Cargando…

Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND: The multicenter, open‐label, randomized, phase III EPIC study (EMR 062202‐025) investigated cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor–detectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed on first‐line fluoropyrimidine‐ and oxa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sobrero, Alberto, Lenz, Heinz‐Josef, Eng, Cathy, Scheithauer, Werner, Middleton, Gary, Chen, Wenfeng, Esser, Regina, Nippgen, Johannes, Burris, Howard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873334/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33191588
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13591
_version_ 1783649362760433664
author Sobrero, Alberto
Lenz, Heinz‐Josef
Eng, Cathy
Scheithauer, Werner
Middleton, Gary
Chen, Wenfeng
Esser, Regina
Nippgen, Johannes
Burris, Howard
author_facet Sobrero, Alberto
Lenz, Heinz‐Josef
Eng, Cathy
Scheithauer, Werner
Middleton, Gary
Chen, Wenfeng
Esser, Regina
Nippgen, Johannes
Burris, Howard
author_sort Sobrero, Alberto
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The multicenter, open‐label, randomized, phase III EPIC study (EMR 062202‐025) investigated cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor–detectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed on first‐line fluoropyrimidine‐ and oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy; we report the outcomes of patients with RAS‐wild‐type (wt) disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Available DNA samples from RAS‐unselected patients (n = 1,164 of 1,298 [89.7%]) were reanalyzed for RAS mutations using beads, emulsion, amplification, and magnetics. Baseline characteristics, efficacy, safety, and poststudy therapy were assessed. RAS‐wt status was defined as a mutated RAS allele frequency of ≤5%, with all relevant alleles being analyzable. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups (n = 452 patients with RAS‐wt mCRC; cetuximab plus irinotecan n = 231, irinotecan n = 221) and between the RAS‐wt and RAS‐unselected populations. In the cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan arms, median overall survival was 12.3 versus 12.0 months, median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 5.4 versus 2.6 months, and objective response rate (ORR) was 29.4% versus 5.0%, respectively. Quality of life (QoL) was improved in the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm. Serious adverse events occurred in 45.4% (cetuximab plus irinotecan) and 42.4% (irinotecan) of patients. In total, 47.1% of patients in the irinotecan arm received subsequent cetuximab therapy. CONCLUSION: PFS, ORR, and QoL were improved with cetuximab plus irinotecan as a second‐line treatment in patients with RAS‐wt mCRC, confirming that cetuximab‐based therapy is suitable in this population. Almost half of patients in the irinotecan arm received poststudy cetuximab, masking a potential overall survival benefit of cetuximab addition. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Cetuximab is approved for the treatment of RAS–wild‐type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this retrospective analysis of the phase III EPIC study (cetuximab plus irinotecan vs. irinotecan alone as second‐line treatment in patients with RAS‐unselected mCRC), the subgroup of patients with RAS–wild‐type mCRC who received cetuximab plus irinotecan had improved progression‐free survival, objective response rate, and quality of life compared with the RAS‐unselected population. These findings suggest that cetuximab‐based therapy is a suitable second‐line treatment for patients with RAS–wild‐type mCRC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7873334
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78733342021-02-17 Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Sobrero, Alberto Lenz, Heinz‐Josef Eng, Cathy Scheithauer, Werner Middleton, Gary Chen, Wenfeng Esser, Regina Nippgen, Johannes Burris, Howard Oncologist Gastrointestinal Cancer BACKGROUND: The multicenter, open‐label, randomized, phase III EPIC study (EMR 062202‐025) investigated cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor–detectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed on first‐line fluoropyrimidine‐ and oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy; we report the outcomes of patients with RAS‐wild‐type (wt) disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Available DNA samples from RAS‐unselected patients (n = 1,164 of 1,298 [89.7%]) were reanalyzed for RAS mutations using beads, emulsion, amplification, and magnetics. Baseline characteristics, efficacy, safety, and poststudy therapy were assessed. RAS‐wt status was defined as a mutated RAS allele frequency of ≤5%, with all relevant alleles being analyzable. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups (n = 452 patients with RAS‐wt mCRC; cetuximab plus irinotecan n = 231, irinotecan n = 221) and between the RAS‐wt and RAS‐unselected populations. In the cetuximab plus irinotecan versus irinotecan arms, median overall survival was 12.3 versus 12.0 months, median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 5.4 versus 2.6 months, and objective response rate (ORR) was 29.4% versus 5.0%, respectively. Quality of life (QoL) was improved in the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm. Serious adverse events occurred in 45.4% (cetuximab plus irinotecan) and 42.4% (irinotecan) of patients. In total, 47.1% of patients in the irinotecan arm received subsequent cetuximab therapy. CONCLUSION: PFS, ORR, and QoL were improved with cetuximab plus irinotecan as a second‐line treatment in patients with RAS‐wt mCRC, confirming that cetuximab‐based therapy is suitable in this population. Almost half of patients in the irinotecan arm received poststudy cetuximab, masking a potential overall survival benefit of cetuximab addition. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Cetuximab is approved for the treatment of RAS–wild‐type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this retrospective analysis of the phase III EPIC study (cetuximab plus irinotecan vs. irinotecan alone as second‐line treatment in patients with RAS‐unselected mCRC), the subgroup of patients with RAS–wild‐type mCRC who received cetuximab plus irinotecan had improved progression‐free survival, objective response rate, and quality of life compared with the RAS‐unselected population. These findings suggest that cetuximab‐based therapy is a suitable second‐line treatment for patients with RAS–wild‐type mCRC. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2020-12-14 2021-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7873334/ /pubmed/33191588 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13591 Text en © 2020 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Gastrointestinal Cancer
Sobrero, Alberto
Lenz, Heinz‐Josef
Eng, Cathy
Scheithauer, Werner
Middleton, Gary
Chen, Wenfeng
Esser, Regina
Nippgen, Johannes
Burris, Howard
Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
title Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
title_full Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
title_fullStr Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
title_short Extended RAS Analysis of the Phase III EPIC Trial: Irinotecan + Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan as Second‐Line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
title_sort extended ras analysis of the phase iii epic trial: irinotecan + cetuximab versus irinotecan as second‐line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer
topic Gastrointestinal Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873334/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33191588
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13591
work_keys_str_mv AT sobreroalberto extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT lenzheinzjosef extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT engcathy extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT scheithauerwerner extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT middletongary extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT chenwenfeng extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT esserregina extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT nippgenjohannes extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer
AT burrishoward extendedrasanalysisofthephaseiiiepictrialirinotecancetuximabversusirinotecanassecondlinetreatmentforpatientswithmetastaticcolorectalcancer