Study |
related clinical trial |
N. of patients |
Type of cetuximab treatment |
line of therapy |
main results |
Zhang et al. [13] |
phase II (ImClone 0144) |
39 |
cetuximab monotherapy |
3rd line |
Shorter PFS for patients with FCGR2A R/R or FCGR3A V/V |
Bibeau et al. [19] |
None |
69 |
cetuximab + irinotecan |
3rd line |
PFS advantage for FCGR3A V/V |
Calemma et al. [20] |
None |
49 |
cetuximab + various chemotherapy |
1st, 2nd and 3rd line |
Response Rate and PFS advantage for FCGR3A V/V |
Rodríguez et al. [21] |
None |
44 |
cetuximab+various chemotherapy |
1st, 2nd and 3rd line |
higher percentage of patients progressing within 6 months in the FCGR2A R/R and FCGR3A F/F groups |
Etienne-Grimaldi et al. [15] |
phase II (CETUFTIRI) |
51 |
cetuximab + UFT + irinotecan |
1st line |
Shorter OS for FCGR3A F/F |
Park et al. [22] |
None |
107 |
cetuximab+irinotecan |
3rd line |
no significant association of FCGR SNPs with outcome |
Dahan et al. [23] |
None |
56 |
cetuximab+various chemotherapy |
1st, 2nd and 3rd line |
Shorter OS for FCGR3A V/V |
Zhang et al.
[24] |
phase II (BOND-2) |
65 |
cetuximab + bevacizumab ± irinotecan |
3rd line |
Increased response for FCGR3A F/F only in cetuximab + bevacizumab treated patients |
Paez et al. [25] |
None |
104 |
cetuximab + various chemotherapy |
1st, 2nd and 3rd line |
no significant association of FCGR SNPs with outcome |
Pander et al. [16] |
phase III (CAIRO-2) |
122 |
cetuximab + oxaliplatin + capecitabine + bevacizumab |
1st line |
PFS advantage for FCGR3A F/F |
Graziano et al. [27] |
None |
110 |
cetuximab + irinotecan |
3rd line |
no significant association of FCGR SNPs with outcome |
Negri et al. [26] |
None |
86 |
cetuximab + various chemotherapy |
1st, 2nd and 3rd line |
no significant association of FCGR SNPs with outcome |