Survival benefit with regorafenib and/or trifluridine/tipiracil sequencing to rechallenge with anti-EGFR-based third-line regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer: A multicenter retrospective real-world subgroups comparison.
Authors: Carlo Signorelli, Mario Giovanni Chilelli, Michele Basso, Maria Alessandra Calegari, Annunziato Anghelone, Jessica Lucchetti, Alessandro Minelli, Lorenzo Angotti, Ina Valeria Zurlo, Marta Schirripa, Cristina Morelli, Emanuela Dell'Aquila, Donatello Gemma, Domenico Cristiano Corsi, Giulia Arrivi, Federica Zoratto, Maria Grazia Morandi, Fiorenza Santamaria, Rosa Saltarelli, Enzo Maria Ruggeri
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

e15553 Background: Rechallenge with anti-EGFR drugs has recently proven therapeutic activity in a subset of RAS wild type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who had previously benefited from cetuximab- or panitumumab-based first-line regimen. Regorafenib (R) and Trifluridine/tipiracil (T) have been found to improve survival in patients with refractory mCRC. This real-life subgroup survival analysis focused on treatment with R and T, sequential or not, in patients who had received prior third-line anti-EGFR therapy. Methods: Clinical data of patients diagnosed with mCRC who received R and/or T between July 2012 and March 2022, were retrospectively collected from 13 Italian cancer institutes. The objective of this subgroup analysis was to compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients who received late-line R and/or T according to prior third-line anti-EGFR-based treatment. Results: The entire study enrolled 866 patients. 146 (16.8%) of them received the T/R sequence (T/R), 116 (13.3%) the reverse sequence (R/T), 325 (37.5%) T, and 279 (32.5%) R. For the purpose of this subgroup analysisi we identified 338 RAS wt patients (39%) who were eligible. Of these, 290/338 patients (85.8%) did not receive the previous third-line anti-EGFR therapy, while 48 patients (14.2%) did it (12 T/R, 10 R/T, 13 T, 13 R). When comparing T/R to R/T in patients who did not previously received third-line anti-EGFR drug rechallenge, we observed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS. In detail, the median PFS benefit was 67,5% when treating patients with T/R sequence vs. the reverse sequence (11,4 vs. 3,7 months, respectively, ∆ = 7,7 months; p = &lt; 0,0001; HR = 0,17; 95% CI = 0,09-0,32). In patients who received T/R or R/T following rechallenge with anti-EGFR drug, we also observed a comparable, albeit smaller and non-statistically significant, improvement in PFS (8.1 vs. 7.8 months, respectively; p = 0.22; HR 0,51; 95% CI = 0,17-1,50). There were no statistically significant differences in OS between these groups. Anti-EGFR rechallenge data analysis showed that the non-sequential administration of R and T had no statistically significant impact on survival outcomes. Conclusions: With the limit of the sample size, our retrospective subgroup analysis failed to validate the promising beneficial effects of anti-EGFR rechallenge prior to R and/or T treatment. A statistically significant longer PFS was only observed in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer receiving T/R sequence without prior cetuxumab- or panitumumab-based regimens.