In:
Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 35, No. 15_suppl ( 2017-05-20), p. 3510-3510
Abstract:
3510 Background: FIRE-3 compared 1 st -line therapy with FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab in 592 KRAS exon 2 wt mCRC patients. CMS is grouping CRCs according to their gene-signature in 4 different types. Relevance of CMS for the treatment of mCRC remains unclear. Methods: Patients were grouped according to tumor CRC-CMSs. Using ALMAC’s Xcel tissue array, gene signatures of FIRE-3 tumor samples were analyzed. Survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimation and log-rank tests. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated according to the Cox proportional hazard method. Results: CMS classification could be determined in 385 specimens available from the ITT population (n = 592). In this KRAS exon 2 wt population (n = 385), frequencies were: CMS1 (10.4%), CMS2 (36.6%), CMS3 (11.7%), CMS4 (29.1%), non-consensus (12.2%). In RAS wt (n = 315), frequencies were: CMS1 (11.1%), CMS2 (38.1%), CMS3 (9.5%), CMS4 (29.5%), non-consensus (11.7%). Independent of the treatment, CMS was a strong prognosticator for ORR (p = 0.023), PFS (p 〈 0.001) and OS (p 〈 0.001). For data on CMS and treatment efficacy in the RAS wt population see the following table. Conclusions: CMS classification is prognostic for mCRC. The survival benefit in RAS wt previously observed for FOLFIRI cetuximab vs. FOLFIRI bevacizumab is not significantly different across CMS groups, although there are trends when comparing OS HR between categories with CMS4 showing the best HR. [Table: see text]
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0732-183X
,
1527-7755
DOI:
10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.3510
Language:
English
Publisher:
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Publication Date:
2017
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2005181-5
Permalink