-Bev) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) bid for 14d (d1-14) plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm A) or capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) BID for 14d (d1-14), irinotecan 200 mg/m(2) (d1) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm B). Patients included into this trial are required to consent to the analysis of tumour tissue and blood for translational investigations. In Arm A, treatment escalation from Cape-Bev to CAPIRI-Bev is recommended in case of progressive disease (PD). In Arm B, de-escalation from CAPIRI-Bev to Cape-Bev is possible after 6 months of treatment or in case of irinotecan-associated toxicity. Re-escalation to CAPIRI-Bev after PD is possible. The primary endpoint is time to failure of strategy (TFS). Secondary endpoints are overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life.The AIO KRK 0110 trial is designed for patients with disseminated, but asymptomatic mCRC who are not potential candidates for surgical resection of metastasis. Two bevacizumab-based strategies are compared: one starting as single-agent chemotherapy (Cape-Bev) allowing escalation to CAPIRI-Bev and another starting with combination chemotherapy (CAPIRI-Bev) and allowing de-escalation to Cape-Bev and subsequent re-escalation if necessary.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01249638 EudraCT-No.: 2009-013099-38.

Project description:BackgroundThe evidence on the efficacy of anticancer therapy is limited in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This retrospective analysis of phase III FIRE-3 trial assesses the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab according to the patients' age and sidedness of primary tumour.MethodsThe study endpoints overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients, followed by stratification according to primary tumour sidedness. ORR was compared using Fisher´s exact test, OS and PFS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate Cox regression analyses assessed hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for OS and PFS.ResultsOverall, older patients with RAS WT tumours had a significantly shorter OS when compared to younger patients (25.9 months vs 29.3 months, HR 1.29; P = 0.02). Also the proportion of right-sided tumours was significantly greater in older patients (27.1% vs 17.9%; P = 0.029). Secondary resection rates were numerically higher in younger patients (25.4% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.068) than in older patients. This was primarily seen in the Cetuximab arm, where older patients underwent less likely resection (13.1% vs. 26%; P = 0.02). Older patients with left-sided tumours showed only a trend towards greater efficacy of cetuximab (HR 0.86; P = 0.38). In patients with right-sided primary tumours, older patients did not appear to benefit from cetuximab in contrast to younger patients (≥65 years: 16.6 months vs 23.6 months, HR 1.1; P = 0.87; <65 years: 21.9 months vs 16.4 months HR 1.5; P = 0.31).ConclusionsIn FIRE-3, OS was generally shorter in older patients in comparison to younger patients. This could be explained by the overrepresentation of right-sided tumours and a lower secondary resection rate in older patients. The efficacy of targeted therapy was dependent on tumour sidedness in older patients with RAS WT mCRC.Clinical trialFIRE-3 (NCT00433927).

Project description:Background: The prognosis of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is poor, especially after failure of initial systemic therapy. The VELOUR study showed modestly prolonged overall survival (OS) with ziv-aflibercept plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (zFOLFIRI) vs. placebo+FOLFIRI after progression on 5-fluoruracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) ± bevacizumab. The utility of zFOLFIRI after bevacizumab+FOLFIRI is unknown and not recommended in NCCN guidelines. We explored whether zFOLFIRI may be active beyond progression on bevacizumab+FOLFIRI. Methods: We undertook a retrospective analysis of patients treated in routine clinical practice. A chart review was conducted for a cohort (N = 19) of advanced cancer patients (18 mCRC) who received zFOLFIRI from 2014 to 2018 at Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC). Analysis included time on zFOLFIRI, PFS, OS, CEA trends and adverse events. A second mCRC cohort (N = 26) from the Flatiron Health EHR-derived database treated with zFOLFIRI after prior bevacizumab+FOLFOX and bevacizumab+FOLFIRI was analyzed for time-on-treatment and overall survival. Results: Median age of mCRC cohort at zFOLFIRI treatment was 54 (FCCC; N = 18) and 62 (Flatiron Health-cohort; N = 26). Of 18 FCCC mCRC patients, 1 patient had prior bevacizumab+FOLFOX and ramucirumab+irinotecan prior to zFOLFIRI for 8.5 months. Of 17 FCCC mCRC patients with prior bevacizumab+FOLFIRI who received zFOLFIRI, 13 had mutant-KRAS, 3 WT-KRAS, and one BRAF-V600E. The patient with BRAF-V600E mutation achieved stable disease on zFOLFIRI after multiple BRAF-targeted therapies. One patient (WT-KRAS mCRC) remained on zFOLFIRI for 14 months. Of 14 patients with mutated-KRAS, 8 remained on zFOLFIRI for >5 months including 3 for >15 months. The rate-of-change in CEA measures on zFOLFIRI was significantly different (p = 0.004) between rapid progressors and those with PFS>4 months. For mCRC patients treated with zFOLFIRI in the 3rd line or greater (N = 18), median PFS was 7.1 months (214 days) and median OS was 13.8 months (416 days). Median time-on-treatment with zFOLFIRI in the Flatiron Health cohort was 4.4 months, median OS was 7.8 months, and longest time-on-treatment with zFOLFIRI was 266 days. Conclusions: In these small real-world cohorts, clinical meaningful stable disease and overall survival on zFOLFIRI beyond progression on bevacizumab+FOLFIRI was observed in patients with mCRC. Further exploration of this approach is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundCetuximab plus FOLFIRI improved overall survival compared with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in FIRE-3, but no corresponding benefit was found for progression-free survival. This analysis aimed to determine whether cetuximab improves response and survival versus bevacizumab among response-evaluable patients receiving first-line FOLFIRI for RAS wild-type mCRC and the effect of primary tumour side on outcomes.MethodsThe intent-to-treat population included 593 patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type mCRC. Further testing identified 400 patients with extended RAS wild-type disease; of these, 352 (88%) who received ≥3 cycles of therapy and had ≥1 post-baseline scan were evaluable for response and constituted the per-protocol population (169 cetuximab and 183 bevacizumab). Patients received 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) with either weekly cetuximab or biweekly bevacizumab given on day 1 of each 14-day cycle until response, progression or toxicity occurred. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) in the per-protocol population. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The effect of primary tumour location was evaluated.ResultsMedian OS in the RAS wild-type population was 31 vs 26 months in the cetuximab and bevacizumab groups, respectively (HR 0.76, P = 0.012). In the per-protocol population, outcomes favoured cetuximab for ORR (77% vs 65%, P = 0.014) and median OS (33 vs 26 months, HR 0.75, P = 0.011), while PFS was comparable between groups. The advantage of cetuximab over bevacizumab occurred only in patients with left-sided primary tumours.ConclusionsFOLFIRI plus cetuximab resulted in a significantly higher ORR and longer OS compared to FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab among patients with left-sided tumours. The superior response associated with cetuximab may particularly benefit patients with symptomatic tumours or borderline-resectable metastases. CLINICALTRIALS.Gov identifierNCT00433927.

Dataset Information

Consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) of colorectal cancer (CRC) and first-line efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in the FIRE3 (AIO KRK-0306) trial.

Publications

Consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) of colorectal cancer (CRC) and first-line efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in the FIRE3 (AIO KRK-0306) trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets