Advances and new perspectives in the treatment of metastatic colon cancer

Table 2 Selected clinical trials involving anti-epidermal growth factor receptor, regorafenib or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor vs anti-epidermal growth factor receptor receptor agents

Ref.	Drug and study name	Study description	No. of patients	Comparison	Median OS (mo)	Median TTP/PFS (mo)	ORR	1-yr survival
	Cetuximab (C)
Cunningham et al[34] 2004	BOND trial	RCT, phase 2, 2nd line irinotecan-refractory	329	Irinotecan + C vs irinotecan	8.6 vs 6.9	4.1 vs 1.5	23% vs 11%	29% vs 32%
Van Cutsem et al[37] 2009	CRYSTAL trial	RCT, 1st line	1198	FOLFIRI + C vs FOLFIRI	20 vs 18.5 and (25 vs 21)	9 vs 8 and (10 vs 8.7)	47% vs 39% (59 vs 43%)	Not reported (approximately 35% vs 25%)
Maughan et al[59] 2011	COIN trial	RCT, phase 3, 1st line	729 (KRAS wild type)	Oxaliplatin-based chemo + C vs chemo alone	17 vs 17.9	8.6 vs 8.6	64% vs 57%	Not reported
Tveit et al[60] 2011	NORDIC VII trial	RCT, open label, 1st line	571	FLOX + C vs intermittent FLOX + C vs FLOX	19.7 vs 20.3 vs 20.4	8.3 vs 7.3 vs 7.9	49% vs 47% vs 41%	Not reported (approximately 70%)
	Panitumumab (P)
Douillard et al[39] 2010	PRIME trial	RCT, phase 3, 1st line	1183	FOLFOX-4 + P vs FOLFOX-4	24 vs 20 (WT) 15 vs 19 (MT)	9.6 vs 8 (WT) 7.3 vs 8.8 (MT)	55 vs 48% (WT) 40 vs 40% (MT)	Approximately 75% both (WT) approximately 60% vs 75% (MT)
	Regorafenib (R)
Grothey et al[47] 2013	CORRECT trial	RCT, phase 3, 3rd line	760	Regorafenib vs placebo	6.4 vs 5.0	1.9 vs 1.7	1.0% vs 0.4%	24.3% vs 20.0%
	Cetuximab (C) vs Bevacizumab (B)
Stintzing et al[63] 2013	FIRE-3trial	RCT, phase 3, 1st line	592	FOLFIRI + C vs FOLFIRI + B	28.7 vs 25	10 vs 10.3	62 % vs 58%	Not reported

RCT: Randomized controlled trial; OS: Overall survival; TTP: Time to progression; PFS: Progression free survival; ITT: Intention to treat; ORR: Overall response rate.