Dong Ma

Regorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care in Asian patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CONCUR): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND In the international randomised phase 3 CORRECT trial (NCT01103323), regorafenib significantly improved overall survival versus placebo in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Of the 760 patients in CORRECT, 111 were Asian (mostly Japanese). This phase 3 trial was done to assess regorafenib in a broader population of Asian patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer than was studied in CORRECT. METHODS In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 trial done in 25 hospitals in mainland China, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam, we recruited Asian patients aged 18 years or older with progressive metastatic colorectal cancer who had received at least two previous treatment lines or were unable to tolerate standard treatments. Patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, life expectancy of at least 3 months, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function, without other uncontrolled medical disorders. We randomly allocated patients (2:1; with a computer-generated unicentric randomisation list [prepared by the study funder] and interactive voice response system; block size of six; stratified by metastatic site [single vs multiple organs] and time from diagnosis of metastatic disease [<18 months vs ≥18 months]) to receive oral regorafenib 160 mg once daily or placebo on days 1-21 of each 28 day cycle; patients in both groups were also to receive best supportive care. Participants, investigators, and the study funder were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and we analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01584830. FINDINGS Between April 29, 2012, and Feb 6, 2013, we screened 243 patients and randomly assigned 204 patients to receive either regorafenib (136 [67%]) or placebo (68 [33%]). After a median follow-up of 7·4 months (IQR 4·3-12·2), overall survival was significantly better with regorafenib than it was with placebo (hazard ratio 0·55, 95% CI 0·40-0·77, one-sided p=0·00016; median overall survival 8·8 months [95% CI 7·3-9·8] in the regorafenib group vs 6·3 months [4·8-7·6] in the placebo group). Drug-related adverse events occurred in 132 (97%) of 136 regorafenib recipients and 31 (46%) of 68 placebo recipients. The most frequent grade 3 or higher regorafenib-related adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction (22 [16%] of 136 patients in the regorafenib group vs none in the placebo group), hypertension (15 [11%] vs two [3%] of 68 patients in the placebo group), hyperbilirubinaemia (nine [7%] vs one [1%]), hypophosphataemia (nine [7%] vs none), alanine aminotransferase concentration increases (nine [7%] vs none), aspartate aminotransferase concentration increases (eight [6%] vs none), lipase concentration increases (six [4%] vs one [1%]), and maculopapular rash (six [4%] vs none). Drug-related serious adverse events occurred in 12 (9%) patients in the regorafenib group and three (4%) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION This phase 3 trial is the second to show an overall survival benefit with regorafenib compared with placebo in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, substantiating the role of regorafenib as an important treatment option for patients whose disease has progressed after standard treatments. In this trial, preceding standard treatments did not necessarily include targeted treatments. Adverse events were generally consistent with the known safety profile of regorafenib in this setting. FUNDING Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

Single-agent capecitabine as maintenance therapy after induction of XELOX (or FOLFOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety

BACKGROUND The optimal strategy of maintenance therapy for patients with mCRC is controversial. This study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy with capecitabine versus observation following inductive chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III trial, patients who received 18-24 weeks of induction chemotherapy with XELOX or FOLFOX and achieved disease control were randomly assigned centrally (1:1) to receive maintenance therapy of capecitabine or only observation until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization; the secondary end points included overall survival (OS), PFS from induction treatment (PFS2) and safety. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02027363. RESULTS Between 30 July 2010 and 15 September 2013, 274 patients were enrolled in the study from 11 sites in China and randomly assigned to maintenance group (n = 136) or observation group (n = 138). Clinicopathological characteristics were balanced in two groups. The median follow-up time from randomization was 29.0 months [interquartile range (IQR) 21-36 months]. The primary end point of PFS was statistically significantly longer in capecitabine maintenance group than in observation group {6.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.26-7.71] versus 3.43 (2.83-4.16) months, HR 0.54 (0.42-0.70), P < 0.001}. The median OS of capecitabine maintenance group was longer than that of observation group, but not statistically significant [25.63 (22.46-27.80) versus 23.30 (19.68-26.92) months; HR 0.85 (0.64-1.11), P = 0.2247]. Similar safety profiles were observed in both arms. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities in capecitabine maintenance group versus observation group were neutropenia, hand-foot syndrome, and mucositis. CONCLUSIONS Maintenance therapy with a single agent of capecitabine can be considered an appropriate option following the induction of XELOX or FOLFOX in mCRC patients with acceptable toxicities. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER NCT02027363.

Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III Trial of Trifluridine/Tipiracil (TAS-102) Monotherapy in Asian Patients With Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The TERRA Study

Purpose Trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) was effective in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a phase II Japanese trial. This regional trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil in Asian patients with mCRC with or without exposure to biologic therapy. Patients and Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial was conducted at 30 sites in China, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand. Patients ≥ 18 years old with histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum and known KRAS status who were refractory or intolerant to two or more prior chemotherapy regimens were enrolled. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio; minimization method) to receive trifluridine/tipiracil (twice per day orally; 5 days on and 2 days off for 2 weeks, followed by 14 days off per cycle) or placebo. The primary end point was overall survival (intent-to-treat population). Results Between October 16, 2013, and June 15, 2015, 406 patients were randomly assigned to receive trifluridine/tipiracil (n = 271) or placebo (n = 135). Risk of death was significantly lower in the trifluridine/tipiracil arm than in the placebo arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.99; log-rank P = .035). Median overall survival was significantly longer in the trifluridine/tipiracil than in the placebo arm (7.8 months [95% CI, 7.1 to 8.8 months] v 7.1 months [95% CI, 5.9 to 8.2 months], respectively), for a median survival follow-up time of 13.8 months (95% CI, 13.1 to 15.3 months) compared with 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.6 to 17.3 months), respectively. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar between the arms (trifluridine/tipiracil, n = 63 [23.2%]; placebo, n = 32 [23.7%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusion Trifluridine/tipiracil has a statistically significant survival benefit compared with placebo in Asian patients with mCRC refractory or intolerant to standard chemotherapies, regardless of exposure to biologic therapy. The safety profile is similar to previous reports.

500OCONCUR: A RANDOMIZED, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED PHASE 3 STUDY OF REGORAFENIB (REG) MONOTHERAPY IN ASIAN PATIENTS WITH PREVIOUSLY TREATED METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER (MCRC)

ABSTRACT Aim: Regorafenib, an oral multi-kinase inhibitor, improves overall survival (OS) in patients with mCRC who progressed after standard therapies. CONCUR (NCT01584830) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of REG in Asian patients with mCRC. Methods: Patients with mCRC who progressed Results: Demographics and baseline characteristics were balanced in patients randomized to REG (n = 136) or placebo (n = 68). The median age was 57 yrs, all were ECOG PS 0–1, 53% had received >3 treatments for CRC, and 41% had no prior anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR therapy. Treatment with REG resulted in a 45% reduction in the risk of death (median OS 8.8 vs 6.3 months; one-sided p = 0.0002; Table), and improved PFS (HR 0.311; 95%CI 0.222–0.435; one-sided p Subgroups by prior targeted therapy N HR (95% CI) All patients 204 0.550 (0.395–0.765) No targeted therapy 84 0.359 (0.215–0.601) Anti-VEGF, or anti-EGFR, or both 120 0.747 (0.488–1.145) Anti-VEGF only 45 0.987 (0.482–2.025) Anti-EGFR only 39 0.719 (0.340–1.523) Both anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR 36 0.484 (0.217–1.081) Conclusions: Regorafenib provides a statistically significant improvement in OS in Asian patients with mCRC who progressed after standard therapies. Adverse events are consistent with the known safety profile of REG. Disclosure: T.W. Kim: Member of Pharma Advisory Boards for Merck and Abbvie. Received research funding from Bayer; T.C.C. Yau: Advisory Board member for Bayer; B. Ma: Advisory Board member for Bayer. Received research funding from Novartis, and Merck Serono; J. Shapiro: Employee of Sponsor (Bayer Pharma AG) J. Kalmus: Employee of Sponsor (Bayer Pharma AG); J. Li: Advisory Board member for Roche and Merck. Received research funding from Merck and Amgen. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Effect of Fruquintinib vs Placebo on Overall Survival in Patients With Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The FRESCO Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have limited effective and tolerable treatment options. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral fruquintinib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor, as third-line or later therapy in patients with metastatic CRC. Design, Setting, and Participants FRESCO (Fruquintinib Efficacy and Safety in 3+ Line Colorectal Cancer Patients) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter (28 hospitals in China), phase 3 clinical trial. From December 2014 to May 2016, screening took place among 519 patients aged 18 to 75 years who had metastatic CRC that progressed after at least 2 lines of chemotherapy but had not received VEGFR inhibitor therapy; 416 met the eligibility criteria and were stratified by prior anti-VEGF therapy and K-ras status. The final date of follow-up was January 17, 2017. Interventions Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either fruquintinib, 5 mg (n = 278) or placebo (n = 138) orally, once daily for 21 days, followed by 7 days off in 28-day cycles, until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or study withdrawal. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was overall survival. Key secondary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (time from randomization to disease progression or death), objective response rate (confirmed complete or partial response), and disease control rate (complete or partial response, or stable disease recorded ≥8 weeks postrandomization). Duration of response was also assessed. Safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events. Results Of the 416 randomized patients (mean age, 54.6 years; 161 [38.7%] women), 404 (97.1%) completed the trial. Median overall survival was significantly prolonged with fruquintinib compared with placebo (9.3 months [95% CI, 8.2-10.5] vs 6.6 months [95% CI, 5.9-8.1]); hazard ratio (HR) for death, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.51-0.83; P < .001). Median progression-free survival was also significantly increased with fruquintinib (3.7 months [95% CI, 3.7-4.6] vs 1.8 months [95% CI, 1.8-1.8] months); HR for progression or death, 0.26 (95% CI, 0.21 to 0.34; P < .001). Grades 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 61.2% (170) of patients who received fruquintinib and 19.7% (27) who received placebo. Serious adverse events were reported by 15.5% (43) of patients in the fruquintinib group and 5.8% (8) in the placebo group, with 14.4% (40) of fruquintinib-treated and 5.1% (7) of placebo-treated patients requiring hospitalization. Conclusions and Relevance Among Chinese patients with metastatic CRC who had tumor progression following at least 2 prior chemotherapy regimens, oral fruquintinib compared with placebo resulted in a statistically significant increase in overall survival. Further research is needed to assess efficacy outside of China. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02314819