Jana Prausová

PURPOSE: Treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) commonly involves a fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimen such as infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, often combined with bevacizumab or an epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody. We studied the effect of adding the novel antiangiogenic agent aflibercept (also known as ziv-aflibercept in the United States) to FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin, including patients who received prior bevacizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive aflibercept (4 mg/kg intravenously; 612 patients) or placebo (614 patients) every 2 weeks in combination with FOLFIRI. Treatment was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Adding aflibercept to FOLFIRI significantly improved overall survival relative to placebo plus FOLFIRI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.817; 95.34% CI, 0.713 to 0.937; P = .0032) with median survival times of 13.50 versus 12.06 months, respectively. Aflibercept also significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.661 to 0.869; P < .0001), with median PFS times of 6.90 versus 4.67 months, respectively. The effects on overall survival and PFS exhibited a consistent trend across prespecified subgroup analyses, including bevacizumab pretreated patients. Response rate was 19.8% (95% CI, 16.4% to 23.2%) with aflibercept plus FOLFIRI compared with 11.1% (95% CI, 8.5% to 13.8%) with placebo plus FOLFIRI (P = .0001). Adverse effects reported with aflibercept combined with FOLFIRI included the characteristic anti-vascular endothelial growth factor effects and also reflected an increased incidence of some chemotherapy-related toxicities. CONCLUSION: Aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI conferred a statistically significant survival benefit over FOLFIRI combined with placebo in patients with mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin.

PURPOSE: This study compared denosumab, a fully human monoclonal anti-receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand antibody, with zoledronic acid (ZA) for delaying or preventing skeletal-related events (SRE) in patients with advanced cancer and bone metastases (excluding breast and prostate) or myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind, double-dummy design to receive monthly subcutaneous denosumab 120 mg (n = 886) or intravenous ZA 4 mg (dose adjusted for renal impairment; n = 890). Daily supplemental calcium and vitamin D were strongly recommended. The primary end point was time to first on-study SRE (pathologic fracture, radiation or surgery to bone, or spinal cord compression). RESULTS: Denosumab was noninferior to ZA in delaying time to first on-study SRE (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.98; P = .0007). Although directionally favorable, denosumab was not statistically superior to ZA in delaying time to first on-study SRE (P = .03 unadjusted; P = .06 adjusted for multiplicity) or time to first-and-subsequent (multiple) SRE (rate ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.04; P = .14). Overall survival and disease progression were similar between groups. Hypocalcemia occurred more frequently with denosumab. Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred at similarly low rates in both groups. Acute-phase reactions after the first dose occurred more frequently with ZA, as did renal adverse events and elevations in serum creatinine based on National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events grading. CONCLUSION: Denosumab was noninferior (trending to superiority) to ZA in preventing or delaying first on-study SRE in patients with advanced cancer metastatic to bone or myeloma. Denosumab represents a potential novel treatment option with the convenience of subcutaneous administration and no requirement for renal monitoring or dose adjustment.

PURPOSE: To determine whether adding cetuximab to irinotecan prolongs survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, phase III study randomly assigned 1,298 patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-expressing mCRC who had experienced first-line fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin treatment failure to cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) day 1 followed by 250 mg/m(2) weekly) plus irinotecan (350 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks) or irinotecan alone. Primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Median OS was comparable between treatments: 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 11.3) with cetuximab/irinotecan and 10.0 months (95% CI, 9.1 to 11.3) with irinotecan alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.975; 95% CI, 0.854 to 1.114; P = .71). This lack of difference may have been due to post-trial therapy: 46.9% of patients assigned to irinotecan eventually received cetuximab (87.2% of those who did, received it with irinotecan). Cetuximab added to irinotecan significantly improved PFS (median, 4.0 v 2.6 months; HR, 0.692; 95% CI, 0.617 to 0.776; P <or= .0001) and RR (16.4% v 4.2%; P < .0001), and resulted in significantly better scores in the QOL analysis of global health status (P = .047). Cetuximab did not exacerbate toxicity, except for acneform rash, diarrhea, hypomagnesemia, and associated electrolyte imbalances. Neutropenia was the most common severe toxicity across treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab and irinotecan improved PFS and RR, and resulted in better QOL versus irinotecan alone. OS was similar between study groups, possibly influenced by the large number of patients in the irinotecan arm who received cetuximab and irinotecan poststudy.