Cargando…
The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer
BACKGROUND: In the phase III RECOURSE trial, trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) extended overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory or intolerant to standard therapies. The present analysis inve...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7493695/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29274618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.009 |
_version_ | 1783582612308099072 |
---|---|
author | Van Cutsem, Eric Mayer, Robert J. Laurent, Stéphanie Winkler, Robert Grávalos, Cristina Benavides, Manuel Longo-Munoz, Federico Portales, Fabienne Ciardiello, Fortunato Siena, Salvatore Yamaguchi, Kensei Muro, Kei Denda, Tadamichi Tsuji, Yasushi Makris, Lukas Loehrer, Patrick Lenz, Heinz-Josef Ohtsu, Atsushi |
author_facet | Van Cutsem, Eric Mayer, Robert J. Laurent, Stéphanie Winkler, Robert Grávalos, Cristina Benavides, Manuel Longo-Munoz, Federico Portales, Fabienne Ciardiello, Fortunato Siena, Salvatore Yamaguchi, Kensei Muro, Kei Denda, Tadamichi Tsuji, Yasushi Makris, Lukas Loehrer, Patrick Lenz, Heinz-Josef Ohtsu, Atsushi |
author_sort | Van Cutsem, Eric |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the phase III RECOURSE trial, trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) extended overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory or intolerant to standard therapies. The present analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil in RECOURSE subgroups. METHODS: Primary and key secondary end-points were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model in prespecified subgroups, including geographical subregion (United States of America [USA], European Union [EU], Japan), age (<65 years, ≥65 years) and v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma 2 viral oncogene homologue (KRAS) status (wild type, mutant). Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Eight-hundred patients were enrolled: USA, n = 99; EU, n = 403; Japan, n = 266. Patients aged ≥65 years and those with mutant KRAS tumours comprised 44% and 51% of all patients in the subregions, respectively. Final OS analysis (including 89% of events, compared with 72% in the initial analysis) confirmed the survival benefit associated with trifluridine/tipiracil, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59–0.81; P = 0.0001). Median OS in the three regions was 6.5–7.8 months in the trifluridine/tipiracil arm and 4.3–6.7 months in the placebo arm (USA: HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34–0.94; P = 0.0277; EU: HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.48–0.80; P = 0.0002; Japan: HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57–1.00; P = 0.0470). Median PFS was 2.0–2.8 months for trifluridine/tipiracil and 1.7–1.8 months for placebo; HRs favoured trifluridine/tipiracil in all regions. Similar clinical benefits of trifluridine/tipiracil were observed in elderly patients and in those with mutant KRAS tumours. There were no marked differences among subregions in terms of safety and tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: Trifluridine/tipiracil was effective in all subgroups, regardless of age, geographical origin or KRAS status. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01607957. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7493695 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74936952020-09-16 The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer Van Cutsem, Eric Mayer, Robert J. Laurent, Stéphanie Winkler, Robert Grávalos, Cristina Benavides, Manuel Longo-Munoz, Federico Portales, Fabienne Ciardiello, Fortunato Siena, Salvatore Yamaguchi, Kensei Muro, Kei Denda, Tadamichi Tsuji, Yasushi Makris, Lukas Loehrer, Patrick Lenz, Heinz-Josef Ohtsu, Atsushi Eur J Cancer Article BACKGROUND: In the phase III RECOURSE trial, trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) extended overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory or intolerant to standard therapies. The present analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil in RECOURSE subgroups. METHODS: Primary and key secondary end-points were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model in prespecified subgroups, including geographical subregion (United States of America [USA], European Union [EU], Japan), age (<65 years, ≥65 years) and v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma 2 viral oncogene homologue (KRAS) status (wild type, mutant). Safety and tolerability were reported with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Eight-hundred patients were enrolled: USA, n = 99; EU, n = 403; Japan, n = 266. Patients aged ≥65 years and those with mutant KRAS tumours comprised 44% and 51% of all patients in the subregions, respectively. Final OS analysis (including 89% of events, compared with 72% in the initial analysis) confirmed the survival benefit associated with trifluridine/tipiracil, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59–0.81; P = 0.0001). Median OS in the three regions was 6.5–7.8 months in the trifluridine/tipiracil arm and 4.3–6.7 months in the placebo arm (USA: HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34–0.94; P = 0.0277; EU: HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.48–0.80; P = 0.0002; Japan: HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57–1.00; P = 0.0470). Median PFS was 2.0–2.8 months for trifluridine/tipiracil and 1.7–1.8 months for placebo; HRs favoured trifluridine/tipiracil in all regions. Similar clinical benefits of trifluridine/tipiracil were observed in elderly patients and in those with mutant KRAS tumours. There were no marked differences among subregions in terms of safety and tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: Trifluridine/tipiracil was effective in all subgroups, regardless of age, geographical origin or KRAS status. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01607957. 2017-12-21 2018-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7493695/ /pubmed/29274618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.009 Text en This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Van Cutsem, Eric Mayer, Robert J. Laurent, Stéphanie Winkler, Robert Grávalos, Cristina Benavides, Manuel Longo-Munoz, Federico Portales, Fabienne Ciardiello, Fortunato Siena, Salvatore Yamaguchi, Kensei Muro, Kei Denda, Tadamichi Tsuji, Yasushi Makris, Lukas Loehrer, Patrick Lenz, Heinz-Josef Ohtsu, Atsushi The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
title | The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
title_full | The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
title_fullStr | The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
title_short | The subgroups of the phase III RECOURSE trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
title_sort | subgroups of the phase iii recourse trial of trifluridine/tipiracil (tas-102) versus placebo with best supportive care in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7493695/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29274618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vancutsemeric thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT mayerrobertj thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT laurentstephanie thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT winklerrobert thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT gravaloscristina thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT benavidesmanuel thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT longomunozfederico thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT portalesfabienne thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT ciardiellofortunato thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT sienasalvatore thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT yamaguchikensei thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT murokei thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT dendatadamichi thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT tsujiyasushi thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT makrislukas thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT loehrerpatrick thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT lenzheinzjosef thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT ohtsuatsushi thesubgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT vancutsemeric subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT mayerrobertj subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT laurentstephanie subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT winklerrobert subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT gravaloscristina subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT benavidesmanuel subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT longomunozfederico subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT portalesfabienne subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT ciardiellofortunato subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT sienasalvatore subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT yamaguchikensei subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT murokei subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT dendatadamichi subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT tsujiyasushi subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT makrislukas subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT loehrerpatrick subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT lenzheinzjosef subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer AT ohtsuatsushi subgroupsofthephaseiiirecoursetrialoftrifluridinetipiraciltas102versusplacebowithbestsupportivecareinpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer |