Cited by 960Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations

Addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: Results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial

Open access
Maughan, Timothy S, Adams, Richard A, Smith, Christopher G, Meade, Angela M, Seymour, Matthew T, Wilson, Richard H, Idziaszczyk, Shelley, Harris, Rebecca +13 more·2011·The Lancet

Abstract

Background In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival.Methods In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448.Findings 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3-29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4-30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87-1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0-12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1-13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82-1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5-27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5-24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5-31·7).Interpretation This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended.Funding Cancer Research UK, Cancer Research Wales, UK Medical Research Council, Merck KGgA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60613-2

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Maughan, T. S., Adams, R. A., Smith, C. G., Meade, A. M., Seymour, M. T., Wilson, R. H., Idziaszczyk, S., Harris, R., Fisher, D., Kenny, S. L., Kay, E., Mitchell, J. K., Madi, A., Jasani, B., James, M. D., Bridgewater, J., Kennedy, M. J., Claes, B., Lambrechts, D., Kaplan, R., & Cheadle, J. P.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL (GB)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Cancer Trials Ireland (IE)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Kaplan, Richard
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-06
Volume
377
Issue
9783
Pages
2103-2114
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2145070131
Cited by
960
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 60 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 86 · 2015: 97 · 2014: 126 · 2013: 112 · 2012: 96
FWCI
57.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Sanofi
  • Cancer Research Wales
  • Merck KGaA
  • Cancer Research UK
  • University College London
  • Cardiff University
  • Heart Research Institute
  • Vlaamse regering
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Keywords
cetuximab, oxaliplatin, fluoropyrimidine, first-line chemotherapy, advanced colorectal cancer, anti-EGFR therapy, overall survival, progression-free survival, capecitabine, leucovorin, KRAS mutation, NRAS, BRAF, EGFR status
MeSH terms
Cetuximab, Capecitabine, Oxaliplatin, Aged, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Deoxycytidine, Female, Fluorouracil, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mutation, Organoplatinum Compounds, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Colorectal Neoplasms, Survival Rate, Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras), ras Proteins, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized, ErbB Receptors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review