We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL, PHASE II
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
The MITO CERV-2 trial: A randomized phase II study of cetuximab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel, in advanced or recurrent cervical cancer.
Gynecologic Oncology 2019 June
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer cells often express Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR). Cetuximab (CET), an anti-EGFR antibody, can be safely combined with carboplatin (C) and paclitaxel (P), a standard treatment for advanced/recurrent cervical cancer (ARCC) patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: ARCC patients, ECOG PS ≤ 1, were randomized to CP for 6 cycles with or without CET (400 mg/m2 one week before starting CP, then 250 mg/m2 weekly) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Event-free survival (EFS) was the primary endpoint. With a 4.5 months expected median EFS and a 6.4 months predicted EFS (HR 0.70), 0.20 one-tailed α and 80% power, 89 events were required for the final intent-to-treat analysis.
RESULTS: 108 patients were assigned to CP (n = 53) or CP-CET (n = 55). Median age was 50, 69% were PS0, 76% had recurrent disease, 91% had distant metastasis and 57% had received previous chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 23 months, 102 patients had an event, 97 progressed and 61 died. Median EFS was 4.7 and 6.0 months (one-tail P = 0.43), median PFS was 5.2 and 7.6 months (one-tail P = 0.20) and median OS was 17.7 and 17 months (one-tail P = 0.27), with CP and CP-CET, respectively. There was no difference in the occurrence of severe adverse events, except for skin toxicity. Biomarker analysis, in a small subgroup of patients, suggests that PIK3CA mutation might be predictive of CET resistance.
CONCLUSION: CP-CET was not more active than CP alone in unselected ARCC patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: ARCC patients, ECOG PS ≤ 1, were randomized to CP for 6 cycles with or without CET (400 mg/m2 one week before starting CP, then 250 mg/m2 weekly) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Event-free survival (EFS) was the primary endpoint. With a 4.5 months expected median EFS and a 6.4 months predicted EFS (HR 0.70), 0.20 one-tailed α and 80% power, 89 events were required for the final intent-to-treat analysis.
RESULTS: 108 patients were assigned to CP (n = 53) or CP-CET (n = 55). Median age was 50, 69% were PS0, 76% had recurrent disease, 91% had distant metastasis and 57% had received previous chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 23 months, 102 patients had an event, 97 progressed and 61 died. Median EFS was 4.7 and 6.0 months (one-tail P = 0.43), median PFS was 5.2 and 7.6 months (one-tail P = 0.20) and median OS was 17.7 and 17 months (one-tail P = 0.27), with CP and CP-CET, respectively. There was no difference in the occurrence of severe adverse events, except for skin toxicity. Biomarker analysis, in a small subgroup of patients, suggests that PIK3CA mutation might be predictive of CET resistance.
CONCLUSION: CP-CET was not more active than CP alone in unselected ARCC patients.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app