Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)  (3)
  • Kaiser, Ulrich  (3)
  • 1
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 35, No. 4_suppl ( 2017-02-01), p. 658-658
    Abstract: 658 Background: The 4-drug-regimen FOLFOXIRI+Bevacizumab (Bev) was superior to FOLFIRI+Bev (TRIBE F.Loupakis, NEJM 2014). CHARTA investigates the same 4-drug-regimen vs. FOLFOX+Bev. Methods: 250 patients were randomized from 7/11 to 12/14 to standard FOLFOX+Bev (A) vs. FOLFOXIRI+Bev (B), with dose/schedule as in TRIBE, 25% dose reduction in cycle 1 + 2, if necessary. Incl.criteria: ECOG 0-2, ≥ 1 measurable lesion 〉 1cm; stratified by ESMO-Group 1, 2, 3 (HJ Schmoll et. al., Ann Oncol 2012). Induction: 6 months, maintenance Capecitabine+Bev until progression or max. of 12 months, with reinduction by individual decision. Primary EP: significant improvement of PFS-rate at 9 months (p 〈 0.1, 2-sided Fisher’s-exact test); secondary EP: RR- rate, PFS, OS, sec. resection. Results: Evaluable 241 pts. (1 not elig., 8 prot. violation); m/f: 65%/35%, age 61 yrs. (21-82), left/right: left A: 51, 5%, B: 48, 5%; right A: 45%, B: 55%; ECOG 0-1/2: 96% / 4%, ESMO-group 1/2/3: 29%/ 55%/ 16%. Primary endpoint was met: significantly improved PFS at 9 months 56% vs. 68% (p= 0,086). Preliminary PFS 9,76 vs. 12,0 months (HR 0.77, p=0.61), identical to TRIBE: 9.7 vs. 12.1. Response (A/B): CR: 5/5%, CR/PR 60/70%, SD 25/21%, PD 14/9%; sec. resection: 21/23%. Subgroup - analyses did not show significant differences, except CR / PR left/right (A/B): left 59/68%, right 63/73%; PFS (months) left 10.4/12 (HR 0.69, p=0.03), right: 8.2 /10.7); non-significant improvement in ESMO-group 3 (HR 0.51), RAS-wt (HR 0.67), Koehne-Score High risk HR 0.58; ECOG 1: HR 0.69. QL-Global- Health-Score: slightly worse in A, vs. improved in B. Dose-intensity 〈 70%/ 70-90%/ 〉 90% (A/B): 39/37%/ 18/26%/ 41%/36%; initial dose-reduction 17% of pts. Toxicity: low to moderate without major differences between A & B, except grade ¾ diarrhea 12/16%, neutrophils 14/20%, GI 12/20%. Conclusions: The 4-drug-regimen has superior activity with the same outcome as TRIBE and is well tolerated, without a negative effect of initial dose-reduction, and an improvement of global QoL-Score. Final PFS, OS data and detailed subgroup/multivariate analysis, including Quality of life data, will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT01321957.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 35, No. 15_suppl ( 2017-05-20), p. 3544-3544
    Abstract: 3544 Background: FOLFOXIRI/bev is a highly efficacious first line regimen in MCRC. Despite higher rates of neutropenia, diarrhea and stomatitis, FOLFOXIRI/bev is tolerable and feasible in MCRC patients. To date nothing is known about the impact of this regimen on HRQOL. Methods: 250 patients were randomized to FOLFOX/bev (arm A) or FOLFOXIRI/bev (arm B). HRQOL were assessed at baseline, every 8 weeks during induction treatment (6 months) and every 12 weeks during maintenance treatment, using the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29 and QLQ-CIPN20. The mean values of every score were calculated as the average of week 8, 16 and 24 assessment. Test concerning mean values were performed as t-test, with global type I error set at 0.05. HRQOL deterioration and improvement rates were analyzed and compared between treatment groups using chi² tests. Results: For HRQOL analysis, 237 patients were eligible (arm A: 118; arm B: 119). Compliance rate with the HRQOL questionnaires was 95.4% at baseline, 72.6% at week 8, 59.5 % at week 16 and 43.5% at week 24. Whereas mean global quality of life score (GHS/QOL) was similar between arm A and B (59.8 vs. 58.8; p = 0.726), mean scores for nausea/vomiting (9.4 vs. 16.0; p = 0.015) and diarrhea (23.7 vs. 32.1; p = 0.051) significantly or borderline significantly favored arm A during induction period. Furthermore, at week 8 scores of nausea/vomiting (9.2 versus 17.3, p = 0.006) appetite loss (19.5 vs. 29.4; p = 0.035) and financial problems (18.3 vs. 29.5; p = 0.021) and at the end of treatment physical functioning (75.0 vs. 65.8; p = 0.048) were significantly better for arm A compared to arm B. No significant differences were observed in the remaining EORTC scores. The rates of deterioration and improvement between baseline and week 8 of at least 10 points in the EORTC scores were similar (e.g. deterioration-rate GHS/QOL score 21.5% vs. 26.5% for arm A vs. B; p = 0.461). Conclusions: Although no remarkable detriment in HRQOL was noted, the better efficacy of FOLFOXIRI/bev compared to FOLFOX/bev is associated with a decrease in mainly gastrointestinal QOL scores. Further subgroup-analyses will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT01321957.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 35, No. 15_suppl ( 2017-05-20), p. 3533-3533
    Abstract: 3533 Background: FOLFOXIRI/Bevacizumab (Bev) is superior to FOLFIRI/Bev in the TRIBE trial (F Loupakis, NEJM 2014). The CHARTA trial was developed parallel to TRIBE with the same 4-drug-protocol but vs. FOLFOX/B ev as control arm. Methods: From 7/11 to 12/14 250 patients were randomized, including ECOG 0-2, ≥ 1 measurable lesion 〉 1cm, stratified by ESMO-Group 1,2,3 (HJ Schmoll, Ann Oncol 2012). Induction: 6 months, maintenance Capecitabine+Bev until progression or max.12 months, at P reinduction by investigators decision. 25% dose reduction was allowed in cycle 1 + 2 on the investigator’s discretion. Primary EP: significant improvement of PFS-rate @ 9 months (p 〈 0.1, 2-sided Fisher’s-exact test); secondary EP: RR, PFS, OS, toxicity. Results: 241 pts. (1 not elig., 8 prot. violation) are evaluable after a follow up of 31.4 (0.1-51) months. m/f: 65%/35%, age 61y (21-82), ECOG 0-1/2: 96%/4%. The Primary Endpoint was met: PFS @ 9 months 56% vs. 68%, p= 0.086. PFS was improved: 9.8 vs. 12.0 months, HR 0.7 (ns.), identical to TRIBE with 9.7 vs. 12.1 months. Response rate (A/B): CR: 5%/5%, CR/PR 60%/70%, SD 25%/21%, PD 14%/9%. Final OS will be available at the meeting. Toxicity was low to moderate without major differences except ° ¾ diarrhea (12%/16%) and neutrophils (14%/20%). Clinical/molecular prognostic or predictive factors are equally distributed (stratification by ESMO groups) (see table). There are major, but mostly not significant differences in RR/ PFS in most subgroups, however, not strong enough to safely identify patients with high potential to benefit from the 4-drug combination. Therefore, a multivariate analysis to model a common prognostic and predictive risk score is ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: “CHARTA” supports the superiority of FOLFOXIRI/Bev. A combined prognostic and predictive classification is required to better select those patients with most potential benefit from the 4-drug combination. Clinical trial information: NCT01321957. [Table: see text]
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages