Efficacy and Tolerability of First-Line Cetuximab Plus Leucovorin, Fluorouracil, and Oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) Versus FOLFOX-4 in Patients With RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Open-Label, Randomized, Phase III TAILOR Trial

Shukui Qin, Jin Li, Liwei Wang, Jianming Xu, Ying Cheng, Yuxian Bai, Wei Li, Nong Xu, Li-Zhu Lin, Qiong Wu, Yunfeng Li, Jianwei Yang, Hongming Pan, Xuenong Ouyang, Wensheng Qiu, Kaichun Wu, Jianping Xiong, Guanghai Dai, Houjie Liang, Chunhong Hu, Jun Zhang, Min Tao, Qiang Yao, Junyuan Wang, Jiongjie Chen, S Peter Eggleton, Tianshu Liu, Shukui Qin, Jin Li, Liwei Wang, Jianming Xu, Ying Cheng, Yuxian Bai, Wei Li, Nong Xu, Li-Zhu Lin, Qiong Wu, Yunfeng Li, Jianwei Yang, Hongming Pan, Xuenong Ouyang, Wensheng Qiu, Kaichun Wu, Jianping Xiong, Guanghai Dai, Houjie Liang, Chunhong Hu, Jun Zhang, Min Tao, Qiang Yao, Junyuan Wang, Jiongjie Chen, S Peter Eggleton, Tianshu Liu

Abstract

Purpose: Cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy is a standard-of-care first-line treatment regimen for patients with RAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); however, the efficacy of cetuximab plus leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) has never before been proven in a controlled and randomized phase III trial. To our knowledge, the TAILOR trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01228734) is the first randomized, multicenter, phase III study of the addition of cetuximab to first-line FOLFOX prospectively choosing a RAS wt population and thus providing confirmative data for the efficacy and safety of cetuximab plus FOLFOX versus FOLFOX alone.

Patients and methods: TAILOR is an open-label, randomized (1:1), multicenter, phase III trial in patients from China comparing FOLFOX-4 with or without cetuximab in RAS wt (KRAS/NRAS, exons 2 to 4) mCRC. The primary end point of TAILOR was progression-free survival time; secondary end points included overall survival time, overall response rate, and safety and tolerability.

Results: In the modified intent-to-treat population of 393 patients with RAS wt mCRC, adding cetuximab to FOLFOX-4 significantly improved the primary end point of progression-free survival time compared with FOLFOX-4 alone (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.89; P = .004; median, 9.2 v 7.4 months, respectively), as well as the secondary end points of overall survival time (current assessment after 300 events: hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.96; P = .02; median, 20.7 v 17.8 months, respectively) and overall response rate (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.61 to 3.61; P < .001; 61.1% v 39.5%, respectively). Treatment was well tolerated, and there were no new or unexpected safety findings.

Conclusion: The TAILOR study met all of its objectives and relevant clinical end points, confirming cetuximab in combination with FOLFOX as an effective standard-of-care first-line treatment regimen for patients with RAS wt mCRC.

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
TAILOR study patient disposition. (*) One patient randomly assigned to the leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-4) arm received cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4; this patient was included in the FOLFOX-4 arm of the mITT population considered for efficacy analysis but the cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 arm of the modified safety population considered for safety analysis. ITT, intent to treat; mITT, modified intent to treat; wt, wild type.
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
(A) Primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS) time by independent review committee in the RAS wild-type modified intent-to-treat population. (B) Secondary end point of overall survival (OS) time in the RAS wild-type modified intent-to-treat population. FOLFOX-4, leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin; HR, hazard ratio.
Fig 3.
Fig 3.
Forest plot of demographic- and biomarker-defined subgroup analyses involving the primary end point of progression-free survival time by independent review committee in the RAS wild-type modified intent-to-treat population. BSA, body surface area; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; FOLFOX-4, leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin; HR, hazard ratio; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; M-184/3Nos, adenocarcinoma, not otherwise specified; ULN, upper limit of normal.

References

    1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:74–108.
    1. Van Cutsem E, Cervantes A, Adam R, et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1386–1422.
    1. Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Hitre E, et al. Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1408–1417.
    1. Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Láng I, et al. Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: Updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2011–2019.
    1. Van Cutsem E, Lenz HJ, Köhne CH, et al. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan plus cetuximab treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:692–700.
    1. Bokemeyer C, Bondarenko I, Makhson A, et al. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:663–671.
    1. Bokemeyer C, Bondarenko I, Hartmann JT, et al. Efficacy according to biomarker status of cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: The OPUS study. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1535–1546.
    1. Bokemeyer C, Köhne CH, Ciardiello F, et al. FOLFOX4 plus cetuximab treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:1243–1252.
    1. Maughan TS, Adams RA, Smith CG, et al. Addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial. Lancet. 2011;377:2103–2114.
    1. Tveit KM, Guren T, Glimelius B, et al. Phase III trial of cetuximab with continuous or intermittent fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX) versus FLOX alone in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: The NORDIC-VII study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1755–1762.
    1. Vale CL, Tierney JF, Fisher D, et al. Does anti-EGFR therapy improve outcome in advanced colorectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2012;38:618–625.
    1. Taieb J, Maughan T, Bokemeyer C, et al. Cetuximab combined with infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/FA) and oxaliplatin in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): A pooled analysis of COIN and OPUS study data. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30 (suppl; abstr 3574)
    1. Lenz H, Niedzwiecki D, Innocenti F, et al. CALGB/SWOG 80405: Phase III trial of irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5-FU/leucovorin (mFOLFOX6) with bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (CET) for patients (pts) with expanded RAS analyses in untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (mCRC) Ann Oncol. 2014;25 (suppl 4; abstr 501O)
    1. Chang AL, Cornelio GH, Shen L, et al. Final analysis of the phase 2 APEC study: Overall survival (OS) data and biomarker subanalyses for first-line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI with cetuximab (cet) once every 2 weeks in patients (pts) with KRAS or RAS (KRAS and NRAS, exons 2-4) wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) J Clin Oncol. 2015;33 (suppl 3; abstr 566)
    1. Folprecht G, Gruenberger T, Bechstein WO, et al. Tumour response and secondary resectability of colorectal liver metastases following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cetuximab: The CELIM randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:38–47.
    1. Ocvirk J, Brodowicz T, Wrba F, et al. Cetuximab plus FOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI in metastatic colorectal cancer: CECOG trial. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:3133–3143.
    1. Cheng AL, Li J, Vaid AK, et al. Adaptation of international guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer: An Asian consensus. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2014;13:145–155.
    1. Douillard JY, Oliner KS, Siena S, et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1023–1034.
    1. Heinemann V, von Weikersthal LF, Decker T, et al. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): A randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1065–1075.
    1. Brulé SY, Jonker DJ, Karapetis CS, et al. Location of colon cancer (right-sided versus left-sided) as a prognostic factor and a predictor of benefit from cetuximab in NCIC CO.17. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:1405–1414.
    1. Venook AP, Neidzwiecki D, Innocenti F, et al. Impact of primary (1°) tumor location on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance) J Clin Oncol. 2016;34 (suppl; abstr 3504)
    1. Tejpar S, Stintzing S, Ciardiello F, et al. Prognostic and predictive relevance of primary tumor location in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: Retrospective analyses of the CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 trials. JAMA Oncol. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3797. [Epub ahead of print on October 10, 2016]
    1. Chung KY, Shia J, Kemeny NE, et al. Cetuximab shows activity in colorectal cancer patients with tumors that do not express the epidermal growth factor receptor by immunohistochemistry. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:1803–1810.
    1. Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, et al. Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:337–345.
    1. Hebbar M, Wacrenier A, Desauw C, et al. Lack of usefulness of epidermal growth factor receptor expression determination for cetuximab therapy in patients with colorectal cancer. Anticancer Drugs. 2006;17:855–857.
    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colon Cancer. V2.2016.
    1. Bokemeyer C, Van Cutsem E, Rougier P, et al. Addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: Pooled analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS randomised clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:1466–1475.
    1. Karapetis CS, Jonker D, Daneshmand M, et al. PIK3CA, BRAF, and PTEN status and benefit from cetuximab in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: Results from NCIC CTG/AGITG CO.17. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:744–753.
    1. Stintzing S, Miller-Phillips L, Modest DP, et al. Impact of BRAF and RAS mutations on first-line efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab: Analysis of the FIRE-3 (AIO KRK-0306) study. Eur J Cancer. 2017;79:50–60.
    1. Pietrantonio F, Petrelli F, Coinu A, et al. Predictive role of BRAF mutations in patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving cetuximab and panitumumab: A meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:587–594.
    1. Rowland A, Dias MM, Wiese MD, et al. Meta-analysis of BRAF mutation as a predictive biomarker of benefit from anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:1888–1894.
    1. Kopetz S, McDonough SL, Lenz H-J, et al. Randomized trial of irinotecan and cetuximab with or without vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (SWOG S1406) J Clin Oncol. 2017;35 (suppl; abstr 3505)
    1. Huijberts S, Schellens JHM, Fakih M, et al. BEACON CRC (binimetinib [BINI], encorafenib [ENCO], and cetuximab [CTX] combined to treat BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer [mCRC]): A multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-arm phase III study of ENCO plus CTX plus or minus BINI vs irinotecan (IRI)/CTX or infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid/IRI (FOLFIRI)/CTX with a safety lead-in of ENCO + BINI + CTX in patients (pts) with BRAFV600E mCRC. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35 (suppl; abstr TPS3622)
    1. Holch JW, Ricard I, Stintzing S, et al. The relevance of primary tumour location in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of first-line clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2017;70:87–98.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться