Abstract 3888
Background
The C-cubed study investigates the optimal treatment strategy in patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We tested the superiority of a sequential treatment of FP+BEV followed by OX+FP+BEV (arm A: OX “wait & go”) at first progression to a combination treatment of OX+FP+BEV (arm B: OX “stop & go”), trial information: UMIN000015405.
Methods
The Primary endpoint was time-to-failure of strategy (TFS). A target sample size of 304 patients was considered sufficient to validate an expected Hazard Ratio (HR) for TFS of arm A compared with arm B with 80% power and 2-sided 5% α in case of a true HR value of < 0.69. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, and safety.
Results
Between Dec 2014 and Sep 2016, 311 patients were enrolled, and 302 patients were randomized either to receive the arm A (n = 151) or B (n = 151) as a full analysis set (FAS). Superiority of TFS in the arm A was established in this study (HR, 0.475; 95% CI, 0.362–0.623; p < 0.0001). OSs in the arms A and B were not considered significantly different (HR, 0.930; 95% CI, 0.666–1.298). The patient population was predominantly positive for RAS mutant tumors (RAS MT) compared with that for RAS wild-type tumors (RAS WT), but this did not confer any clinical disadvantage in TFS to either arms (see table for details). We will present additional data associated with RAS status and differences between capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil at the meeting.Table:
571P
Table | Endpoint | Arm A, “wait & go” (n = 151) Months (95%CI) | Arm B, “stop & go” (n = 151) Months (95%CI) | p-value (log rank) |
---|---|---|---|---|
TFS (FAS) | 15.2 (12.5 – 17.2) | 7.6 (6.2 – 9.5) | <.0001 | |
OS (FAS) | 27.5 (24.4 – 32.7) | 29.4 (24.1 – 36.0) | 0.6692 | |
Factor | RAS WT (n = 112) Months (95%CI) | RAS MT (n = 167) Months (95%CI) | p-value (log rank) | |
TFS | Arm A | 14.0 (11.2 – 19.0) | 15.3 (12.4 – 17.2) | 0.3126 |
Arm B | 7.8 (7.0 – 10.5) | 7.4 (5.2 – 9.6) | 0.1615 | |
OS | Arm A | 27.5 (22.6 – NC) | 28.0 (23.4 – 32.7) | 0.3143 |
Arm B | 34.7 (24.5 – NC) | 24.3 (19.1 – 32.8) | 0.0265 |
Conclusions
The sequential “wait & go” strategy for OX was superior in TFS compared with the combinational “stop & go” accompanying with the equal survival benefit of nearly 30 months. Thus, the sequential approach with FP+BEV followed by OX is deemed an acceptable treatment strategy for patients with mCRC.
Clinical trial identification
UMIN000015405.
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
Japan South West Oncology Group (JSWOG).
Funding
Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
Disclosure
T. Nagasaka: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Eli Lilly Japan. Y. Shindo: Research grant / Funding (institution): Chugai; Research grant / Funding (institution): MSD; Research grant / Funding (self): Ono; Research grant / Funding (institution): Daiichi-Sankyo; Research grant / Funding (institution): Lilly. A. Tsuji: Honoraria (institution): Daiichi Sankyo; Honoraria (institution), Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Taiho Pharmaceutical; Honoraria (institution), Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Chugai Pharma; Honoraria (institution), Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Merck Serono; Honoraria (institution), Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Takeda Pharmaceutical; Honoraria (institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb Japan. Y. Tsuji: Honoraria (institution): Bayer Co. Ltd; Honoraria (institution): Merck Serono Co. Ltd; Honoraria (institution): Eli Lilly Japan; Honoraria (institution): Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd; Honoraria (institution): Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd; Honoraria (institution): Ono Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd; Honoraria (institution): Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd; Honoraria (institution): Medicon Co. Ltd. H. Mishima: Research grant / Funding (institution): Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
3911 - Defining a SUV decrease cut-off in PET/CT response monitoring after one cycle of preoperative breast cancer chemotherapy
Presenter: Marcin Kubeczko
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1849 - Effect of thioredoxin 1 quantity detection to complement the mammography in breast cancer diagnosis
Presenter: Younju Lee
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2221 - Identification of ultralow risk breast cancer patients (probable overdiagnosis)
Presenter: Salvador Gamez Casado
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5291 - Prevalence of Vitamin D3 deficiency among women with early breast cancer receiving chemotherapy in an oncology dayward.
Presenter: Warner Finstad
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4247 - Changes in ER pathway activity score during neoadjuvant letrozole to assess therapy response and predict disease free survival (DFS) in ER positive breast cancer patients
Presenter: Arran Turnbull
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
568 - Second primary malignancies in patients with breast cancer.
Presenter: Carlos Erasun Lecuona
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1428 - Phase II randomized trial of neoadjuvant trastuzumab and pertuzumab (TP) with either palbociclib + letrozole (Pal+L) or paclitaxel (Pac) for elderly patients with estrogen receptor & HER2 positive (ER+/HER2+) Breast Cancer (BC) (International Breast Cancer Study Group IBCSG 55-17, TOUCH)
Presenter: Laura Biganzoli
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1479 - Neoadjuvant HER2-targeted therapy with or without immunotherapy with pembrolizumab (neoHIP): an open label randomized phase 2 trial
Presenter: Heather McArthur
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1481 - A randomized phase 2 study of peri-operative ipilimumab, nivolumab and cryoablation versus standard care in women with residual, early stage/resectable, triple negative breast cancer after standard-of-care neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Presenter: Heather McArthur
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4334 - ALEXANDRA/IMpassion030: A phase 3 study of standard adjuvant chemotherapy with or without atezolizumab in early stage triple negative breast cancer.
Presenter: Michail Ignatiadis
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract