Trial reportJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2025
Final Results of ERBIMOX: A Randomized Phase II Study of Modified FOLFOX7 With or Without Cetuximab as First-Line Treatment for KRAS Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.
Trial report in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe combination of FOLFOX/FOLFIRI with an EGFR-antibody (cetuximab/panitumumab) is a first-line standard for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The OPTIMOX stop-and-go regimen, which reduces oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy, and fluorouracil/folinic acid (FU/FA) were standard maintenance-therapies in the pre-antibody era. Whether an EGFR-antibody adds value to the OPTIMOX strategy in the RAS wild-type setting remains unknown.
methodsIn the open-label, randomized, multicenter phase II ERBIMOX trial, patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC received either first-line induction-therapy with 8 cycles of mFOLFOX7 followed by maintenance-therapy with FU/FA (OPTIMOX arm) or mFOLFOX7 + cetuximab followed by FU/FA + cetuximab (ERBIMOX arm). Primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of additional cetuximab to mFOLFOX7 during induction/maintenance-therapy. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The trial is registered at EudraCT (No.2006-002744-28).
resultsFrom 2006-2011, 138 patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC from 23 German sites were randomly assigned to either OPTIMOX (N = 63) or ERBIMOX (N = 75). ORR numerically favored the ERBIMOX arm (64.0% vs. 54.0%, P = 0.3071). Median PFS (ERBIMOX vs. OPTIMOX) was 9.6 vs. 8.8 months (P = 0.7612), median OS 25.6 vs. 30.9 months (P = 0.5821). Most common grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were skin reactions (21.9% vs. 2.1%) and gastrointestinal disorders (13.5% vs. 9.5%). No cetuximab-related deaths occurred.
conclusionIn treatment-naïve KRAS wild-type mCRC, adding cetuximab to mFOLFOX7 resulted in numerically higher ORR than mFOLFOX alone, but no statistically significant differences in ORR, PFS or OS; probably because of the premature stop due to poor recruitment. The safety profile was as expected, with few discontinuations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40571867What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.