Efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab vs FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in 1st-line treatment of older patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: an analysis of the randomised trial FIRE-3

Laura Fischer(LMU Klinikum), Sebastian Stintzing(Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Ludwig Fischer von Weikersthal(Klinikum St. Marien Amberg), Dominik Paul Modest(Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Thomas Decker, Alexander Kiani(Bayreuth Medical Center), Florian Kaiser, Salah-Eddin Al-Batran(Goethe University Frankfurt), Tobias Heintges(Lukaskrankenhaus), Christian Lerchenmüller, Christoph Kahl(Klinikum Magdeburg), G. Seipelt, Frank Kullmann(Klinikum Weiden), Martina Stauch, Werner Scheithauer(Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna), Clemens Gießen-Jung(LMU Klinikum), Jens Uhlig, Bettina Peuser, Claudio Denzlinger(Marienhospital Stuttgart), Arndt Stahler(Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Lena Weiss(LMU Klinikum), Kathrin Heinrich(LMU Klinikum), Swantje Held(ClinAssess (Germany)), Andreas Jung(Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München), Thomas Kirchner(Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München), Volker Heinemann(LMU Klinikum)
British Journal of Cancer
May 30, 2022
Cited by 17Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The evidence on the efficacy of anticancer therapy is limited in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This retrospective analysis of phase III FIRE-3 trial assesses the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab according to the patients' age and sidedness of primary tumour. METHODS: The study endpoints overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients, followed by stratification according to primary tumour sidedness. ORR was compared using Fisher´s exact test, OS and PFS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate Cox regression analyses assessed hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for OS and PFS. RESULTS: Overall, older patients with RAS WT tumours had a significantly shorter OS when compared to younger patients (25.9 months vs 29.3 months, HR 1.29; P = 0.02). Also the proportion of right-sided tumours was significantly greater in older patients (27.1% vs 17.9%; P = 0.029). Secondary resection rates were numerically higher in younger patients (25.4% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.068) than in older patients. This was primarily seen in the Cetuximab arm, where older patients underwent less likely resection (13.1% vs. 26%; P = 0.02). Older patients with left-sided tumours showed only a trend towards greater efficacy of cetuximab (HR 0.86; P = 0.38). In patients with right-sided primary tumours, older patients did not appear to benefit from cetuximab in contrast to younger patients (≥65 years: 16.6 months vs 23.6 months, HR 1.1; P = 0.87; <65 years: 21.9 months vs 16.4 months HR 1.5; P = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: In FIRE-3, OS was generally shorter in older patients in comparison to younger patients. This could be explained by the overrepresentation of right-sided tumours and a lower secondary resection rate in older patients. The efficacy of targeted therapy was dependent on tumour sidedness in older patients with RAS WT mCRC. CLINICAL TRIAL: FIRE-3 (NCT00433927).


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis