2021
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-021-01902-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Safety and efficacy of panitumumab in combination with trifluridine/tipiracil for pre-treated patients with unresectable, metastatic colorectal cancer with wild-type RAS: The phase 1/2 APOLLON study

Abstract: Background We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of combination treatment with panitumumab plus trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who were refractory/intolerant to standard therapies other than anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy. Methods APOLLON was an open-label, multicentre, phase 1/2 trial. In the phase 1 part, 3 + 3 de-escalation design was used to investigate the recomme… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The higher efficacy in patients with RAS wild-type and left-sided tumors also yields the question of whether bevacizumab or an anti-EGFR drug is the best combination option in these subjects. Trifluridine-tipiracil was combined with the anti-EGFR drug panitumumab in patients with wild-type RAS mCRC who were refractory/intolerant to standard therapies other than anti-EGFR therapy, yielding a median PFS and OS of 5.8 months and 14.1 months, respectively [ 23 ]. We will hopefully be able to provide a better answer to this question based on upcoming results from the phase II FIRE-8 trial [ 24 ], which aims to compare bevacizumab and panitumumab as a combination partner for trifluridine-tipiracil as first-line treatment in patients with RAS wild-type tumors, and from the phase II VELO trial [ 25 ], which is investigating a combination of trifluridine-tipiracil and panitumumab versus trifluridine-tipiracil alone as third-line therapy in patients with RAS wild-type tumors who experienced clinical response to EGFR targeting earlier lines of treatment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The higher efficacy in patients with RAS wild-type and left-sided tumors also yields the question of whether bevacizumab or an anti-EGFR drug is the best combination option in these subjects. Trifluridine-tipiracil was combined with the anti-EGFR drug panitumumab in patients with wild-type RAS mCRC who were refractory/intolerant to standard therapies other than anti-EGFR therapy, yielding a median PFS and OS of 5.8 months and 14.1 months, respectively [ 23 ]. We will hopefully be able to provide a better answer to this question based on upcoming results from the phase II FIRE-8 trial [ 24 ], which aims to compare bevacizumab and panitumumab as a combination partner for trifluridine-tipiracil as first-line treatment in patients with RAS wild-type tumors, and from the phase II VELO trial [ 25 ], which is investigating a combination of trifluridine-tipiracil and panitumumab versus trifluridine-tipiracil alone as third-line therapy in patients with RAS wild-type tumors who experienced clinical response to EGFR targeting earlier lines of treatment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In that study, for patients with mCRC, TAS-102 plus bevacizumab as a third-line treatment achieved a median PFS of 4.5 months (95% CI, 1.8-7.1) and median OS of 9.2 months (95% CI, 5.5-12.8) ( 15 ). In addition, in the APOLLON study, the median PFS and OS of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC treated with TAS plus panitumumab were 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.5-6.5) and 14.1 months (95% CI, 12.2-19.3), respectively ( 16 ). The results of these studies are encouraging, and thus, clinicians should further explore TAS-102 combination therapy for mCRC to extend time benefits for patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%