Top

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

Published in:

01-07-2011 | Review

Cetuximab and panitumumab in KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Authors: Fausto Petrelli, Karen Borgonovo, Mary Cabiddu, Mara Ghilardi, Sandro Barni

Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease | Issue 7/2011

Abstract

Background

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies (panitumumab [P] and cetuximab [C]) are approved and effective only in KRAS wild-type patients with advanced colorectal cancer. The purpose of our meta-analysis is to evaluate the real effects of C and P in KRAS wild-type patients treated in randomized trials.

Patients and methods

Eligible studies included prospective, randomized, and controlled trials in which either C or P had been added to standard antineoplastic therapy or best supportive care and data for KRAS wild-type patients only had been calculated. Six thousand three hundred ninety-five patients' tumor samples have been analyzed (total wild-type n = 3,254; experimental arm n = 1,608; control arm n = 1,646). Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for response rate were calculated, as well as hazard ratios (HRs)for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival.

Results

The overall RR of response rate is 1.69 (p = 0.003) in all trials. The overall HRs for PFS and survival are 0.65 (p = 0.0006) and 0.84 (p = 0.03), respectively, and both are significant. The HRs for PFS and survival in C trials are 0.64 and 0.79, respectively, and 0.65 and 0.87, respectively, in P trials, although only the results achieved in P trials are significant (p = 0.0007 and p = 0.03). Both response rate (RR = 10.94) and PFS (HR = 0.51) have increased more in pretreated patients than in first-line trials.

Conclusion

The addition of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies to standard anticancer therapy in KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer showed an overall significantly increased risk of objective response rate and increased progression-free and overall survival. Only the results achieved in P randomized trials are significant, and the strongest results have been achieved in pretreated patients.

Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Boige V et al (2008) KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol 26:374–379, AbstractPubMedCrossRef

Souglakos J, Philips J, Wang R et al (2009) Prognostic and predictive value of common mutations for treatment response and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 101:465–472, AbstractPubMedCrossRef

Khambata-Ford S, Garrett CR, Meropol NJ et al (2007) Expression of epiregulin and amphiregulin and K-ras mutation status predict disease control in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol 25:3230–3237PubMedCrossRef

De Roock W, Peissevaux H, De Schutter J et al (2008) KRAS wild-type state predicts survival and is associated to early radiological response in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. Ann Oncol 19:508–515PubMedCrossRef

Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Le Corre D et al (2006) KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 66:3992–3995, AbstractPubMedCrossRef

Di Fiore F, Blanchard F, Charbonnier F et al (2007) Clinical relevance of KRAS mutation detection in metastatic colorectal cancer treated by cetuximab plus chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 96:1166–1169, AbstractPubMedCrossRef

Amado RG, Wolf M, Peeters M et al (2008) Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:1626–1634PubMedCrossRef

Karapetis CS, Khambata-Ford S, Jonker DJ et al (2008) K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 359(17):1757–65PubMedCrossRef

Bokemeyer C, Kohne C, Rougier P, Stroh C, Schlichting M, Van Cutsem E. Cetuximab with chemotherapy (CT) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS studies according to KRAS and BRAF mutation status. Program and abstracts of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; June 4–8, 2010; Chicago, Illinois. Abstract 3506

10.

Maughan TS, Adams R, Smith CG, et al. Identification of potentially responsive subsets when cetuximab is added to oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (CT) in first-line advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC): Mature results of the MRC COIN trial. Program and abstracts of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; June 4–8, 2010; Chicago, Illinois. Abstract 3502

11.

Siena S, Cassidy J, Tabernero J, et al. Randomized phase III study of panitumumab (pmab) with FOLFOX4 compared to FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment (tx) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): PRIME trial. Program and abstracts of the 2010 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium; January 22-24, 2010; Orlando, Florida. Abstract 283

12.

Peeters M, Price TJ, Hotko YS, et al. Randomized phase III study of panitumumab (pmab) with FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI alone as second-line treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): patient-reported outcomes (PRO). Program and abstracts of the 2010 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium; January 22–24, 2010; Orlando, Florida. Abstract 282

13.

Douillard JY, Cassidy J, Jassem J, et al. Randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of panitumumab with FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 alone as 1st-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): efficacy by skin toxicity. Program and abstracts of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; June 4–8, 2010; Chicago, Illinois. Abstract 3528

14.

Valerius T, Dechant M, Lammerts van Bueren JJ, et al. Effect of the epidermal growth factor receptor antibody panitumumab on triggering of ADCC. Program and abstracts of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; June 4–8, 2010; Chicago, Illinois. Abstract 11055

15.

Chen HX, Mooney M, Boron M et al (2006) Phase II multicenter trial of bevacizumab plus fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with advanced refractory colorectal cancer: an NCI Treatment Referral Center Trial TRC-0301. J Clin Oncol 24(21):3354–60PubMedCrossRef

16.

De Roock W, Claes B, Bernasconi D et al (2010) Effects of KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA mutations on the efficacy of cetuximab plus chemotherapy in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective consortium analysis. Lancet Oncol 11(8):753–62PubMedCrossRef

17.

Tang PA, Bentzen SM, Chen EX, Siu LL (2007) Surrogate end points for median overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: literature-based analysis from 39 randomized controlled trials of first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 25(29):4562–8PubMedCrossRef

18.

Folprecht G, Gruenberger T, Bechstein WO et al (2010) Tumour response and secondary resectability of colorectal liver metastases following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cetuximab: the CELIM randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 11(1):38–47PubMedCrossRef

19.

Nordlinger B, Sorbye H, Glimelius B et al (2008) Perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC Intergroup trial 40983): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 371(9617):1007–16PubMedCrossRef

20.

Masi G, Loupakis F, Salvatore L et al (2010) Bevacizumab with FOLFOXIRI (irinotecan, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and folinate) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 11(9):845–52PubMedCrossRef

21.

Sobrero A, Ackland S, Clarke S et al. Phase IV study of bevacizumab in combination with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncology. 2009; 77(2):113-9. Epub 2009 Jul 23. Erratum in: Oncology. 2009; 77(3-4):256. Oncology. 2009; 77(2): following 119. Chiara, Silvia [corrected to Chiara, Silvana]

22.

Van Cutsem E, Rivera F, Berry S et al (2009) Safety and efficacy of first-line bevacizumab with FOLFOX, XELOX, FOLFIRI and fluoropyrimidines in metastatic colorectal cancer: the BEAT study. Ann Oncol 20(11):1842–7PubMedCrossRef

23.

Kozloff M, Yood MU, Berlin J, Flynn PJ, Kabbinavar FF, Purdie DM, Ashby MA, Dong W, Sugrue MM, Grothey A (2009) Clinical outcomes associated with bevacizumab-containing treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: the BRiTE observational cohort study. Oncologist 14(9):862–70PubMedCrossRef

24.

Hochster HS, Hart LL, Ramanathan RK, Childs BH, Hainsworth JD, Cohn AL, Wong L, Fehrenbacher L, Abubakr Y, Saif MW, Schwartzberg L, Hedrick E. Safety and efficacy of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine regimens with or without bevacizumab as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results of the TREE Study. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jul 20; 26(21):3523-9. Erratum in: J Clin Oncol. 2008 Oct 1; 26(28): 4697

25.

Fuchs CS, Marshall J, Mitchell E et al (2007) Randomized, controlled trial of irinotecan plus infusional, bolus, or oral fluoropyrimidines in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the BICC-C Study. J Clin 25(30):4779–4786

26.

Cao Y, Tan A, Gao F et al (2009) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing chemotherapy plus bevacizumab with chemotherapy alone in metastatic colorectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 24(6):677–85PubMedCrossRef

27.

Fornaro L, Baldi GG, Masi G et al (2010) Cetuximab plus irinotecan after irinotecan failure in elderly metastatic colorectal cancer patients: clinical outcome according to KRAS and BRAF mutational status. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol (in press)

28.

Tol J, Dijkstra JR, Klomp M et al (2010) Markers for EGFR pathway activation as predictor of outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with or without cetuximab. Eur J Cancer 46(11):1997–2009PubMedCrossRef

29.

Siena S, Sartore-Bianchi A, Di Nicolantonio F et al (2009) Biomarkers predicting clinical outcome of epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(19):1308–24PubMedCrossRef

Title: Cetuximab and panitumumab in KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis
Authors: Fausto Petrelli
Karen Borgonovo
Mary Cabiddu
Mara Ghilardi
Sandro Barni
Publication date: 01-07-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease / Issue 7/2011
Print ISSN: 0179-1958
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1262
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-011-1149-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Cetuximab and panitumumab in KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Background

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2011

Organic colonic lesions in 3,332 patients with suspected irritable bowel syndrome and lacking warning signs, a retrospective case–control study

Cushing’s syndrome cured by resection of an appendiceal carcinoid tumor

Lymph node ratio is a powerful prognostic index in patients with stage III distal rectal cancer: a Japanese multicenter study

Optimal use of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colorectal cancer

Molecular profiles and clinical outcome of stage UICC II colon cancer patients

RET-protooncogene variants in patients with sporadic neoplasms of the digestive tract and the central nervous system