Table 3 Association of various predictive parameters and their combinations with tumour responses in patients treated with cetuximab regimensa

From: Feasibility of proposed single-nucleotide polymorphisms as predictive markers for targeted regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer

  

Overall response rates b

DCRs b

Predictive parameters

Subgroups

Responders/subgroups (%)

OR

95% CI

P -value c

Responders/subgroups (%)

OR

95% CI

P -value c

KRAS

WT

40/99 (40.4)

1

  

76/99 (76.8)

1

  
 

MT

3/24 (12.5)

0.211

0.059–0.754

0.009

12/24 (54.2)

0.358

0.141–0.905

0.04

Skin toxicityd

Yes

37/92 (40.2)

1

0.129–0.915

 

74/92 (80.4)

1

  
 

No

6/32 (18.8)

0.343

 

0.032

15/32 (46.9)

0.215

0.09–0.509

0.001

WT LIFR rs3729740

Yes

29/58 (50)

1

  

48/58 (82.8)

1

  

or WT KRAs

No

14/66 (21.2)

0.269

0.123–0.589

0.001

41/66 (62.1)

0.342

0.147–0.794

0.016

WT LIFR rs3729740

Yes

27/52 (51.9)

1

0.122–0.576

 

47/52 (90.4)

1

  

or skin toxicity

No

16/72 (22.2)

0.265

 

0.001

42/72 (58.3)

0.149

0.053–0.419

<0.001

  1. Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; CR=complete response; DCR=disease-control rate; 5-FU=5-fluorouracil; OR=odds ratio; MT= mutant; PD=progressive disease; PR=partial response; SD=stable disease; WT=wild-type.
  2. Bold font, P<0.05.
  3. aEither irinotecan or oxaliplatin was combined to cetuximab with 5-FU/leucovorin (FL) or capecitabine, namely, FOLFIRI and XELIRI or FOLFOX and XELOX.
  4. bAssessment using RECIST criteria (Therasse et al, 2000). Overall response (OR=CR+PR) and disease-control (DCR=CR+PR+SD) rates. .
  5. cPredictive parameters and their combinations were compared between the two subgroups, using Fisher’s exact test.
  6. dSkin toxicity confined to acneform rash, nail toxicity and dry skin.
Back to article page