A randomized phase II trial evaluating safety and efficacy of an experimental chemotherapy regimen (CPT-11 + oxaliplatin [IRINOX]) and two standard arms (LV5-FU2 + CPT-11 [FOLFIRI], LV5-FU2 + oxaliplatin [FOLFOX]) in first line metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) (FNCLCC Accord 08)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3586-3586
Author(s):  
Y. Becouarn ◽  
M. Ychou ◽  
E. Boucher ◽  
A. Adenis ◽  
L. Cany ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Median Number ◽  
First Line ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Number Of Cycles ◽  
Age Range

3586 Background: LV5-FU2 + CPT-11 or oxaliplatin (OHP) are standard therapies in first line MCRC. This phase II trial evaluates an experimental regimen of CPT-11 + oxaliplatin, without 5FU. Methods: First line MCRC evaluable patients (pts) were randomized to receive, every two weeks, either: Arm A = OHP 85 mg/m2 d1 followed by CPT-11 180 mg/m2 (IRINOX), or Arm B = simplified LV5-FU2 (leucovorin 200 mg/m2 as a 2 h-infusion d1, 5FU bolus 400 mg/m2 d1, and 5FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m2 d1–2) and CPT-11 180 mg/m2 d1 (FOLFIRI), or simplified LV5-FU2 and OHP 85 mg/m2 d1 (FOLFOX). Results were combined for the two standard arms (FOLFIRI + FOLFOX). Results: 80 pts were included between 09/2002 and 04/2005, 40 in IRINOX (arm A), 20 each in FOLFIRI and FOLFOX (arm B). Pts characteristics (A:B): M/F = 27/13:29/11; median age (range): 63 (41–76):61 (47–75); PS (0/1/2): 16/21/3:16/22/2; median number of cycles (range): 8.0 (1–16):12 (1–26). Safety data: no toxic death. IRINOX (318 cycles): NCI G3–4 neutropenia, 43.6% (pts), 14.7% (cycles); G3–4 neurotoxicity, 17.9% (pts), 5.0% (cycles); G3–4 diarrhea, 33.3% (pts), 5.3% (cycles). FOLFIRI (238 cycles) and FOLFOX (186 cycles): G3–4 neutropenia, 40% (pts) and 23.8% (pts) respectively (8.8% and 7.6% of cycles); G3–4 neurotoxicity, 0% and 14.3% (pts), 0% and 2.7% (cycles); G3–4 diarrhea 15% and 0% (pts), 2.1% and 0% (cycles). Median relative dose-intensity was 0.86 (0.57–1.0) for CPT-11, 0.86 (0.57 -1.0) for OHP in the IRINOX arm. We observed 21 PR in the IRINOX arm, 19 PR and 2 CR in the 2 control arms, for an ORR = 52.5%, 90% CI (38–66). Median follow-up: 17 months, median PFS for IRINOX: 8.4 months. Conclusions: The combination of CPT-11 and OHP (IRINOX) at these doses, every 2 weeks, appears safe and active in first line MCRC. [Table: see text]

Final survival results from a multicenter, randomized phase II trial of intravenous paclitaxel plus FOLFOX (ivPOF) and/or intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus FOLFOX (ipPOF) versus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC): SYLT/FNF 004.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4041-4041
Author(s):  
Shen Zhao ◽  
Rongbo Lin ◽  
Nan-Feng Fan ◽  
Yigui Chen ◽  
Xiaofeng Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Number ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Study Objective ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Number Of Cycles ◽  
Final Survival ◽  
Unacceptable Toxicity ◽  
First Line Treatment

4041 Background: Progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival for SYLT/FNF 004 were previously reported in ASCO and ASCO-GI 2019. At that time, PFS was statistically significantly improved with ivPOF or ipPOF compared to mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment of AGC; however, there were no significant between-treatment differences in OS. Herein, we report final survival results for this trial. Methods: Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatments: intravenous paclitaxel 135 mg/m2 + mFOLFOX6 omitting the 5-FU bolus (ivPOF); intraperitoneal paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 + mFOLFOX6 omitting the 5-FU bolus (ipPOF); or mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2 followed by 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus and 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 as a 46-hour continuous infusion). Treatment cycles were repeated every 14 days for up to 9 cycles. Thereafter, maintenance treatment with S-1 80 mg/m2/day for 14 days every 3 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient refusal, or physician decision. The original study objective was to compare ivPOF or ipPOF vs. mFOLFOX6 for PFS. Due to slow accrual, the protocol was later amended to compare POF (ivPOF and ipPOF) with mFOLFOX6 for PFS. Results: Between Nov 2015 and May 2018, 89 subjects (30 ivPOF, 29 ipPOF, 30 mFOLFOX6) were enrolled. As of the data cutoff on Dec 31, 2020, median follow-up was 41 (IQR: 37-43) months. The median number of cycles administered was 7 (IQR: 4-9) for POF; 6 (IQR: 4-9) for ivPOF; 9 (IQR: 4-9) for ipPOF; and 4 (IQR: 3-9) for mFOLFOX6. Median PFS and OS, respectively, were 6.23 (95% CI: 4.90 to 9.07) and 10.17 (95% CI: 8.97 to 16.4) months for POF and 4.55 (95% CI: 2.73 to 6.87) and 6.87 (95% CI: 5.83 to 13.6) months for mFOLFOX6. Both PFS and OS were statistically significantly better with POF, ivPOF or ipPOF versus mFOLFOX6 (Table). Safety was consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: POF, ivPOF or ipPOF improved both PFS and OS compared with mFOLFOX6, with similarly manageable adverse effects. Clinical trial information: NCT02845908. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document