Panitumumab versus cetuximab in combination with irinotecan in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

被引:0
|
作者
Braghiroli, Maria Ignez Freitas Melro [1 ,2 ]
Filho, Daniel Santos Rocha Sobral [1 ]
Fagundes, Juliana Goes Martins [1 ]
Mendoza, Elizabeth Zambrano [1 ]
Neffa, Maria Fernanda Batistuzzo Vicentini [1 ]
Campos, Karla Souza [1 ]
da Fonseca, Leonardo Gomes [1 ,2 ]
Bonadio, Renata Colombo [1 ,2 ]
Talans, Aley [1 ]
Braghiroli, Oddone Freitas Melro [1 ,2 ]
Mathias-Machado, Maria Cecilia [1 ]
Sabbaga, Jorge [1 ,2 ]
Venchiarutti, Camila Motta [1 ,2 ]
Hoff, Paulo Marcelo Gehm [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Inst Canc Estado Sao Paulo, Av Dr Arnaldo 251, BR-02146000 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
[2] Inst DOr Pesquisa & Ensino, Av Brigadeiro Luis Antonio 5001, BR-01401002 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
关键词
Colorectal cancer; Panitumumab; Cetuximab; Third-line; Refractoriness; WILD-TYPE KRAS; PHASE-III TRIAL; PLUS IRINOTECAN; RAS MUTATIONS; 1ST-LINE TREATMENT; OPEN-LABEL; CHEMOTHERAPY; FLUOROURACIL; LEUCOVORIN; CARE;
D O I
10.1016/j.ctarc.2025.100867
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: There is evidence that adding cetuximab can overcome resistance to irinotecan, but a similar analysis with Panitumumab isn't readily available. This study evaluated the activity of each anti-EGFR plus irinotecan as a salvage third-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who progressed to irinotecan monotherapy and were exposed to an anti-EGFR antibody as a third line of treatment. This study was conducted at a single cancer center in Brazil. The primary outcome was overall survival. The secondary outcomes were objective response rate, stratified by primary tumor sidedness, progression-free survival, and toxicity. Results: This analysis included 412 patients who had progressed on irinotecan and were KRAS wild-type. One hundred eighty-two received Irinotecan plus Cetuximab (I + C group) and 230 Irinotecan plus Panitumumab (I + P group). There was no significant difference in median overall survival between treatment groups (9.1 months [I + C] vs 10.1 months [I + P]; p = 0.76). There was also no difference in progression-free survival (3.63 months [I + C] vs 3.73 months [I + P]; p = 0.19) and objective response rate (23.0 % [I + C] vs 22.3 % [I + P]; p = 0.97). Patients with right-sided tumors had worse overall survival than left-sided (6.2 months vs 10.1 months; p = 0.003) but presented a better objective response rate with panitumumab (8.3 % [I + P] vs 3.3 % [I + C]). There were more infusion reactions with cetuximab. Conclusions: Panitumumab and cetuximab have similar activity when combined with irinotecan as treatment for patients with disease progression with an irinotecan regimen, potentially rescuing the irinotecan activity.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF CETUXIMAB VERSUS PANITUMUMAB IN THIRD-LINE THERAPY FOR CHEMOTHERAPY-REFRACTORY METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER IN BRAZIL
    Sasse, Andre
    Carvalho, Adriana
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2012, 23 : 100 - 100
  • [32] BTH1677 in combination with cetuximab with and without irinotecan in patients with advanced metastatic colorectal cancer
    Cornelio, Gerardo H.
    Tamayo, Maria E.
    Flores, Myra L.
    Bautista, Janet B.
    Tioleco, Paulo S.
    Gargano, Michele A.
    Kurman, Michael R.
    Walsh, Richard M.
    Beliveau, Martin
    Marier, Jean-Francois
    Patchen, Myra L.
    COLORECTAL CANCER, 2016, 5 (03) : 95 - 108
  • [33] EFFICACY OF CETUXIMAB/PANITUMUMAB AFTER PREVIOUS BEVACIZUMAB IN METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER
    Gherman, Alexandra
    Cainap, Calin
    Vesa, Stefan-Cristian
    Havasi, Andrei Dan
    Trifon, Alexandra
    Cainap, Simona Sorana
    Crisan, Ovidiu
    Irimie, Alexandru
    FARMACIA, 2020, 68 (04) : 656 - 664
  • [34] Cetuximab and irinotecan in chemoresistant metastatic colorectal cancer: Retrospective analysis
    Kocakova, I
    Kocak, I
    Spelda, S.
    Vyzula, R.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2007, 18 : VII79 - VII79
  • [35] Pharmacokinetics of Irinotecan With and Without Panitumumab Coadministration in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
    Yang, Bing-Bing
    Wu, Chi-Yuan
    Chen, Eric
    Infante, Jeffrey R.
    Chen, Alin
    Gao, Bing
    Smith, Brian
    Litten, Jason
    Kennecke, Hagen
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY IN DRUG DEVELOPMENT, 2013, 2 (03): : 205 - 212
  • [36] Panitumumab (Pmab) versus cetuximab (Cmab)/irinotecan (Iri) therapy among patients with KRAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC).
    Kennecke, Hagen F.
    Chen, Leo
    Blanke, C. D.
    Cheung, Winson Y.
    Schaff, Kimberly
    Speers, Caroline
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2012, 30 (04)
  • [37] Randomized phase II trial of cetuximab/bevacizumab/irinotecan (CBI) versus cetuximab/bevacizumab (CB) in irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer.
    Saltz, LB
    Lenz, HJ
    Hochster, H
    Wadler, S
    Hoff, P
    Kemeny, N
    Hollywood, E
    Gonen, M
    Wetherbee, S
    Chen, H
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2005, 23 (16) : 248S - 248S
  • [38] Colorectal Cancer Panitumumab is not inferior to Cetuximab
    Weiss, Johannes
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE, 2014, 52 (09): : 1034 - 1034
  • [39] A Case of Panitumumab-Responsive Metastatic Rectal Cancer Initially Refractory to Cetuximab
    Kasagi, Yuta
    Oki, Eiji
    Ando, Koji
    Kimura, Yasue
    Ikegami, Toru
    Saeki, Hiroshi
    Morita, Masaru
    Kusumoto, Tetsuya
    Maehara, Yoshihiko
    CASE REPORTS IN ONCOLOGY, 2013, 6 (02): : 382 - 386
  • [40] Assessment of baseline clinical predictive factors of response to cetuximab-irinotecan in patients with irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer
    Hebbar, Mohamed
    Di Fiore, Frederic
    Conroy, Thierry
    Giraud, Claire
    Gasnault, Laurent
    Fournier, Charles
    Pereira, Renata
    Bouche, Olivier
    Fournier, Peggy
    Deligny, Nathalie
    Joly, Jean-Paul
    Maes, Patricia
    Rad, Emilia
    Michel, Pierre
    Adenis, Antoine
    ONCOLOGY, 2007, 73 (3-4) : 185 - 191