1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Despite recent metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) therapeutic innovations a comprehensive synthesis of patient outcome and risk-benefit assessment of phase 1/2 trials is missing. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess efficacy, safety, and trends over time for phase 1 and 2 mCRC trials by examining clinical benefit rate (CBR), overall response rate (ORR), grade 3 or higher adverse events (AE), and discontinuation due to AE. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines were followed. We searched PubMed and Embase for publications of phase 1/2 trials between 2010–2021. Trials reporting on new therapies for treatment-refractory mCRC were included. Results: The search strategy yielded 4175 unique reports, of which 258 publications were eligible. These publications report data of 277 unique treatment arms. Overall ORR was 6 %, CBR was 27 % in phase 1 % and 36 % in phase 2 trials. CBR increased from 23 % in 2010–2012 to 42 % in 2019–2021. Compared to 2010–2012, trials in 2019–2021 more often tested immunomodulators (4 % vs 23 %), included molecularly preselected populations (4 % vs 38 %) and younger patients (median age<60 44 % vs 66 %). Grade 3 + AE occurred in 35 % of patients, most frequently in trials investigating targeted treatments. Conclusions: Treatment efficacy in phase 1/2 trials is modest but improved from 2010 to 2021. This improvement is accompanied by a shift towards testing in a younger, fitter, and more strictly molecularly preselected population, as well as an increased focus on targeted and immunotherapies.

Original languageEnglish
Article number115059
JournalEuropean Journal of Cancer
Volume212
Early online date30 Sept 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2024

Keywords

  • Clinical trials, Phase I
  • Clinical trials, Phase II
  • Colorectal neoplasms
  • Drug development
  • Drug therapy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Neoplasm metastasis

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy and safety in early-phase clinical trials for refractory colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this