Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cetuximab-based therapy versus non-cetuximab therapy for advanced cancer: a meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the efficacy and safety of cetuximab-based therapy versus non-cetuximab therapy for advanced cancer.

Methods

A total of 7,954 patients from 17 randomized controlled trials are identified, with 3,965 patients in the cetuximab group and 3,989 patients in the non-cetuximab group. The outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade 3/4 advent events.

Results

There was a significant improvement of PFS (HR 0.83, 95%CI 0.78–0.88), OS (HR 0.89, 0.84–0.95), and ORR in the cetuximab group (OR 1.39, 1.22–1.58). In subgroup analysis, in colorectal cancer, there was a significant improvement of PFS (0.72, 0.66–0.78), OS (0.90, 0.81–1.00), and ORR in the cetuximab group (1.36, 1.15–1.60). In head and neck carcinoma, there was a significant improvement of PFS (0.63, 0.54–0.73), OS (0.78, 0.67–0.91), and ORR in the cetuximab group (1.57, 1.15–2.16). In non-small-cell lung cancer, there was a significant improvement of OS (0.86, 0.76–0.96) in the cetuximab group, and no difference on PFS (0.82, 0.64–1.07) and ORR (1.56, 0.85–2.88). In pancreatic cancer, there was no difference on PFS (1.11, 0.97–1.28), OS (1.07, 0.93–1.25), and ORR (0.94, 0.66–1.33). There were higher incidences of grade 3–4 toxicity (OR 1.84), skin-related toxicity (OR 31.80), acneiform rash (OR 30.14), and hypomagnesemia (OR 6.72) in the cetuximab group.

Conclusions

Cetuximab-based therapy improved PFS and OS, and better ORR versus non-cetuximab therapy. The severe adverse events should be predictable and manageable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao YP, Xu JQ, Murray T, Thun MJ (2008) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 58:71–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. (2000) Palliative chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer. Colorectal meta-analysis collaboration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2):CD001545

  3. Bunn PA (2002) Chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: who, what, when, why? J Clin Oncol 20:23S–33S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Harari PM, Ritter MA, Petereit DG, Mehta MP (2003) Chemoradiation for upper aerodigestive tract cancer: balancing evidence from clinical trials with individual patient recommendations. Curr Probl Cancer 28:7–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hirsch FR, Varella-Garcia M, Bunn PA Jr et al (2003) Epidermal growth factor receptor in non-small-cell lung carcinomas: correlation between gene copy number and protein expression and impact on prognosis. J Clin Oncol 21:3798–3807

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Adenis A, Aranda Aguilar E, Robin YM et al (2005) Expression of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR or HER1) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in a large scale metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) trial. J Clin Oncol 23:278s (suppl; abstr 3630)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fjallskog MLH, Lejonklou MH, Oberg KE et al (2003) Expression of molecular targets for tyrosine kinase receptor antagonists in malignant endocrine pancreatic tumors. Clin Cancer Res 9:1469–1473

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mendelsohn J, Baselga J (2003) Status of epidermal growth factor receptor antagonists in the biology and treatment of cancer. J Clin Oncol 21:2787–2799

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dassonville O, Formento JL, Francoual M et al (1993) Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor and survival in upper aerodigestive tract cancer. J Clin Oncol 11:1873–1878

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Liang K, Ang KK, Milas L, Hunter N, Fan Z (2003) The epidermal growth factor receptor mediates radioresistance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57:246–254

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bonner JA, Maihle NJ, Folven BR, Christianson TJ, Spain K (1994) The interaction of epidermal growth factor and radiation in human head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cell lines with vastly different radiosensitivities. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 29:243–247

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Baselga J (2001) The EGFR as a target for anticancer therapy—focus on cetuximab. Eur J Cancer 37(suppl 4):S16–S22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim ES, Khuri FR, Herbst RS (2001) Epidermal growth factor receptor biology (IMC-C225). Curr Opin Oncol 13:506–513

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bruns CJ, Harbison MT, Davis DW et al (2000) Epidermal growth factor receptor blockade with C225 plus GEM results in regression of human pancreatic carcinoma growing orthotopically in nude mice by antiangiogenic mechanisms. Clin Cancer Res 6:1936–1948

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Saltz LB, Meropol NJ, Loehrer PJ Sr, Needle MN, Kopit J, Mayer RJ (2004) Phase II trial of cetuximab in patients with refractory colorectal cancer that expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor. J Clin Oncol 22:1201–1208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, Khayat D, Bleiberg H, Santoro A et al (2004) Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351:337–345

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Parmar MKB, Torri V, Stewart L (1998) Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Statist Med 17:2815–2834

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F (2000) Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C (2001) Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med 135:982–989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Moher M et al (1998) Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 352:609–613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bokemeyer C, Bondarenko I, Makhson A, Hartmann JT, Aparicio J, de Braud F, Donea S, Ludwig H, Schuch G, Stroh C, Loos AH, Zubel A, Koralewski P (2008) Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol [Epub ahead of print]

  23. Sobrero AF, Maurel J, Fehrenbacher L, Scheithauer W, Abubakr YA, Lutz MP, Vega-Villegas ME, Eng C, Steinhauer EU, Prausova J, Lenz HJ, Borg C, Middleton G, Kroning H, Luppi G, Kisker O, Zubel A, Langer C, Kopit J, Burris HA 3rd (2008) EPIC: phase III trial of cetuximab plus irinotecan after fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin failure in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:2311–2319

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Jonker DJ, O’Callaghan CJ, Karapetis CS, Zalcberg JR, Tu D, Au HJ, Berry SR, Krahn M, Price T, Simes RJ, Tebbutt NC, van Hazel G, Wierzbicki R, Langer C, Moore MJ (2007) Cetuximab for the treatment of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 357:2040–2048

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Borner M, Koeberle D, Von Moos R, Saletti P, Rauch D, Hess V, Trojan A, Helbling D, Pestalozzi B, Caspar C, Ruhstaller T, Roth A, Kappeler A, Dietrich D, Lanz D, Mingrone W (2008) Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Bern, Switzerland.Adding cetuximab to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK. Ann Oncol 19:1288–1292

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tol J, Koopman M, Rodenburg CJ, Cats A, Creemers GJ, Schrama JG, Erdkamp FL, Vos AH, Mol L, Antonini NF, Punt CJ (2008) A randomised phase III study on capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab with or without cetuximab in first-line advanced colorectal cancer, the CAIRO2 study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). An interim analysis of toxicity. Ann Oncol 19:734–738

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Butts CA, Bodkin D, Middleman EL, Englund CW, Ellison D, Alam Y, Kreisman H, Graze P, Maher J, Ross HJ, Ellis PM, McNulty W, Kaplan E, Pautret V, Weber MR, Shepherd FA (2007) Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin [corrected], with or without cetuximab, as first-line therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic non small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(36):5777–5784. Erratum in: J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3295

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rosell R, Robinet G, Szczesna A, Ramlau R, Constenla M, Mennecier BC, Pfeifer W, O’Byrne KJ, Welte T, Kolb R, Pirker R, Chemaissani A, Perol M, Ranson MR, Ellis PA, Pilz K, Reck M (2008) Randomized phase II study of cetuximab plus cisplatin/vinorelbine compared with cisplatin/vinorelbine alone as first-line therapy in EGFR-expressing advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 19(2):362–369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J, Azarnia N, Shin DM, Cohen RB, Jones CU, Sur R, Raben D, Jassem J, Ove R, Kies MS, Baselga J, Youssoufian H, Amellal N, Rowinsky EK, Ang KK (2006) Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med 354:567–578

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Burtness B, Goldwasser MA, Flood W, Mattar B, Forastiere AA, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (2005) Phase III randomized trial of cisplatin plus placebo compared with cisplatin plus cetuximab in metastatic/recurrent head and neck cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 23(34):8646–8654. Erratum in: J Clin Oncol 2006;24:724

    Google Scholar 

  31. Vermorken JB, Mesia R, Rivera F, Remenar E, Kawecki A, Rottey S, Erfan J, Zabolotnyy D, Kienzer HR, Cupissol D, Peyrade F, Benasso M, Vynnychenko I, De Raucourt D, Bokemeyer C, Schueler A, Amellal N, Hitt R (2008) Platinum-based chemotherapy plus cetuximab in head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 359:1116–1127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cascinu S, Berardi R, Labianca R, Siena S, Falcone A, Aitini E, Barni S, Di Costanzo F, Dapretto E, Tonini G, Pierantoni C, Artale S, Rota S, Floriani I, Scartozzi M, Zaniboni A, Italian Group for the Study of Digestive Tract Cancer (GISCAD) (2008) Cetuximab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised, multicentre, phase II trial. Lancet Oncol 9(3):9–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Punt CJ, Tol J, Rodenburg CJ, Cats A, Creemers G, Schrama JG, Erdkamp FL, Vos A, Mol L, Antonini NF (2008) Randomized phase III study of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab with or without cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC), the CAIRO2 study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). J Clin Oncol 26:15S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Van Cutsem E, Nowacki M, Lang I, Cascinu S, Shchepotin I, Maurel J, Rougier P, Cunningham D, Nippgen J, Kohne C (2007) Randomized phase III study of irinotecan and 5-FU/FA with or without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): the CRYSTAL trial. J Clin Oncol 25:18S

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pirker R, Szczesna A, von Pawel J, Krzakowski M, Ramlau R, Park K, Gatzemeier U, Bajeta E, Emig M, Pereira JR (2008) FLEX: A randomized, multicenter, phase III study of cetuximab in combination with cisplatin/vinorelbine (CV) versus CV alone in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol 26:20S

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Bogart J, Govindan R, Wang X, Liu D, Kratzke RA, Vokes EE (2008) A phase II study of pemetrexed, carboplatin, thoracic radiation with or without cetuximab in patients with locally advanced unresectable non-small cell lung cancer: CALGB 30407–Early evaluation of feasibility, toxicity. J Clin Oncol 26:20S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Philip PA, Benedetti J, Fenoglio-Preiser C, Zalupski M, Lenz H, O’Reilly E, Wong R, Atkins J, Abruzzese J, Blanke C (2007) Phase III study of gemcitabine [G] plus cetuximab [C] versus gemcitabine in patients [pts] with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma [PC]: SWOG S0205 study. J Clin Oncol 25:18S (LBA4509)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Burtness BA, Powell ME, Berlin JD, Liles DK, Chapman AE, Mitchell EP, Benson AB (2008) Phase II ECOG trial of irinotecan/docetaxel with or without cetuximab in metastatic pancreatic cancer: updated survival and CA19-9 results. J Clin Oncol 26:20S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Karapetis CS, Khambata-Ford S, Jonker DJ, O’Callaghan CJ, Tu D et al (2008) K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 359:1757–1765

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Touyz RM (2008) Transient receptor potential melastatin 6 and 7 channels, magnesium transport, and vascular biology: implications in hypertension. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 294:H1103–H1118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Schrag D, Chung KY, Flombaum C, Saltz L (2005) Cetuximab therapy and symptomatic hypomagnesemia. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:1221–1224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Rafailidis PI, Kakisi OK, Vardakas K, Falagas ME (2007) Infectious complications of monoclonal antibodies used in cancer therapy: a systematic review of the evidence from randomized controlled trials. Cancer 109:2182–2189

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Thomas M (2005) Cetuximab: adverse event profile and recommendations for toxicity management. CJON 9:332–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Colorectal and Anal Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi, People’s Republic of China

    Lidan Liu, Yunfei Cao, Aihua Tan, Cun Liao & Feng Gao

Authors
  1. Lidan Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yunfei Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aihua Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cun Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Feng Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yunfei Cao or Feng Gao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, L., Cao, Y., Tan, A. et al. Cetuximab-based therapy versus non-cetuximab therapy for advanced cancer: a meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 65, 849–861 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-009-1090-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-009-1090-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation