Top Rated Hyderabad Call Girls Chintal ⟟ 9332606886 ⟟ Call Me For Genuine Se...
Tratamiento de cáncer de colon metastásico: de las guías de práctica, genómica a la realidad
1. Tratamiento del cáncer colorectal metastásico: de las guías
de práctica clínica, pasando por la genómica y la realidad
Mauricio Lema Medina MD
Clínica de Oncología Astorga / Clínica SOMA, Medellín, Colombia
Cartagena, Colombia
09.07.2014
10. “Thou shall not use anti EGFR-agents
in mutated RAS CRC patients”
11. mCRC: ESMO Clinical Practice
Guidelines
http://www.esmo.org/Guidelines/Gastrointestinal-Cancers/Metastatic-Colorectal-Cancer
Group 0Group 0
Group 1Group 1
Group 2Group 2
Group 3Group 3
Resectable R0
Convertible
Unlikely
resectable/High
tumor burden
Never resectable
Surgery/ +/- Adj CTSurgery/ +/- Adj CT
Conversion CT/SurgeryConversion CT/Surgery
Conversion CT/SurgeryConversion CT/Surgery
Less-toxic CTLess-toxic CT
Cure
Cure
Long OS
QoL
Criticism: solely based on DISEASE characteristics
12. mCRC: ESMO Clinical Practice
Guidelines
http://www.esmo.org/Guidelines/Gastrointestinal-Cancers/Metastatic-Colorectal-Cancer
Group 0Group 0
Group 1Group 1
Group 2Group 2
Group 3Group 3
Resectable R0
Convertible
Unlikely
resectable/High
tumor burden
Never resectable
Surgery/ +/- Adj CTSurgery/ +/- Adj CT
Conversion CT/SurgeryConversion CT/Surgery
Conversion CT/SurgeryConversion CT/Surgery
Less-toxic CTLess-toxic CT
FOLFOX
FOLFOXIRI-Bev
FOLFIRI-Cet
FOLFOX-Bev
XELOX-Bev
FOLFOX-Cet
FOLFIRI-Cet
FP-Bev
Criticism: solely based on DISEASE characteristics
14. CAPOX +
Bevacizumab
6 meses
“Continuum of care” in mCRC – “blurring line descriptions”
Cape + Bevacizumab
Hasta progresión
1o
línea
FOLFIRI +
Bevacizumab
Oxaliplatino hasta neuropatía
QT + Bevacizumab
Hasta progresión
2o
línea
Cetuximab +/-
Irinotecán
Regorafenib
Hasta progresión
≥3o
línea (KRAS nativo)
Hasta progresión
CAIRO-3
TML
Cunningham D, et al. N Engl J Med 2004;351:337-45. CORRECT Trial (Van Cutsem 2012)
16. clinicaloptions.com/oncology
Optimizing Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Mutations in KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF
Distribution and Prognostic Significance
BRAF mutation All patients
Any mutation
KRAS mutation
KRAS WT
All WT
Mutation Status
0
6
12
MedianPFS
(Mos)
Arm A Arm B
0
6
12
18
MedianOS
(Mos)
57
340
268
815
367
289
45
366
297
815
362
292
0
10
20
30
40
2-YrOS(%)
Prognostic Effect of Mutational Status
“All WT”
n = 581
(44%)
KRAS MT
n = 565
(43%)
NRAS MT
n = 50 (4%)
BRAF MT
n = 102 (8%)
Total
N = 1316 (81%)
554
11
39
10
2
Population n (%) Arm A Arm B
ITT 1630 815 815
Assessed for mutations 1316 648 668
KRAS mutation
NRAS mutation
BRAF mutation
565 (43)
50 (4)
102 (8)
268
18
57
297
32
45
KRAS WT 729 (55) 367 362
KRAS/NRAS/BRAF WT
“All WT”
581 (44) 289 292
Maughan TS, et al. ASCO 2010. Abstract 3502.
17. clinicaloptions.com/oncology
Optimizing Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Phase III 80405 Trial: First-line CT + Either
Cetux or Bev in KRAS-WT mCRC
Primary endpoint: OS
Secondary endpoints: ORR, PFS, TTF, duration of response
Patients with mCRC
and KRAS WT
(codons 12, 13),
ECOG PS 0/1
(N = 1137)
FOLFOX or FOLFIRI +
Bevacizumab q2w
(n = 559)
ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT00265850. Venook AP, et al. ASCO 2014. LBA3..
FOLFOX or FOLFIRI +
Cetuximab q1w
(N = 578)
A third arm with CT + bevacizumab + cetuximab
was closed to accrual in September 2009
18. clinicaloptions.com/oncology
Optimizing Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
CALGB/SWOG 80405: OS in the ITT
Population
mOS (95% CI), mos
CT + Cetux 29.9 (27.0-32.9)
CT + Bev 29.0 (25.7-31.2)
HR 0.925 (0.78-1.09)
P = 0.34
Venook AP, et al. ASCO 2014. Abstract LBA3.
0
12 24 36 48 60 72
Mos
80
100
60
40
0
OS(%)
20
84
19. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival
(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts)
with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of
CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Alan P. Venook.
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3504
.
20. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival
(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts)
with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of
CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Alan P. Venook.
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3504
.
21. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival
(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts)
with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of
CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Alan P. Venook.
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3504
.
22. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival
(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts)
with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of
CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Alan P. Venook.
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3504
.
23. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival
(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts)
with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of
CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Alan P. Venook.
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3504
.
24. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival
(OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts)
with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of
CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Alan P. Venook.
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3504
.
25. The relationship between primary tumor sidedness and
prognosis in colorectal cancer. Deborah Schrag
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
26. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
27. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
28. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
29. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
30. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
31. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
32. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
33. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
34. Association of primary (1°) site and molecular features with
progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of
metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor ( EGFR) therapy. Michael Sangminα
Lee
Proc ASCO, 2016, 3505
.
43. clinicaloptions.com/oncology
Colorectal Cancer: Individualizing Therapy Beyond Second-line Treatment
Phase III RAISE Study: Second-Line
Ramucirumab/FOLFIRI vs FOLFIRI
Patients with CRC
and progression
during or within 6
months of first-line
bevacizumab,
oxaliplatin, and a
fluoropyrimidine
(N = 1072)
Treat until PD or
unacceptable
toxicity
Ramucirumab 8 mg/kg +
FOLFIRI q2w per cycle
(n = 536)
Placebo +
FOLFIRI q2w per cycle
(n = 536)
Stratified by geographic region, KRAS mutation
status, TTP after start of first-line therapy
Ramucirumab: anti-VEGFR2 antibody
Primary endpoint: OS
Tabernero J, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:499-508.
61. FOLFIRINOX combined to targeted therapy according
RAS status for colorectal cancer patients with liver
metastases initially non-resectable: A phase II randomized
Study—Prodige 14 – accord 21 (METHEP-2), a unicancer
GI trial. Mark Ychou. Proc ASCO, 2016, Abstract 3512
Proc ASCO, 2016, Discussio
.
FOLFIRINOX as induction treatment in rectal cancer
patients with synchronous metastases (RCSM): Results of
the FFCD 1102 phase II trial. JB Bachet. Proc ASCO, 2016,
Abstract 3513
71. As of today, clinical practice
guidelines for mCRC are but a
repository of treatment options
filled with soft statements aimed
more to convince insurers rather
than to truly guide clinicians.
Editor's Notes
ITT, intention to treat; MT, mutation; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; WT, wild-type
5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; BEV, bevacizumab; CT, chemotherapy; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; mCRC, metastatic colorectal cancer; OS, overall survival; PD, progressive disease; PFS, progression-free survival.
Let’s take a look at the data that’s really come forward for helping us manage patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. And in particular we’re going to focus on second line and beyond because there are a lot of new choices, a lot of new trials, new medicines that have come forward in this setting, and we want to give everybody a context of how to manage it. And really, there are a lot of choices for these patients. So let’s make sure we have good clarity on this.
Now the first of these studies that really came forward into the second line with biologics is known as the TML study, and the idea behind this was that if you were on bevacizumab in first line, could you continue it on through the second line and still demonstrate benefit?
CT, chemotherapy; BEV, bevacizumab; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; ITT, intent to treat; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; PS, performance score; TML, treatment with multiple lines.
And in a randomized clinical trial where half got the bevacizumab on through to second line, the other half did not, we showed a survival advantage for those patients—not a very big one, a 1.4‑month improvement in survival, but it’s been an important positive impact for patients through lines of therapy. So this really established anti‑VEGF therapy through lines of therapy, using bevacizumab. It also showed a progression‑free survival advantage in those patients.
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FOLFIRI, fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan; mCRC, metastatic colorectal cancer; ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival; q2w, once every 2 weeks; PFS, progression-free survival; PS, performance status.
In a very similar design, the VELOUR study randomized patients in second line to FOLFIRI plus or minus ziv‑aflibercept. Very similar design to the TML. Some patients had had prior bevacizumab in this clinical trial, but it was not a requirement of this clinical trial.
FOLFIRI, fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan; mCRC, metastatic colorectal cancer; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival.
And just like the TML study, a 1.4‑month improvement in overall survival and improvement in progression‑free survival.
AFL, aflibercept; FOLFIRI, fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan; mCRC, metastatic colorectal cancer; OS, overall survival
When we look at the subset of patients who had had prior bevacizumab, we also see an improvement in outcome there, in both PFS and OS. So even if you’d had a VEGF inhibitor in the first line, this switching to a second VEGF inhibitor was still a positive impact and, of course, supported its approval in the United States and around the world for second-line treatment in combination with FOLFIRI.
CRC, colorectal cancer; FOLFIRI, fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan; OS, overall survival; PD, progressive disease; TTP, time to progression.
Enrollment of at least 1050 patients with 756 events for 85% power; Hazard ratio of 0.8; Median overall survival of 10 months in the control arm vs 12.5 months with ramucirumab with a 2-sided α level of 0.05. And then comes along the third of these clinical trials and the third of these medicines, a medicine called ramucirumab. Also a monoclonal antibody, but it binds again to the receptor and not to the ligand, so slightly different mechanism of action, but exactly the same design again. Second‑line metastatic colon, FOLFIRI plus or minus ramucirumab in these patients.
FOLFIRI, fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan; OS, overall survival; Ram, ramucirumab.
Yet again we see a one and a half or so month improvement in overall survival in those patients, and again the majority of these folks had had prior VEGF therapy as well.
Now I want to kind of end our discussion about the third line and beyond treatments, and a drug that we’ve had for a while now: regorafenib. You know this medicine. It’s a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, hits a lot of different targets within cancer cells. We’re not really sure of the true mechanism of action for this drug.
BSC, best supportive care; mCRC, metastatic colorectal cancer; po, orally; qd, daily.
It has some VEGF activity and others, but it was tried in a randomized clinical trial known as the CORRECT study, 2:1 randomization against placebo, done around the world. And of course, this really sets a new stage for us, for the treatment of metastatic colon; this trial accrued very quickly. It showed us that there are a lot of these patients out there who’ve tried all their standard medicines and are now looking for new treatment options.
IQR, interquartile range; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival.
And it accrued, as I said, quickly, and it demonstrated an improvement in overall survival. Again, 1.4 months’ improvement and was enough to justify its approval both here in the United States and around the world. So it is a drug that has value, it controls our cancer in patients, and we should utilize it more.