BRAF Inhibitor Encorafenib And Cetuximab Real Life Investigation of Next Generation CRC Treatment
NCT ID: NCT04673955
Last Updated: 2022-09-29
Study Results
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.
RECRUITING
500 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2020-09-03
2027-01-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
BERING CRC - designed as a prospective (allowing initial retrospective documentation), longitudinal, non-interventional study - will investigate the real-world effectiveness, quality of life, safety and tolerability of encorafenib and cetuximab in BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC patients, who have received prior systemic therapy. Data from this study will contribute to a deeper understanding and characterization to the everyday use of encorafenib and cetuximab in a broader patient population in the German, Austrian, and Swiss routine setting.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
A Study of Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab With or Without Chemotherapy in People With Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
NCT04607421
Encorafenib, Binimetinib and Cetuximab in Subjects With Previously Untreated BRAF-mutant ColoRectal Cancer
NCT03693170
A Retrospective Non Interventional Study on First Line Treatment for Patients With BRAFV600E Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC)
NCT04317599
Phase II Study of ctDNA-guided Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab Retreatment in Patients BRAF V600E Mutated mCRC
NCT06578559
Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab in a Neoadjuvant Setting in Patients With BRAF Mutation Localised Colon or Upper Rectum Cancer
NCT05706779
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Failure to achieve adequate survival outcomes with standard treatment regimens in patients with BRAF-mutated mCRC has encouraged efforts to combine multiple targeted therapies: With 665 randomized patients, the BEACON CRC trial represents the largest trial and is currently the only phase III study in patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. After a safety lead in for dose confirmation of the triplet regimen, the phase III part was per-formed with a total of 665 patients, randomized 1:1:1 to either receive encorafenib plus binimetinib and cetuximab (triplet) or encorafenib plus cetuximab (doublet) or FOLFIRI / IRI plus cetuximab (control).
The BEACON CRC study met its primary endpoints Overall Response Rate (ORR) and Overall Survival (OS) comparing Encorafenib + Binimetinib + Cetuximab vs. Chemotherapy + Cetuximab (ORR: 26 vs. 2%, p\<0.001; OS: median 9.0 vs. 5.4 months, HR 0.52, p\<0.001). The BEACON CRC study was alpha-controlled also for the secondary endpoint comparing Encorafenib + Cetuximab vs. Chemotherapy + Cetuximab in terms of ORR and OS and showed a statistically significant advantage (ORR: 20 vs. 2%, p\<0.001; OS: median 8.4 vs. 5.4 months, HR 0.60, p\<0.001). In terms of safety, the overall frequency of adverse events grade 3/4 was 58% (En-corafenib + Binimetinib + Cetuximab) vs. 50% (Encorafenib + Cetuximab) vs. 61% (Chemotherapy + Cetuximab). Analysis of Quality of Life data resulted in a longer maintenance of Quality of Life in the Encorafenib + Binimetinib + Cetuximab arm and the Encorafenib + Cetuximab arm com-pared to Chemotherapy + Cetuximab. Between Encorafenib + Binimetinib + Cetuximab and Encorafenib + Cetuximab, no relevant differences were reported. With a longer Follow-Up (12.8 months) the updated OS data showed a median OS of 9.3 months in both the Encorafenib + Binimetinib + Cetuximab arm and the Encorafenib + Cetuximab arm compared to 5.9 months in the control arm. Updated ORR rates were 27% in the triplet arm (p\<0.0001 vs. control), 20% in the doublet arm (p\<0.0001 vs. control) and 2% in the control arm. The safety and tolerability were adequate, manage-able and consistent with the known profiles of BRAF-, MEK-, and EGFR-inhibitors. Regarding the triplet combination, the most common adverse events of any grade were diarrhea (triplet: 62%; control: 48%), dermatitis acneiform (triplet: 49%; control: 39%), nausea (triplet: 45%; control: 41%), and vomiting (triplet: 38%; control: 29%). Regarding the doublet combina-tion, the most common adverse events of any grade were nausea (34%), diarrhea (33%), fatigue (doublet 30%; triplet 33%; control 27%) and derma-titis acneiform (29%).
The most common updated grade ≥3 adverse events regarding the triplet combination were diarrhea (triplet: 11%; control: 10%), abdominal pain (triplet: 6%; control: 5%), nausea (triplet: 5%; control: 2%,vomiting (triplet: 5%; control: 3%) and intestinal obstruction (triplet 5%; control 3%). With the doublet regimen, the most common updated grade ≥3 adverse events were intestinal obstruction (doublet 5%), asthenia (doublet 4%; triplet 4%; control 5%), fatigue (doublet 4%; triplet 2%; control 5%), diarrhea (3%) and abdominal pain (3%).
Based on these data, it is expected that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) will approve encorafenib plus cetuximab for the treatment of adult patients with metastatic BRAFV600E-mutant CRC, who have received prior systemic therapy.
Data from pivotal clinical trials are usually based on a selected patient population in order to provide standardized results in the given indication. However, after marketing authorization usage in a broader patient popula-tion is to be expected. Therefore, BERINGCRC - designed as a prospective (allowing initial retrospective documentation), longitudinal, non-interventional study - will investigate the real-world effectiveness, quality of life, safety and tolerability of encorafenib and cetuximab in BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC patients, who have received prior systemic therapy.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Encorafenib
Observation of real-life treatment with encorafenib and cetuximab
Cetuximab
Observation of real-life treatment with encorafenib and cetuximab
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Legally capable patient ≥ 18 years of age (no upper limit)
* Metastatic colorectal carcinoma with BRAFV600E-mutation, pretreated with systemic therapy
* Decision was taken to treat the patient with the doublet therapy (encorafenib and cetuximab) in accordance with the current SmPC and by prescription; this decision was taken prior to and independent from the inclusion into the study;
* Treatment with the doublet therapy (encorafenib plus cetuximab) has been started ≤ 3 months prior to providing written informed consent for this study or is planned to be started in the near future.
Exclusion Criteria
* Prior treatment with any RAF-inhibitor or MEK-inhibitor.
* Presence of any contraindication with regard to the doublet therapy (encorafenib plus cetuximab) as specified in the corresponding SmPCs
* Current or upcoming participation in an interventional clinical trial
* Current or upcoming systemic treatment of any other tumor than metastatic colorectal carcinoma
* Prisoners or persons who are compulsorily detained (involuntarily incarcerated).
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
iOMEDICO AG
INDUSTRY
Pierre Fabre Pharma AG
INDUSTRY
Pierre Fabre Pharma Austria
UNKNOWN
Pierre Fabre Pharma GmbH
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Clinic
Braunau am Inn, Upper Austria, Austria
Clinic
Linz, Upper Austria, Austria
Clinic
Feldkirch, Voralberg, Austria
Clinic
Vienna, , Austria
Practice
Offenburg, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Ulm, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany
Clinic
Ulm, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany
Practice
Augsburg, Bavaria, Germany
Practice
Donauwörth, Bavaria, Germany
Clinic
Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany
Practice
München, Bavaria, Germany
Practice
Würzburg, Bavaria, Germany
Medical Car Centre
Aschaffenburg, Bayer, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Potsdam, Brandenburg, Germany
Practice
Celle, Lower Saxony, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Goslar, Lower Saxony, Germany
Practice
Göttingen, Lower Saxony, Germany
Medical Practice
Hanover, Lower Saxony, Germany
Practice
Hanover, Lower Saxony, Germany
Practice
Leer, Lower Saxony, Germany
Clinic
Weißenfels, Lower Saxony, Germany
Medical Practice
Wilhelmshaven, Lower Saxony, Germany
Practice
Rostock, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany
Practice
Rostock, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany
Clinic
Rostock, Melcklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany
Clinic
Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Clinic
Bochum, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Practice
Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Clinic
Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Practice
Bottrop, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Clinic
Essen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Practice
Moers, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Mönchengladbach, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Mülheim, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Neuss, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Clinic
Paderborn, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Medical Care Centre
Porta Westfalica, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Practice
Stolberg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Practice
Troisdorf, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Clinic
Wuppertal, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Practice
Bad Kreuznach, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany
Practice
Kaiserslautern, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany
Practice
Worms, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany
Clinic
Saarbrücken, Saarland, Germany
Practice
Dresden, Saxony, Germany
Prctice
Naunhof, Saxony, Germany
Clinic
Torgau, Saxony, Germany
Practice
Halle, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
Clinic
Köthen, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
Practice
Köthen, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
Clinic
Flensburg, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany
Clinic
Eisenach, Thuringia, Germany
Hospital
Aschaffenburg, , Germany
Medical Care Centre
Berlin, , Germany
Practice
Berlin, , Germany
Practice
Berlin, , Germany
Clinic
Berlin, , Germany
Private Practice
Berlin, , Germany
Private Practice
Dresden, , Germany
Hospital
Esslingen am Neckar, , Germany
Practice
Hamburg, , Germany
Practice
Hamburg, , Germany
Private Practice
Heidelberg, , Germany
Private Practice
Leer, , Germany
Private Practice
Lübeck, , Germany
Private Practice
Naunhof, , Germany
Private Practice
Offenburg, , Germany
Private Practice
Oldenburg in Holstein, , Germany
Private Practice
Schorndorf, , Germany
Private Practice
Würzburg, , Germany
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
NIS-PFO-2020-3101
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.