Leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab versus S-1 and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (SOFT): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial.

Studies done in Asia have shown that a regimen of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) has promising efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We aimed to establish whether SOX plus bevacizumab is non-inferior to mFOLFOX6 (modified regimen of leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) plus bevacizumab as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. We undertook an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial in 82 sites in Japan. We enrolled individuals aged 20-80 years who had metastatic colorectal cancer, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had assessable lesions, had received no previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy, could take drugs orally, and had adequate organ function. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (on day 1 of each 2-week cycle, 5 mg/kg intravenous infusion of bevacizumab and a simultaneous intravenous infusion of 85 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m(2)l-leucovorin, 400 mg/m(2) bolus fluorouracil, and 2400 mg/m(2) infusional fluorouracil) or SOX plus bevacizumab (on day 1 of each 3-week cycle, 7·5 mg/kg intravenous infusion of bevacizumab and 130 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion of oxaliplatin; assigned dose of S-1 twice a day from after dinner on day 1 to after breakfast on day 15, followed by 7-day break). Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation method, with stratification by institution and whether postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy had been given. Participants, investigators, and data analysts were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), which was defined as the interval between enrolment and progressive disease (≥20% increase in sum of longest dimensions of target lesions from baseline, or appearance of new lesions) or death, whichever came first. The primary analysis was done by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center, number JapicCTI-090699. Between Feb 1, 2009, and March 31, 2011, 512 patients underwent randomisation. 256 patients assigned to receive SOX plus bevacizumab and 255 assigned to receive mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab were included in the primary analysis. Median PFS was 11·5 months (95% CI 10·7-13·2) in the group assigned to mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab and 11·7 months (10·7-12·9) in the group assigned to SOX plus bevacizumab (HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·86-1·27; less than non-inferiority margin of 1·33, pnon-inferiority=0·014). The most common haematological adverse events of grade 3 or higher were leucopenia (21 [8%] of 249 patients given mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab included in safety analysis vs six [2%] of 250 given SOX plus bevacizumab; p=0·0029) and neutropenia (84 [34%] vs 22 [9%]; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or higher anorexia (13 [5%] vs three [1%]; p=0·019) and diarrhoea (23 [9%] vs seven [3%]; p=0·0040) were significantly more common in patients given SOX plus bevacizumab than in those given mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab. We recorded seven treatment-related deaths (three in the group given mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab; four in that given SOX plus bevacizumab). SOX plus bevacizumab is non-inferior to mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab with respect to PFS as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer, and could become standard treatment in Asian populations. Taiho.

Yamada Y ，Takahari D ，Matsumoto H ，Baba H ，Nakamura M ，Yoshida K ，Yoshida M ，Iwamoto S ，Shimada K ，Komatsu Y ，Sasaki Y ，Satoh T ，Takahashi K ，Mishima H ，Muro K ，Watanabe M ，Sakata Y ，Morita S ，Shimada Y ，Sugihara K ... -  《-》

Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab and reintroduction after progression versus mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRIBE2): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, rand

The triplet FOLFOXIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab showed improved outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, compared with FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab. However, the actual benefit of the upfront exposure to the three cytotoxic drugs compared with a preplanned sequential strategy of doublets was not clear, and neither was the feasibility or efficacy of therapies after disease progression. We aimed to compare a preplanned strategy of upfront FOLFOXIRI followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression versus a sequence of mFOLFOX6 (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI doublets, in combination with bevacizumab. TRIBE2 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised study of patients aged 18-75 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2, with unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, recruited from 58 Italian oncology units. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour location, and previous adjuvant chemotherapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm was used to randomly assign patients (1:1) via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two different treatment strategies. In the control group, patients received first-line mFOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 of intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously over 30 min) followed by FOLFIRI (180 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 120 min concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab after disease progression. In the experimental group, patients received FOLFOXIRI (165 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 60 min; 85 mg/m2 intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 3200 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression. Combination treatments were repeated every 14 days for up to eight cycles followed by fluorouracil and leucovorin (at the same dose administered at the last induction cycle) plus bevacizumab maintenance until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. Patients and investigators were not masked. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival 2, defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression on any treatment given after first disease progression, or death, analysed by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. Study recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02339116. Between Feb 26, 2015, and May 15, 2017, 679 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (340 in the control group and 339 in the experimental group). At data cut-off (July 30, 2019) median follow-up was 35·9 months (IQR 30·1-41·4). Median progression-free survival 2 was 19·2 months (95% CI 17·3-21·4) in the experimental group and 16·4 months (15·1-17·5) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·63-0·88; p=0·0005). During the first-line treatment, the most frequent of all-cause grade 3-4 events were diarrhoea (57 [17%] vs 18 [5%]), neutropenia (168 [50%] vs 71 [21%]), and arterial hypertension (25 [7%] vs 35 [10%]) in the experimental group compared with the control group. Serious adverse events occurred in 84 (25%) patients in the experimental group and in 56 (17%) patients in the control group. Eight treatment-related deaths were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions, two intestinal perforations, two sepsis, one myocardial infarction, and one bleeding) and four in the control group (two occlusions, one perforation, and one pulmonary embolism). After first disease progression, no substantial differences in the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported between the control and experimental groups, with the exception of neurotoxicity, which was only reported in the experimental group (six [5%] of 132 patients). Serious adverse events after disease progression occurred in 20 (15%) patients in the experimental group and 25 (12%) in the control group. Three treatment-related deaths after first disease progression were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions and one sepsis) and four in the control group (one intestinal occlusion, one intestinal perforation, one cerebrovascular event, and one sepsis). Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression seems to be a preferable therapeutic strategy to sequential administration of chemotherapy doublets, in combination with bevacizumab, for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer selected according to the study criteria. The GONO Cooperative Group, the ARCO Foundation, and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Cremolini C ，Antoniotti C ，Rossini D ，Lonardi S ，Loupakis F ，Pietrantonio F ，Bordonaro R ，Latiano TP ，Tamburini E ，Santini D ，Passardi A ，Marmorino F ，Grande R ，Aprile G ，Zaniboni A ，Murgioni S ，Granetto C ，Buonadonna A ，Moretto R ，Corallo S ，Cordio S ，Antonuzzo L ，Tomasello G ，Masi G ，Ronzoni M ，Di Donato S ，Carlomagno C ，Clavarezza M ，Ritorto G ，Mambrini A ，Roselli M ，Cupini S ，Mammoliti S ，Fenocchio E ，Corgna E ，Zagonel V ，Fontanini G ，Ugolini C ，Boni L ，Falcone A ，GONO Foundation Investigators ... -  《-》

S-1 plus oxaliplatin versus capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) is one of the reference doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy treatments for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CapeOX with that of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX), a promising alternative treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. In this open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients (1:1) from 11 institutions in South Korea to receive either CapeOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1) or SOX (S-1 40 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1). Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks and continued for as many as nine cycles of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy, except in instances of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or a patient's refusal. Maintenance chemotherapy with S-1 or capecitabine was allowed after discontinuation of oxaliplatin. Randomisation was done with a computer-generated sequence (stratified by primary sites, previous adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment, and the presence of measurable lesions). The primary endpoint was to show non-inferiority of SOX relative to CapeOX in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). The primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00677443. Between May 14, 2008, and Sept 23, 2009, we randomly assigned 168 patients to receive SOX and 172 to receive CapeOX. Median PFS was 8·5 months (95% CI 7·6-9·3) in the SOX group and 6·7 months (6·2-7·1) in the CapeOX group (hazard ratio, 0·79 [95% CI 0·60-1·04]; p(non-inferiority)<0·0001, p(log-rank)=0·09). The upper limit of the CI was below the predefined margin of 1·43, showing the non-inferiority of SOX to CapeOX. We recorded a higher incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia (49 [29%] vs 24 [15%]), thrombocytopenia (37 [22%] vs 11 [7%]), and diarrhoea (16 [10%] vs seven [4%]) in the SOX group than in the CapeOX group. The frequency of any grade of hand-foot syndrome was greater in the CapeOX group than it was in the SOX group (51 [31%] vs 23 [14%]). The SOX regimen could be an alternative first-line doublet chemotherapy strategy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Further investigation is needed to explore its potential when used together with other targeted agents or as adjuvant chemotherapy. Korea Healthcare Technology Research and Development Project, Ministry of Health and Welfare, South Korea.

Hong YS ，Park YS ，Lim HY ，Lee J ，Kim TW ，Kim KP ，Kim SY ，Baek JY ，Kim JH ，Lee KW ，Chung IJ ，Cho SH ，Lee KH ，Shin SJ ，Kang HJ ，Shin DB ，Jo SJ ，Lee JW ... -  《-》

Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) versus fluorouracil and folinic acid plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised phase 2/3 non-inferiority study (FIRIS study).

Fluorouracil and folinic acid with either oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or irinotecan (FOLFIRI) are widely used as first-line or second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, infusional fluorouracil-based regimens, requiring continuous infusion and implantation of an intravenous port system, are inconvenient. We therefore planned an open-label randomised controlled trial to verify the non-inferiority of irinotecan plus oral S-1 (a combination of tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine, and potassium oxonate; IRIS) to FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Between Jan 30, 2006, and Jan 29, 2008, 426 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer needing second-line chemotherapy from 40 institutions in Japan were randomly assigned by a computer-based minimisation method to receive either FOLFIRI (n=213) or IRIS (n=213). In the FOLFIRI group, patients received folinic acid (200 mg/m(2)) and irinotecan (150 mg/m(2)) and then a bolus injection of fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)) on day 1 and a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (2400 mg/m(2)) over 46 h, repeated every 2 weeks. In the IRIS group, patients received irinotecan (125 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 15 and S-1 (40-60 mg according to body surface area) twice daily for 2 weeks, repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, with a non-inferiority margin of 1.333. Statistical analysis was on the basis of initially randomised participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00284258. All randomised patients were included in the primary analysis. After a median follow-up of 12.9 months (IQR 11.5-18.2), median progression-free survival was 5.1 months in the FOLFIRI group and 5.8 months in the IRIS group (hazard ratio 1.077, 95% CI 0.879-1.319, non-inferiority test p=0.039). The most common grade three or four adverse drug reactions were neutropenia (110 [52.1%] of 211 patients in the FOLFIRI group and 76 [36.2%] of 210 patients in the IRIS group; p=0.0012), leucopenia (33 [15.6%] in the FOLFIRI group and 38 [18.1%] in the IRIS group; p=0.5178), and diarrhoea (ten [4.7%] in the FOLFIRI group and 43 [20.5%] in the IRIS group; p<0.0001). One treatment-related death from hypotension due to shock was reported in the FOLFIRI group within 28 days after the end of treatment; no treatment-related deaths were reported in the IRIS group. Progression-free survival with IRIS is not inferior to that with FOLFIRI in patients receiving second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Treatment with IRIS could be an additional therapeutic option for second-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Taiho Pharmaceutical Co Ltd and Daiichi Sankyo Co Ltd.

Muro K ，Boku N ，Shimada Y ，Tsuji A ，Sameshima S ，Baba H ，Satoh T ，Denda T ，Ina K ，Nishina T ，Yamaguchi K ，Takiuchi H ，Esaki T ，Tokunaga S ，Kuwano H ，Komatsu Y ，Watanabe M ，Hyodo I ，Morita S ，Sugihara K ... -  《-》

Maintenance strategies after first-line oxaliplatin plus fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AIO 0207): a randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial.

The definition of a best maintenance strategy following combination chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated whether no continuation of therapy or bevacizumab alone are non-inferior to fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, following induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab. In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial, we included patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function, no pre-existing neuropathy greater than grade 1, and measurable disease, from 55 hospitals and 51 private practices in Germany. After 24 weeks of induction therapy with either fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin, both with bevacizumab, patients without disease progression were randomly assigned centrally by fax (1:1:1) to standard maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, bevacizumab alone, or no treatment. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. Stratification criteria were response status, termination of oxaliplatin, previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin, and ECOG performance status. At first progression, re-induction with all drugs of the induction treatment was a planned part of the protocol. Time to failure of strategy was the primary endpoint, defined as time from randomisation to second progression after maintenance (and if applicable re-induction), death, or initiation of further treatment including a new drug. Time to failure of strategy was equivalent to time to first progression for patients who did not receive re-induction (for any reason). The boundary for assessment of non-inferiority was upper limit of the one-sided 98·8% CI 1·43. Analyses were done by intention to treat. The study has completed recruitment, but follow-up of participants is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00973609. Between Sept 17, 2009, and Feb 21, 2013, 837 patients were enrolled and 472 randomised; 158 were randomly assigned to receive fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab, 156 to receive bevacizumab monotherapy, and 158 to receive no treatment. Median follow-up from randomisation is 17·0 months (IQR 9·5-25·4). Median time to failure of strategy was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·1-8·5) for the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 6·1 months (5·3-7·4) for the bevacizumab alone group, and 6·4 months (4·8-7·6) for the no treatment group. Bevacizumab alone was non-inferior to standard fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·85-1·37]; p=0·53; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·42), whereas no treatment was not (HR 1·26 [0·99-1·60]; p=0·056; upper limit of the one-sided 99·8% CI 1·65). The protocol-defined re-induction after first progression was rarely done (30 [19%] patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 67 [43%] in the bevacizumab monotherapy group, and 73 [46%] in the no treatment group. The most common grade 3 adverse event was sensory neuropathy (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab group, 22 [14%] of 156 patients in the bevacizumab alone group, and 12 [8%] of 158 patients in the no treatment group). Although non-inferiority for bevacizumab alone was demonstrated for the primary endpoint, maintenance treatment with a fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab may be the preferable option for patients following an induction treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab, as it allows the planned discontinuation of the initial combination without compromising time with controlled disease. Only a few patients were exposed to re-induction treatment, thus deeming the primary endpoint time to failure of strategy non-informative and clinically irrelevant. Progression-free survival and overall survival should be considered primary endpoints in future trials exploring maintenance strategies.

Hegewisch-Becker S ，Graeven U ，Lerchenmüller CA ，Killing B ，Depenbusch R ，Steffens CC ，Al-Batran SE ，Lange T ，Dietrich G ，Stoehlmacher J ，Tannapfel A ，Reinacher-Schick A ，Quidde J ，Trarbach T ，Hinke A ，Schmoll HJ ，Arnold D ... -  《-》