Missing content? – Request curation!
Request curation for specific Genes, variants, or PubMed publications.
Have questions, comments or suggestions? - Let us know!
Email us at : firstname.lastname@example.org
|Ref Type||Journal Article|
|Authors||Goey KKH, Elias SG, van Tinteren H, Laclé MM, Willems SM, Offerhaus GJA, de Leng WWJ, Strengman E, Ten Tije AJ, Creemers GM, van der Velden A, de Jongh FE, Erdkamp FLG, Tanis BC, Punt CJA, Koopman M|
|Title||Maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab versus observation in metastatic colorectal cancer: updated results and molecular subgroup analyses of the phase 3 CAIRO3 study.|
|Journal||Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology|
|Date||2017 Sep 01|
|Abstract Text||The phase 3 CAIRO3 study showed that capecitabine plus bevacizumab (CAP-B) maintenance treatment after six cycles capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients is effective, without compromising quality of life. In this post hoc analysis with updated follow-up and data regarding sidedness, we defined subgroups according to RAS/BRAF mutation status and mismatch repair (MMR) status, and investigated their influence on treatment efficacy.A total of 558 patients with previously untreated mCRC and stable disease or better after six cycles CAPOX-B induction treatment were randomised to either CAP-B maintenance treatment (n = 279) or observation (n = 279). Upon first progression, patients were to receive CAPOX-B reintroduction until second progression (PFS2, primary end point). We centrally assessed RAS/BRAF mutation status and MMR status, or used local results if central assessment was not possible. Intention-to-treat stratified Cox models adjusted for baseline covariables were used to examine whether treatment efficacy was modified by RAS/BRAF mutation status.RAS, BRAF mutations, and MMR deficiency were detected in 240/420 (58%), 36/381 (9%), and 4/279 (1%) patients, respectively. At a median follow-up of 87 months (IQR 69-97), all mutational subgroups showed significant improvement from maintenance treatment for the primary end point PFS2 [RAS/BRAF wild-type: hazard ratio (HR) 0.57 (95% CI 0.39-0.84); RAS-mutant: HR 0.74 (0.55-0.98); V600EBRAF-mutant: HR 0.28 (0.12-0.64)] and secondary end points, except for the RAS-mutant subgroup regarding overall survival. Adjustment for sidedness instead of primary tumour location yielded comparable results. Although right-sided tumours were associated with inferior prognosis, both patients with right- and left-sided tumours showed significant benefit from maintenance treatment.CAP-B maintenance treatment after six cycles CAPOX-B is effective in first-line treatment of mCRC across all mutational subgroups. The benefit of maintenance treatment was most pronounced in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type and V600EBRAF-mutant tumours.NCT00442637.|
|Molecular Profile||Treatment Approach|
|Gene Name||Source||Synonyms||Protein Domains||Gene Description||Gene Role|
|Therapy Name||Drugs||Efficacy Evidence||Clinical Trials|
|Drug Name||Trade Name||Synonyms||Drug Classes||Drug Description|
|Gene||Variant||Impact||Protein Effect||Variant Description||Associated with drug Resistance|
|Molecular Profile||Indication/Tumor Type||Response Type||Therapy Name||Approval Status||Evidence Type||Efficacy Evidence||References|
|Unknown unknown||colorectal cancer||not applicable||Bevacizumab + Capecitabine||Phase III||Actionable||In a Phase III trial, maintenance therapy with Avastin (bevacizumab) and Xeloda (capecitabine) in combination resulted in a greater benefit compared to observation in colorectal cancer patients who were re-treated with Avastin (bevacizumab), Xeloda (capecitabine), and Eloxatin (oxaliplatin) due to progression, regardless of whether patients harbored RAS or BRAF V600E mutations (PMID: 28911067).||28911067|