Summary Background The optimum duration of first-line treatment with chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is unknown. The CAIRO3 study was ...designed to determine the efficacy of maintenance treatment with capecitabine plus bevacizumab versus observation. Methods In this open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients in 64 hospitals in the Netherlands. We included patients older than 18 years with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, with stable disease or better after induction treatment with six 3-weekly cycles of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B), WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab (maintenance group) or observation (observation group). Randomisation was done centrally by minimisation, with stratification according to previous adjuvant chemotherapy, response to induction treatment, WHO performance status, serum lactate dehydrogenase concentration, and treatment centre. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. We assessed disease status every 9 weeks. On first progression (defined as PFS1), patients in both groups were to receive the induction regimen of CAPOX-B until second progression (PFS2), which was the study's primary endpoint. All endpoints were calculated from the time of randomisation. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00442637. Findings Between May 30, 2007, and Oct 15, 2012, we randomly assigned 558 patients to either the maintenance group (n=279) or the observation group (n=279). Median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 36–57). The primary endpoint of median PFS2 was significantly improved in patients on maintenance treatment, and was 8·5 months in the observation group and 11·7 months in the maintenance group (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·56–0·81, p<0·0001). This difference remained significant when any treatment after PFS1 was considered. Maintenance treatment was well tolerated, although the incidence of hand-foot syndrome was increased (64 23% patients with hand-foot skin reaction during maintenance). The global quality of life did not deteriorate during maintenance treatment and was clinically not different between treatment groups. Interpretation Maintenance treatment with capecitabine plus bevacizumab after six cycles of CAPOX-B in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is effective and does not compromise quality of life. Funding Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). The DCCG received financial support for the study from the Commissie Klinische Studies (CKS) of the Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF), Roche, and Sanofi-Aventis.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Summary Background The optimum use of cytotoxic drugs for advanced colorectal cancer has not been defined. Our aim was to investigate whether combination treatment is better than sequential ...administration of the same drugs in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Methods We randomly assigned 820 patients with advanced colorectal cancer to receive either first-line treatment with capecitabine, second-line irinotecan, and third-line capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (sequential treatment; n=410) or first-line treatment capecitabine plus irinotecan and second-line capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (combination treatment; n=410). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov with the number NCT00312000. Findings 17 patients (nine in the sequential treatment group, eight in the combination group) were found to be ineligible and were excluded from the analysis. 675 (84%) patients died during the study: 336 in the sequential group and 339 in the combination group. Median overall survival was 16·3 (95% CI 14·3–18·1) months for sequential treatment and 17·4 (15·2–19·2) months for combination treatment (p=0·3281). The hazard ratio for combination versus sequential treatment was 0·92 (95% CI 0·79–1·08; p=0·3281). The frequency of grade 3–4 toxicity over all lines of treatment did not differ significantly between the two groups, except for grade 3 hand-foot syndrome, which occurred more often with sequential treatment than with combination treatment (13% vs 7%; p=0·004). Interpretation Combination treatment does not significantly improve overall survival compared with the sequential use of cytotoxic drugs in advanced colorectal cancer. Thus sequential treatment remains a valid option for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Load filters
No result was selected!
Please select the results that you wish to export.
The search was successfully saved.
Editing
The search could not be saved.
Saved searches can be viewed in the list My searches.
The changes made to the saved search were saved successfully.
Save search
Shelf entry
No result was selected!
Adding material to shelf was successful.
Adding material to shelf was partly successful.
Adding material to shelf failed completely.
It was not necessary to add the material to the shelf.
Please select the results that you want to put on shelf!
On shelf the following records have been successfully added:
On shelf the following records have been successfully added:
