Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Versus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Therapy for RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase III ERMES Study

Carmine Pinto,Armando Orlandi,Nicola Normanno,Evaristo Maiello,Maria A. Calegari,Lorenzo Antonuzzo,Roberto Bordonaro,Maria G. Zampino,Sara Pini,Francesca Bergamo,Giuseppe Tonini,Antonio Avallone,Tiziana P. Latiano,Gerardo Rosati,Alessio Aligi Cogoni,Alberto Ballestrero,Alberto Zaniboni,Mario Roselli,Stefano Tamberi,Carlo Barone
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.23.01021
IF: 45.3
2024-01-07
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:PURPOSE The intensity of anti-EGFR–based first-line therapy for RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), once disease control is achieved, is controversial. A de-escalation strategy with anti-EGFR monotherapy represents a potential option to maintain efficacy while reducing cytotoxicity. METHODS In this multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, patients with untreated RAS/BRAF wt mCRC were randomly assigned to receive either fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan/cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) until disease progression (arm A) or FOLFIRI/Cet for eight cycles followed by Cet alone (arm B). The coprimary end points were a noninferior progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified per-protocol (mPP) population (>eight cycles) and a lower incidence of grade (G) 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for arm B compared with arm A. RESULTS Overall, 606 patients were randomly assigned, with 300 assigned to arm A and 306 to arm B. The median follow-up was 22.3 months. In the mPP population, 291 events occurred with a PFS of 10 versus 12.2 months for arms B and A, respectively ( P of noninferiority = .43). In the intention-to-treatment (ITT, ≥one cycle) population, 503 events occurred with a PFS of 9 versus 10.7 months ( P = .39). The overall survival was 35.7 versus 30.7 months ( P = .119) and 31.0 versus 25.2 months ( P = .32) in the mPP and ITT population, respectively. Arm B had lower G3-4 AEs during the maintenance period than arm A (20.2% v 35.1%). CONCLUSION The ERMES study did not demonstrate noninferiority of maintenance with Cet alone. Despite a more favorable safety profile, maintenance with single-agent Cet after induction with FOLFIRI/Cet cannot be recommended for all patients but could represent an option in selected cases.
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?