Nivolumab received US Food and Drug Administration approval as a single agent or in combination with ipilimumab in patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) ...metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed following treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan based on CheckMate 142. Presented are results of nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab in the first-line therapy cohort from the phase II CheckMate 142 study.
Patients with no prior treatment in the metastatic setting for MSI-H/dMMR CRC were treated with nivolumab every 2 weeks plus low-dose ipilimumab every 6 weeks until disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (investigator assessment; RECIST v1.1).
Median age of treated patients was 66 years (N = 45). Median follow-up was 29.0 months. Objective response rate and disease control rate were 69% (95% CI, 53 to 82) and 84% (95% CI, 70.5 to 93.5), respectively, with 13% complete response rate. Median duration of response was not reached; 74% of responders had ongoing responses at data cutoff. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were not reached with minimum follow-up of 24.2 months (24-month rates, 74% and 79%, respectively). Clinical benefit was observed regardless of baseline demographic and tumor characteristics, including
or
mutation status. In a post hoc analysis, of 14 patients who discontinued treatment and did not receive subsequent therapy, 10 remained progression-free. Patient-reported outcomes were stable over the treatment period. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 22% of patients; 13% discontinued because of any-grade treatment-related adverse events.
Nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab demonstrated robust and durable clinical benefit and was well tolerated as a first-line treatment for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Based on these promising data, randomized studies are warranted.
Summary Background Angiogenesis is an important therapeutic target in colorectal carcinoma. Ramucirumab is a human IgG-1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGF receptor 2. ...We assessed the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI (leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) for metastatic colorectal cancer in patients with disease progression during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine. Methods Between Dec 14, 2010, and Aug 23, 2013, we enrolled patients into the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 RAISE trial. Eligible patients had disease progression during or within 6 months of the last dose of first-line therapy. Patients were randomised (1:1) via a centralised, interactive voice-response system to receive 8 mg/kg intravenous ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI or matching placebo plus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or death. Randomisation was stratified by region, KRAS mutation status, and time to disease progression after starting first-line treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01183780 .ld Findings We enrolled 1072 patients (536 in each group). Median overall survival was 13·3 months (95% CI 12·4–14·5) for patients in the ramucirumab group versus 11·7 months (10·8–12·7) for the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·844 95% CI 0·730–0·976; log-rank p=0·0219). Survival benefit was consistent across subgroups of patients who received ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI. Grade 3 or worse adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (203 38% of 529 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 123 23% of 528 in the placebo group, with febrile neutropenia incidence of 18 3% vs 13 2%), hypertension (59 11% vs 15 3%), diarrhoea (57 11% vs 51 10%), and fatigue (61 12% vs 41 8%). Interpretation Ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo plus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. No unexpected adverse events were identified and toxic effects were manageable. Funding Eli Lilly.
There is a paucity of effective systemic therapy options for patients with advanced, chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, a highly ...selective and potent oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs) 1, 2, and 3, in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer.
We conducted an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (FRESCO-2) at 124 hospitals and cancer centres across 14 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) with histologically or cytologically documented metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma who had received all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine–tipiracil or regorafenib, or both. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive fruquintinib (5 mg capsule) or matched placebo orally once daily on days 1–21 in 28-day cycles, plus best supportive care. Stratification factors were previous trifluridine–tipiracil or regorafenib, or both, RAS mutation status, and duration of metastatic disease. Patients, investigators, study site personnel, and sponsors, except for selected sponsor pharmacovigilance personnel, were masked to study group assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as the time from randomisation to death from any cause. A non-binding futility analysis was done when approximately one-third of the expected overall survival events had occurred. Final analysis occurred after 480 overall survival events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04322539, and EudraCT, 2020-000158-88, and is ongoing but not recruiting.
Between Aug 12, 2020, and Dec 2, 2021, 934 patients were assessed for eligibility and 691 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive fruquintinib (n=461) or placebo (n=230). Patients had received a median of 4 lines (IQR 3–6) of previous systemic therapy for metastatic disease, and 502 (73%) of 691 patients had received more than 3 lines. Median overall survival was 7·4 months (95% CI 6·7–8·2) in the fruquintinib group versus 4·8 months (4·0–5·8) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·55–0·80; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 286 (63%) of 456 patients who received fruquintinib and 116 (50%) of 230 who received placebo; the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the fruquintinib group included hypertension (n=62 14%), asthenia (n=35 8%), and hand-foot syndrome (n=29 6%). There was one treatment-related death in each group (intestinal perforation in the fruquintinib group and cardiac arrest in the placebo group).
Fruquintinib treatment resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. These data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Ongoing analysis of the quality of life data will further establish the clinical benefit of fruquintinib in this patient population.
HUTCHMED.
Background
Bevacizumab, a VEGF‐A inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy, has proven to increase progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival in multiple lines of therapy of metastatic ...colorectal cancer (mCRC). The angiogenic factor angiopoetin‐2 (Ang‐2) is associated with poor prognosis in many cancers, including mCRC. Preclinical models demonstrate improved activity when inhibiting both VEGF‐A and Ang‐2, suggesting that the dual VEGF‐A and Ang‐2 blocker vanucizumab (RO5520985 or RG‐7221) may improve clinical outcomes. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus modified (m)FOLFOX‐6 (folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5‐FU) and oxaliplatin) versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX‐6 for first‐line mCRC.
Patients and Methods
All patients received mFOLFOX‐6 and were randomized 1:1 to also receive vanucizumab 2,000 mg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every other week. Oxaliplatin was given for eight cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator‐assessed PFS.
Results
One hundred eighty‐nine patients were randomized (vanucizumab, n = 94; bevacizumab, n = 95). The number of PFS events was comparable (vanucizumab, n = 39; bevacizumab, n = 43). The hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.64–1.58; p = .98) in a stratified analysis based on number of metastatic sites and region. Objective response rate was 52.1% and 57.9% in the vanucizumab and bevacizumab arm, respectively. Baseline plasma Ang‐2 levels were prognostic in both arms but not predictive for treatment effects on PFS of vanucizumab. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥3 was similar between treatment arms (83.9% vs. 82.1%); gastrointestinal perforations (10.8% vs. 8.4%) exceeded previously reported rates in this setting. Hypertension and peripheral edema were more frequent in the vanucizumab arm.
Conclusion
Vanucizumab/mFOLFOX‐6 did not improve PFS and was associated with increased rates of antiangiogenic toxicity compared with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX‐6. Our results suggest that Ang‐2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in first‐line mCRC.
Implications for Practice
This randomized phase II study demonstrates that additional angiopoietin‐2 (Ang‐2) inhibition does not result in superior benefit over anti–VEGF‐A blockade alone when each added to standard chemotherapy. Moreover, the performed pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that vanucizumab was bioavailable and affected its intended target, thereby strongly suggesting that Ang‐2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in the clinical setting of treatment‐naïve metastatic colorectal cancer. As a result, the further clinical development of the dual VEGF‐A and Ang‐2 inhibitor vanucizumab was discontinued.
This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus mFOLFOX‐6 versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX‐6 in the first‐line setting of metastatic colorectal cancer.
Purpose
The optimal drug regimen and sequence are still unknown for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are candidates for third-line (3L) or subsequent treatment. The aim of this ...study is to know the opinion of experts on the most appropriate treatment options for mCRC in 3L and to clarify certain clinical decisions in Spain.
Methods
Using a modified Delphi method, a group of experts discussed the treatment in 3L of patients with mCRC and developed a questionnaire with 21 items divided into 5 sections.
Results
After 2 rounds, the 67 panelists consulted agreed on 17 items (81%). They considered that the main objective of 3L is to equally increase survival and improve patients’ quality of life (QoL), but preferably the QoL. It was agreed that patients with mCRC in 3L prefer to receive active versus symptomatic treatment. Panelists considered trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) to be the best oral treatment available to them in 3L. In patients with MSI-H or dMMR and
BRAF V600E
, the panelists mostly prefer targeted treatments. Panelists agreed the use of a therapeutic sequence that not only increases outcomes but also allows patients to be treated later. Finally, it was agreed that FTD/TPI has a mechanism of action that allows it to be used in patients refractory to previous treatment with 5-fluorouracil.
Conclusion
The experts agreed with most of the proposed items on 3L treatment of mCRC, prioritizing therapeutic options that increase survival and preserve QoL, while facilitating the possibility that patients can continue to be treated later.
Approximately 8–10% of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) tumours harbour BRAFV600E mutations. Eleven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 24 non-RCTs were identified. Seven studies evaluated ...BRAF inhibitors. Single-agent BRAF inhibitors had minimal efficacy, whereas BRAF inhibitor plus anti-EGFR therapy improved outcomes. In BEACON CRC, overall survival (OS) was significantly longer for patients receiving encorafenib plus cetuximab ± binimetinib when compared with irinotecan/FOLFIRI plus cetuximab as second- and third-line therapy. Seven prospective non-RCTs reported worse OS and progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant vs BRAF wild-type mCRC. Eight RCTs reported that PFS and OS were generally shorter for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC vs those with KRAS or RAS wild-type mCRC. Patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC have worse outcomes with conventional therapy vs patients with BRAF wild-type tumours. BRAF inhibitors in conjunction with anti-EGFR therapy improves outcomes for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC vs conventional therapy or a BRAF inhibitor alone.
Display omitted
•8–12% of mCRC tumours have BRAFV600E mutations, associated with poor outcomes.•Targeted therapies have been developed for BRAF-mutant mCRC.•This literature review investigated outcomes in patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.•BRAF inhibitor + anti-EGFR therapy improved outcomes with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common forms of cancer, with an estimated 1.36 million new cases and almost 700,000 deaths annually. Approximately 21% of patients with CRC have metastatic ...disease at diagnosis. The objective of this article is to review the literature on the efficacy and safety of oral drugs available for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Several such drugs have been developed, and fluoropyrimidines are the backbone of chemotherapy in this indication. They exert their antitumour activity by disrupting the synthesis and function of DNA and RNA. Oral fluoropyrimidines include prodrugs capecitabine, tegafur, eniluracil/5-fluorouracil, tegafur/uracil, tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil and trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI). Oral drugs offer several advantages over injectable formulations, including convenience, flexibility, avoidance of injection-related adverse events (AEs) and, in some circumstances, lower costs. However, oral drugs may not be suitable for patients with gastrointestinal obstruction or malabsorption, they may result in reduced treatment adherence and should not be co-administered with drugs that interfere with absorption or hepatic metabolism. Oral fluoropyrimidines such as capecitabine, as monotherapy or in combination with oxaliplatin, irinotecan or bevacizumab, are as effective as intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in first-line treatment of mCRC. Other oral fluoropyrimidines, such as FTD/TPI, are effective in patients with mCRC who are refractory, intolerant or ineligible for 5-FU. In addition, oral fluoropyrimidines are used in adjuvant treatment of mCRC. Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor used in patients in whom several previous lines of therapy have failed. Frequent AEs associated with oral drugs used in the treatment of CRC include hand-foot syndrome and gastrointestinal and haematological toxicities.
The purpose of this article is to evaluate the safety of two regorafenib dose-escalation approaches in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients.
Patients with mCRC and progression ...during or within 3 months following their last standard chemotherapy regimen were randomised to receive the approved dose of regorafenib of 160 mg QD (arm A) or 120 mg QD (arm B) administered as 3 weeks of treatment followed by 1 week off, or 160 mg QD 1 week on/1 week off (arm C). The primary end-point was the percentage of patients with G3/G4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in each arm.
There were 299 patients randomly assigned to arm A (n = 101), arm B (n = 99), or arm C (n = 99); 297 initiated treatments (arm A n = 100, arm B n = 98, arm C n = 99: population for safety analyses). G3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 60%, 55%, and 54% of patients in arms A, B, and C, respectively. The most common G3/4 AEs were hypertension (19, 12, and 20 patients), fatigue (20, 14, and 15 patients), hypokalemia (11, 7, and 10 patients), and hand–foot skin reaction (8, 7, and 3 patients). Median overall survival was 7.4 (IQR 4.0–13.7) months in arm A, 8.6 (IQR 3.8–13.4) in arm B, and 7.1 (IQR 4.4–12.4) in arm C.
The alternative regorafenib dosing schedules were feasible and safe in patients with mCRC who had been previously treated with standard therapy. There was a higher numerical improvement on the most clinically relevant AEs in the intermittent dosing arm, particularly during the relevant first two cycles.
NCT02835924.
•Feasibility of two dose schedules of regorafenib initial deintensification in Europe.•No improvement on the overall safety profiles was seen.•A reduction in the most relevant AEs was observed (fatigue and HFSR).•Efficacy was sustained across the experimental arms despite dose deintensification.
Background
The Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK‐STAT) signaling pathway plays a key role in the systemic inflammatory response in many cancers, including colorectal ...cancer (CRC). This study evaluated the addition of ruxolitinib, a potent JAK1/2 inhibitor, to regorafenib in patients with relapsed/refractory metastatic CRC.
Methods
In this two‐part, multicenter, phase 2 study, eligible adult patients had metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0‐2; received fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan‐based chemotherapy, an anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy (if no contraindication); and if KRAS wild‐type (and no contraindication), an anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor therapy; and progressed following the last administration of approved therapy. Patients who received previous treatment with regorafenib, had an established cardiac or gastrointestinal disease, or had an active infection requiring treatment were excluded. The study was conducted in 95 sites in North America, European Union, Asia Pacific, and Israel. After an open‐label, safety run‐in phase (part 1; ruxolitinib 20 mg twice daily BID plus regorafenib 160 mg once daily QD), the double‐blind, randomized phase (part 2) was conducted wherein patients were randomized 1:1 to receive ruxolitinib 15 mg BID plus regorafenib 160 mg QD ruxolitinib group or placebo plus regorafenib 160 mg QD placebo group. Part 2 included substudy 1 (patients with high systemic inflammation, ie, C‐reactive protein CRP >10 mg/L) and substudy 2 (patients with low systemic inflammation, ie, CRP ≤10 mg/L); the primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).
Results
The study was terminated early; substudy 1 was terminated for futility at interim analysis and substudy 2 was terminated per sponsor decision. Ruxolitinib 20 mg BID was well tolerated in the safety run‐in (n = 11). Overall, 396 patients were randomized (substudy 1: n = 175 ruxolitinib group, n = 87; placebo group, n = 88; substudy 2: n = 221 ruxolitinib group, n = 110; placebo group, n = 111). There was no significant difference in OS or progression‐free survival (PFS) between treatments in substudy 1 (OS: hazard ratio HR = 1.040 95% confidence interval: 0.725‐1.492; PFS: HR = 1.004 0.724‐1.391) and substudy 2 (OS: HR = 0.767 0.478‐1.231; PFS: HR = 0.787 0.576‐1.074). The most common hematologic adverse event was anemia. No new safety signals with ruxolitinib were identified.
Conclusions
Although addition of ruxolitinib to regorafenib did not show increased safety concerns in patients with relapsed/refractory metastatic CRC, this combination did not improve OS/PFS vs. regorafenib plus placebo.
The addition of ruxolitinib, a JAK 1/2 inhibitor, to regorafenib was well tolerated in patients with relapsed/refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. However, this combination did not improve survival outcomes compared with regorafenib plus placebo.
Chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR is standard first-line therapy in RAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but biomarkers of early response are clinically needed. We aimed to define the ...utility of ctDNA to assess early response in patients with mCRC receiving first-line anti-EGFR therapy.
Prospective multicentric study of tissue patients with RAS wt mCRC treated with first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab undergoing sequential liquid biopsies. Baseline and early (C3) ctDNA were analyzed by NGS. Trunk mutations were assessed as surrogate marker of total tumor burden. RAS/BRAF/MEK/EGFR-ECD were considered mutations of resistance. ctDNA results were correlated with clinical outcome.
One hundred patients were included. ctDNA was detected in 72% of patients at baseline and 34% at C3. Decrease in ctDNA trunk mutations correlated with progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.23; P = 0.001). RAS/BRAF were the only resistant mutations detected at C3. An increase in the relative fraction of RAS/BRAF at C3 was followed by an expansion of the RAS clone until PD, and was associated with shorter PFS (HR, 10.5; P < 0.001). The best predictor of response was the combined analysis of trunk and resistant mutations at C3. Accordingly, patients with "early molecular response" (decrease in trunk and decrease in resistant mutations) had better response (77.5% vs. 25%, P = 0.008) and longer PFS (HR, 0.18; P < 0.001) compared with patients with "early molecular progression" (increase in trunk and/or increase in resistant mutations).
ctDNA detects early molecular response and predicts benefit to chemotherapy plus cetuximab. A comprehensive NGS-based approach is recommended to integrate information on total disease burden and resistant mutations. See related commentary by Eluri et al., p. 302.
PDF
