Literature DB >> 27144068

Second-line panitumumab as a triweekly dose for patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer: a single-institution experience.

Mohamed A Daoud1, Engy M Aboelnaga1, Wael M Mohamed1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Panitumumab administered as monotherapy in colorectal cancer (CRC) has shown response and disease stabilization rates of approximately 30%. The current study aimed to evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with panitumumab every 3 weeks as a second line treatment.
METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of 18 patients, aged more than 18 years, with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC treated with panitumumab as a second-line single agent after progression on first-line chemotherapy.
RESULTS: The median number of courses received was 10 (range, 4-29), and the median duration of treatment was 30 weeks (range, 12-96 weeks). After a median follow-up period of 13 months, the median PFS was 6 months (range, 4.3-7.7 months) and the median OS was 11 months (range, 7.4-14.5 months). The median PFS was 4 months for patients with < grade 2 skin toxicity and 6 months (range, 4.5-7.5 months) for patients with ≥grade 2 skin rash (P=0.05). The median OS was 9 months (range, 6.4-11.5 months) and 14 months (range, 11.6-16.3 months) for the two groups of patients (P=0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab given every 3 weeks is effective and well tolerated in patients with advanced CRC that progressed after standard chemotherapy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  KRAS; Metastatic colorectal carcinoma; panitumumab; second-line

Year:  2016        PMID: 27144068      PMCID: PMC4850122          DOI: 10.28092/j.issn.2095-3941.2015.0009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Biol Med        ISSN: 2095-3941            Impact factor:   4.248


Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant neoplasm originating in the lower part of the digestive system, including the colon and rectum. In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the tumor spreads beyond the local or regional lymph nodes to other parts of the body, such as the liver, lungs, peritoneum, and para-aortic lymph nodes (stage IV disease). At the time of diagnosis, an estimated 20%-55% of people with CRC already have metastatic disease. Moreover, approximately 50%-60% of the people who have undergone surgery for early-stage CRC will eventually develop metastatic disease, most commonly in the liver[1]. The management of mCRC is mainly palliative, and includes combinations of treatment modalities, such as palliative surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, for symptom control and psychosocial support. However, approximately 8% of people with mCRC have potentially resectable liver metastases, and chemotherapy may render these liver metastases operable[2]. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been validated as a therapeutic target in several human tumors, including CRC[3-6]. Ligand occupancy of EGFR activates the RAS/RAF/MAPK, STAT, and PI3K/AKT signaling pathways, which modulate cellular proliferation, adhesion, angiogenesis, migration, and survival[7,8]. The antiEGFR targeted antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab, administered as monotherapy in CRC, have shown response and disease stabilization rates of approximately 10% and 30%, respectively[4,5]. Retrospective studies have identified KRAS mutation in tumors as a negative predictive factor for panitumumab and cetuximab for improved response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)[9-15]. In September 2007, a prospectively defined retrospective analysis of the pivotal phase III study of panitumumab as monotherapy in mCRC setting provided evidence that clinical benefits are specific to patients with wildtype (WT) KRAS tumors[16]. Panitumumab can be administered from a weekly to a triweekly schedule. In a dose-finding study, panitumumab, given at a dose of 9 mg/kg triweekly, was well tolerated and exhibited predictable pharmacokinetics with low intra- and inter-patient variability[17]. The current study aimed to evaluate the PFS and OS for mCRC patients treated with panitumumab every 3 weeks as second-line treatment.

Patients and methods

This study included 18 patients aged more than 18 years, both males and females, with WT KRAS axon 2 mCRC treated by panitumumab as a second-line single agent after progression on first-line chemotherapy, during the period of January 2007 to December 2012. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, King Abdullah Medical City. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients for the publication of this study.

Patient's criteria

The studied patients had no previous anti-EGFR therapy, antitumor therapy within 30 days, symptomatic brain metastases needing treatment, significant cardiovascular disease, history of interstitial lung disease, serum magnesium concentrations below the lower normal limit, inadequate hematological function, inadequate renal function, or inadequate hepatic function.

Treatment

Panitumumab (Vectibix, Amgen) was administered at a dose of 9 mg/kg over 60 min by intravenous infusion. Treatment was given every 21 days until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of the patient.

KRAS testing

We assessed the KRAS tumor status in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue sections for the presence or absence of the seven most common KRAS mutations. Exon 2 mutations were assessed with Thera screen KRAS assay (Biomnis, Lyon, France). Other RAS and BRAF mutation tests were not performed in this group of patients. All RAS tests are part of the standard therapy before administering panitumumab.

Assessment

The data collected included performance status, histopathology, abdominopelvic MRI/CT, chest CT, KRAS status, type of prior surgery, number of involved organs and locations, prior chemotherapy received, chemotherapy regimen used and number of cycles received, and panitumumab doses and number of cycles received. Clinical response and its duration were assessed according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) guidelines. Data for assessment of the treatment related toxicity and its degree were collected. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (version 4.0)[18].

Outcomes

Analysis included measurement of PFS and OS of the treated patients. PFS was defined as the length of time during and after treatment, in which the disease did not worsen. Survival was defined as the time from the start of treatment with panitumumab until death (patients lost from follow up were censored at the time they were last determined to be alive).

Statistical analysis

SPSS software version 21.0 was used for statistical analysis. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the PFS. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the time to an event, such as median time to progression, duration of response, PFS, and OS. Variables were described using mean, median, minimum, and maximum values. Analysis of treatment efficacy based on grade of skin rash toxicity was also performed using log-rank test for PFS and OS. Correlation analysis between the grade of skin rash and response was also conducted using Pearson Chi-square test.

Results

The study included 18 patients with WT KRAS mCRC. Their median age was 53 years (range, 36-72 years), with male to female ratio of 2:1 (). Patients with performance status of 0-1 represented 83% of the studied group. All patients had previous surgery: radical (28%), palliative (61%), or both (11%). First-line chemotherapy was given to all patients before panitumumab treatment. Approximately 44% of patients received oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment, whereas 56% received irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Bevacizumab was given to 50% of patients. All patients received four cycles or more of triweekly panitumumab. The median number of courses received was 10 (range, 4-29) with a median treatment duration of 30 weeks (range,12-96 weeks). Panitumumab was administered to all patients at a dose of 9 mg/kg. However, treatment was delayed in 5 patients (28%) because of deterioration of general conditions, especially in elderly patients, leucopenia, or anemia requiring supportive measures. Treatment was discontinued in 11 patients (61%) because of disease progression, 2 patients because of development of grade 4 skin toxicity and refusal to continue treatment (11%), and 3 patients (17%) because of death or loss to follow up. Patient's characteristics Four patients (22%) showed partial response, whereas disease stabilization was achieved in 8 patients (44%) (). The median time to response for patients who achieved partial response was 4.7 months (range, 4.2-5.5 months), whereas the median duration of the obtained response was 6 months (range, 4.3-7.7 months). After a median follow-up period of 13 months, the median PFS was 6 months (range, 4.3-7.7 months) and the median OS was 11 months (range, 7.4-14.5 months). Response assessment The association between the degree of skin toxicity and the obtained clinical response showed that four patients (100%) among those who obtained partial response and six patients (75%) with stationary disease had ≥ grade 2 skin toxicity out of the 11 patients with ≥grade 2 skin toxicity. Meanwhile, two patients (25%) among the 7 patients with < grade 2 skin toxicity had stationary disease (P=0.02) (). Response assessment in relation to skin For patients with grade 2 skin toxicity, the median PFS was 4 and 6 months (range, 4.5-7.5 months) for patients with ≥grade 2 skin rash (P=0.05). The median OS was 9 months (range, 6.4-11.5 months) and 14 months (range, 11.6-16.3 months) for the two groups of patients (P=0.002). Hypomagnesemia was reported in 2 patients (11%) among the 8 patients (44%) with grade 3 toxicity. The degree of hypomagnesemia was associated with the obtained clinical response. Three patients (75%) among those who obtained a partial response and two patients (100%) with stationary disease had ≥grade 2 hypomagnesemia out of the six patients with ≥grade 2 hypomagnesemia. Meanwhile, one patient out of the two with < grade 2 hypomagnesemia had partial response (P=0.51) (). Response assessment in relation to hypomagnesaemia The treatment-related toxicities are shown in . Skin rash was the most frequent toxicity among the treated patients (13 patients, 73%), followed by diarrhea (9 patients, 50%). Only one patient developed grade 3 diarrhea requiring hospitalization. Two patients (11%) stopped panitumumab treatment because of the development of a grade 4 skin rash. Treatment related toxicity (18 patients)

Discussion

The findings of this study indicated that panitumumab monotherapy given every 21 days was well tolerated and effective in mCRC patients with disease progression after standard chemotherapy. The RR observed in this study (22%) was better than the previously reported RRs of 8.5%-11.6% in irinotecan and oxaliplatin refractory patients treated with either cetuximab or panitumumab monotherapy[19-21]. This result could be attributed to the fact that testing of the K-RAS status was not conducted for patients in these studies before starting treatment, as well as the small sample size of our study. In a Japanese single-institution study, the RR was 12.5%, and all patients with WT K-RAS achieved a partial response[21]. In a group of patients with WT K-RAS treated with panitumumab as a single agent after progression on both oxaliplatin and irinotecan, the RR was 17%[16]. These results indicated the value of testing the K-RAS status before giving panitumumab as response to treatment was affected by the K-RAS status. In a recent phase III study (ASPECCT) comparing cetuximab and panitumumab based on WT-KRAS exon 2 testing for patients with mCRC refractory to chemotherapy, the RR for the group that received panitumumab was 22%, which was the same as in our study[22]. In the PRIME study[23], Oliner and colleagues demonstrated through biomarker analysis, including K-RAS, N-RAS, and BRAF, that patients with any RAS mutation or a BRAF mutation had worse PFS and worse OS when treated with panitumumab combined with FOLFOX4. By contrast, patients with WT K-RAS exon 2 tumors were associated with a 5.8-month improvement in OS (hazard ratio =0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.99; P=0.043). The median PFS and median OS were 6 and 11 months, respectively. These findings were better than those of a previous study comparing panitumumab and best supportive care without testing K-RAS, with 2.5 and 6.3 months, respectively[5]. In a phase 3 randomized, controlled multicenter study comparing panitumumab in WT K-RAS mCRC vs. BSC for mutant K-RAS mCRC patients, the OS was 8.1 vs. 4.4 months, respectively[24]. In the ASPECCT study for patients treated with panitumumab, the PFS and OS were 4.1 and 10.4 months, respectively, similar to our findings. This relatively high rate of PFS and OS could be attributed to previous treatment with bevacizumab in about 50% of our patients prior to their entry into the study. This finding was also reported in the ASPECCT study, but no biological explanation was provided. Skin rash is a characteristic toxicity of panitumumab and other EGFR inhibitors. Consistent with previous reports, we found an association between clinical efficacy and rash severity[5,23]. The incidence of skin toxicity in panitumumab-treated patients was dose related, but we did not observe a correlation between dose and severity. The time to the worst grade of rash did not differ from the time to any other grade of rash[10-15]. Although skin rash appears to be a marker of drug activity associated with clinical benefit, it also often develops in patients who do not benefit from treatment. Hypomagnesemia occurred in 44% of patients, with its peak after three to four months. In most instances, hypomagnesemia was managed by the treating physician, and it was not a cause to withhold or change the dose of panitumumab. We noted an association between the grade of hypomagnesemia and the RR, but without statistical significance (P=0.51). In a recent Japanese study, hypomagnesemia was observed more commonly in patients exposed to long treatment period with EGFR inhibitors[25]. Consistent with the fully human monoclonal antibody nature of panitumumab, we observed a low incidence of infusion reactions. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that panitumumab given every 3 weeks was effective and well tolerated in patients with advanced CRC that had progressed after standard chemotherapy. Panitumumab represents a novel treatment option that can improve PFS with manageable toxicity in patients with chemorefractory mCRC. However, further comparative randomized studies are necessary to reach firm conclusions based on both clinical and pharmacological bases.

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflicts of interest are disclosed.
Table1

Patient's characteristics

Characteristicsn%
Age, years
Median53
Range36-72
Gender
Males1267
Females633
Tumor grade
Grade 116
Grade 21161
Grade 3633
Performance status (ECOG)
0422
1528
2633
3317
Type of previous surgery
Curative528
Palliative1161
Both (curative/palliative)211
Type of previous chemotherapy regimen (first line)
Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy844
Irinotecan-based chemotherapy1056
Number of involved organs
1739
2844
317
Sites affected
Liver950
Lung739
Peritoneal211
Lymph nodes633
Table2

Response assessment

Itemsn%
Complete response00
Partial response422.2
Stable disease844.4
Progressive disease633.4
Total18100.0
Table3

Response assessment in relation to skin

ItemsDegree of skin rashTotal
< Grade 2, n (%)≥Grade 2, n (%)
Complete response000
Partial response04 (100)4 (100.0)
Stationary course2 (25)6 (75)8 (100.0)
Progressive disease5 (83)1 (17)6 (100.0)
Total7 (39)11 (61)18 (100.0)
Table4

Response assessment in relation to hypomagnesaemia

ItemsDegree of hypomagnesaemiaTotal
< Grade 2, n (%)≥Grade 2, n (%)
Complete response0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)
Partial response1 (25)3 (75)4 (100.0)
Stationary course0 (0)2 (100)2 (100.0)
Progressive disease1 (50)1 (50)2 (100.0)
Total2 (25)6 (75)8 (100.0)
Table5

Treatment related toxicity (18 patients)

ItemsGrade 1, n (%)Grade 2, n (%)Grade 3, n (%)Grade 4, n (%)Overall, n (%)
Skin dryness1 (5.6)2 (11.2)2 (11.2)05 (28)
Skin fissures1 (5.6)0001 (5.6)
Skin rash2 (11.2)8 (44.8)1 (5.6)2 (11.2)13 (72.8)
Stomatitis1 (5.6)3 (16.8)1 (5.6)05 (28)
Anorexia3 (16.8)1 (5.6)004 (22.4)
Vomiting3 (16.8)2 (11.2)005 (28)
Diarrhea2 (11.2)6 (33.6)1 (5.6)09 (50)
Neutropenia1 (5.6)2 (11.2)1 (5.6)04 (22.4)
Alopecia3 (16.8)1 (5.6)1 (5.6)05 (28)
Asthenia2 (11.2)4 (22.4)006 (33.6)
Hypomagnesaemia2 (11.2)4 (22.4)2 (11.2)08 (44.8)
  21 in total

1.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Epidermal growth factor receptor targeting in cancer.

Authors:  John Mendelsohn; Jose Baselga
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 3.  ERBB receptors and cancer: the complexity of targeted inhibitors.

Authors:  Nancy E Hynes; Heidi A Lane
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 4.  The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab (mono- or combination chemotherapy), bevacizumab (combination with non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy) and panitumumab (monotherapy) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer after first-line chemotherapy (review of technology appraisal No.150 and part review of technology appraisal No. 118): a systematic review and economic model.

Authors:  M Hoyle; L Crathorne; J Peters; T Jones-Hughes; C Cooper; M Napier; P Tappenden; C Hyde
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.014

5.  Association of K-ras mutational status and clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving panitumumab alone.

Authors:  Daniel J Freeman; Todd Juan; Maureen Reiner; J Randolph Hecht; Neal J Meropol; Jordan Berlin; Edith Mitchell; Ildiko Sarosi; Robert Radinsky; Rafael G Amado
Journal:  Clin Colorectal Cancer       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.481

6.  K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Christos S Karapetis; Shirin Khambata-Ford; Derek J Jonker; Chris J O'Callaghan; Dongsheng Tu; Niall C Tebbutt; R John Simes; Haji Chalchal; Jeremy D Shapiro; Sonia Robitaille; Timothy J Price; Lois Shepherd; Heather-Jane Au; Christiane Langer; Malcolm J Moore; John R Zalcberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 7.  KRAS mutations and sensitivity to epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in colorectal cancer: practical application of patient selection.

Authors:  Antonio Jimeno; Wells A Messersmith; Fred R Hirsch; Wilbur A Franklin; S Gail Eckhardt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-01-05       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Dose and schedule study of panitumumab monotherapy in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

Authors:  Louis M Weiner; Arie S Belldegrun; Jeffrey Crawford; Anthony W Tolcher; Pamela Lockbaum; Rosalin H Arends; Lynn Navale; Rafael G Amado; Gisela Schwab; Robert A Figlin
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Clinical relevance of KRAS mutation detection in metastatic colorectal cancer treated by Cetuximab plus chemotherapy.

Authors:  F Di Fiore; F Blanchard; F Charbonnier; F Le Pessot; A Lamy; M P Galais; L Bastit; A Killian; R Sesboüé; J J Tuech; A M Queuniet; B Paillot; J C Sabourin; F Michot; P Michel; T Frebourg
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2007-03-20       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Safety and efficacy of panitumumab therapy after metastatic colorectal cancer progression with cetuximab: Experience at a single Japanese institution.

Authors:  Hiromichi Sonoda; Eiji Mekata; Tomoharu Shimizu; Yoshihiro Endo; Tohru Tani
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 2.967

View more
  1 in total

1.  First-Line Cetuximab Monotherapy in KRAS/NRAS/BRAF Mutation-Negative Colorectal Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Vladimir M Moiseyenko; Fedor V Moiseyenko; Grigoriy A Yanus; Ekatherina Sh Kuligina; Anna P Sokolenko; Ilya V Bizin; Alexey A Kudriavtsev; Svetlana N Aleksakhina; Nikita M Volkov; Vyacheslav A Chubenko; Kseniya S Kozyreva; Mikhail M Kramchaninov; Alexandr S Zhuravlev; Kseniya V Shelekhova; Denis V Pashkov; Alexandr O Ivantsov; Aigul R Venina; Tatyana N Sokolova; Elena V Preobrazhenskaya; Natalia V Mitiushkina; Alexandr V Togo; Aglaya G Iyevleva; Evgeny N Imyanitov
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.859

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.