Randomized trial of irinotecan and cetuximab with or without vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (SWOG S1406).
Abstract
3505 Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) with BRAFV600 mutations have poor outcomes with standard of care chemotherapy and rarely respond to the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. In preclinical models, blockade of BRAFV600 by vemurafenib (V) causes feedback upregulation of EGFR, whose signaling activities can be impeded by cetuximab (C) with anti-tumor activity augmented by irinotecan (I). Methods: Pts with BRAFV600 mutated and extended RAS wild-type mCRC were randomized to irinotecan (180 mg/m2 IV every 14 days) and cetuximab (500 mg/m2 IV every 14 days) with or without vemurafenib (960 mg PO twice daily). Eligible pts had ECOG PS ≤1, and had received 1 or 2 prior regimens with no prior anti-EGFR agents. Randomization was stratified for prior irinotecan. Crossover from the control arm (IC) to the experimental arm (VIC) was allowed after documented progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS, investigator assessed), with 90% power to detect a HR of 0.5, with two-sided type 1 error of 5%. Results: 106 pts were enrolled (99 eligible, 49 in the experimental arm) from 12/2014 to 4/2016, with median age 62 years, 59% female, and 39% with prior irinotecan therapy. PFS was improved with the addition of vemurafenib (HR 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 0.66, P < 0.001) with median PFS of 4.4 (95% CI 3.6 – 5.7) mos vs 2.0 (95% CI 1.8 – 2.1) months. Response rate was 16% vs 4% (P = 0.08), with disease control rate of 67% vs 22%. In…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In BRAFV600 colorectal cancer, targeting EGFR in combination with BRAF inhibition has led to an improvement in clinical efficacy.
“Indeed, in BRAFV600 colorectal cancer, targeting EGFR—the RTK thought to be the primary driver of feedback reactivation from preclinical studies—in combination with BRAF inhibition, has led to an improvement in clinical efficacy (34–39).”
From Vertical Pathway Inhibition Overcomes Adaptive Feedback Resistance to KRASG12C Inhibition (2020) · cites this paper as [37]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Encorafenib, Binimetinib, and Cetuximab in <i>BRAF</i> V600E–Mutated Colorectal Cancer
Kopetz, S., Grothey, A., Yaeger, R., Van Cutsem, E., Desai, J., Yoshino, T., Wasan, H., Ciardiello, F., Loupakis, F., Hong, Y. S., et al. (2019) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1908075 · Cited by 1,491 · see citing works
Self-citationCombined BRAF, EGFR, and MEK Inhibition in Patients with <i>BRAF</i> V600E-Mutant Colorectal Cancer
Corcoran, R. B., André, T., Atreya, C. E., Schellens, J. H. M., Yoshino, T., Bendell, J. C., Hollebecque, A., McRee, A. J., Siena, S., Middleton, G., et al. (2018) · Cancer Discovery · doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-17-1226 · Cited by 592 · see citing works
Self-citationVertical Pathway Inhibition Overcomes Adaptive Feedback Resistance to KRASG12C Inhibition
Ryan, M. B., Fece de la Cruz, F., Phat, S., Myers, D. T., Wong, E., Shahzade, H. A., Hong, C. B., & Corcoran, R. B. (2020) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-3523 · Cited by 496 · see citing works
KRASG12C-independent feedback activation of wild-type RAS constrains KRASG12C inhibitor efficacy
Ryan, M. B., Coker, O., Sorokin, A., Fella, K., Barnes, H., Wong, E., Kanikarla, P., Gao, F., Zhang, Y., Zhou, L., et al. (2022) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2022.110993 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Self-citationYaeger, R., Yao, Z., Hyman, D. M., Hechtman, J. F., Vakiani, E., Zhao, H., Su, W., Wang, L., Joelson, A., Cercek, A., et al. (2017) · Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-17-0768 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Yu, I. S., & Cheung, W. Y. (2018) · Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1155/2018/9450754 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Jacobs, S. A., Lee, J. J., George, T. J., Wade, J. L., Stella, P. J., Wang, D., Sama, A. R., Piette, F., Pogue-Geile, K. L., Kim, R. S., et al. (2021) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-20-1831 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Kopetz, S., McDonough, S. L., Lenz, H.-J., Magliocco, A. M., Atreya, C. E., Diaz, L. A., Allegra, C. J., Raghav, K. P. S., Morris, V. K., Wang, S. E., Lieu, C. H., Guthrie, K. A., & Hochster, H. S.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
- Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
- University of Southern California (US)
- Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
- University of Florida (US)
- Kaiser Permanente (US)
- University of Colorado Denver (US)
- Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, CT;
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2017-05-20
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 15_suppl
- Pages
- 3505-3505
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W4235320392
- Cited by
- 58
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 2
- Type
- conference abstract
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
- 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
- metastatic colorectal cancer, BRAF V600 mutation, vemurafenib, cetuximab, irinotecan, EGFR inhibition, BRAF inhibitors, progression-free survival, RAS wild-type, combination chemotherapy, anti-EGFR therapy, response rate, disease control rate, diarrhea
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