English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 12145/12927 (94%)
Visitors : 907683      Online Users : 944
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.nhri.org.tw/handle/3990099045/12782


    Title: Ramucirumab (RAM) or merestinib (MER) or placebo (PL) plus gemcitabine (GEM) and cisplatin (CIS) as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (BTC): A randomized, double-blind, phase II study
    Authors: Valle, JW;Bai, LY;Orlova, R;Van Cutsem, E;Alfonso, JA;Chen, LT;Obermannova, R;Ettrich, TJ;Chen, JS;Wasan, HS;Denlinger, CS;Vogel, A;He, AR;Bousmans, N;Girvan, AC;Zhang, W;Walgren, RA;Carlesi, R;Oh, DY
    Contributors: National Institute of Cancer Research
    Abstract: Background: We assessed RAM or MER plus standard of care GEM+CIS as first-line treatment for BTC. Methods: Patients (pts) with BTC, ECOG PS 0/1, and measurable disease were randomized 2:1:2:1 to oral MER 80 mg QD, oral PL QD, IV RAM 8 mg/kg days 1 and 8 Q3W or IV PL days 1 and 8 Q3W. Pts also received up to 8 cycles IV GEM 1000 mg/m2 + CIS 25 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 Q3W. RAM, MER, or PL could continue until disease progression. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. PFS and hazard ratios (HRs) were compared using stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression models, respectively. NCT02711553. Results: 309 pts were randomized to RAM (106), MER (102), or pooled PL (101). More pts in the RAM (54.7%) and MER (49.0%) groups had baseline ECOG PS 1 vs PL (38.6%). Efficacy endpoints are in Table. Fewer pts received post-discontinuation systemic therapy in the RAM group (RAM 37.5%, MER 50.0%, PL 52.0%). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were: RAM vs PL: neutropenia (49.0% vs 33.0%), thrombocytopenia (34.6% vs 17.0%), and anemia (26.9% vs 19.0%); MER vs PL: neutropenia (47.1% vs 33.0%), thrombocytopenia (18.6% vs 17.0%), and alanine aminotransferase increased (10.8% vs 5.0%). Conclusions: PFS, OS, and ORR were not improved with the addition of RAM or MER to GEM+CIS. Treatment was well tolerated, with safety profiles consistent with known profiles for RAM, MER, and GEM+CIS. Translational studies are ongoing.
    Date: 2020-02
    Relation: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020 Feb;38(4):Meeting Abstract 477.
    Link to: https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.4_suppl.477
    JIF/Ranking 2023: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=NHRI&SrcApp=NHRI_IR&KeyISSN=0732-183X&DestApp=IC2JCR
    Cited Times(WOS): https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000530922700458
    Appears in Collections:[陳立宗] 會議論文/會議摘要

    Files in This Item:

    There are no files associated with this item.



    All items in NHRI are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    Related Items in TAIR

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback