Dominik P Modest1, Sebastian Stintzing1, Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal1, Thomas Decker1, Alexander Kiani1, Ursula Vehling-Kaiser1, Salah-Eddin Al-Batran1, Tobias Heintges1, Christian Lerchenmüller1, Christoph Kahl1, Gernot Seipelt1, Frank Kullmann1, Martina Stauch1, Werner Scheithauer1, Svantje Held1, Markus Möhler1, Andreas Jung1, Thomas Kirchner1, Volker Heinemann2. 1. Dominik P. Modest, Sebastian Stintzing, and Volker Heinemann, University Hospital Grosshadern; Andreas Jung and Thomas Kirchner, University of Munich, Munich; Dominik P. Modest, Sebastian Stintzing, Volker Heinemann, Andreas Jung, and Thomas Kirchner, German Cancer Consortium and German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg; Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal, Gesundheitszentrum St Marien, Amberg; Thomas Decker, Oncological Practice, Ravensburg; Alexander Kiani, Klinikum Bayreuth, Bayreuth; Ursula Vehling-Kaiser, Oncological Practice, Landshut; Salah-Eddin Al-Batran, Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt am Main; Tobias Heintges, Städtisches Klinikum Neuss, Neuss; Christian Lerchenmüller, Oncological Practice, Münster; Christoph Kahl, Staedtisches Klinikum Magdeburg, Magdeburg; Gernot Seipelt, Oncological Practice, Bad Soden; Frank Kullmann, Klinikum Weiden, Weiden; Martina Stauch, Oncological Practice, Kronach; Svantje Held, ClinAssess, Leverkusen; Markus Möhler, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität and German Cancer Consortium, Mainz, Germany; and Werner Scheithauer, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Dominik P. Modest, Sebastian Stintzing, and Volker Heinemann, University Hospital Grosshadern; Andreas Jung and Thomas Kirchner, University of Munich, Munich; Dominik P. Modest, Sebastian Stintzing, Volker Heinemann, Andreas Jung, and Thomas Kirchner, German Cancer Consortium and German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg; Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal, Gesundheitszentrum St Marien, Amberg; Thomas Decker, Oncological Practice, Ravensburg; Alexander Kiani, Klinikum Bayreuth, Bayreuth; Ursula Vehling-Kaiser, Oncological Practice, Landshut; Salah-Eddin Al-Batran, Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt am Main; Tobias Heintges, Städtisches Klinikum Neuss, Neuss; Christian Lerchenmüller, Oncological Practice, Münster; Christoph Kahl, Staedtisches Klinikum Magdeburg, Magdeburg; Gernot Seipelt, Oncological Practice, Bad Soden; Frank Kullmann, Klinikum Weiden, Weiden; Martina Stauch, Oncological Practice, Kronach; Svantje Held, ClinAssess, Leverkusen; Markus Möhler, Johannes-Gutenberg Universität and German Cancer Consortium, Mainz, Germany; and Werner Scheithauer, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. volker.heinemann@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We investigated choice and efficacy of subsequent treatment, with special focus on second-line therapy, in the FIRE-3 trial (FOLFIRI plus cetuximab [arm A] or bevacizumab [arm B]) for patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Start of subsequent-line (second or third) therapy was defined as use of an antitumor drug that was not part of the previous regimen. We evaluated choice, duration, and efficacy of subsequent therapy and determined the impact of subsequent-line treatment on outcome of patients in FIRE-3. RESULTS: Of 592 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 414 (69.9%) received second-line and 256 (43.2%) receivedthird-line therapy. In subsequent treatment lines, 47.1% of patients originally assigned to arm A received bevacizumab, and 52.2% originally assigned to arm B received either cetuximab or panitumumab. Oxaliplatin was subsequently used in 55.9% (arm A) and 53.2% (arm B) of patients. Second-line therapy was administered for a median duration of 5.0 versus 3.2 months (P < .001) in study arm A versus B. Progression-free (6.5 v 4.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.85; P < .001) and overall survival (16.3 v 13.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = .0021) from start of second-line therapy were longer in patients in arm A compared with arm B. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the sequence of drug application might be more important than exposure to single agents. In patients with RAS wild-type tumors, first-line application of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-directed therapy may represent a favorable condition for promoting effective subsequent therapy including antiangiogenic agents.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We investigated choice and efficacy of subsequent treatment, with special focus on second-line therapy, in the FIRE-3 trial (FOLFIRI plus cetuximab [arm A] or bevacizumab [arm B]) for patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Start of subsequent-line (second or third) therapy was defined as use of an antitumor drug that was not part of the previous regimen. We evaluated choice, duration, and efficacy of subsequent therapy and determined the impact of subsequent-line treatment on outcome of patients in FIRE-3. RESULTS: Of 592 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 414 (69.9%) received second-line and 256 (43.2%) received third-line therapy. In subsequent treatment lines, 47.1% of patients originally assigned to arm A received bevacizumab, and 52.2% originally assigned to arm B received either cetuximab or panitumumab. Oxaliplatin was subsequently used in 55.9% (arm A) and 53.2% (arm B) of patients. Second-line therapy was administered for a median duration of 5.0 versus 3.2 months (P < .001) in study arm A versus B. Progression-free (6.5 v 4.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.85; P < .001) and overall survival (16.3 v 13.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.88; P = .0021) from start of second-line therapy were longer in patients in arm A compared with arm B. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the sequence of drug application might be more important than exposure to single agents. In patients with RAS wild-type tumors, first-line application of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-directed therapy may represent a favorable condition for promoting effective subsequent therapy including antiangiogenic agents.
Authors: Alan P Venook; Donna Niedzwiecki; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Federico Innocenti; Briant Fruth; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Deborah Schrag; Claire Greene; Bert H O'Neil; James Norman Atkins; Scott Berry; Blase N Polite; Eileen M O'Reilly; Richard M Goldberg; Howard S Hochster; Richard L Schilsky; Monica M Bertagnolli; Anthony B El-Khoueiry; Peter Watson; Al B Benson; Daniel L Mulkerin; Robert J Mayer; Charles Blanke Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jaafar Bennouna; Sandrine Hiret; Aurelie Bertaut; Olivier Bouché; Gael Deplanque; Christian Borel; Eric François; Thierry Conroy; François Ghiringhelli; Gaëtan des Guetz; Jean-François Seitz; Pascal Artru; Mohamed Hebbar; Trevor Stanbury; Marc G Denis; Antoine Adenis; Christophe Borg Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Rui Pedro Marques; Ana Rita Godinho; Peter Heudtlass; Helena Luna Pais; António Quintela; Ana Paula Martins Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Axel Wein; Jürgen Siebler; Ruediger Goertz; Kerstin Wolff; Nicola Ostermeier; Dagmar Busse; Andreas E Kremer; Franz Koch; Alexander Hagel; Michael Farnbacher; Ferdinand J Kammerer; Markus F Neurath; Robert Gruetzmann Journal: Case Rep Oncol Date: 2016-07-09