Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aim: Investigate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy of BTH1677/cetuximab, with and without irinotecan, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients & methods: Patients with recurrent or progressive mCRC were assigned to BTH1677/cetuximab/irinotecan (group 1; n = 10) or BTH1677/cetuximab (group 2; n = 22). Adverse events, PK parameters and tumor response were assessed. Results & conclusion: Adverse events were consistent with those expected of the backbone therapy of cetuximab/irinotecan (group 1) or cetuximab alone (group 2). The BTH1677 PK profiles were similar in the two groups. The overall response rates were 30.0% (group 1) and 22.7% (group 2); in KRAS wild-type subset analysis, rates were 42.9% and 45.5%, respectively. BTH1677 therapy was tolerable and warrants further evaluation for treatment of mCRC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cornelio et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: