Perifosine Plus Capecitabine Versus Placebo Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Refractory Advanced Colorectal Cancer

NCT ID: NCT01097018

Last Updated: 2013-07-02

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

468 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2010-04-30

Study Completion Date

2012-04-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The trial will compare the overall survival of perifosine plus capecitabine to placebo plus capecitabine in patients with refractory advanced colorectal cancer.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Colorectal Cancer

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

QUADRUPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Perifosine + Capecitabine

Perifosine 1 tablet daily + Capecitabine BID days 1 - 14 every 21 days

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Capecitabine

Intervention Type DRUG

1000 mg/m2 BID/ Days 1-14

Perifosine

Intervention Type DRUG

50 mg daily x 21 days

Placebo + Capecitabine

Placebo 1 tablet daily + Capecitabine BID days 1 - 14 every 21 days

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Capecitabine

Intervention Type DRUG

1000 mg/m2 BID/ Days 1-14

Placebo

Intervention Type DRUG

1 pill daily x 21 days

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Capecitabine

1000 mg/m2 BID/ Days 1-14

Intervention Type DRUG

Perifosine

50 mg daily x 21 days

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo

1 pill daily x 21 days

Intervention Type DRUG

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients must have failed available therapy for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, including fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, bevacizumab and for K-ras wild-type (WT) patients, anti-EGFR antibody (cetuximab or panitumumab) containing therapies.
* For oxaliplatin-based therapy, failure of therapy will also include patients who had oxaliplatin discontinued secondary to toxicity.
* No prior exposure to capecitabine in the metastatic colorectal cancer setting, except limited-course radiosensitizing capecitabine
* Patients must have at least one measurable lesion by RECIST criteria

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients with known dipyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency or prior severe reaction to 5-FU
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

AEterna Zentaris

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Johanna Bendell, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

SCRI Development Innovations, LLC

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Alhambra, California, United States

Site Status

Bakersfield, California, United States

Site Status

La Verne, California, United States

Site Status

Long Beach, California, United States

Site Status

Los Angeles, California, United States

Site Status

Northridge, California, United States

Site Status

Redondo Beach, California, United States

Site Status

Santa Barbara, California, United States

Site Status

Santa Maria, California, United States

Site Status

Denver, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Grand Junction, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Yale University School of Medicine

New Haven, Connecticut, United States

Site Status

Stamford, Connecticut, United States

Site Status

Waterbury, Connecticut, United States

Site Status

Fort Myers, Florida, United States

Site Status

Hollywood, Florida, United States

Site Status

Pembroke Pines, Florida, United States

Site Status

Athens, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Lawrenceville, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Marietta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Roswell, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Harvey, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Park Ridge, Illinois, United States

Site Status

South Bend, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Terre Haute, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Baltimore, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Bethesda, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Lansing, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Jackson, Mississippi, United States

Site Status

Tupelo, Mississippi, United States

Site Status

St Louis, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Lincoln, Nebraska, United States

Site Status

Henderson, Nevada, United States

Site Status

Las Vegas, Nevada, United States

Site Status

Morristown, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Site Status

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Site Status

Armonk, New York, United States

Site Status

Great Neck, New York, United States

Site Status

New Hyde Park, New York, United States

Site Status

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Bismarck, North Dakota, United States

Site Status

Fargo, North Dakota, United States

Site Status

Cincinnati, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States

Site Status

Columbia, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Chattanooga, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Memphis, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

TN Oncology

Nashville, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Abilene, Texas, United States

Site Status

Austin, Texas, United States

Site Status

Beaumont, Texas, United States

Site Status

Dallas, Texas, United States

Site Status

Dallas, Texas, United States

Site Status

Dallas, Texas, United States

Site Status

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Site Status

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

Midland, Texas, United States

Site Status

Tyler, Texas, United States

Site Status

Richmond, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Seattle, Washington, United States

Site Status

Spokane, Washington, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Results of the X-PECT study: A phase III randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of perifosine plus capecitabine (P-CAP) versus placebo plus capecitabine (CAP) in patients (pts) with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). https://meetinglibrary.asco.org/content/98646-114 Abstract Number:LBA3501

Reference Type RESULT

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

Protocol 343

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.