Randomized phase 3 study of panitumumab (pmab) vs cetuximab (cmab) in chemorefractory wild-type (WT) KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): outcomes by hypomagnesemia (hypomag) in ASPECCT.

Authors

null

Marc Peeters

Antwerp University Hospital and University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium

Marc Peeters , Timothy Jay Price , Tae Won Kim , Jin Li , Stefano Cascinu , Paul Ruff , Attili Venkatasatya Suresh , Anne L. Thomas , Sergei Tjulandin , Kathy Zhang , Roger Sidhu , Swaminathan Murugappan

Organizations

Antwerp University Hospital and University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia, Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China, Clinica di Oncologia Medica, Università Politecnica delle Marche, AO Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad, India, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, United Kingdom, N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Moscow, Russia, Global Biostatistical Science, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: ASPECCT met its primary endpoint of non-inferiority of overall survival (OS) of pmab vs cmab. We evaluate outcomes by hypomag, an on-treatment, anti-EGFR related adverse event that develops due to the inhibition of EGFR function. Conflicting reports have suggested hypomag is associated with survival. Methods: Patients (pts) with previously treated WT KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of OS. Progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were secondary endpoints. Pts were categorized ± any grade hypomag during the study and data from the primary analysis was evaluated by treatment arm. Analysis of Mg supplementation during hypomag was not conducted. Results: 999 pts were randomized and treated: 499 pmab, 500 cmab. Any grade hypomag was 28.8% and grade ≥3 was 7.3% in the pmab arm vs 18.9% and 2.6% in the cmab arm, respectively. Median time to first hypomag onset was 82 days in the pmab arm and 57 days in the cmab arm. In the pmab arm, 1.0% of pts discontinued treatment and 5% of pts had dose modifications due to hypomag vs <0.5% and 3% in the cmab arm, respectively. Results are shown (Table). Conclusions: In ASPECCT, rates of hypomag were higher in the pmab vs the cmab arm. Pts who developed any grade hypomag with pmab or cmab had higher ORR, PFS, and OS compared with those pts who did not. Clinical trial information: NCT01001377

Pmab ArmHypomag – Yes
(n = 143)
Hypomag – No
(n = 353)
HR (95% CI)
Median OS - mos (95% CI)13.8 (11.6 – 15.5)8.7 (8.1 – 9.8)0.61 (0.48 – 0.77)
Median PFS - mos (95% CI)6.7 (5.2 – 6.8)3.0 (2.8 – 3.1)0.46 (0.37 – 0.56)
ORRa - % (95% CI)34.5 (26.7 – 42.9)16.9 (13.1 – 21.2)
Odds Ratio
(95% CI)
2.71 (1.67 – 4.34)
Median duration of treatment
- wks (range)
28.0 (6.3 – 88.0)11.7 (2.0 – 130.0)
Cmab ArmHypomag – Yes
(n = 95)
Hypomag – No
(n = 408)
HR(95% CI)
Median OS - mos (95% CI)12.5 (10.0 – 14.8)9.4 (8.3 – 10.5)0.70 (0.55 – 0.91)
Median PFS - mos (95% CI)6.6 (5.0 – 6.8)3.2 (3.0 – 4.0)0.53 (0.42 – 0.68)
ORRa - % (95% CI)28.0 (19.1 – 38.2)17.9 (14.2 – 22.0)
Odds Ratio
(95% CI)
1.81 (1.02 – 3.15)
Median duration of treatment
- wks (range)
27.0 (4.0 – 94.3)14.0 (1.0 – 69.9)

aEvaluable pts per modified RECIST.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2015 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Gastrointestinal (Colorectal) Cancer

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Colorectal and Anal

Sub Track

Colorectal Cancer

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT01001377

Citation

J Clin Oncol 33, 2015 (suppl; abstr 3587)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.3587

Abstract #

3587

Poster Bd #

80

Abstract Disclosures