A study-level meta-analysis of efficacy data from head-to-head first-line trials of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus bevacizumab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

Head-to-head trials comparing first-line epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRI) versus vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (bevacizumab) therapy yielded differing results, and debate remains over optimal first-line therapy for patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Methods

A PubMed search identified first-line mCRC trials comparing EGFRI plus chemotherapy versus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy; data were subsequently updated using recent congress presentations. This study-level meta-analysis estimated the overall survival (OS) treatment effect of first-line chemotherapy plus EGFRIs or bevacizumab in patients with RAS WT mCRC. Secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), resection rate and safety. Early tumour shrinkage (ETS) of ≥20% at week 8 was an exploratory end-point.

Results

Three trials comprising data from 1096 patients with RAS WT mCRC were included. OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80 [95% confidence interval: 0.68–0.93]), ORR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.57) and ETS (OR: 0.48) favoured EGFRIs plus chemotherapy versus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. PFS (HR: 0.98) and resections (OR: 0.93) were similar between treatments. For patients with KRAS exon 2 WT/‘other’ RAS mutant mCRC the OS HR was 0.70. A safety meta-analysis was not possible due to a lack of data; in the individual studies, skin toxicities and hypomagnesaemia were more common with EGFRIs, nausea and hypertension were more common with bevacizumab.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis supports a potential benefit for first-line EGFRI plus chemotherapy versus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy with respect to OS, ORR and ETS in patients with RAS WT mCRC. A patient-level meta-analysis is awaited.

Leer todo

SIRFLOX: Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing First-Line mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Versus mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Plus Selective Internal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Al final de todo  observen que no se analiza si el paciente recibió bevacizumab o no. ¿Porque será?

Purpose SIRFLOX was a randomized, multicenter trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres to standard fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)–based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naïve patients with liver metastases plus or minus limited extrahepatic metastases were randomly assigned to receive either modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX6; control) or mFOLFOX6 plus SIRT (SIRT) plus or minus bevacizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at any site as assessed by independent centralized radiology review blinded to study arm.

Results Between October 2006 and April 2013, 530 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (control, 263; SIRT, 267). Median PFS at any site was 10.2 v 10.7 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12; P = .43). Median PFS in the liver by competing risk analysis was 12.6 v 20.5 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P = .002). Objective response rates (ORRs) at any site were similar (68.1% v 76.4% in control v SIRT; P = .113). ORR in the liver was improved with the addition of SIRT (68.8% v 78.7% in control vSIRT; P = .042). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events, including recognized SIRT-related effects, were reported in 73.4% and 85.4% of patients in control versus SIRT.

Conclusion The addition of SIRT to FOLFOX-based first-line chemotherapy in patients with liver-dominant or liver-only metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve PFS at any site but significantly delayed disease progression in the liver. The safety profile was as expected and was consistent with previous studies

Leer completo

Neoadjuvant Treatment for Surgically Resectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Review Article | January 15, 2016 | Oncology Journal, Colorectal Cancer, Gastrointestinal Cancer

By Marwan Al-Hajeili, MD, John L. Marshall, MD, and Brandon G. Smaglo, MD

The curative surgical resection of metastatic disease in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer with a limited tumor burden is standard of care. However, the role for neoadjuvant medical therapy and the ideal composition of that therapy are not established. Several neoadjuvant medical therapies, including standard advanced colorectal cancer chemotherapy regimens—such as folinic acid, fluorouracil (5-FU), and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX); folinic acid, 5-FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI); and folinic acid, 5-FU, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI)—have been evaluated, as has the addition of the biologic agents bevacizumab, panitumumab, and cetuximab. Those patients who are immediate surgical candidates do not seem to benefit from a neoadjuvant medical approach and should proceed directly to surgical resection. Those patients who are not surgical candidates at presentation can in some instances achieve a conversion of disease to a curable state with systemic therapy. Here, we review the studies that have explored different treatment regimens, therapeutic sequencing, and biologic inclusions for the treatment of these patients, with neoadjuvant intent. We also describe how we have established our own treatment paradigm for the management of potentially curable metastatic colorectal cancer. 
Leer todo el artículo