Response rate using conventional criteria is a poor surrogate for clinical benefit on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in metastatic colorectal.

Slides:



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

Biomarker Analyses in CLEOPATRA: A Phase III, Placebo-Controlled Study of Pertuzumab in HER2- Positive, First-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Baselga.
CM A pooled safety & efficacy analysis examining the effect of performance status on outcomes in 9 first line treatment trials of 6,286 patients.
D. Haller, CRC Symposium, Oncology Spectrums, NYC Combination and Sequential Chemotherapy of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Daniel G. Haller, MD.
1 N9841: A Randomized Phase III Equivalence Trial of Irinotecan (CPT-11) versus FOLFOX4 in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Carcinoma Previously Treated.
Advanced NSCLC Objective response rate -Well defined & widely accepted -Does not correlate well with OS -May be more useful if SD included -Higher RR correlates.
Controversies in Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer Parag Sanghvi M.D. Tasha McDonald M.D. Department of Radiation Medicine OHSU.
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,
Regulatory Background and Past FDA Approvals in Colorectal Cancer Amna Ibrahim M.D DODP, FDA.
Avastin ® : setting the standard in treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) Fairooz Kabbinavar David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA Los Angeles,
CM A Comparison of Simple Single-Item Measures and the Common Toxicity Criteria in Detecting the Onset of Oxaliplatin-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy.
Diabetes mellitus and the incidence and time to onset of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients with colorectal cancer: A pooled.
Taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC): investigational agents TTP = median time to disease progression OS = median overall survival.
Clinicaloptions.com/oncology Expert Insight Into the First-line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer N016966: Efficacy Results  PFS significantly.
An update on biological therapies in colorectal cancer Mount Vernon Cancer Network Sept 05 Mark Harrison.
Discussion abstracts Alberto Sobrero MD Ospedale San Martino Genoa, Italy.
Adjuvant Therapy of Colon Cancer 2005 Daniel G. Haller, M.D. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA.
A Meta-Analysis of Overall Survival Data from Three Randomized Trials of Bevacizumab (BV) and First-Line Chemotherapy as Treatment for Patients with Metastatic.
What is the reference cytotoxic regimen in advanced gastric cancer? Florian Lordick Klinikum Braunschweig Germany.
Capecitabine versus Bolus 5-FU/Leucovorin as Adjuvant Therapy for Colon Cancer: X-ACT Trial Results James Cassidy, MD Colorectal Cancer Update Think Tank.
ARTERIAL THROMBOEMBOLIC EVENTS IN A POOLED ANALYSIS OF 5 RANDOMIZED, CONTROLLED TRIALS OF BEVACIZUMAB WITH CHEMOTHERAPY JR Skillings Genentech, Inc, South.
Understanding the Costs and Benefits of Colon Cancer Treatment Colorectal Cancer Poster Discussion 2006 Neal J. Meropol, M.D. Director, Gastrointestinal.
Targeting VEGF for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer Herbert Hurwitz Duke University Medical Center Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Systemic Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Living with a Moving Landscape Neal J. Meropol, MD Fox Chase Cancer Center May 16, 2005.
*University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium
This house believes that FOLFIRINOX is the best treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma Pro Marc YCHOU Montpellier.
Impact of age and comorbidities on treatment effect, tolerance and toxicity in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) treated on CALGB
Minimal versus Intense Upfront Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Paulo M. Hoff, MD, FACP Hospital Sirio Libanes Sao Paulo, Brazil Centro.
Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing FOLFIRINOX (F: 5FU/Leucovorin [LV], Irinotecan [I], and Oxaliplatin [O]) versus Gemcitabine (G) as First-Line Treatment.
T Andre, E Quinaux, C Louvet, E Gamelin, O Bouche, E Achille, P Piedbois, N Tubiana-Mathieu, M Buyse and A de Gramont. Updated results at 6 year of the.
Outcome of chemotherapy in synovial sarcoma (sys) patients (pts): review of 15 clinical trials from EORTCc involving advanced sys compared to other Soft.
Risk Stratified Analysis Improves Prediction of Treatment Benefit Over Subgroup Analysis: Findings from Intergroup N9741 HK Sanoff, ME Campbell, HC Pitot,
PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL (PFS) AS A SURROGATE FOR OVERALL SURVIVAL (OS) IN PATIENTS WITH ADVANCED COLORECTAL CANCER Buyse M 1, Burzykowski T 2, Carroll.
Mace L. Rothenberg, M.D. Professor of Medicine Ingram Professor of Cancer Research Biomarkers in Colorectal Cancer Management: KRAS Mutations and EGFR.
Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemo-bevacizumab therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized.
Best of ASCO – Colorectal & Pancreatic Cancers Best of ASCO Colorectal & Pancreatic Cancers Ali Shamseddine, MD Professor of Medicine Head of Hematology/Oncology.
Final Analysis of Overall Survival for the Phase III CONFIRM Trial: Fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg Di Leo A et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-4.
KRAS status and efficacy in the first- line treatment of patients with mCRC treated with FOLFOX with or without cetuximab: The OPUS experience Carsten.
Cmab might have therapeutic benefit in Japanese patients with KRAS p.G13D mutant colorectal cancer. Limitations of this study are its retrospective design.
Preliminary Results from a Phase II study of FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab as First Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Abstract #3579) S. Kopetz,
FOLFOX4 with or without Bevacizumab in Previously Treated Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Results from ECOG-E3200 Lee M Ellis, MD Colorectal Cancer Update.
Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: the influence of KRAS and BRAF biomarkers on outcome: updated data from the CRYSTAL.
1 CONFIDENTIAL – DO NOT DISTRIBUTE ARIES mCRC: Effectiveness and Safety of 1st- and 2nd-line Bevacizumab Treatment in Elderly Patients Mark Kozloff, MD.
Figure 1. Hazard ratios for progression-free survival analyzed with fixed effect model. Table 1: Relevant trials Table 2. Methodological quality Conclusions.
CD-1 Second-line Chemotherapy for Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer Disease Background Nicholas J. Vogelzang, MD Director Nevada Cancer Institute CD-1.
Adjuvant Therapy of Colon Cancer: Where are we now ? Leonard Saltz, MD Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York, NY.
Impact of Bevacizumab (Bev) on Efficacy of Second-Line Chemotherapy (CT) for Triple- Negative Breast Cancer: Analysis of RIBBON-2 Brufsky A et al. Proc.
1 ABSTRACT #4036 (Sat. June 2, 2007: 2:00-6:00pm) Association between exposure to bevacizumab (BV) beyond first progression (BBP) and overall survival.
Who can benefit from chemotherapy holidays after first-line therapy for advanced colorectal cancer ? N. Perez-Staub, B. Chibaudel, A. Figer, A. Cervantes,
1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib.
HERA TRIAL: 2 Years versus 1 Year of Trastuzumab After Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Women with HER2-Positive Early Breast Cancer at 8 Years of Median Follow-Up.
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.
Moskowitz CH et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 673.
Pharmacogenetics of Irinotecan Clinical perspectives: utility of genotyping Mark J. Ratain, MD University of Chicago 11/3/04.
Genetic polymorphisms, toxicity, & response rate in African Americans (AA) with metastatic colorectal cancer compared to Caucasians (C) treated with IFL,
Microsatellite Instability Predicts Improved Response to Adjuvant Therapy With Irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin in Stage III Colon Cancer In association.
CCO Independent Conference Coverage
What do we do after FOLFIRINOX? Gemcitabine-Based Therapy is Standard
BRAF mutant mCRC patients – What would you recommend? FOLFIRINOX/Bev
Jordan Berlin Co-Director, GI Oncology Program
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.
Progression-Free Survival Times Overall Survival Times
Published online September 20, 2017 by JAMA Surgery
LV5FU2-cisplatin followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: Preliminary results of a randomized phase III trial (FFCD.
Cetuximab with chemotherapy as 1st-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS studies according to KRAS.
Ali Shamseddine,MD,FRCP
1Cancer Research UK, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Phase III study of irinotecan/5FU/LV (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5FU/LV (FOLFOX) +/- cetuximab for patients with untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the.
1Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Canada
Presentation transcript:

Response rate using conventional criteria is a poor surrogate for clinical benefit on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): A comparative analysis of N9741 and AVF2107 A. Grothey, E.E. Hedrick, R.D. Mass, S. Sarkar, R.K. Ramanathan, H. Hurwitz, R.M. Goldberg, D.J. Sargent

Background and Specific Aims Background: Mass et al (ASCO 2005) reported longer PFS and OS for patients treated with BV + IFL compared to IFL (AVF2107) regardless of response Specific aims: We compared data from two positive phase III trials in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, AVF2107 and N9741, to determine if: A) This observation is a consequence of addition of a biologic agent to chemotherapy or is common to trials in which a significant survival benefit is observed for one arm B) RR, PFS or OS is the preferred endpoint for assessment of treatment benefits Background: Mass et al (ASCO 2005) reported longer PFS and OS for patients treated with BV + IFL compared to IFL (AVF2107) regardless of response Specific aims: We compared data from two positive phase III trials in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, AVF2107 and N9741, to determine if: A) This observation is a consequence of addition of a biologic agent to chemotherapy or is common to trials in which a significant survival benefit is observed for one arm B) RR, PFS or OS is the preferred endpoint for assessment of treatment benefits

Study Designs of AVF2107 and N9741 N=795 Irinotecan + 5-FU/LV(IFL) oxaliplatin(IROX) Oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV (FOLFOX) R Goldberg et al: J Clin Oncol 2004 N=923 Irinotecan + 5-FU/LV(IFL) 5-FU/LV + BV Irinotecan + 5-FU/LV (IFL) + BV R Hurwitz et al: N Engl J Med 2004 AVF2107N9741 ** * Arms included in analysis

Methods Retrospective analysis Definition of "responders" or "nonresponders” in AVF2107g: RECIST N9741: WHO criteria PFS and OS were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves Hazard ratios (HR) for progression and death in each subgroup were estimated by Cox regression A patient with SD at 6 weeks but PD at 12 weeks was classified as PD in AVF2107 and as SD in N9741 An adjusted analysis was performed in which the definition of SD in AVF2107 was revised according to the criteria used in N9741 Retrospective analysis Definition of "responders" or "nonresponders” in AVF2107g: RECIST N9741: WHO criteria PFS and OS were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves Hazard ratios (HR) for progression and death in each subgroup were estimated by Cox regression A patient with SD at 6 weeks but PD at 12 weeks was classified as PD in AVF2107 and as SD in N9741 An adjusted analysis was performed in which the definition of SD in AVF2107 was revised according to the criteria used in N9741

Criteria for Tumor Response in AVF2107 and N9741

PFS - Responders AVF2107 N9741

PFS - Non-Responders AVF2107 N9741

OS - Responders/Non-Responders AVF2107 N9741 IFL vs IFL+ BVHR R0.60 (P =.014) NR0.76 (P =.019) Survival (months) Percent Surviving IFL (R) n=143 IFL/BV (R) n=180 IFL (NR) n=268 IFL/BV (NR) n= Percent Surviving Survival (months) IFL (R) n=133 FOLFOX (R) n=193 IFL (NR) n=252 FOLFOX (NR) n=190 IFL vs FOLFOXHR R0.71 (P =.005) NR0.74 (P =.003)

Treatment Benefit and Response Median (months) HRP-value IFL+BVIFL IFL+BV vs IFL AVF2107 Responders N=323 PFS OS Non- responders N=490 PFS OS FOLFOXIFL FOLFOX vs IFL N9741 Responders N=326 PFS OS Non- responders N=442 PFS OS

Conclusions In AVF2107 and N9741 patients without response according RECIST or WHO still have significant benefit from the superior regimen in terms of PFS and OS The magnitude of benefit is similar for responders and non-responders This finding is true regardless of whether the regimen includes chemotherapy alone or the antiangiogenic biologic BV PFS and the percentage of patients experiencing tumor control may more accurately reflect patient benefit than response rate in phase III trials in metastatic CRC In AVF2107 and N9741 patients without response according RECIST or WHO still have significant benefit from the superior regimen in terms of PFS and OS The magnitude of benefit is similar for responders and non-responders This finding is true regardless of whether the regimen includes chemotherapy alone or the antiangiogenic biologic BV PFS and the percentage of patients experiencing tumor control may more accurately reflect patient benefit than response rate in phase III trials in metastatic CRC