1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (bev) vs FOLFIRI plus bev
Advertisements

CM A pooled safety & efficacy analysis examining the effect of performance status on outcomes in 9 first line treatment trials of 6,286 patients.
Facon T et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 2.
1 N9841: A Randomized Phase III Equivalence Trial of Irinotecan (CPT-11) versus FOLFOX4 in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Carcinoma Previously Treated.
Have the OPTIMOX-2, CAIRO-3, COIN, DREAM and other recent trials settled the question of maintenance versus observation in advanced CRC? Yes Deborah Schrag,
Fabio Puglisi Dipartimento di Oncologia Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Udine Antiangiogenic Treatment Mediterranean School of Oncology.
A Meta Analysis of Risk of Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Treated with Anti Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF)
AVADO PFS Analysis (ITT Population) All P values vs. placebo Adapted from Miles et al. ASCO 2008, abstract LBA 1011.
Phase III Study Comparing Gemcitabine plus Cetuximab versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Southwest.
Phase III study of first-line XELOX plus bevacizumab (BEV) for 6 cycles followed by XELOX plus BEV or single agent (s/a) BEV as maintenance therapy in.
Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin in elderly and/or frail patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: MRC trial FOCUS2 M. T. Seymour 1, T. S. Maughan 2, H.
RANDOMIZED PHASE II TRIAL COMPARING FOLFIRINOX (5FU/LEUCOVORIN, IRINOTECAN AND OXALIPLATIN) VS GEMCITABINE AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR METASTATIC PANCREATIC.
Clinicaloptions.com/oncology Expert Insight Into the First-line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer N016966: Efficacy Results  PFS significantly.
Phase III studies of Xeloda® in colorectal cancer (CRC)
Capecitabine versus Bolus 5-FU/Leucovorin as Adjuvant Therapy for Colon Cancer: X-ACT Trial Results James Cassidy, MD Colorectal Cancer Update Think Tank.
Results of Docetaxel Plus Oxaliplatin (DOCOX) +/- Cetuximab in Patients with Metastatic Gastric and/or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results.
Poster #382 XELOX-1/NO16966, a randomized phase III trial of first-line XELOX vs. FOLFOX-4 for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC): Updated.
Targeting VEGF for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer Herbert Hurwitz Duke University Medical Center Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Results of the X-PECT Study: A phase III randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study of perifosine plus capecitabine (P-CAP) vs. placebo plus capecitabine.
Phase III Trial of Pazopanib in Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Sternberg CN et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Oral Presentation)
This house believes that FOLFIRINOX is the best treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma Pro Marc YCHOU Montpellier.
Phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without irinotecan in the front-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in elderly patients. FFCD
Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing FOLFIRINOX (F: 5FU/Leucovorin [LV], Irinotecan [I], and Oxaliplatin [O]) versus Gemcitabine (G) as First-Line Treatment.
Gemcitabine + Cisplatin +/- Bevacizumab as 1st-line Treatment of Advanced NSCLC: AVAiL Study Manegold PASCO 25:#7514, 2007/Ann.
E2100 A Randomized Phase III Trial of Paclitaxel versus Paclitaxel plus Bevacizumab as First- Line Therapy for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer.
Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemo-bevacizumab therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized.
MAX: International multi-centre randomised phase II/III study of capecitabine (Cap), bevacizumab (Bev) and mitomycin C (MMC) as first-line treatment for.
Best of ASCO – Colorectal & Pancreatic Cancers Best of ASCO Colorectal & Pancreatic Cancers Ali Shamseddine, MD Professor of Medicine Head of Hematology/Oncology.
0 Adjuvant FOLFIRI +/- Cetuximab in Patients with Resected Stage III Colon Cancer NCCTG Intergroup Phase III Trial N0147 Jocelin Huang, Daniel J Sargent,
Ruan J et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 247.
Previous medical history C n= 37 CB n= 32 CBM n= 30 Total n= 99 Hypertension23 (62%)16 (50%)16 (53%)55 (56%) Hypercholesterolaemia6 (16%)7 (22%)7 (23%)20.
KRAS status and efficacy in the first- line treatment of patients with mCRC treated with FOLFOX with or without cetuximab: The OPUS experience Carsten.
XELOX vs. FOLFOX4: survival and response results from XELOX-1 / NO16966, a randomized phase III trial of first-line treatment for patients with metastatic.
AVADO TRIAL David Miles Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, United Kingdom A randomized, double-blind study of bevacizumab in combination with docetaxel.
ECCO ESMO 2011 GI Cancer Updates TAS102 and BSC vs. Placebo and BSC Reviewer: Dr. Scott Berry Date posted: October 2011.
The Combination of Bevacizumab (Bev) with capecitabine/irinotecan (CapIri/Bev) or capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CapOx/Bev) is highly active in advanced colorectal.
Preliminary Results from a Phase II study of FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab as First Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Abstract #3579) S. Kopetz,
. Background Paclitaxel and Irinotecan in Platinum Refractory or Resistant Small Cell Lung Cancer: a Galician Lung Cancer.
Kang Y et al. Proc ASCO 2010;Abstract LBA4007.
Phase II trial of chemotherapy with high-dose FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the front-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)
Niall C. Tebbutt International randomised phase III study of capecitabine, bevacizumab, and mitomycin C in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal.
Gemcitabine With or Without Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer (ABC): Results of a Multicentre, Randomized Phase III.
Safety and efficacy of oxaliplatin – fluoropyrimidine regimens with or without bevacizumab as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC):
Low Dose Decitabine Versus Best Supportive Care in Elderly Patients with Intermediate or High Risk MDS Not Eligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: Final Results.
EORTC OSN/CTOS11 Safety of Caelyx combined with ifosfamide in previously untreated adult patients with advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcomas. Final.
P.A. Tang 1, S. J. Cohen 1, G. Bjarnason 1, C. Kollmannsberger 1, K. Virik 1, M. J. MacKenzie 1, J. Brown 1, L. Wang 1, A. Chen 2, M. J. Moore 1 1 Princess.
Patterns of Care in Medical Oncology Treatment of Metastatic Colon Cancer.
1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib.
Reviewer: Dr Scott Berry Date posted: June 21, 2007 CAPEOX vs. FOLFOX4 +/- Bevacizumab: survival results from NO16966, a randomized.
Phase III Study of First-Line XELOX Plus Bevacizumab (BEV) for 6 Cycles Followed by XELOX Plus BEV or Single Agent (s/a) BEV as Maintenance Therapy in.
A three-arm randomized phase III trial of FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 + bevacizumab vs XELOX + bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with stage III.
A Phase III, Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter Study of Eribulin Mesylate versus Capecitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast.
Phase II Multicenter Study of Single-Agent Lenalidomide in Subjects with Mantle Cell Lymphoma Who Relapsed or Progressed After or Were Refractory to Bortezomib:
Y-K Kang, A Ohtsu, E Van Cutsem, SY Rha, A Sawaki SR Park, H-Y Lim, J Wu, B Langer, MA Shah on behalf of AVAGAST investigators AVAGAST: a randomized, double-blind.
Alessandra Gennari, MD PhD
CCO Independent Conference Highlights
Gajria D et al. Proc SABCS 2010;Abstract P
Vahdat L et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract P
KEYNOTE-012: Durable Efficacy With Pembrolizumab in PD-L1–Positive Gastric Cancer CCO Independent Conference Highlights of the 2015 ASCO Annual Meeting*
Trifluridine/Tipiracil (TAS-102) Improves Survival in Patients With Metastatic CRC and Mild Renal/Hepatic Impairment: Subgroup Analysis of RECOURSE CCO.
BRAF mutant mCRC patients – What would you recommend? FOLFIRINOX/Bev
Nab-paclitaxel in Ovarian Cancer
First efficacy and safety results from XELOX-1/NO16966, a randomised 2x2 factorial phase III trial of XELOX vs FOLFOX4 + bevacizumab or placebo in first-line.
LV5FU2-cisplatin followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: Preliminary results of a randomized phase III trial (FFCD.
Phase 2, Randomized, Open-label Study of Cetuximab and Bevacizumab Alone or in Combination with Fixed-dose Rate (FDR) Gemcitabine as First-line Therapy.
Adjuvant chemotherapy after potentially curative resection of metastases from colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis of two randomized trials E Mitry, A Fields,
R Hermann6, P Sportelli7, L Gardner7 and J Bendell8
Phase III study of irinotecan/5FU/LV (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5FU/LV (FOLFOX) +/- cetuximab for patients with untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the.
and the NSABP Investigators
1Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Canada
Presentation transcript:

1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib versus Placebo as First-line Treatment for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Charles Fuchs (Principal Investigator) John Marshall (Co-Principal Investigator) Edith Mitchell (US), Rafal Wierzbicki (Canada), Vinod Ganju (Australia), Mark Jeffery (New Zealand), Joseph Schulz (US), Donald Richards (US), and the BICC-C Study Working Group (>100 study sites) BICC-C Study

2  In previous studies of metastatic CRC (mCRC):  Both infusional & bolus regimens of 5-FU with LV and irinotecan confer superior efficacy when compared to 5-FU and LV alone  Few studies have compared a combination using infusional 5-FU to the same combination with bolus 5-FU  Single-agent capecitabine offers equivalent efficacy to bolus 5-FU and LV in the adjuvant and metastatic setting  Few studies have compared combinations using infusional 5-FU & irinotecan to the same combination with capecitabine Background

3  Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) is up regulated in colorectal adenoma and adenocarcinomas  In phase III trials, celecoxib reduces the incidence of colorectal adenomas  In mouse xenografts of human CRC, celecoxib inhibits angiogenic factors and induces apoptosis and tumor regression  In xenografts, celecoxib appears to increase chemotherapy activity and reduce chemotherapy toxicity Background

4 Original Study Design Celecoxib 400 mg bid 1st-line mCRC N = 1000 Placebo Irinotecan: 180 mg/m 2 (D1) LV: 400 mg/m 2 over 2 h (D1) 5-FU: 400 mg/m 2 (bolus) (D1) 5-FU: 2400 mg/m 2 (46-h infusion) (D1) q2wks FOLFIRI Irinotecan: 125 mg/m 2 (D1, 8) 5-FU: 500 mg/m 2 (bolus) (D1, 8) LV: 20 mg/m 2 (D1, 8) q3wks mIFL Irinotecan: 250 mg/m 2 (D1) Capecitabine: 1000 mg/m 2 bid (D1-14) q3wks CapeIRI RANDOMIZATIONRANDOMIZATION RANDOMIZATIONRANDOMIZATION Stratification : Age ( 70) PS (0 vs 1) Low dose aspirin use (< 325 mg every day): yes vs no

5 Timeline of Study Events 2002 Period 1 1st Patient Enrolled Date: Feb 2003 Period 2 Add Bevacizumab 1st Patient Enrolled: May

6 Period 1: Treatment Regimens Celecoxib 400 mg bid 1st-line mCRC N = 430 2/03–4/04 Placebo Irinotecan: 180 mg/m 2 (D1) LV: 400 mg/m 2 over 2 h (D1) 5-FU: 400 mg/m 2 (bolus) (D1) 5-FU: 2400 mg/m 2 (46-h infusion) (D1) q2wks FOLFIRI Irinotecan: 125 mg/m 2 (D1, 8) 5-FU: 500 mg/m 2 (bolus) (D1, 8) LV: 20 mg/m 2 (D1, 8) q3wks mIFL Irinotecan: 250 mg/m 2 (D1) Capecitabine: 1000 mg/m 2 bid (D1-14) q3wks CapeIRI RANDOMIZATIONRANDOMIZATION RANDOMIZATIONRANDOMIZATION Stratification : Age ( 70) PS (0 vs 1) Low dose aspirin use (< 325mg every day): yes vs no

7 Period 2: Treatment Regimens Celecoxib 400 mg bid 1st-line mCRC N = 117 5/04–12/04 Placebo Irinotecan: 180 mg/m 2 (D1) LV: 400 mg/m 2 over 2 h (D1) 5-FU: 400 mg/m 2 (bolus) (D1) 5-FU: 2400 mg/m 2 (46-h infusion) (D1) q2wks FOLFIRI Irinotecan: 125 mg/m 2 (D1, 8) 5-FU: 500 mg/m 2 (bolus) (D1, 8) LV: 20 mg/m 2 (D1, 8) q3wks mIFL Irinotecan: 250 mg/m 2 (D1) Capecitabine: 1000 mg/m 2 bid (D1-14) q3wks CapeIRI RANDOMIZATIONRANDOMIZATION RANDOMIZATIONRANDOMIZATION Stratification: Age, PS, Low dose aspirin use + 5 mg/kg bevacizumab q 2wks mg/kg bevacizumab q 3wks

8 Timeline of Study Events 2002 Period 1 1st Patient Enrolled Date: Feb 2003 Period 2 Add Bevacizumab 1st Patient Enrolled: May 2004 Period 2 Enrollment Closed Dec ASCO Abstract Clinical Cut-off: Aug 1, 2005 Database Lock: Dec 20, 2005 ASCO Presentation Clinical Cut-off: Mar 1, 2006 Database Lock: May 10, 2006

9 Eligibility Criteria  Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)  Measurable disease (RECIST)  No prior chemotherapy for mCRC  Adjuvant therapy >12 months  Age >18 years  ECOG Performance Status <1  Adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function

10 Study Endpoints  Primary endpoint  Progression free survival (PFS) for FOLFIRI vs mIFL  Secondary endpoints  PFS, overall survival (OS), response rate, & safety for –FOLFIRI vs mIFL vs CapeIRI –Celecoxib vs placebo –FOLFIRI + bevacizumab vs mIFL + bevacizumab

11 Period 1: Patients Characteristics FOLFIRI n=144 mIFL n=141 CapeIRI n=145 Median Age (yrs)6162 Male / Female (%)64 / 3659 / 4155 / 45 ECOG PS 0 / 1(%)52 / 4850 / 5048/ 52 Colon (%) Rectum (%) Liver Metastasis (%) Lung Metastasis (%) Number of Organs Involved (%) 1 2 ≥ Prior Adjuvant CT (%)91816

12 Period 1: Tumor Response Tumor Response FOLFIRI n=144 (%) mIFL n=141 (%) CapeIRI n=145 (%) P value CR NS PR NS SD NS PD NS UNK/NE5.5 / / / 16.5NS

13 Period 1: Progression Free Survival (ITT)* Clinical Data Cut-Off: 8/01/05 FOLFIRI mIFL CapeIRI Regimen Median PFS (Months)HR P Value FOLFIRI8.2-- mIFL (1.1, 1.9) 0.01 CapeIRI (1.1, 1.9) 0.01 *Pre-defined analysis; Data in ASCO 2006 abstract

14 Period 1: Progression Free Survival Data thru Mar 1, 2006 (ITT) Months Proportion of Progression Free Survival Regimen Median PFS (Months) HR (95% CI) P Value FOLFIRI7.6-- mIFL (1.2, 2.0) CapeIRI (1.1, 1.9) FOLFIRI mIFL CapeIRI

15 Period 1: Multivariate Analysis: PFS Adjusted for Other Prognostic Factors * Includes baseline stratification factors: age, PS, and aspirin use ** Adjusted for age, PS, aspirin use, prior adjuvant therapy, no. of organs involved, and gender FOLFIRI vs mIFLFOLFIRI vs CapeIRI HR (95% CI)* 1.55 (1.2, 2.0) 1.47 (1.1,1.9) Adjusted HR (95% CI)** 1.52 (1.1, 2.0) 1.45 (1.1, 1.9)

16 Period 1: Overall Survival Data thru Mar 1, 2006 (ITT) Survival Time (months) Proportion of Patients Who Survived Regimen Median OS (Months)1 Year HR (95% CI) P Value FOLFIRI23.176%-- mIFL17.665%1.2 (0.9, 1.6) 0.2 CapeIRI18.967%1.2 (0.9, 1.6) 0.17 FOLFIRI mIFL CapeIRI

17 Period 1: Common Grade 3-4 Adverse Events Adverse Event Grade 3-4 FOLFIRI n=137 (%) m-IFL n=137 (%) CapeIRI n=141 (%) Nausea8718 Vomiting7716 Diarrhea Dehydration6719 Neutropenia Febrile neutropenia Hand-foot syndrome0010 MI / stroke day mortality

18 Reasons for Study Discontinuation Period 1 FOLFIRI n = 137 n(%) mIFL n = 137 n(%) CapeIRI n = 141 n(%) Progressive disease64 (46.7)73 (53.3)51 (36.2) Unacceptable toxicity9 (6.6)17 (12.4)24 (17.0) > 3 week delay due to toxicity10 (7.3)2 (1.5)11 (7.8) Other anti-cancer treatment8 (5.8)5 (3.6)3 (2.1) Withdraw consent15 (10.9)14 (10.2)12 (8.5) Investigator’s decision22 (16.1)16 (11.7)14 (9.9) Other9 (6.5)10 (7.3)26 (18.4)

19 PERIOD 2 DATA Addition of Bevacizumab Arm A: FOLFIRI + bev (n = 57) Arm B: mIFL + bev (n = 60) Arm A: FOLFIRI + bev (n = 57) Arm B: mIFL + bev (n = 60)

20 Period 2: Patients Characteristics FOLFIRI + bevacizumab n=57 mIFL + bevacizumab n=60 Median Age (yrs)5960 Male / Female (%)53 / 4763 / 37 ECOG PS 0 / 1 / 2 (%)54 / 44 / 252 / 48 / 0 Colon (%) Rectum (%) Liver Metastasis (%) Lung Metastasis (%) No. of Organs Involved (%) 1 2 ≥ Prior Adjuvant CT (%)2313

21 Period 2: Progression Free Survival Data thru Mar 1, 2006 (ITT) Months Proportion of Progression Free Survival mIFL + bevacizumab Regimen Median PFS (Months) HR (95% CI) P Value FOLFIRI + BEV9.9-- mIFL + BEV (0.7, 2.0) 0.5 FOLFIRI + bevacizumab

22 Period 2: Overall Survival Data thru Mar 1, 2006 (ITT) Proportion of Patients Who Survived Survival Time (months) Regimen Median OS (Months)1 Year HR (95% CI) P Value FOLFIRI+ BEV Not Reached 87%-- mIFL + BEV18.761%2.5 (1.3,5.0) 0.01 mIFL + bevacizumab FOLFIRI + bevacizumab

23 Period 2: Common Grade 3-4 Adverse Events Adverse Event Grade 3-4 FOLFIRI + bevacizumab n = 56 (%) m-IFL + bevacizumab n = 59 (%) Nausea115 Vomiting115 Diarrhea1112 Dehydration52 Neutropenia5229 Febrile neutropenia Hand-foot syndrome Hypertension MI / stroke day mortality1.86.8

24 Analysis of Celecoxib vs Placebo Period 1 Celecoxib (n = 213) Placebo (n = 217) Celecoxib (n = 213) Placebo (n = 217)

25 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1: Patients Characteristics Celecoxib n = 213 Placebo n = 217 Median Age (yrs)6162 Male / Female (%)60 / 4058 / 42 ECOG PS 0 / 1 (%)50 / 50 Colon (%) Rectum (%) Liver Metastasis (%) Lung Metastasis (%) Number of Organs Involved (%) 1 2 ≥ Prior Adjuvant CT (%)1218 Low dose aspirin use1011

26 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1: PFS thru Mar 1, 2006 (ITT) Months Proportion of Progression Free survival Celecoxib Placebo Regimen Median PFS (Months) HR (95% CI) P Value Celecoxib6.4-- Placebo (0.8, 1.4) 0.7

27 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1: OS thru Mar 1, 2006 (ITT) Survival Time (months) Proportion of Patients Who Survived Regimen Median OS (Months)1 Year HR (95% CI) P Value Celecoxib21.169%-- Placebo18.969%1.0 (0.8, 1.4) 0.8 Celecoxib Placebo

28 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1: Common Grade 3-4 Adverse Events Adverse Event Celecoxib n=208 (%) Placebo n=207 (%) Nausea11 Vomiting1110 Diarrhea2924 Dehydration129 Neutropenia37 Febrile neutropenia Hand-foot syndrome Hypertension MI / stroke day mortality5.32.9

29 Conclusions  First line FOLFIRI significantly improves PFS when compared with mIFL or CapeIRI  Trend in overall survival favors FOLFIRI  Toxicity profile generally favors FOLFIRI Period 1 Period 2  First line FOLFIRI + bevacizumab significantly improves OS compared with mIFL + bevacizumab  Both regimens were tolerable Celecoxib  Celecoxib neither improved efficacy nor reduced chemotherapy toxicity

30 Back-Up

31 Treatment Cycles Period 1 FOLFIRI 2-wk cycles m-IFL 3-wk cycles CapeIRI 3-wk cycles Randomized / Treated144 / / / 141 No of cycles received Mean (SE) Median (Range) (0.9) 12 (1 - 48) (0.5) 7 (1 - 31) (0.5) 5 (1 – 35) Treatment duration (days) Mean (SE) Median (Range) (13.1) 184 (15 – 741) (11.8) 168 (22 – 673) (10.7) 114 (22 – 761)

32 Period 1: Death FOLFIRI N=137 n(%) m-IFL N=137 n(%) CapeIRI N=141 n(%) Number of deaths 77 (56.2)87 (63.5)86 (61.0) Cause of death: Cancer Progression Toxicity Other Unknown 72 (52.5) 0(0.0) 2 (1.4) 3 (2.2) 79 (57.7) 2 (1.4) 5 (3.6) 1 (0.7) 80 (56.7) 1 (0.7) 4 (2.8) 1 (0.7)

33 Period 1: Death within 60 days of first cycle FOLFIRI N=137 n(%) m-IFL N=137 n(%) CapeIRI N=141 n(%) Number of deaths 4 (2.9)8 (5.8)5 (3.5) Cause of death: Cancer Progression Toxicity Other Unknown 4 (2.9) 0 (0.0) 6 (4.4) 1 (0.7) 0 (0.0) 2 (1.4) 1 (0.7) 2 (1.4) 0 (0.0)

34 Period 1: Efficacy Results FOLFIRI n = 144 mIFL n = 141 CapeIRI n = 145 Overall RR (%) Median TTP (months) Median OS (months) 1 year survival rate (%)

35 Period 1: Progression Free Survival (Censoring Bevacizumab) (ITT) Months Proportion of Progression Free Survival FOLFIRI mIFL CapeIRI Regimen Median PFS (Months) HR P Value FOLFIRI7.61.0ref mIFL CapeIRI P1 patients did receive bevacizumab after the amendment and were censored for PFS

36 BICC-C: Efficacy Results Excluding Patients Who Discontinued Treatment Within the First 30 Days for Toxicity - Period 1 Period 1Period 2 Without BevacizumabWith Bevacizumab FOLFIRI (n = 144) mIFL (n = 141) CapeIRI (n = 145) FOLFIRI + Avastin (n = 57) mIFL + Avastin (n = 60) PFS (mo) HRNA0.60.7NA1.0 pNA NA0.9

37 Period 1: Second and third line therapy Patients who received n(%) FOLFIRI n=90 mIFL n=91 CapeIRI n=96 Second line chemotherapy87 (96)84 (92)91 (95) Third line chemotherapy28 (31)26 (29)32 (34) Cohort of patients for whom subsequent treatment data are available

38 Period 1: Tumor Response (ITT) Tumor Response FOLFIRI n=116 (%) mIFL n=120 (%) CapeIRI n=112 (%) P value CR9 (7.75)8 (6.6)4 (3.6)NS PR58 (50)51(42.5)51(45.5)NS SD39 (33.6)50 (41.6)42 (37.5)NS PD10 (8.6)11 (9.1)15 (13.4)NS Includes only patients for whom data are available

39 Period 1: Tumor Response (as-treated population)) FOLFIRI N=137 (%) mIFL N=137 (%) CapeIRI N=141 (%) CR PR SD PD UNK/NE

40 Grade 3-4 Hematological Adverse Events Period 1 FOLFIRI n = 137 (%) m-IFL n = 137 (%) CapeIRI n = 141 (%) Neutropenia Anemia Thrombocytopenia Febrile neutropenia

41 Grade 3-4 Hematological Adverse Events - First 6 weeks Period 1 FOLFIRI n = 137 (%) m-IFL n = 137 (%) CapeIRI n = 141 (%) Neutropenia Anemia Thrombocytopenia

42 Grade 3-4 Most Common Adverse Events - First 6 weeks Period 1 FOLFIRI n = 137 (%) m-IFL n = 137 (%) CapeIRI n = 141 (%) Diarrhea Dehydration Abdominal pain/discomfort Nausea Vomiting Stomatitis Hand-Foot Syndrome Myocardial infraction Thrombosis / Embolism3.6 / / / 2.1 Bleeding

43 Grade 3-4 Most Common Adverse Events Period 1 FOLFIRI n = 137 (%) m-IFL n = 137 (%) CapeIRI n = 141 (%) Diarrhea Dehydration Abdominal pain/discomfort Nausea Vomiting Stomatitis Hand-Foot Syndrome Myocardial infarction Thrombosis/Embolism 13.8 / / / 5.7 Bleeding Cerebrovascular accident / Transient ischaemic attack 0.0 / / / 0.0

44 The Most Common Treatment- Related Clinical Adverse Events (grade 3/4) Period 1 FOLFIRI n = 137 (%) m-IFL n = 137 (%) CapeIRI n = 145 (%) Diarrhea Abdominal pain/discomfort Nausea Vomiting Stomatitis Asthenia / Fatigue0.7 / / / 9.2 Dehydration Hand-Foot Syndrome Deep Vein Thrombosis

45 Grade 3-4 most common Adverse Events Period 1 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 56 (%) m-IFL + Avastin N= 59 (%) Diarrhea Dehydration Abdominal pain Nausea Vomiting Stomatitis Hand-Foot Syndrome Hypertension Thrombosis/Embolism 9.0 / / 3.4 Syncope Cerebrovascular accident Proteinuria1.81.7

46 Treatment Cycles Period 2 FOLFIRI + bevacizumab 2-wk cycles m-IFL + bevacizumab 3-wk cycles Randomized / Treated57 / 5660 / 59 No of cycles received Mean (SE) Median (Range) (1.1) 12 (1 - 34) (0.9) 8 (1 - 28) Treatment duration (days) Mean (SE) Median (Range) (17.0) 182 (15 – 540) (18.6) 169 (22 – 589)

47 R easons for study discontinuation Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 56 n(%) mIFL + Avastin N= 59 n(%) Progressive disease12 (21.4)18 (30.5) Unacceptable toxicity4 ( 7.1)5 ( 8.5) > 3 week delay due to toxicity3 ( 5.4 )3 ( 5.1) Other anti-cancer treatment3 ( 5.4 )5 ( 8.5) Withdraw consent12 (21.4)14 (23.7) Investigator’s decision11 (19.6) 3 ( 5.1) Other11 (19.7)22 (19.1)

48 Period 2: Second and third line therapy Patients who received n(%) FOLFIRI + bevacizumab n=35 mIFL + bevacizumab n=26 Second line chemotherapy33 (94)19 (73) Third line chemotherapy 5 (14)4 (15) Cohort of patients for which subsequent treatment data is available

49 Death Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 56 n(%) m-IFL + Avastin N= 57 n(%) Number of deaths 12 (21.4)25 (42.4) Cause of death: Cancer Progression Toxicity Other Unknown 11 (19.6) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.8) 0 (0.0) 19 (32.2) 1 (1.7) 4 (7.0) 1 (1.7)

50 Grade 3-4 most common Adverse Events -First 6 weeks- Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 56 (%) m-IFL + Avastin N= 59 (%) Diarrhea Dehydration Abdominal pain Nausea Vomiting Stomatitis Hypertension Thrombosis / Embolism 1.8 / / 1.7

51 The most common treatment- related clinical adverse events (grade 3/4) Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 56 (%) m-IFL + Avastin N= 59 (%) Diarrhea Abdominal pain Nausea Vomiting Stomatitis Asthenia / Fatigue 0.0 / / 5.0 Dehydration Hand-Foot Syndrome Thrombosis / Embolism 5.3 / / 0.0 Hypertension

52 Death within 60 days of first cycle Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 56 n(%) m-IFL + Avastin N= 59 n(%) Number of deaths 1 (1.8)4 (6.8) Cause of death: Cancer Progression Toxicity Other 0 (0.0) 1 (1.8) 2 (3.4) 1 (1.7)

53 Tumor Response Rate (ITT) Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N= 57 (%) mIFL + Avastin N= 60 (%) CR3 (5.3)3 (5.0) PR28 (49.1)29 (48.3) SD16 (28.1)16 (26.7) PD5 (8.8)4 (6.7) NE 5 (8.8)8 (13.3)

54 Tumor Response Rate (ITT) Period 2 FOLFIRI + Avastin N=52 (%) mIFL + Avastin N= 52 (%) CR3 (5.3)3 (5.0) PR28 (49.1)29 (48.3) SD16 (28.1)16 (26.7) PD5 (8.8)4 (6.7) Includes only patients for whom data are available

55 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period1: Tumor Response Tumor Response Celecoxib n= 170 (%) Placebo n= 178 (%) P value CR8(3.8)13(6.0)NS PR75(35.2)85(39.2)NS SD69(32.4)62(28.6)NS PD18(8.5)18(8.3)NS Includes all patients for whom data are available

56 Treatment Cycles Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1 CelecoxibPlacebo Randomized / Treated57 / 5660 / 59 No of cycles received Mean (SE) Median (Range) (1.1) 12 (1- 34) (0.9) 8 (1- 28) Treatment duration (days) Mean (SE) Median (Range) (17.0) 182 ( ) (18.6) 169 ( )

57 Reasons for Study Discontinuation Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1 Celecoxib n = 208 n(%) Placebo n = 207 n(%) Progressive disease99 (47.6)89 (43) Unacceptable toxicity28 (13.5)22 (10.6) > 3 week delay due to toxicity12 (5.7)11 (5.3) Other anti-cancer treatment8 (3.8) Withdraw consent19 (9.1)22 (10.6) Investigator’s decision26 (12.5) Other16 (7.7)29 (14)

58 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period1: Tumor Response Tumor Response Celecoxib n= 213 (%) Placebo n= 217 (%) P value CR3.86.0NS PR NS SD NS PD8.58.3NS UNK/NE NS

59 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1: Death Celecoxib n=208 (%) Placebo n=207 (%) Number of deaths125 (60.1)125 (60.4) Cause of death: Cancer Progression Toxicity Other Unknown 117 (93.6) 1 (0.8) 4 (3.2) 3 (2.4) 114 (91.2) 2 (1.6) 7 (5.6) 2 (1.6)

60 Celecoxib vs Placebo - Period 1: Death within 60 days of first dose Celecoxib n=208 (%) Placebo n=207 (%) Number of deaths11 (5.3)6 (2.9) Cause of death: Cancer Progression Toxicity Other 9 (81.8) 1 (9.0) 3 (50.0) 2 (33.3) 1 (16.6)