Efficacy and safety of regorafenib for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours after failure of imatinib and sunitinib (GRID): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Oncologist, 2019
Background Regorafenib at the standard intermittent dosing schedule proved effective in the GRID trial for refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). However, this dosing schedule requires frequent dose reduction, and the progression of GISTs or tumor-related symptoms during the off-treatment period has also been noted in some patients. Therefore, we conducted this phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib at a lower dose on a continuous dosing schedule. Methods Patients with measurable, metastatic, or recurrent GISTs who failed to respond to both imatinib and sunitinib were eligible for this study. Regorafenib 100 mg p.o. daily was administered continuously. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR: complete response plus partial response [PR] plus stable disease [SD]) lasting for at least 12 weeks using RECIST version 1.1. Results The best response was PR in 2 (8%), SD in 16 (64%), and progressive disease in 6 (24%) patients. DCR lasting ...
Journal of Clinical …, 2012
Metastatic GI stromal tumor (GIST) is a life-threatening disease with no therapy of proven efficacy after failure of imatinib and sunitinib. Regorafenib is a structurally unique inhibitor of multiple cancer-associated kinases, including KIT and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), with broad-spectrum anticancer activity in preclinical and early-phase trials. Because KIT and PDGFR-␣ remain drivers of GIST after resistance to imatinib and sunitinib, we performed a multicenter single-stage phase II trial of regorafenib in patients with advanced GIST after failure of at least imatinib and sunitinib. Patients and Methods Patients received regorafenib orally, 160 mg daily, on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle. Disease assessment was performed every two cycles per RECIST 1.1. Primary end point was clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined as objective responses (ie, complete or partial response [PR] as well as stable disease [SD] Ն 16 weeks). Serial tumor biopsies were obtained from consenting patients whenever possible. Results From February to December 2010, 34 patients were enrolled at four US centers. As of July 28, 2011, 33 patients had received at least two cycles of regorafenib (range, two to 17 cycles). CBR was 79% (95% CI, 61% to 91%). Four patients achieved PR, and 22 exhibited SD Ն 16 weeks. Median progression-free survival was 10.0 months. The most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension and hand-foot-skin reaction. Conclusion Regorafenib has significant activity in patients with advanced GIST after failure of both imatinib and sunitinib. A phase III trial of regorafenib versus placebo is ongoing to define more fully the safety and efficacy of regorafenib in this setting.
Cureus
Regorafenib, a multi-kinase inhibitor, has been widely used to treat patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) who failed the initial treatment with imatinib and sunitinib. This systematic review aims to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with metastatic and/or unresectable GIST. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to perform this systematic review. We searched PubMed, Science Direct, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant articles based on predefined selection criteria. The implication of the search strategy results in 776 records from all databases. We excluded conference abstracts, discussion articles, case reports, case series, systematic reviews, and other observational non-intervention studies from the study, along with the articles published in languages other than English. After the screening and quality assessment, 10 studies were selected for final review-two randomized controlled trials and eight non-randomized prospective and retrospective review articles of intervention. Regorafenib improved the survival rates of patients after the failure of imatinib and sunitinib treatment, with an acceptable safety profile. Close monitoring of the patients may be needed to detect and manage the grade 4 or higher adverse events.
Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2012
Background. Data regarding the management and outcome of patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) refractory to 1st-line imatinib and 2nd-line sunitinib are limited. Methods. Medical records of 223 imatinib-resistant and sunitinib-resistant GIST who were treated in 11 major referral centers were reviewed. Results. The three most frequent drugs used in the 3rd-line setting were: nilotinib n = 67 (29.5%), sorafenib n = 55 (24.5%), and imatinib n = 40 (17.5%). There were 18 patients (8%) who received best supportive care (BSC) only. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) on 3rd-line treatment were 3.6 months [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 3.1-4.1] and 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.5-10.9), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that, in the 3rd-line setting, albumin level and KIT/PDGFRA mutational status were significantly associated with PFS, whereas performance status and albumin level were associated with OS. After adjustment
Treatment patterns, efficacy and toxicity of regorafenib in gastrointestinal stromal tumour patients
Scientific reports, 2017
Regorafenib was approved as third-line therapy for advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumour (GIST) at a starting dose of 160 mg daily 3 weeks on, 1 week off, based on improvement in progression free survival over placebo (4.8 vs. 0.9 months), but the response rate was low at 4.5%. Given the high toxicity rate in GIST patients, there is variability in the post-marketing dosing of regorafenib. We aimed to summarize our experience regarding prescribing patterns, efficacy and toxicity of regorafenib and determine the role of response assessment by Choi criteria in GIST patients. We included 28 patients who received regorafenib from our pharmacy. Baseline patient characteristics and treatment outcomes were recorded and an independent radiologist assessed response using Choi and RECIST. Seventy-nine percent of patients started at a 120 mg continuous daily dosing schedule, different from the standard intermittent dosing schedule. Grade 3/4 adverse events were experienced by 43% of patients...
Medical Science Monitor, 2019
Departmental sources Background: This study aimed to undertake an analysis of ten years of real-world evidence (RWE) on overall survival (OS) following treatment of advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) with imatinib, sunitinib, and sorafenib using data from the Polish National Health Fund. Material/Methods: Data from the Polish National Health Fund, the sole Polish public payer, identified 1,641 patients with advanced GIST who were treated with imatinib (n=1047), sunitinib (n=457), and sorafenib (n=137). The differences in overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Results: For patients with advanced GIST, the median follow-up time for patients treated with imatinib was 71 months (95% CI, 64.8-79.2), the median OS was 56.9 months (95% CI, 50.4-61.2), with survival at 12 months (89.5%), 24 months (77.9%), 36 months (66.9%), and 60 months (48.4%). The median follow-up time for patients treated with sunitinib was 41.4 months (95% CI, 34.6-49.3), the median OS was 22.8 months (95% CI, 19.2-26.8), with survival at 12 months (68.2%), 24 months (47.1%), and 36 months (31%). The median follow-up time for patients treated with sorafenib was 17.4 months (95% CI, 14.6-22.9), the median OS was 16.9 months (95% CI, 13.7-24.3), with survival at 12 months (61.9%), at 24 months (36.2%), and at 36 months (16.8%). Conclusions: Real-world data collected in a ten-year period confirmed the effectiveness of the use of imatinib, sunitinib, or sorafenib for the treatment of advanced GIST and was comparable with the findings from clinical trials.
Oncotarget, 2015
Background: Although treatment with imatinib in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients has led to significant clinical benefits, the disease will eventually progress due to imatinib resistance. Treatment options after failure of first-line imatinib include imatinib dose escalation or shifting to sunitinib. However, there is no large-scale study to compare the efficacy difference between these two treatment strategies or the role of surgery. Results: This study recruited 521 advanced GIST patients including 246, 125, and 150 placed in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Groups 1 and 2 had significantly longer overall survival (OS) as compared with the group 3 (median 37.5 months versus 16.0 months; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for confounding variables, groups 1 and 2 had longer OS than group 3. A favorable survival trend was seen with surgery, although this benefit disappeared after adjusting for confounding factors. Materials and Methods: We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study using data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database from July 2004 to December 2010. Advanced GIST patients who no longer responded to first-line imatinib were stratified into three groups: imatinib dose escalation (group 1); imatinib dose escalation and a shift to sunitinib (group 2); a direct shift to sunitinib (group 3). The therapeutic success of the three treatment regimens and the effect of surgery were evaluated by overall survival. Conclusions: For advanced GIST patients who failed first-line imatinib treatment, imatinib dose escalation confers significantly longer OS compared to a direct switch to sunitinib. Surgery does not provide survival benefits.
2012
"Introduction We conducted a systematic review of evidence on the effectiveness of imatinib at escalated doses of 600 mg/day or 800 mg/day for treatment of adults with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST), following progression on imatinib at the 400 mg/day dose, compared with sunitinib and/or ‘best supportive care’. Methods Electronic searches were undertaken to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised studies, and case series reporting outcome data on survival, quality of life or adverse events. Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers and full text reports of potentially relevant studies assessed for inclusion. Included studies were quality assessed by two reviewers and data were extracted. Five studies reported data on the relevant population and were included. Results and Discussion Median overall survival for imatinib (800 mg/day) and sunitinib both were less than 2 years. Around 25% of patients required either an imatinib dose delay or reduction. Approximately one-third of patients receiving dose escalated imatinib (either dose) showed either response or stable disease. Amongst those responding to the escalated 800 mg/day dose, median progression-free survival was over 25 months. The statistical likelihood of response may depend on exon mutational status. There were few data and those that were available were potentially biased, due to their non-randomised nature. Further data are needed to justify international guideline recommendations on imatinib dose escalation. Conclusion A prospective audit of management and outcomes for unresectable GIST patients treated with dose escalation upon progression at 400 mg/day may be appropriate as an RCT may be unfeasible"