1 / 10

ECCO ESMO 2011 GI Cancer Updates TAS102 and BSC vs. Placebo and BSC

ECCO ESMO 2011 GI Cancer Updates TAS102 and BSC vs. Placebo and BSC. Reviewer: Dr. Scott Berry Date posted: October 2011.

apollo
Download Presentation

ECCO ESMO 2011 GI Cancer Updates TAS102 and BSC vs. Placebo and BSC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ECCO ESMO 2011 GI Cancer UpdatesTAS102 and BSC vs. Placebo and BSC Reviewer: Dr. Scott Berry Date posted: October 2011

  2. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase II study of TAS-102 plus best supportive care (BSC) versus Placebo plus BSC in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (10040030 study)Presenter: Y. Kuboki (The Cancer Institute Hospital of JFCR, Tokyo, Japan)

  3. Background • TAS-102 is a new oral anticancer agent that combines trifluorothymidine and thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor at a molar ratio of 1:0.5 • trifluorothymidine inhibits thymidylate synthase and DNA synthesis • thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor prevents the degradation of trifluorothymidine

  4. TAS-102+BSC vs P+BSC N= 169 Primary Outcome: Overall Survival n=112 TAS-102+BSC 70mg/m2b.i.d q4wks (d 1-5, 8-12) R 2:1 • Patient Population • 2 or more prior regimens • Refractory/Intolerant of: • fluoropyrimidine • irinotecan • oxaliplatin • ECOG PS 0-2 n=57 Placebo + BSC

  5. Prior Chemotherapy

  6. RESULTS

  7. Major Adverse Events (Grade 3/4) There were no treatment related deaths

  8. Post-Treatment

  9. STUDY COMMENTARY • Interesting subset analysis based on the KRAS status of the patients’ tumours: • KRAS WT OS HR = 0.70 • KRAS MUT OS HR = 0.44 • However: • ? Biologic rationale • Needs to be validated in future trials • Given that this study was done solely in Japan – would be good to have clinical data from a broader patient population

  10. BOTTOM LINE FOR MEDICAL ONCOLOGISTS • We are seeing more treatment refractory patients like the patients in this trial that are fit for further therapy – especially patients with KRAS Mutant tumours • This randomized phase II trial of this novel agent demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in OS in this group of patients • However a larger, confirmatory phase III trial is needed before it could be considered a standard of care

More Related