结直肠癌靶向治疗进展_培训课件.ppt

Targeted Agents Improve Outcomes in the Salvage Setting Trial/Author Pretreated Population Design PFS, Mos HR OS, Mos HR E3200[1] 5-FU/irinotecan refractory (n = 829) FOLFOX/Bev vs FOLFOX vs Bev 7.3 vs 4.7 vs 2.7 0.61 12.9 vs 10.8 vs 10.2 0.75 EPIC[2] 5-FU/oxaliplatin refractory (n = 1298) Cetux/Iri vs Cetux 4.0 vs 2.6 0.692 10.7 vs 10.0 0.975 181[3] One 5-FU–based regimen, KRAS WT (n = 597) FOLFIRI/Pmab vs FOLFIRI 5.9 vs 3.9 0.73 14.5 vs 12.5 0.85 VELOUR[4] FOLFOX (n = 1226) FOLFIRI/aflibercept vs FOLFIRI 6.9 vs 4.7 0.82 13.5 vs 12.1 0.76 NCIC CO.17[5] CT refractory, KRAS WT (n = 230) Cetux/BSC vs BSC 3.7 vs 1.9 0.40 9.5 vs 4.8 0.55 Amado[6] CT refractory, KRAS WT (n = 243) Pmab/BSC vs BSC 12.3 wks vs 7.3 wks 0.45 8.1 vs 7.6 0.99 1. Giantonio BJ, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25: 1539-1544. 2. Sobrero AF, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26: 2311-2319. 3. Peeters M, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28: 4706-4713. 4. Tabernero J, et al. ECCO-ESMO 2011. Abstract LBA6. 5. Karapetis CS, et al. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1757-1765. 6. Amado RG, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26: 1626-1634. All survival outcome differences significant except OS in EPIC, 181, and Amado 感谢关注 * * * * Bev, bevacizumab; FOLFIRI; fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan; FOLFOX; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin; HR, hazard ratio; IFL, fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan; mCRC, metastatic colorectal cancer; NR, not reported; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; XELOX, capecitabine, oxaliplatin * Cetux, cetuximab; CRC, colorectal cancer; FOLFIRI; fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan; FOLFOX; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; Pmab, panitumumab; WT, wild-type; XELOX, capecitabine, oxaliplatin EFGR targeted agents are not currently approved in the first-line setting. * Bev, bevacizumab; BSC, best supportive care; Cetux, cetuximab; CT, chemotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; KRAS, Kirsten-RAS; OS; overall survival; PFS, progres