Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell'Italia Meridionale - PubMed
- ️Sat Jan 01 2005
Clinical Trial
. 2005 Aug 1;23(22):4866-75.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.113. Epub 2005 Jun 6.
Vittorio Gebbia, Giancarlo Paoletti, Francesco Giuliani, Michele Caruso, Nicola Gebbia, Giacomo Cartenì, Biagio Agostara, Giuseppe Pezzella, Luigi Manzione, Nicola Borsellino, Andrea Misino, Sante Romito, Ernesto Durini, Stefano Cordio, Marisa Di Seri, Massimo Lopez, Evaristo Maiello, Severino Montemurro, Antonio Cramarossa, Vito Lorusso, Maurizio Di Bisceglie, Maurizio Chiarenza, Maria Rosaria Valerio, Teresa Guida, Vita Leonardi, Salvatore Pisconti, Gerardo Rosati, Francesco Carrozza, Giuseppe Nettis, Matteo Valdesi, Gianfranco Filippelli, Santo Fortunato, Sergio Mancarella, Cosimo Brunetti; Gruppo Oncologico Dell'Italia Meridionale
Affiliations
- PMID: 15939922
- DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.113
Clinical Trial
Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell'Italia Meridionale
Giuseppe Colucci et al. J Clin Oncol. 2005.
Abstract
Purpose: We performed this phase III study to compare the irinotecan, leucovorin (LV), and fluorouracil (FU) regimen (FOLFIRI) versus the oxaliplatin, LV, and FU regimen (FOLFOX4) in previously untreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer.
Patients and methods: A total of 360 chemotherapy-naive patients were randomly assigned to receive, every 2 weeks, either arm A (FOLFIRI: irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) on day 1 with LV 100 mg/m(2) administered as a 2-hour infusion before FU 400 mg/m(2) administered as an intravenous bolus injection, and FU 600 mg/m(2) as a 22-hour infusion immediately after FU bolus injection on days 1 and 2 [LV5FU2]) or arm B (FOLFOX4: oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 with LV5FU2 regimen).
Results: One hundred sixty-four and 172 patients were assessable in arm A and B, respectively. Overall response rates (ORR) were 31% in arm A (95% CI, 24.6% to 38.3%) and 34% in arm B (95% CI, 27.2% to 41.5%; P = .60). In both arms A and B, median time to progression (TTP; 7 v 7 months, respectively), duration of response (9 v 10 months, respectively), and overall survival (OS; 14 v 15 months, respectively) were similar, without any statistically significant difference. Toxicity was mild in both groups: alopecia and gastrointestinal disturbances were the most common toxicities in arm A; thrombocytopenia and neurosensorial were the most common toxicities in arm B. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were uncommon in both arms, and no statistical significant difference was observed.
Conclusion: There is no difference in ORR, TTP, and OS for patients treated with the FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4 regimen. Both therapies seemed effective as first-line treatment in these patients. The difference between these two combination therapies is mainly in the toxicity profile.
Comment in
-
Blanke CD. Blanke CD. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Aug 1;23(22):4811-4. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.914. Epub 2005 Jun 6. J Clin Oncol. 2005. PMID: 15939928 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Maiello E, Giuliani F, Gebbia V, Di Renzo N, Pezzella G, Romito S, Mallamaci R, Lopez M, Colucci G; Gruppo Oncologico dell'Italia Meridionale. Maiello E, et al. Ann Oncol. 2006 Jun;17 Suppl 7:vii55-9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdl952. Ann Oncol. 2006. PMID: 16760295 Clinical Trial.
-
Kemeny N, Garay CA, Gurtler J, Hochster H, Kennedy P, Benson A, Brandt DS, Polikoff J, Wertheim M, Shumaker G, Hallman D, Burger B, Gupta S. Kemeny N, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Dec 1;22(23):4753-61. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.03.119. J Clin Oncol. 2004. PMID: 15570076 Clinical Trial.
-
Tournigand C, André T, Achille E, Lledo G, Flesh M, Mery-Mignard D, Quinaux E, Couteau C, Buyse M, Ganem G, Landi B, Colin P, Louvet C, de Gramont A. Tournigand C, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jan 15;22(2):229-37. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.113. Epub 2003 Dec 2. J Clin Oncol. 2004. PMID: 14657227 Clinical Trial.
-
Hind D, Tappenden P, Tumur I, Eggington S, Sutcliffe P, Ryan A. Hind D, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2008 May;12(15):iii-ix, xi-162. doi: 10.3310/hta12150. Health Technol Assess. 2008. PMID: 18462574 Review.
-
The evolving role of oxaliplatin in the management of colorectal cancer.
de Gramont A, Schmoll HJ, Cervantes A, Tournigand C. de Gramont A, et al. Colorectal Dis. 2003 Nov;5 Suppl 3:10-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1463-1318.5.s3.3.x. Colorectal Dis. 2003. PMID: 23573556 Review.
Cited by
-
Role of targeted therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.
Ohhara Y, Fukuda N, Takeuchi S, Honma R, Shimizu Y, Kinoshita I, Dosaka-Akita H. Ohhara Y, et al. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016 Sep 15;8(9):642-55. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v8.i9.642. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016. PMID: 27672422 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Yousef M, Yousef A, Chowdhury S, Fanaeian MM, Knafl M, Peterson J, Zeineddine M, Alfaro K, Zeineddine F, Goldstein D, Hornstein N, Dasari A, Huey R, Johnson B, Higbie V, Bent A, Kee B, Lee M, Morelli MP, Morris VK, Halperin D, Overman MJ, Parseghian C, Vilar E, Wolff R, Raghav KP, White MG, Uppal A, Sun R, Wang W, Kopetz S, Willis J, Shen JP. Yousef M, et al. JAMA Oncol. 2024 Nov 1;10(11):1519-1529. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.3666. JAMA Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39264607
-
Martin RC 2nd, Scoggins CR, Tomalty D, Schreeder M, Metzger T, Tatum C, Sharma V. Martin RC 2nd, et al. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Aug;16(8):1531-8. doi: 10.1007/s11605-012-1892-8. Epub 2012 Apr 24. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012. PMID: 22528576 Clinical Trial.
-
Progress in metastatic colorectal cancer: growing role of cetuximab to optimize clinical outcome.
García-Foncillas J, Díaz-Rubio E. García-Foncillas J, et al. Clin Transl Oncol. 2010 Aug;12(8):533-42. doi: 10.1007/s12094-010-0551-3. Clin Transl Oncol. 2010. PMID: 20709651 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Supplementary concepts
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical