Effect of the Addition of Cetuximab to Paclitaxel, Cisplatin, and Radiation Therapy for Patients With Esophageal Cancer: The NRG Oncology RTOG 0436 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Mohan Suntharalingam, Kathryn Winter, David Ilson, Adam P Dicker, Lisa Kachnic, André Konski, A Bapsi Chakravarthy, Christopher J Anker, Harish Thakrar, Naomi Horiba, Ajay Dubey, Joel S Greenberger, Adam Raben, Jeffrey Giguere, Kevin Roof, Gregory Videtic, Jondavid Pollock, Howard Safran, Christopher H Crane, Mohan Suntharalingam, Kathryn Winter, David Ilson, Adam P Dicker, Lisa Kachnic, André Konski, A Bapsi Chakravarthy, Christopher J Anker, Harish Thakrar, Naomi Horiba, Ajay Dubey, Joel S Greenberger, Adam Raben, Jeffrey Giguere, Kevin Roof, Gregory Videtic, Jondavid Pollock, Howard Safran, Christopher H Crane

Abstract

Importance: The role of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition in chemoradiation strategies in the nonoperative treatment of patients with esophageal cancer remains uncertain.

Objective: To evaluate the benefit of cetuximab added to concurrent chemoradiation therapy for patients undergoing nonoperative treatment of esophageal carcinoma.

Design, setting, and participants: A National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored, multicenter, phase 3, randomized clinical trial open to patients with biopsy-proven carcinoma of the esophagus. The study accrued 344 patients from 2008 to 2013.

Interventions: Patients were randomized to weekly concurrent cisplatin (50 mg/m2), paclitaxel (25 mg/m2), and daily radiation of 50.4 Gy/1.8 Gy fractions with or without weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m2 on day 1 then 250 mg/m2 weekly).

Main outcomes and measures: Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint, with a study designed to detect an increase in 2-year OS from 41% to 53%; 80% power and 1-sided α = .025.

Results: Between June 30, 2008, and February 8, 2013, 344 patients were enrolled. This analysis used all data received at NRG Oncology through April 12, 2015. Sixteen patients were ineligible, resulting in 328 evaluable patients, 159 in the experimental arm and 169 in the control arm. Patients were well matched between the treatment arms for patient and tumor characteristics: 263 (80%) with T3 or T4 disease, 215 (66%) N1, and 62 (19%) with celiac nodal involvement. Incidence of grade 3, 4, or 5 treatment-related adverse events at any time was 71 (46%), 35 (23%), or 6 (4%) in the experimental arm and 83 (50%), 28 (17%), or 2 (1%) in the control arm, respectively. A clinical complete response (cCR) rate of 81 (56%) was observed in the experimental arm vs 92 (58%) in the control arm (Fisher exact test, P = .66). No differences were seen in cCR between treatment arms for either histology (adenocarcinoma or squamous cell). Median follow-up for all patients was 18.6 months. The 24- and 36-month local failure for the experimental arm was 47% (95% CI, 38%-57%) and 49% (95% CI, 40%-59%) vs 49% (95% CI, 41%-58%) and 49% (95% CI, 41%-58%) for the control arm (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.66-1.28; P = .65). The 24- and 36-month OS rates for the experimental arm were 45% (95% CI, 37%-53%) and 34% (95% CI, 26%-41%) vs 44% (95% CI, 36%-51%) and 28% (95% CI, 21%-35%) for the control arm (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.70-1.16; P = .47).

Conclusions and relevance: The addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation did not improve OS. These phase 3 trial results point to little benefit to current EGFR-targeted agents in an unselected patient population, and highlight the need for predictive biomarkers in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00655876.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Ms Winter reports grants from NCI grant, a subcontract to her employer ACR, during the conduct of the study. Dr Raben reports speaking fees from Eli Lilly, Foundation Medicine Inc, and BMY, speaker and research collaboration fees from Genomic Health, outside the submitted work. No other disclosures are reported.

Figures

Figure 1.. CONSORT Diagram
Figure 1.. CONSORT Diagram
Figure 2.. Overall Survival and Local Failure…
Figure 2.. Overall Survival and Local Failure by Treatment Arm
A, Overall survival by treatment arm (n = 328). B, Local failure by treatment arm (n = 328).

References

    1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(1):9-29.
    1. Cooper JS, Guo MD, Herskovic A, et al. ; Radiation Therapy Oncology Group . Chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced esophageal cancer: long-term follow-up of a prospective randomized trial (RTOG 85-01). JAMA. 1999;281(17):1623-1627.
    1. Herskovic A, Martz K, al-Sarraf M, et al. . Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with cancer of the esophagus. N Engl J Med. 1992;326(24):1593-1598.
    1. Kelsen DP, Winter KA, Gunderson LL, et al. ; Radiation Therapy Oncology Group; USA Intergroup . Long-term results of RTOG trial 8911 (USA Intergroup 113): a random assignment trial comparison of chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(24):3719-3725.
    1. Minsky BD, Neuberg D, Kelsen DP, et al. . Final report of Intergroup Trial 0122 (ECOG PE-289, RTOG 90-12): Phase II trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus concurrent chemotherapy and high-dose radiation for squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43(3):517-523.
    1. Huang SM, Bock JM, Harari PM. Epidermal growth factor receptor blockade with C225 modulates proliferation, apoptosis, and radiosensitivity in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Cancer Res. 1999;59(8):1935-1940.
    1. Harari PM, Huang SM. Epidermal growth factor receptor modulation of radiation response: preclinical and clinical development. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2002;12(3)(suppl 2):21-26.
    1. Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J, et al. . Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer: 5-year survival data from a phase 3 randomised trial, and relation between cetuximab-induced rash and survival. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(1):21-28.
    1. Safran H, Suntharalingam M, Dipetrillo T, et al. . Cetuximab with concurrent chemoradiation for esophagogastric cancer: assessment of toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70(2):391-395.
    1. van Hagen P, Hulshof MC, van Lanschot JJ, et al. ; CROSS Group . Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(22):2074-2084.
    1. Honing J, Smit JK, Muijs CT, et al. . A comparison of carboplatin and paclitaxel with cisplatinum and 5-fluorouracil in definitive chemoradiation in esophageal cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(3):638-643.
    1. Curtis NJ, Noble F, Bailey IS, Kelly JJ, Byrne JP, Underwood TJ. The relevance of the Siewert classification in the era of multimodal therapy for adenocarcinoma of the gastro-oesophageal junction. J Surg Oncol. 2014;109(3):202-207.
    1. Szántó I, Vörös A, Gonda G, et al. . [Siewert-Stein classification of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction]. Magy Seb. 2001;54(3):144-149.
    1. Greene FL; American Joint Committee on Cancer . American Cancer Society. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002.
    1. Zelen M. The randomization and stratification of patients to clinical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1974;27(7-8):365-375.
    1. Fleming TR. One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1982;38(1):143-151.
    1. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53(282):457-481.
    1. Mantel N. Evaluation of survival data and two new rank order statistics arising in its consideration. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966;50(3):163-170.
    1. Cox D. Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc B. 1972;34(2):187-220.
    1. Kalbfleisch J, Prentice R. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. New York: John Wiley & Sons. KalbfleischThe Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data; 1980.
    1. Crosby T, Hurt CN, Falk S, et al. . Chemoradiotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with oesophageal cancer (SCOPE1): a multicentre, phase 2/3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(7):627-637.
    1. Waddell T, Chau I, Cunningham D, et al. . Epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine with or without panitumumab for patients with previously untreated advanced oesophagogastric cancer (REAL3): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(6):481-489.
    1. Ang KK, Zhang Q, Rosenthal DI, et al. . Randomized phase III trial of concurrent accelerated radiation plus cisplatin with or without cetuximab for stage III to IV head and neck carcinoma: RTOG 0522. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):2940-2950.
    1. Shimada H, Shiratori T, Takeda A, et al. . Perioperative changes of serum p53 antibody titer is a predictor for survival in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. World J Surg. 2009;33(2):272-277.
    1. Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Boige V, et al. . KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(3):374-379.
    1. Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Le Corre D, et al. . KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 2006;66(8):3992-3995.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅