
==== Front
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology
0344-5704
1432-0843
Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin/Heidelberg

38987363
4682
10.1007/s00280-024-04682-4
Original Article
Regorafenib plus FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment for patients with RAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (FOLFIRINOX-R trial): a dose-escalation study
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3123-9746
Adenis Antoine antoine.adenis@icm.unicancer.fr

1
Ghiringhelli François 2
Gauthier Ludovic 3
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5644-9603
Mazard Thibault 1
Evesque Ludovic 4
Evrard Alexandre 56
Chalbos Patrick 7
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8990-314X
Moussion Aurore 7
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6328-9839
Gourgou Sophie 3
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7378-9469
Ychou Marc 1
1 grid.121334.6 0000 0001 2097 0141 Medical Oncology Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), INSERM U1194, Montpellier University, Montpellier, 34298 France
2 https://ror.org/00pjqzf38 grid.418037.9 0000 0004 0641 1257 Medical Oncology Department, Centre Georges-Francois Leclerc, Dijon, France
3 grid.121334.6 0000 0001 2097 0141 Biometrics Unit, Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), Montpellier University, Montpellier, France
4 https://ror.org/05hmfw828 grid.417812.9 0000 0004 0639 1794 Medical Oncology Department, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France
5 grid.121334.6 0000 0001 2097 0141 Montpellier Cancer Research Institute (IRCM), INSERM U1194, Montpellier University, Montpellier, France
6 grid.488845.d 0000 0004 0624 6108 Laboratory of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Nimes University Hospital, IRCM, University of Montpellier, INSERM, Montpellier, France
7 grid.121334.6 0000 0001 2097 0141 Clinical Research and Innovation Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), Montpellier University, Montpellier, France
10 7 2024
10 7 2024
2024
94 3 443452
8 2 2024
29 5 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Purpose

The combination of bevacizumab and FOLFIRINOX is used in patients with RAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (RASm-mCRC). Regorafenib, an oral multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has antiangiogenic properties, cytostatic effects and also true cytotoxic effects, unlike bevacizumab. The aim of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the regorafenib-FOLFIRINOX combination in patients with RASm-mCRC.

Methods

The FOLFIRINOX-R trial was a phase 1/2 study where the dose-escalation part (3 + 3 design with three dose levels, DLs) was completed before its early termination. FOLFIRINOX (14-day cycle) included oxaliplatin (standard dose), folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan (150 or 180 mg/m²). Regorafenib (120 or 160 mg daily) was given from day 4 to day 10 of each cycle. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was studied in the first three cycles. Eligibility criteria included ECOG performance status ≤ 1 and not previously treated RASm-mCRC.

Results

Thirteen patients (median age: 65 years; min-max: 40–76) were enrolled. DLT could not be evaluated in one patient (DL3) due to poor observance. The median treatment duration and median follow-up were 6.2 (min-max: 2.3–10) and 13.4 (min-max: 3.8–18.0) months, respectively. Dose was modified in 12/13 (92%) patients. One grade 3 hypokalemia occurred at DL2. MTD was not reached at DL3. Grade 3 diarrhea was recorded in 7/13 patients (13 events) equally distributed in all DLs.

Conclusion

The RP2D for this regorafenib-FFX combination could not be determined due to a high prevalence of grade 3 diarrhea related to treatment as advised by our Independent Data Monitoring Committee.

Trial registration numbers

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03828799.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00280-024-04682-4.

Keywords

Regorafenib
FOLFIRINOX
Colorectal cancer
Phase 1 trial
Recommended phase 2 dose
Bayer Healthcare PharmaceuticalsN/A issue-copyright-statement© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in western countries. Most patients will develop metastases and only few will be cured. Palliative chemotherapy, combined or not with targeted agents, can be proposed to patients with unresectable metastases. According to the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines, the standard first-line treatment in these patients includes doublet (fluoropyrimidines plus oxaliplatin or irinotecan) or triplet chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) alone or in combination with monoclonal antibodies against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR; cetuximab or panitumumab) or vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A; bevacizumab), depending on the tumor RAS/BRAF mutational status [1].

RAS mutations are identified in about 60% of metastatic CRC (mCRC) and are negative predictors of anti-EGFR antibody efficacy [2]. RAS mutational status is also associated with poor prognosis, as reported in several randomized trials in patients with mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab [2] or with triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab [3, 4]. Currently, the standard first-line treatment of patients with RAS-mutant (RASm) mCRC is doublet or triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab [1]. A recent meta-analysis indicated that triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab significantly improves the outcome of patients with mCRC (including those with RASm tumors), compared with doublet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, with only a moderate increase in toxicity [5].

Regorafenib is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor approved for refractory mCRC at the dose of 160 mg per day, 3 weeks on and 1 week off. It inhibits angiogenic and stromal receptor tyrosine kinases, such as VEGFR1/3, PDGFR-b, FGFR-1, and TIE-2, the oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases c-KIT and RET, and also the activity of signaling kinases, such as RAF1 and B-RAF [6, 7]. Regorafenib displays antiangiogenic properties and also anti-proliferative activities, as demonstrated in colorectal cancer models [6–8] and also in patients with mCRC, with observed clinical responses irrespective of the RAS mutational status or the treatment line [9–13]. In patients with mCRC, regorafenib has been assessed in combination with doublet chemotherapy (FOLFOX and/or FOLFIRI) in two uncontrolled studies [14, 15] and with FOLFIRI in one randomized phase 2 trial [16]. Using a 1 week-on/1 week-off schedule of regorafenib (160 mg orally once per day on days 4–10) with a standard 14-day cycle of FOLFIRI or FOLFOX, Schultheis et al. [14] reported 71% of severe drug-related adverse events (among which 50% were due to neutropenia), including 7% of severe diarrhea, in 45 patients. They concluded that regorafenib has acceptable tolerability in combination with chemotherapy and noticed an increased exposure of irinotecan, but no significant effect on 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin pharmacokinetics. Argilés et al. [15] assessed the FOLFOX-regorafenib combination as first-line treatment in a phase 2 trial with 53 patients and reported that the most prevalent severe grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (40% including 15% of grade 4), hypertension (28% including 4% of grade 4), peripheral neuropathy (13%), hypophosphatemia (13%) and diarrhea (25%). In this study, 94% of the 53 patients required regorafenib dose modifications (reduction or interruption) due to adverse events. Conversely, the response rate was not increased compared with historical data on patients treated with FOLFOX [15]. Sanoff et al. [16] carried out a randomized phase 2 study to determine whether the addition of regorafenib (160 mg once daily on days 4–10) to FOLFIRI improved progression-free survival (PFS) (versus the placebo-FOLFIRI arm) in 181 patients with mCRC refractory to first-line treatment with oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based regimens. PFS was longer in the regorafenib-FOLFIRI arm than in the placebo-FOLFIRI arm (median, 6.1 vs. 5.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53–1.01; p = 0.056) [16]. Similarly, the overall response rate (ORR) was numerically higher with regorafenib-FOLFIRI (34%; 95% CI, 25-44%) than with placebo-FOLFIRI (21%; 95% CI, 11-33%; P = 0.07). However, dose reductions were more frequent in the regorafenib-FOLFIRI than in the placebo-FOLFIRI arm (58% versus 25%). More patients experienced severe adverse events in the regorafenib-FOLFIRI than in the placebo-FOLFIRI arm (79% versus 59%), particularly neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, hypophosphatemia, hand-foot syndrome and diarrhea (15% in the experimental arm). The authors concluded that the regorafenib-FOLFIRI combination was unlikely to provide clinically meaningful improvement for patients with mCRC because of its modest clinical benefit and its toxicity profile [16].

Given the improved outcome observed with triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment of patients with RASm mCRC [5], the need of developing more efficient strategies in this setting, and the hypothesis that regorafenib could do better than bevacizumab when combined with triplet chemotherapy (if adverse events can be controlled), we designed the FOLFIRINOX-R study to assess the safety and the efficacy of regorafenib in combination with FOLFIRINOX [17] in patients with RASm mCRC [18].

Materials and methods

FOLFIRINOX-R is a prospective, multicentric, non-randomized, open-label, phase 1b/2 trial conducted at four cancer centers in France. It had a standard 3 + 3 design for dose escalation followed by a phase 2 trial to study the safety and efficacy of regorafenib in combination with FOLFIRINOX after identification of the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). The study details have been previously reported [18].

Participants

Key inclusion criteria were: ≥18-year-old patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of ≤ 1, with measurable (according to RECIST version 1.1) and unresectable mCRC and RASm by circulating tumor DNA analysis. In addition, patients should not have been previously treated for mCRC. Patients needed to have adequate bone marrow, renal and liver functions, serum lipase ≤ 1.5 times the upper limit of normal (ULN), serum uracil < 17 ng/ml, and wild type homozygous or heterozygous status for the uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A1*28 polymorphism [18]. Patients with the UGT1A1*28/*28 genotype were not selected in this FOLFIRINOX-R study.

The study was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The study protocol (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03828799), including all amendments, was reviewed and approved by the French ethics committee (CPP Est III) on December 4, 2018, and the French National Agency for the Safety of Health Products (ANSM) on November 21, 2018. Patients provided their written informed consent before enrollment in the study.

Study design

FOLFIRINOX was administered as per standard: oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² on day 1 (intravenous, IV, infusion over 2 h), immediately followed by folinic acid 400 mg/m² or calcium levofolinate 200 mg/m² (2-hour IV infusion), with the addition of irinotecan (150 or 180 mg/m² ; 90-minute IV infusion through a Y-connector) immediately followed by 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m² IV bolus then 2400 mg/m² over 46 h continuous infusion) (19). Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was delivered from day 7 to day 12. Regorafenib was administered orally (80, 120, or 160 mg) once per day from day 4 to day 10 of each 14-day cycle. The pre-defined dose levels (DLs) were as follows: DL -1 (irinotecan 150 mg/m² plus regorafenib 80 mg/m²); DL1 (irinotecan 150 mg/m² plus regorafenib 120 mg/m²); DL2 (irinotecan 180 mg/m² plus regorafenib 120 mg/m²); and DL3 (irinotecan 180 mg/m² plus regorafenib 160 mg/m²). Treatment cycles were repeated every 14 days for up to 12 cycles. Then, treatment continued with a maintenance phase (regorafenib alone) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Details on permitted dose delays and modifications were provided in the already published study protocol [18]. Specifically, treatment could be interrupted to perform surgical resection or any regional procedure, if needed. Laboratory and clinical evaluations were performed at each cycle (see reference 18 for more details). During the first three cycles, laboratory assessments were performed also on day 8 of each cycle. Tumor assessment (RECIST, v1.1) was performed every 8 weeks. The main objective of the phase 1 of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the RP2D of the combination of regorafenib plus FOLFIRINOX by testing different doses of regorafenib and irinotecan. The dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) period was defined as the time from the first cycle of treatment until the day of the planned fourth cycle, corresponding to 42 days. DLT was defined as the occurrence of one or more of the following toxicities during the first three cycles of treatment: any unplanned interruption > 7 days of regorafenib due to drug-related toxicity, grade ≥ 3 (CTCAE v5) non-hematologic toxicity (except grade 3 nausea, grade 3 vomiting, grade 3 diarrhea and grade ≥ 3 lipase elevation without signs of pancreatitis), grade ≥ 2 posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome, grade ≥ 2 retinopathy, any of the following liver-specific toxicities [grade ≥ 3 bilirubin increase, grade ≥ 3 aspartate transaminase (AST) and/or alanine transaminase (ALT) increase, or AST and/or ALT increase > 3 x ULN with concurrent bilirubin increase > 2 x ULN], grade 4 neutropenia lasting > 3 days, grade ≥ 3 febrile neutropenia, grade 4 anemia, platelets < 25,000 /mm3 or platelets < 50,000 /mm3 with bleeding, grade ≥ 3 international normalized ratio or partial thromboplastin time elevation with bleeding, grade ≥ 3 hemorrhage/bleeding. The phase 2 part of the study would start after the RP2D determination and after the agreement by the Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC). The primary objective of the phase 2 study was to evaluate the 48-week disease-control rate in all treated patients. The main secondary endpoints of the study included safety according to the NCI-CTCAE v.5, ORR according to the RECIST v1.1, deepness of response, disease control rate (DCR), PFS, and overall survival [18].

Statistical design

A minimum of 12 and a maximum of 24 patients needed to be included in the phase 1 study, with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 6 patients per DL. Six patients needed to be included at the RP2D. The phase 2 part of the trial followed a Fleming’s one-stage design. Detailed assumptions and numbers of patients to be included were described in Adenis et al. [18].

Results

Patient characteristics

Between July 17, 2019 and October 15, 2021, 13 patients with RASm mCRC were enrolled in the phase 1b study. The patient demographics and baseline disease characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Most patients had a left-sided primary tumor (10/13 patients) and were chemotherapy-naive (12/13 patients) (Table 1).

Table 1 Patients’ characteristics (phase 1b study)

	Dose level 1	Dose level 2	Dose level 3	ITT sample	
ITT population, n	3	6	4	13	
Safety population#, n	3	6	4	13	
Patients evaluable for DLT##, n	3	6	3	12	
Age, years, median (min; max)	53 (49; 65)	69 (40;76)	64.5 (49;76)	65 (40; 76)	
Male/female ratio, n	1/2	3/3	2/2	7/6	
ECOG PS = 0/1, n	1/2	2/4	3/1	6/7	
Primary location					
 Left side/right side	2/1	4/2	4/0	10/3	
Metastatic sites					
 Brain

 Liver

 Lymph nodes

 Peritoneum

 Lung

	0

3

0

1

1

	1

5

2

1

3

	0

4

0

0

1

	1

12

3

2

5

	
Previous chemotherapy	0	1	0	1	
ITT: Intention-to-treat, DLT: Dose-limiting toxicity

# Patients who received at least one dose of treatment

## Patients treated and evaluable for DLT (1 unevaluable patient due to low observance)

Study drug exposure

All patients received at least one dose of the study drug combination (regorafenib plus FOLFIRINOX at one of the three DLs) (Fig. 1). The median number of administered cycles was 12 [interquartile Q1 and Q3: 7.0–15.0] and the median treatment duration was 6.2 months [Q1-Q3: 4.3–7.1]. Additional details on the number of cycles administered and the relative dose intensity per drug and DL are in Table 2.

Fig. 1 Study flowchart

Table 2 Drug exposure

Parameters	Dose level 1 n = 3	Dose level 2 n = 6	Dose level 3 n = 4	Safety sample n = 13	
Regorafenib + FOLFIRINOX		
 Treatment duration, months a	4.3 (3.7–6.5)	5.9 (3.5–7.5)	6.6 (5.4-8.0)	6.2 (4.3–7.1)	
 Number of cycles administered a	7.0 (7.0–12.0)	12.0 (7.0–16.0)	13.5 (11.0-16.5)	12.0 (7.0–15.0)	
 At least one dose delay b	3 (100)	5 (83.3)	4 (100)	12 (92.3)	
 At least one dose modification b	3 (100)	5 (83.3)	4 (100)	12 (92.3)	
FU bolus		
 RDI a	0.8 (0.7–0.9)	0.9 (0.7-1.0)	0.9 (0.8-1.0)	0.9 (0.7-1.0)	
 RDI ≥ 90% b	0	3 (50)	2 (50)	5 (38.5)	
 At least one dose delay b	3 (100)	3 (50)	2 (50)	8 (61.5)	
 At least one dose modification b	2 (66.7)	3 (50)	1 (25)	6 (46.2)	
FU continuous infusion		
 RDI a	0.8 (0.6–0.9)	0.9 (0.9-1.0)	0.8 (0.8-1.0)	0.9 (0.6-1.0)	
 RDI ≥ 90% b	2 (66.7)	6 (100)	3 (75)	11 (84.6)	
 At least one dose delay b	3 (100)	3 (50)	2 (50)	8 (61.5)	
 At least one dose modification b	2 (66.7)	2 (33.3)	2 (50)	8 (61.5)	
Oxaliplatin		
 RDI a	0.8 (0.6–0.9)	0.9 (0.7-1.0)	0.8 (0.8–0.9)	0.8 (0.8–0.9)	
 RDI ≥ 90% b	1 (33.3)	4 (66.7)	3 (75)	8 (61.5)	
 At least one dose delay b	3 (100)	3 (50)	2 (50)	8 (61.5)	
 At least one dose modification b	2 (66.7)	4 (66.7)	4 (100)	10 (76.9)	
Irinotecan		
 RDI a	0.8 (0.7–0.9)	0.8 (0.7–0.9)	0.7 (0.7–0.8)	0.8 (0.7–0.8)	
 RDI ≥ 90% b	2 (66.7)	3 (50)	1 (25)	6 (46.2)	
 At least one dose delay b	3 (100)	3 (50)	2 (50)	8 (61.5)	
 At least one dose modification b	3 (100)	4 (66.7)	4 (100)	11 (84.6)	
Regorafenib		
 RDI a	0.9 (0.5–0.9)	0.9 (0.7-1.0)	0. (0.5–0.8)	0.8 (0.6–0.9)	
 RDI ≥ 90% b	2 (66.7)	4 (66.7)	1 (25)	7 (53.8)	
 At least one dose delay b	3 (100)	1 (16.7)	1 (25)	5 (38.5)	
 At least one dose modification b	1 (33)	4 (66.7)	3 (75)	8 (61.5)	
a Data reported as median (Q1-Q3)

b Data reported as n (%)

RDI: Relative dose intensity; FU: 5-fluorouracil

Eight patients (62%) required at least one dose delay (3 at DL1; 1 at DL2, and 2 at DL3) and twelve (92%) needed a dose reduction (3 at DL1; 5 at DL2, and 4 at DL3). The most common cause of dose modification was toxicity of treatment (58/69 cycles with a dose modification). Four patients received maintenance therapy following the first 12 cycles of treatment.

At the time of data cut-off, all patients but one had terminated the study treatment. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were progressive disease (n = 4), toxicity (n = 2, treatment interruption > 28 days: 1, several episodes of grade 3 diarrhoea: 1), and intent for a curative local treatment (n = 6).

Safety analyses

Treatment-related adverse events of any grade were reported in all 13 patients (Table 3). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events were reported for almost all patients (n = 12), particularly diarrhea (seven [53.8%]), neutropenia (two [15.4%]), and peripheral neuropathy (two [15.4%]) (Table 4). Among these grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, 13 grade 3 diarrhea episodes were reported by 7/13 patients despite standard procedures including patient selection (dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotyping and UGT1A1 genotyping, therapeutic education, use of high-dose loperamide, oral and/or IV fluids, hospitalization, and per protocol dose modifications). The median duration of these events was 8 days [min-max: 2-121-11] in six evaluable patients. No relationship between the occurrence of grade ≥ 3 diarrhea episodes and UGT1A1*28 genotype (either wild type homozygous or heterozygous status) could be identified (data not shown). There was no treatment-related death. One DLT (e.g. grade 3 hypokalemia) was recorded at DL2 and one grade 4 neutropenia was reported at DL1. The latter was not considered to be another DLT because the prophylactic G-CSF injection had been unintentionally omitted. As per protocol, MTD was not reached and RP2D should have been the DL3. However, our IDMC highlighted the high frequency of grade 3 diarrhea at all DLs. Accordingly, the IDMC could not validate the DL3 as the RP2D and recommended stopping the study and not proceeding with the phase 2 part.

Table 3 Treatment-related adverse events

	Dose level 1 (IRI 150 mg/m² REGO 120 mg)	Dose level 2 (IRI 180 mg/m² REGO 120 mg)	Dose level 3 (IRI 180 mg/m² REGO 160 mg)	Total	
Patients N = 3	TRAE N = 44	Patients N = 6	TRAE N = 110	Patients N = 4	TRAE N = 82	Patients N = 13	TRAE N = 236	
Anemia	0	0	3 (50%)	7	2 (50%)	3	5 (38.5%)	10	
Neutropenia	3 (66.7%)	6	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	4 (30.8%)	7	
Thrombopenia	1 (33.3%)	2	1 (16.7%)	2	0	0	2 (15.4%)	4	
Coronary vasospasm	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Vertigo	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
Abdominal pain	1 (33.3%)	1	1 (16.7%)	1	1 (25%)	2	3 (23.1%)	4	
Anorectal discomfort	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
Stomatitis	0	0	1 (16.7%	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Constipation	1 (33.3%)	1	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	2 (15.4%)	2	
Diarrhea	2 (66.7%)	7	6 (100%)	23	4 (100%)	21	12 (92.3%)	51	
Dyspepsia	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
Gingival bleeding	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Nausea	0	0	4 (66.7%)	10	4 (100%)	7	8 (61.5%)	17	
Salivary hypersecretion	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
Subileus	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Vomiting	1 (33.3%)	3	1 (16.7%)	1	2 (50%)	4	4 (30.8%)	8	
Asthenia	2 (66.7%)	9	6 (100%)	10	3 (75%)	10	11 (84.6%)	29	
Mucositis	1 (33.3%)	1	3 (50%)	5	0	0	4 (30.8%)	6	
Cholestasis	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Anaphylactic reaction	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
Drug hypersensitivity	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Paronychia	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Pharyngitis	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Transaminase increase	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	1 (25%)	1	2 (15.3%)	2	
LDH increase	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	2	
Glutamyltransferase increase	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	2	1 (7.7%)	1	
Thrombocythemia	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	2	1 (7.7%)	2	
Weight loss	1 (33.3%)	4	3 (50%)	4	3 (75%)	4	7 (53.8%)	12	
Decrease appetite	1 (33.3%)	1	3 (50%)	12	3 (75%)	3	7 (53.8%)	16	
Hypoalbuminemia	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Hypokalemia	0	0	3 (50%)	4	0	0	3 (23.1%)	4	
Hypomagnesemia	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Arthralgia	1 (33.3%)	1	0	0	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Trismus	1 (33.3%)	1	0	0	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Dizziness	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Dysgeusia	0	0	2	2	0	0	2 (15.4%)	2	
Dysphonia	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Peripheral neuropathy	1 (33.3%)	3	4 (66.7%)	7	3 (75%)	9	8 (61.5%)	19	
PPE	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	1 (25%)	1	2 (15.4%)	2	
Proteinuria	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	1 (25%)	1	2 (15.4%)	2	
Epistaxis	1 (33.3%)	1	0	0	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Pulmonary Embolism	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Rhinorrhea	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Alopecia	2 (66.7%)	2	2 (33.3%)	2	2 (50%)	2	6 (46.2%)	6	
Dry skin	1 (33.3%)	1	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	2 (15.4%)	2	
Hypertension	0	0	0	0	2 (50%)	3	2 (15.4%)	3	
IRI: irinotecan; REGO: regorafenib; TRAE: Treatment-related adverse events; PPE: Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia

Table 4 Treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events

	Dose level 1 (IRI 150 mg/m² REGO 120 mg)	Dose level 2 (IRI 180 mg/m² REGO 120 mg)	Dose level 3 (IRI 180 mg/m² REGO 160 mg)	Total	
Patients N = 3	AE N = 5	Patients N = 6	AE N = 9	Patients N = 4	AE N = 9	Patients N = 13	AE N = 23	
Diarrhea	1 (33.3%)	3	2 (33.3%)	4	4 (100)	6	7 (53.8%)	13	
Neutropenia	1 (33.3%)	1	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	2 (15.4%)	2	
Peripheral neuropathy	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	1 (25%)	1	2 (15.4%)	2	
Anaphylactic reaction	0	0	0	0	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
Loss of appetite	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Hypokalemia	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Pulmonary embolism	0	0	1 (16.7%)	1	0	0	1 (7.7%)	1	
Hypertension	0	0	0	1	1 (25%)	1	1 (7.7%)	1	
IRI: irinotecan; REGO: regorafenib; AE: adverse events

Efficacy

Efficacy was evaluated in all 13 patients. At data cut-off, the median follow-up period was 30 months (range 6–40). In the intention-to-treat population (n = 13), a partial response was observed in 8 patients (61.5% [95% CI: 31.6–86%]) and DCR was 100% (Table 5). The median deepness of response was − 52.5% (min-max: -1.1-73%) (Supplementary Table). Six patients underwent surgery because metastases became resectable following treatment and another one underwent thermal ablation (Supplementary Table). The median PFS was 10 months (95% CI: 7.8–15.4).

Table 5 Summary of the outcomes

	Dose level 1 (IRI 150 mg/m² REGO 120 mg)	Dose level 2 (IRI 180 mg/m² REGO 120 mg)	Dose level 3 (IRI 180 mg/m² REGO 160 mg)	ITT sample	
Response					
Response

Complete response

Partial response, n (%)

Stable disease, n (%)

	0

2 (66.7)

1 (33.3)

	0

3 (50)

3 (50)

	0

4 (100)

0

	0

9 (69.2)

4 (30.8)

	
Disease control rate, n (%)

 Progressive disease, n

	3 (100)

0

	6 (100)

0

	0

0

	13 (100)

0

	
Median PFS (95%CI), months	N/A	N/A	N/A	9.1 (7.5-NE)	
Median OS (95%CI), months	N/A	N/A	N/A	18 (9.9-NE)	
IRI: irinotecan; REGO: regorafenib; PFS: progression-free survival; OS: overall survival; ITT: intention-to-treat; NE: not evaluable

Discussion

The aim of the multicenter FOLFIRINOX-R study was to determine the MTD and RP2D of the regorafenib plus FOLFIRINOX combination in patients with RASm mCRC. The study did not meet its primary endpoint. Since the MTD was not reached, the IDMC advised us not to recommend any RP2D due to the frequent occurrence of severe diarrhea (> 50% of patients). The IDMC also recommended to interrupt the study before moving to the phase 2. Severe diarrhea was previously reported in patients treated with any of the drugs included in our experimental regimen: regorafenib (17%) [9], FOLFOX/FOLFIRI (11–14%) [19] and FOLFOXIRI/FOLFIRINOX (20–29%) [17, 20]. Moreover, severe diarrhea in patients with mCRC is not infrequent when chemotherapy is combined with antiangiogenic agents: FOLFOX/FOLFIRI with bevacizumab (8%) [5], FOLFIRI with regorafenib (10–15%) [14, 16], FOLFOX with regorafenib (4–23%) [14, 15], and FOLFOXIRI/FOLFIRINOX with bevacizumab (18–20%) [5, 21]. However, we did not anticipate its occurrence in > 50% of patients receiving the regorafenib-FOLFIRINOX combination. We were fully aware that regorafenib inhibits glucuronosyltransferases, particularly UGT1A1. Moreover, Schultheis et al. [14] showed that when combined with irinotecan, regorafenib increases the exposure of its active metabolite SN-38. Therefore, we excluded patients who carried the UGT1A1*28/*28 variant and who are at high-risk of irinotecan-induced severe diarrhea [22, 23]. Like others [14, 16], we used an intermittent regime of regorafenib (from day 4 to day 10) rather than the standard 3 weeks on and 1 week off regimen in order to avoid the concomitant exposure to regorafenib and irinotecan. Also, the starting doses of regorafenib and irinotecan were lower (120 mg and 150 mg/m², respectively) than previously used in regorafenib-irinotecan combinations (160 mg and 180 mg/m², respectively) [14, 16]. Finally, we carried out dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotyping (exclusion of patients with plasma uracil concentration ≥ 16 ng/ml) to avoid severe adverse events related to the use of fluorouracil, including diarrhea [24]. Lastly, we preferentially used FOLFIRINOX as triplet chemotherapy rather than FOLFOXIRI (21) because the irinotecan dose is lower in FOLFIRINOX (150 mg/m²) than in FOLFOXIRI (165 mg/m²) and due to our long experience with FOLFIRINOX for colorectal and pancreatic cancer management (metastatic and adjuvant settings) [17, 21, 25, 26]. Therefore, we thought that we took all preventive measures to limit the occurrence of severe diarrhea. Our inability to reach our primary objective could be explained by the fact we had more than expected occurrence of grade 3 diarrhea as a DLT in the study design.

Although we interrupted the study before the phase 2 part, we obtained some efficacy results based on the 13 patients included in the phase 1b. The DCR (100%), ORR (66% ORR) and deepness of response rate (-52.5%) were impressive (especially for patients with RASm mCRC), but apparently without any added value compared with the findings of the TRIBE study on FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in 252 patients among whom 40% had RASm mCRC (DCR: 86.1%, ORR: 65.1%, deepness of response rate: -42.2%) [3]. The median PFS were 10 months in our trial and 12.1 months (95% CI: 10.9–13.2) in the TRIBE study [3], with similar median treatment duration (∼ 6 months) in both trials. Similarly to the conclusions from the trials on the regorafenib-FOLFOX or FOLFIRI combination [14, 15], we are unable from this study to suggest that regorafenib plus FOLFIRINOX will provide a greater benefit compared with other combinations of antiangiogenic antibody plus triplet chemotherapy (e.g. bevacizumab plus FOLFOXIRI) as first-line treatment of mCRC. However, the sample size for this study was small and since focus was on safety, a more definitive conclusion cannot be made at this point.

Conclusion

FOLFIRINOX-R did not meet its primary objective because we could not determine the RP2D of regorafenib combined with FOLFIRINOX. More than half of patients had one or more grade 3 diarrhea episodes, regardless of the regorafenib and irinotecan dose levels. Despite a 100% disease control rate, we are unable to conclude that this combination would provide superior benefits to standard triplet chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in RASm mCRC.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Table: Deepness of response (DpR) and surgery after treatment initiation

Acknowledgements

The patients and families who made this study possible. The clinical study teams who participated in the study. Thanks to Julien FRAISSE, Caroline MOLLEVI (Biometrics Unit, ICM, Montpellier, France) and Stéphanie DELAINE (Department of Clinical Research, ICM, Montpellier, France) who contributed to writing the initial statistical design and the study budget, respectively.Thanks to Audrey SIRVENT, Serge ROCHE (CNRS – CRBM – UMR5237, Montpellier University, Montpellier), and Evelyne CRAPEZ (Translational Research Unit, ICM, Montpellier) for their work on the translational data from this study that were not used. We are also indebted to Jaafar BENNOUNA (Hopital Foch, Paris, France), Sophie COUSIN (Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France), and Marie-Cécile LE DELEY (Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France), our Independent Data Monitoring Committee. Thank to Dr Elisabetta Andermarcher for editing the manuscript.

Author contributions

A.A., T.M., and M.Y. designed the clinical study and contributed to data interpretation. A.A., F.G., T.M., and L.E. included patients. E.A did the pharmacokinetic analyses. P.C. contributed to the trial set-up. P.C. and A.M. were responsible for data collection and for administrative support. G.L. and S.G. contributed to the statistical analysis. A.A. contributed to the drafting of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the revision of the manuscript and approved it for submission.

Funding

This study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals that also provided regorafenib. The funder had no role in the study design, management, analysis and interpretation of data as well as no role in the writing of the final report.

Data availability

The corresponding author will provide data and datasets generated and/or analyzed during the study upon reasonable request.

Declarations

Conflicts of interest

A.A. has received research grants from Bayer, MSD, BMS, Arcus and Roche. A.A. has also received speaker honorarium from Novartis, MSD, and BMS. A.A. has received travel grants from MSD and Astra-Zeneca. A.A. has reported a consultative role from BMS, Bayer, MSD, and Astra-Zeneca. T.M. has received honoraria for speaking or consulting roles from Servier, Pierre Fabre, Merck Serono, AAA, Sanofi, Galapagos, and research grants from Amgen and Roche. T.M. has also received travel grants from Pierre Fabre, Merck Serono, and Sanofi. L.E. has received speaker honorarium from Astrellas, Pierre Fabre, and Merck. L.E. has also received travel grants from MSD, Servier, BMS, and Merck. L.E. has reported a consultative role from Astrellas. F.G., L.G., A.E., P.C., A.M., S.G., M.Y declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

The study was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The study protocol (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03828799; EudraCT identifier: 2018-003541-42), including all amendments, was reviewed and approved by the French ethics committee (CPP Est III) on December 4, 2018, and the French National Agency for the Safety of Health Products (ANSM) on November 21, 2018.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Patients provided their written informed consent before enrollment in the study.

Presented in part at the 57th ASCO Annual Meeting, Chicago, June 3–June 7, 2022.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Cervantes A Adam R Roselló S Metastatic colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up Ann Oncol 2023 34 10 32 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.003 36307056
Cervantes A, Adam R, Roselló S et al (2023) Metastatic colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 34:10–32. 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.00336307056
2. Modest DP Ricard I Heinemann V Outcome according to KRAS-, NRAS- and BRAF-mutation as well as KRAS mutation variants: pooled analysis of five randomized trials in metastatic colorectal cancer by the AIO colorectal cancer study group Ann Oncol 2016 27 1746 1753 10.1093/annonc/mdw261 27358379
Modest DP, Ricard I, Heinemann V et al (2016) Outcome according to KRAS-, NRAS- and BRAF-mutation as well as KRAS mutation variants: pooled analysis of five randomized trials in metastatic colorectal cancer by the AIO colorectal cancer study group. Ann Oncol 27:1746–1753. 10.1093/annonc/mdw26127358379
3. Loupakis F Cremolini C Masi G Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer N Engl J Med 2014 371 1609 1618 10.1056/NEJMoa1403108 25337750
Loupakis F, Cremolini C, Masi G et al (2014) Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 371:1609–1618. 10.1056/NEJMoa140310825337750
4. Cremolini C Loupakis F Antoniotti C FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: updated overall survival and molecular subgroup analyses of the open-label, phase 3 TRIBE study Lancet Oncol 2015 16 1306 1315 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00122-9 26338525
Cremolini C, Loupakis F, Antoniotti C et al (2015) FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: updated overall survival and molecular subgroup analyses of the open-label, phase 3 TRIBE study. Lancet Oncol 16:1306–1315. 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00122-926338525
5. Cremolini C Antoniotti C Stein A Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of FOLFOXIRI Plus Bevacizumab Versus doublets Plus Bevacizumab as initial therapy of unresectable metastatic colorectal Cancer JCO 2020 38 3314 3324 10.1200/JCO.20.01225
Cremolini C, Antoniotti C, Stein A et al (2020) Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of FOLFOXIRI Plus Bevacizumab Versus doublets Plus Bevacizumab as initial therapy of unresectable metastatic colorectal Cancer. JCO 38:3314–3324. 10.1200/JCO.20.01225
6. Mross K Frost A Steinbild S A phase I dose-escalation study of regorafenib (BAY 73-4506), an inhibitor of oncogenic, angiogenic, and stromal kinases, in patients with advanced solid tumors Clin Cancer Res 2012 18 2658 2667 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-1900 22421192
Mross K, Frost A, Steinbild S et al (2012) A phase I dose-escalation study of regorafenib (BAY 73-4506), an inhibitor of oncogenic, angiogenic, and stromal kinases, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res 18:2658–2667. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-190022421192
7. Schmieder R Hoffmann J Becker M Regorafenib (BAY 73-4506): antitumor and antimetastatic activities in preclinical models of colorectal cancer Int J Cancer 2014 135 1487 1496 10.1002/ijc.28669 24347491
Schmieder R, Hoffmann J, Becker M et al (2014) Regorafenib (BAY 73-4506): antitumor and antimetastatic activities in preclinical models of colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer 135:1487–1496. 10.1002/ijc.2866924347491
8. Jeong W Doroshow JH Kummar S United States Food and Drug Administration approved oral kinase inhibitors for the treatment of malignancies Curr Probl Cancer 2013 37 110 144 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2013.06.001 23972982
Jeong W, Doroshow JH, Kummar S (2013) United States Food and Drug Administration approved oral kinase inhibitors for the treatment of malignancies. Curr Probl Cancer 37:110–144. 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2013.06.00123972982
9. Grothey A Van Cutsem E Sobrero A Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial Lancet 2013 381 303 312 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61900-X 23177514
Grothey A, Van Cutsem E, Sobrero A et al (2013) Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 381:303–312. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61900-X23177514
10. Tabernero J Lenz H-J Siena S Analysis of circulating DNA and protein biomarkers to predict the clinical activity of regorafenib and assess prognosis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective, exploratory analysis of the CORRECT trial Lancet Oncol 2015 16 937 948 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00138-2 26184520
Tabernero J, Lenz H-J, Siena S et al (2015) Analysis of circulating DNA and protein biomarkers to predict the clinical activity of regorafenib and assess prognosis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective, exploratory analysis of the CORRECT trial. Lancet Oncol 16:937–948. 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00138-226184520
11. Li J Qin S Xu R Regorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care in Asian patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CONCUR): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2015 16 619 629 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70156-7 25981818
Li J, Qin S, Xu R et al (2015) Regorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care in Asian patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CONCUR): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 16:619–629. 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70156-725981818
12. Carrato A Benavides M Massutí B First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD) BMC Cancer 2019 19 533 10.1186/s12885-019-5753-7 31159765
Carrato A, Benavides M, Massutí B et al (2019) First-line single-agent regorafenib in frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pilot phase II study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD). BMC Cancer 19:533. 10.1186/s12885-019-5753-731159765
13. Cardone C De Stefano A Rosati G Regorafenib monotherapy as second-line treatment of patients with RAS-mutant advanced colorectal cancer (STREAM): an academic, multicenter, single-arm, two-stage, phase II study ESMO Open 2023 8 100748 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100748 36603521
Cardone C, De Stefano A, Rosati G et al (2023) Regorafenib monotherapy as second-line treatment of patients with RAS-mutant advanced colorectal cancer (STREAM): an academic, multicenter, single-arm, two-stage, phase II study. ESMO Open 8:100748. 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.10074836603521
14. Schultheis B Folprecht G Kuhlmann J Regorafenib in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI as first- or second-line treatment of colorectal cancer: results of a multicenter, phase ib study Ann Oncol 2013 24 1560 1567 10.1093/annonc/mdt056 23493136
Schultheis B, Folprecht G, Kuhlmann J et al (2013) Regorafenib in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI as first- or second-line treatment of colorectal cancer: results of a multicenter, phase ib study. Ann Oncol 24:1560–1567. 10.1093/annonc/mdt05623493136
15. Argilés G Saunders MP Rivera F Regorafenib plus modified FOLFOX6 as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase II trial Eur J Cancer 2015 51 942 949 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.02.013 25818084
Argilés G, Saunders MP, Rivera F et al (2015) Regorafenib plus modified FOLFOX6 as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase II trial. Eur J Cancer 51:942–949. 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.02.01325818084
16. Sanoff HK Goldberg RM Ivanova A Multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase 2 trial of FOLFIRI with regorafenib or placebo as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer Cancer 2018 124 3118 3126 10.1002/cncr.31552 29905927
Sanoff HK, Goldberg RM, Ivanova A et al (2018) Multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase 2 trial of FOLFIRI with regorafenib or placebo as second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Cancer 124:3118–3126. 10.1002/cncr.3155229905927
17. Ychou M Viret F Kramar A Tritherapy with fluorouracil/leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX): a phase II study in colorectal cancer patients with non-resectable liver metastases Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2008 62 195 201 10.1007/s00280-007-0588-3 17901955
Ychou M, Viret F, Kramar A et al (2008) Tritherapy with fluorouracil/leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX): a phase II study in colorectal cancer patients with non-resectable liver metastases. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 62:195–201. 10.1007/s00280-007-0588-317901955
18. Adenis A Mazard T Fraisse J FOLFIRINOX-R study design: a phase I/II trial of FOLFIRINOX plus regorafenib as first line therapy in patients with unresectable RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer BMC Cancer 2021 21 564 10.1186/s12885-021-08312-7 34001059
Adenis A, Mazard T, Fraisse J et al (2021) FOLFIRINOX-R study design: a phase I/II trial of FOLFIRINOX plus regorafenib as first line therapy in patients with unresectable RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer. BMC Cancer 21:564. 10.1186/s12885-021-08312-734001059
19. Tournigand C André T Achille E FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study J Clin Oncol 2004 22 229 237 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.113 14657227
Tournigand C, André T, Achille E et al (2004) FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study. J Clin Oncol 22:229–237. 10.1200/JCO.2004.05.11314657227
20. Falcone A Ricci S Brunetti I Phase III trial of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) compared with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest J Clin Oncol 2007 25 1670 1676 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.0928 17470860
Falcone A, Ricci S, Brunetti I et al (2007) Phase III trial of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) compared with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest. J Clin Oncol 25:1670–1676. 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.092817470860
21. Ychou M Rivoire M Thezenas S Chemotherapy (doublet or triplet) plus targeted therapy by RAS status as conversion therapy in colorectal cancer patients with initially unresectable liver-only metastases. The UNICANCER PRODIGE-14 randomised clinical trial Br J Cancer 2022 126 1264 1270 10.1038/s41416-021-01644-y 34992255
Ychou M, Rivoire M, Thezenas S et al (2022) Chemotherapy (doublet or triplet) plus targeted therapy by RAS status as conversion therapy in colorectal cancer patients with initially unresectable liver-only metastases. The UNICANCER PRODIGE-14 randomised clinical trial. Br J Cancer 126:1264–1270. 10.1038/s41416-021-01644-y34992255
22. Ando Y Saka H Ando M Polymorphisms of UDP-glucuronosyltransferase gene and irinotecan toxicity: a pharmacogenetic analysis Cancer Res 2000 60 6921 6926 11156391
Ando Y, Saka H, Ando M et al (2000) Polymorphisms of UDP-glucuronosyltransferase gene and irinotecan toxicity: a pharmacogenetic analysis. Cancer Res 60:6921–692611156391
23. Rouits E Boisdron-Celle M Dumont A Relevance of different UGT1A1 polymorphisms in irinotecan-induced toxicity: a molecular and clinical study of 75 patients Clin Cancer Res 2004 10 5151 5159 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-03-0548 15297419
Rouits E, Boisdron-Celle M, Dumont A et al (2004) Relevance of different UGT1A1 polymorphisms in irinotecan-induced toxicity: a molecular and clinical study of 75 patients. Clin Cancer Res 10:5151–5159. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-03-054815297419
24. Loriot M-A Ciccolini J Thomas F [Dihydropyrimidine déhydrogenase (DPD) deficiency screening and securing of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapies: update and recommendations of the French GPCO-Unicancer and RNPGx networks] Bull Cancer 2018 105 397 407 10.1016/j.bulcan.2018.02.001 29486921
Loriot M-A, Ciccolini J, Thomas F et al (2018) [Dihydropyrimidine déhydrogenase (DPD) deficiency screening and securing of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapies: update and recommendations of the French GPCO-Unicancer and RNPGx networks]. Bull Cancer 105:397–407. 10.1016/j.bulcan.2018.02.00129486921
25. Conroy T Desseigne F Ychou M FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer N Engl J Med 2011 364 1817 1825 10.1056/NEJMoa1011923 21561347
Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M et al (2011) FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med 364:1817–1825. 10.1056/NEJMoa101192321561347
26. Conroy T Hammel P Hebbar M FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer N Engl J Med 2018 379 2395 2406 10.1056/NEJMoa1809775 30575490
Conroy T, Hammel P, Hebbar M et al (2018) FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer. N Engl J Med 379:2395–2406. 10.1056/NEJMoa180977530575490
