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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |