MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2991029322

Systemic chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis:Long-term results of the New EPOC randomised clinical trial

2019· article· en· W2991029322 sur OpenAlexaff
Juan W. Valle, Derek O’Reilly, Ajith K. Siriwardena

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester) · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Établissements canadiensLMC Diabetes & Endocrinology (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCetuximabColorectal cancerOncologyChemotherapyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialClinical trialMetastasisCancer
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial demonstrated a significant reduction in progression free survival (PFS) for the group allocated to cetuximab (HR=1.48 95% CI 1.04-2.12, p=0.030). The focus of the present analysis was to determine the impact on overall survival (OS). Methods Patients with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13 and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. The trial was open label and randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer (one or more of: ≥ 4 metastases, N2 disease or poor differentiation of primary cancer), and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m intravenously over 2 h and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m intravenously over 5 min, followed by a 46 h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m repeated every 2 weeks (regimen one) or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m intravenously over 2 h and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m twice daily on days 1–14 repeated every 3 weeks (regimen two). Patients who had received adjuvant oxaliplatin could receive irinotecan 180 mg/m intravenously over 30 min with fluorouracil instead of oxaliplatin (regimen three). Cetuximab was given intravenously, 500 mg/m every 2 weeks with regimen one and three or a loading dose of 400 mg/m followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg/m with regimen two. The primary trial endpoint was progression free survival. The objective of this present study was to assess the secondary endpoint of overall survival. The trial completed recruitment on 1 Nov 2012 and these data are now presented at a median follow-up of 67 months. Secondary endpoints also included preoperative cancer response (response after the end of the preoperative treatment period using RECIST), pathological resection status (margin ≥1 cm, <1 cm, or cancer on cut surface), and safety findings during chemotherapy. Since the trial was negative, the quality of life and cost effectiveness analyses were not done. All analyses (except AE and SAE analyses) were performed on the intention-to-treat population including all patients with known KRAS (codons 12, 13, 61) wild-type status who had data available for the analysis being performed. AE and SAE analyses included all randomised patients. This trial is registered, ISRCTN 22944367. Findings Between 26 February 2007 and 12 October 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or no cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out five years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol. The updated PFS analysis demonstrated a hazard ratio of 1.17 (in favour of chemotherapy alone), 95% CI 0.87-1.56, p=0.304 with an observed median progression free survival of 22.2 months (95% CI 18.3 to 26.8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15.5 months (95% CI 13.8 to 18.0) in the chemotherapy with cetuximab group. Median OS was shorter in the chemotherapy with cetuximab group (55 months) compared to the chemotherapy alone group (81 months, HR 1.45 95% CI 1.02-2.05, p=0.036), with an observed median OS of 81.0 months (95% CI 59.6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55.4 months (95% CI 43.5 to 71.5) in the cetuximab group. The detriment in OS was most notable in patients with <4 metastases/well differentiated cancers/N stage<2 (HR 2.35 95%CI 1.37-4.03, p=0.012). There was no statistically significant difference in the secondary outcomes of pre-operative response or pathological resection status between groups. There were a total of five deaths that may have been treatment related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy and cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were Neutrophil count decreased (47/271 patients), Diarrhea (27/271), Skin Rash (23/271), Thromboembolic event (21/271), Lethargy (19/271), Mucositis Oral (17/271), Vomiting (14/271), Peripheral Neuropathy (13/271) and pain (12/271). The most common serious adverse events reported of any grade were Diarrhoea (16/271 patients), thromboembolic event (16/271), vomiting (12/271), fever (9/271), sepsis (7/271) and device related infection (7/271). Interpretation Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival improves the overall survival in some studies on patients with advanced inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant overall survival disadvantage. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,028

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,003
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,002
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,075
Tête enseignante GPT0,332
Écart entre enseignants0,257 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester)Même sujetColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesTravaux en français237 207