Association of progression-free survival, overall survival, and patient-reported outcomes by skin toxicity and KRAS status in patients receiving panitumumab monotherapy

Cancer

Volumn 115, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 1544-1554

  Peeters, Marc ^a   Siena, Salvatore ^b   Van Cutsem, Eric ^c   Sobrero, Alberto ^d   Hendlisz, Alain ^e   Cascinu, Stefano ^f   Kalofonos, Haralabos ^g   Devercelli, Giovanna ^h   Wolf, Michael ^h   Amado, Rafael G ^h  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

^b OSPEDALE NIGUARDA CA GRANDA   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^e JULES BORDET INSTITUTE   (Belgium)

^f Azienda Ospedaliera Umberto I   (Italy)

^g UNIVERSITY OF PATRAS   (Greece)

^h AMGEN INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Colorectal cancer; Health related quality of life; Panitumumab; Skin toxicity

Indexed keywords

FLUOROPYRIMIDINE; IRINOTECAN; OXALIPLATIN; PANITUMUMAB;

ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PALLIATIVE THERAPY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLORECTAL CANCER; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; GENE MUTATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METASTASIS; MONOTHERAPY; MULTICENTER STUDY; ONCOGENE K RAS; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SKIN TOXICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WILD TYPE;

ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; GENES, RAS; HUMANS; MUTATION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECEPTOR, EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR; SKIN DISEASES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 63449142391     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24088     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:74-108.
2. Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Siena S, et al. Open-label, phase 3 clinical trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1658-1664.
3. Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, et al. Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan- refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:337-345.
4. Saltz LB, Meropol NJ, Loehrer PJ Sr, et al. Phase II trial of cetuximab in patients with refractory colorectal cancer that expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1201-1208.
5. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2335-2342.
6. Douillard JY, Cunningham D, Roth AD, et al. Irinotecan combined with fluorouracil compared with fluorouracil alone as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2000;355:1041- 1047.
7. de Gramont A, Figer A, Seymour M, et al. Leucovorin and fluorouracil with or without oxaliplatin as first-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:2938-2947.
8. Andre T, Louvet C, Maindrault-Goebel F, et al. CPT-11 (irinotecan) addition to bimonthly, high-dose leucovorin and bolus and continuous-infusion 5-fluorouracil (FOL- FIRI) for pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer. GERCOR. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1343-1347.
9. Andre T, Bensmaine MA, Louvet C, et al. Multicenter phase II study of bimonthly high-dose leucovorin, fluorour- acil infusion, and oxaliplatin for metastatic colorectal cancer resistant to the same leucovorin and fluorouracil regimen. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:3560-3568.
10. Foon KA, Yang XD, Weiner LM, et al. Preclinical and clinical evaluations of ABX-EGF, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:984-990.
11. Jakobovits A, Amado RG, Yang X, Roskos L, Schwab G. From XenoMouse technology to panitumumab, the first fully human antibody product from transgenic mice. Nat Biotechnol. 2007;25:1134-1143.
12. Van Cutsem E, Siena S, Humblet Y, et al. An open-label, single-arm study assessing safety and efficacy of panitumu- mab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:92-98.
13. Lacouture ME. Mechanisms of cutaneous toxicities to EGFR inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:803-812.
14. Perez-Soler R, Saltz L. Cutaneous adverse effects with HER1/EGFR-targeted agents: is there a silver lining? J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5235-5246.
15. Gullick WJ, Hughes CM, Mellon K, Neal DE, Lemoine NR. Immunohistochemical detection of the epidermal growth factor receptor in paraffin-embedded human tissues. J Pathol. 1991;164:285-289.
16. Nicholson RI, Gee JM, Harper ME. EGFR and cancer prognosis. Eur JCancer. 2001;37(suppl 4):S9-S15.
17. Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Gelderblom H, et al. Cetuxi- mab dose-escalation in mCRC patients with no or slight skin reactions on standard treatment (EVEREST). Ann Oncol. 2007;18S(suppl vii):22. Abstract O-0034.
18. Amado RG, Wolf M, Peeters M, et al. Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with meta- static colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1626-1634.
19. Finlay AY, Khan GK. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)-a simple practical measure for routine clinical use. Clin Exp Dermatol. 1994;19:210-216.
20. Mathias S, Pritchard ML, Colwell HH, Lu J, Wright N. What is the minimal clinically important difference and responsiveness of a patient-reported outcome questionnaire for metastatic colorectal cancer? Ann Oncol. 2006;17(suppl9). Abstract 349P.
21. Cella D, Paul D, Yount S, et al. What are the most important symptom targets when treating advanced cancer? A survey of providers in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Cancer Invest. 2003;21:526-535.
22. Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for 2 health state utility measures: EQ- 5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005;14:1523-1532.
23. Brooks R, Rabin R, de Charro F. The Measurement and Valuation of Health Status Using EQ-5D: A European Perspective. New York, NY: Springer; 2003.
24. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365-376.
25. Fairclough DL. Design and analysis of quality of life studies in clinical trials. Interdisciplinary statistics. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2002.
26. Fielding S, Fayers PM, Loge JH, Jordhoy MS, Kaasa S. Methods for handling missing data in palliative care research. Palliat Med. 2006;20:791-798.
27. Siena S, Peeters M, Van Cutsem E, et al. Association of progression-free survival with patient-reported outcomes and survival: results from a randomised phase 3 trial of panitumumab. Br JCancer. 2007;97:1469-1474.
28. Khambata-Ford S, Garrett CR, Meropol NJ, et al. Expression of epiregulin and amphiregulin and K-ras mutation status predict disease control in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3230-3237.
29. Sartore-Bianchi A, Moroni M, Veronese S, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor gene copy number and clinical outcome of metastatic colorectal cancer treated with panitumu-mab. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3238-3245.