Back to Authors

Siena, Salvatore

0000-0002-2681-2846

Mayo Clinic

University of Milan

Citations 22

Mutational analysis of biomarker samples from the CORRECT study: Correlating mutation status with clinical response to regorafenib.
Jeffers, Michael , Sobrero, Alberto , Humblet, Yves, Mineur, Laurent , Barone, Carlo , Adenis, Antoine , Lenz, Heinz‐Josef , Goldberg, Richard M. , Cihon, Frank, Wagner, Andrea, Laurent, Dirk, Cutsem, Eric Van , Siena, Salvatore , Falcone, Alfredo , Ychou, Marc , Bouché, Olivier , Tabernero, Josep , Yoshino, Takayuki , Sargent, Daniel J. , Wagner, Andrea, Grothey, Axel

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 24, 2017 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 381-381

10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.381 Get It

381 Background: In the CORRECT Ph3 trial, regorafenib demonstrated significant improvement in OS and PFS vs. placebo in subjects with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had progressed on standard therapies. An exploratory biomarker substudy was conducted on samples collected from subjects enrolled in CORRECT. Methods: DNA was isolated from archival tumor tissue and fresh baseline plasma samples that were available from 239 (31%) and 503 (66%) subjects enrolled in CORRECT, respectively. Mutations in KRAS, PIK3CA and BRAF were evaluated via BEAMing technology. Results: Mutations were readily detected in DNA isolated from both tumor and plasma samples: KRAS: 59/69%; PIK3CA: 12/17% and BRAF: 1.5/3.4%. The frequency of KRAS mutation detected in tumor samples via BEAMing (59%) was identical to the frequency determined from pre-existing “historical” KRAS mutation data that was available from 96% of the subjects enrolled in the study. Concordance among the mutations detected via BEAMing in tumor vs. plasma was 76% (KRAS), 88% (PIK3CA), and 97% (BRAF). A subset of CRC which was found to be KRAS-wildtype in DNA from archival tumor, but KRAS-mutant in DNA from fresh plasma was identified and may represent subjects whose KRAS mutational status had changed during prior therapy. Correlative subgroup analyses demonstrated that regorafenib mediated a trend for clinical benefit vs. placebo in both KRAS wildtype and mutant subgroups identified by plasma BEAMing (OS: KRAS WT, HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.41–1.08; KRAS mutant, HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.61–1.09; interaction p=0.561). Similar results were noted for PIK3CA WT/mutant subgroups (OS: WT, HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57–0.99; mutant, HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.47–1.50; interaction p=0.723). BRAF was not analysed due to the small number of BRAF-mutant samples. Conclusions: The mutational analysis of DNA isolated from fresh plasma is feasible and robust using the BEAMing platform and may better represent the mutational status of the tumor(s) that a mCRC patient harbors at the time of enrollment than does the mutational analysis of archival primary tumor tissue. Regorafenib was associated with clinical benefit (vs. placebo) in all mutational subgroups evaluated. Clinical trial information: NCT01103323.
Results of a phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial (CORRECT) of regorafenib plus best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo plus BSC in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who have progressed after sta
Grothey, Axel, Sobrero, Alberto , Lenz, Heinz‐Josef , Cihon, Frank, Wagner, Andrea, Siena, Salvatore , Falcone, Alfredo , Ychou, Marc , Yoshino, Takayuki , Wagner, Andrea, Cutsem, Eric Van

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 23, 2017 | Volume: 30 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: LBA385-LBA385

10.1200/jco.2012.30.4_suppl.lba385 Get It

LBA385 Background: Regorafenib (BAY 73-4506) is an oral multikinase inhibitor of a broad range of angiogenic, oncogenic, and stromal kinases. The phase III CORRECT trial was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of regorafenib in pts with mCRC who had progressed after all approved standard therapies. Methods: Enrollment criteria included documented mCRC and progression during or ≤3 months after last standard therapy. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive regorafenib (160 mg od po, 3 weeks on/1 week off) plus BSC, or placebo (PL) plus BSC. Pts continued on treatment until progression, death, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), safety, and quality of life. Results: From May 2010 to March 2011, 760 pts were randomized (regorafenib: 505; PL: 255). Baseline characteristics were balanced between two arms. Preliminary results are available from a pre-planned formal interim analysis. The estimated hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.773 (95% CI: 0.635, 0.941; 1-sided p=0.0051). Median OS was 6.4 mos (95% CI: 5.9, 7.3) for regorafenib and 5.0 mos (95% CI: 4.4, 5.8) for PL. The estimated HR for PFS was 0.493 (95% CI: 0.418, 0.581; 1-sided p < 0.000001). Median PFS was 1.9 mos (95% CI: 1.88, 2.17) for regorafenib and 1.7 mos (95% CI: 1.68, 1.74) for PL. ORR was 1.6% for regorafenib and 0.4% for PL. DCR was 44% for regorafenib and 15% for PL (p < 0.000001). Since the prespecified OS efficacy boundary was crossed (nominal α: 0.0093), the Data Monitoring Committee recommended to unblind the study and pts on PL were allowed to cross over to regorafenib. The most frequent grade 3+ AEs in the regorafenib arm were hand-foot skin reaction (17%), fatigue (15%), diarrhea (8%), hyperbilirubinemia (8%), and hypertension (7%). Updated results will be presented. Conclusions: Statistically significant benefit in OS and PFS was observed for regorafenib over PL in pts with mCRC who have failed all approved standard therapies. No new or unexpected safety signal was found.