Metastatic Colorectal CancerPhase 2/3NCT00294359
The MAX Study: Mitomycin C, Avastin and Xeloda in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
A Phase 2/3 study testing Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab in people with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, run by Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group at 36 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
Although it is possible to cure bowel cancer when it is detected at an early stage, in many cases it may spread to involve other organs and in these cases is generally incurable. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab
- How many people
- 333 participants
- Where
- 36 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- Jun 2005to Jul 2007
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Histological diagnosis of colorectal cancer
- Metastatic disease that is not resectable
- Age > 18 years
- Any patient in whom the investigator considers capecitabine monotherapy appropriate
- Measurable and/or non-measurable disease as assessed by CT scan
- ECOG performance status 0, 1 or 2. Patients with PS2 should have serum albumin >30 g/L
Show all 14Show fewer
- No prior chemotherapy except for adjuvant chemotherapy given in association with (i) complete resection of primary colon or rectal cancer provided there is no clinical, radiological or biochemical evidence of relapse for at least 6 months after completion of adjuvant treatment and/or (ii) complete resection of limited colorectal metastases to liver and/or lung provided there is no clinical, radiological or biochemical evidence of relapse for at least 6 months after completion of adjuvant treatment
- Adequate bone marrow function with platelets > 100 X 109/l; neutrophils > 1.5 X 109/l i) Adequate renal function, with calculated creatinine clearance >30 ml/min (Cockcroft and Gault). For patients with creatinine clearance <50 ml/min the starting dose of capecitabine may not be greater than 2000 mg/m2/d (see Section 7.1)
- Adequate hepatic function with serum total bilirubin < 1.5 X upper limit of normal range
- Life expectancy of at least 12 weeks
- No other concurrent uncontrolled medical conditions
- No other malignant disease apart from non-melanotic skin cancer or carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix or any other cancer treated with curative intent >2 years previously without evidence of relapse
- Women and partners of women of childbearing potential must agree to use adequate contraception
- Written informed consent
Who cannot join
- Medical or psychiatric conditions that compromise the patient's ability to give informed consent or to complete the protocol
- Patients with a lack of physical integrity of the upper gastrointestinal tract, or known malabsorption syndromes.
- Uncontrolled hypertension
- Active bleeding disorders within the last 3 months
- Patients on full anticoagulation with warfarin. (Patients who require full anticoagulation and who wish to participate in the study should be converted to low molecular weight heparin). (Note: patients receiving full anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin should have no evidence of tumour invading or abutting major blood vessels on any prior CT scan)
- Participation in any investigational drug study within the previous 8 weeks
Show all 14Show fewer
- Patients with uncontrolled clinically significant cardiac disease, arrhythmias or angina pectoris
- Patients with a history of acute myocardial infarction or cerebrovascular accident within the last 12 months
- Regular use of aspirin (>325mg/day) or NSAIDs (low dose aspirin (<325 mg/d), or occasional use of NSAIDs is acceptable)
- CNS metastases
- Major surgical procedure within the last 28 days
- Serious non-healing wound, ulcer or bone fracture
- 24 hour urinary protein > 2g/ 24 hours ( performed if urine dipstick > 1+ )
- Pregnancy or lactation
Trial locations and contacts
36 sites in 2 countries.
36 sites in 2 countries
Australia34 sites
Flinders Medical Centre
Adelaide, South Australia
Queen Elizabeth Hospital / Lyell McEwin Centre
Adelaide, South Australia
Royal Adelaide Hospital
Adelaide, South Australia
Bendigo Public Hospital
Bendigo, Victoria
Royal Brisbane Hospital
Brisbane, Queensland
Geelong Hospital
Geelong, Victoria
Royal Hobart Hospital
Hobart, Tasmania
Lismore Hospital
Lismore, New South Wales
Austin Health
Melbourne, Victoria
Box Hill Hospital
Melbourne, Victoria
Frankston Hospital
Melbourne, Victoria
Monash Medical Centre
Melbourne, Victoria
Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute
Melbourne, Victoria
St Vincent's Hospital
Melbourne, Victoria
Newcastle Mater Hospital
Newcastle, New South Wales
Fremantle Hospital
Perth, Western Australia
Royal Perth Hospital
Perth, Western Australia
Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital
Perth, Western Australia
St John of God Hospital, Subiaco
Perth, Western Australia
Bankstown Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Campbelltown Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Liverpool Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Nepean Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
North Shore Private Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Prince of Wales Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Royal North Shore Hosp
Sydney, New South Wales
St George Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Sydney Cancer Centre, Concord Repat General Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Westmead Hospital
Sydney, New South Wales
Tamworth Base Hospital
Tamworth, New South Wales
Tweed Heads Hospital
Tweed Heads, New South Wales
Border Medical Oncology
Wodonga, Victoria
Southern Medical Daycare
Wollongong, New South Wales
New Zealand2 sites
Christchurch Hospital
Christchurch
Palmerston North Hospital
Palmerston
About this study
Official title: The MAX Study: A Randomised Phase II/III Study to Evaluate the Role of Mitomycin C, Avastin and Xeloda in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Although it is possible to cure bowel cancer when it is detected at an early stage, in many cases it may spread to involve other organs and in these cases is generally incurable. Chemotherapy prolongs survival and improves quality of life in such patients, but standard chemotherapy for this disease has not been defined.
There are several possible chemotherapy treatments for patients with bowel cancer, which has spread to other organs. However, these treatments are only partly effective and only work for a limited period of time. Most treatments are associated with a number of possible side effects which may have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Thus, it is imperative that more effective treatments with the lowest possible risk of side effects are developed.
Read more
Previous studies have shown that the addition of a new type of antibody treatment (bevacizumab) to an intensive combination chemotherapy regimen improved survival in patients with advanced bowel cancer and extended the time before tumours began to grow. However, intensive chemotherapy is likely to only be a suitable treatment for a proportion of patients with bowel cancer, because intensive chemotherapy causes a high rate of side effects.
This study compares a gentle chemotherapy treatment (capecitabine chemotherapy tablets given by mouth) with the combination of capecitabine and bevacizumab and the combination of capecitabine, bevacizumab and intravenous mitomycin C.
It is expected that a gentle chemotherapy treatment or a gentle chemotherapy treatment combined with bevacizumab would be an appropriate treatment for both young and fit patients as well as older and less fit patients who would not easily tolerate intensive chemotherapy.
Read the detailed description
Aims - The phase II stage of the study aims to determine the relative toxicity of the combination of capecitabine and bevacizumab and the combination of capecitabine, mitomycin C (MMC) and bevacizumab with that of capecitabine monotherapy and to assess tumour response rate (RECIST criteria) for each arm
For Phase III stage the primary objective is to compare progression-free survival (PFS) on the three arms. Secondary objectives are to determine treatment related toxicity; to determine tumour response rates (RECIST criteria); to determine overall survival for each treatment arm; to compare disease related symptoms and Quality of life and to determine cost effectiveness of bevacizumab containing treatments.
Research Plan Synopsis - Trial Design: Randomised, stratified multicentre phase II/III study. The study will proceed in 2 phases, initially a randomised phase II stage evaluating safety after 60 patients (approx 20 per arm) and 150 patients (approx 50 per arm) have completed at least 6 weeks' treatment. This will continue with a randomised phase III stage evaluating activity, toxicity and quality of life measures.
Treatments: Patients will be randomised to treatment in either one of the three arms: I) Capecitabine as monotherapy ; 2) Capecitabine and bevacizumab; or 3) Capecitabine and bevacizumab and MMC.
Drug administration: Arm 1: Capecitabine 2500mg/m2/d (in 2 divided doses) d1-14 q3weekly. Arm 2: Capecitabine administered as per Arm 1 plus Bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg q3weekly. Arm 3: Capecitabine and Bevacizumab administered as per Arm 2 plus Mitomycin C 7 mg/m2 q 6weekly (maximum dose 14 mg, maximum 4 treatments).
Analysis: A total sample size of 333 patients (111 per group) will be required to detect an improvement of at least 3.1 months in progression free survival from 5.5 to 8.6 months using a 2-tailed comparison, 2.5% level of significance, 3-year accrual and 1-year follow-up. The 12-month survival rate for patients on capecitabine alone is 50%. A sample size of 111 per arm will have 80% power to detect an increase of 17% in the 1-year rate from 50% to 67% based on a significance level of 2.5%, 3-year accrual and 1-year follow-up. For both endpoints (PFS and survival) the difference between capecitabine alone and the regimen containing MMC is expected to be greater (in the order of 4.5 months) which will yield > 80% power to detect the difference in PFS.
Whilst not a primary comparison, the study will nevertheless still have 80% power to detect a 5.5 month difference between the two experimental arms as a secondary comparison based on a level of significance of 1.7%. Secondary endpoints include treatment related toxicity. Toxicity analyses will include treatment-received population, which includes all patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Toxicity will be described by tabulating the proportions of patients with a worst toxicity grade of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 for each of the relevant NCI CTC AE scales.
Phase II: Confidence intervals for the difference in the incidence of bevacizumab and MMC associated grade 3/4 toxicities on the three arms will be calculated. If the incidence of these toxicities in the triple combination regimen (Capecitabine/MMC/ bevacizumab) exceeds the rate of toxicity experienced in the capecitabine/bevacizumab combination by more than 20% then consideration will be given to dose adjustment or stopping recruitment into the triple combination arm.
Phase III: The PFS for capecitabine chemotherapy alone is expected to be about 5.5 months and this is expected to increase to 9 months with the addition of bevacizumab, which is considered to be clinically meaningful. Using an overall 95% confidence level and 80% power and a 2.5% significance level for each comparison 111 patients per arm are required to detect differences based on a 36-month accrual and 12-month follow-up.
Outcomes and Significance - This randomised phase II/III study aims to compare capecitabine monotherapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab and capecitabine plus bevacizumab plus MMC in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.
The use of either MMC or bevacizumab to 5FU based chemotherapy appears to result in improved activity without substantial increases in toxicity. Thus regimens incorporating these agents could have significant activity and be well tolerated. These regimens could be suitable as a low toxicity palliative regimen for a broad range of the population of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer including older patients with co-morbidities.
As it is anticipated that rates of acute toxicity with each regimen will be lower than those observed with oxaliplatin or CPT-11-based regimens, the target population may be more broad ranging than most other studies. Thus, it may include older patients, patients with limited performance status (PS2), patients with co-morbidities or patients in whom there are concerns relating to toxicity with oxaliplatin or CPT-11-based combination chemotherapy. However, it is not restricted to this population and younger, fitter patients may also be enrolled in the study as a lower rate of side effects is likely to be associated with improved quality of life.
- Conditions
- Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
- Being tested
- Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab
- Keywords
- colorectal neoplasm
- Medical subject headings
- Colorectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; BevacizumabDrug
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Phase II: - treatment related toxicity
Phase III: - progression free survival
Secondary outcomes (7)
Phase II: - treatment response
Phase III:
- treatment related toxicity
- treatment response
- overall survival
- symptoms of disease, treatment and quality of life
- cost of therapy and assessment of gain in quality-adjusted progression free survival
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Feb 2006 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2005
- Study completionJul 2007
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Metastatic Colorectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 333 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group
- Sponsor type
- Research network
- Investigators
- Niall C Tebbutt, BA (Hons) BM BCh PhD MRCP FRAC, Principal investigator, Ludwig Oncology Unit, Austin Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00294359
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AG0501CR
- Status last verified
- Aug 2007
- First submitted
- 21 Feb 2006
- Last updated
- 22 Aug 2007
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Mooi JK, Wirapati P, Asher R, Lee CK, Savas P, Price TJ, Townsend A, Hardingham J, Buchanan D, Williams D, Tejpar S, Mariadason JM, Tebbutt NC. The prognostic impact of consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) and its predictive effects for bevacizumab benefit in metastatic colorectal cancer: molecular analysis of the AGITG MAX clinical trial. Ann Oncol. 2018 Nov 1;29(11):2240-2246. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy410.
PubMed 30247524Roohullah A, Wong HL, Sjoquist KM, Gibbs P, Field K, Tran B, Shapiro J, Mckendrick J, Yip D, Nott L, Gebski V, Ng W, Chua W, Price T, Tebbutt N, Chantrill L. Gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases receiving bevacizumab. World J Gastroenterol. 2015 May 7;21(17):5352-8. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i17.5352.
PubMed 25954110
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Aug 2007. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The MAX Study: A Randomised Phase II/III Study to Evaluate the Role of Mitomycin C, Avastin and Xeloda in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00294359
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AG0501CR
- Conditions
- Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
- Keywords
- colorectal neoplasm
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 333 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials GroupResearch network
- Study start
- Jun 2005
- Study completion
- Jul 2007 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Feb 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Although it is possible to cure bowel cancer when it is detected at an early stage, in many cases it may spread to involve other organs and in these cases is generally incurable. Chemotherapy prolongs survival and improves quality of life in such patients, but standard chemotherapy for this disease has not been defined.
There are several possible chemotherapy treatments for patients with bowel cancer, which has spread to other organs. However, these treatments are only partly effective and only work for a limited period of time. Most treatments are associated with a number of possible side effects which may have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Thus, it is imperative that more effective treatments with the lowest possible risk of side effects are developed.
Previous studies have shown that the addition of a new type of antibody treatment (bevacizumab) to an intensive combination chemotherapy regimen improved survival in patients with advanced bowel cancer and extended the time before tumours began to grow. However, intensive chemotherapy is likely to only be a suitable treatment for a proportion of patients with bowel cancer, because intensive chemotherapy causes a high rate of side effects.
This study compares a gentle chemotherapy treatment (capecitabine chemotherapy tablets given by mouth) with the combination of capecitabine and bevacizumab and the combination of capecitabine, bevacizumab and intravenous mitomycin C.
It is expected that a gentle chemotherapy treatment or a gentle chemotherapy treatment combined with bevacizumab would be an appropriate treatment for both young and fit patients as well as older and less fit patients who would not easily tolerate intensive chemotherapy.
Detailed description
Aims - The phase II stage of the study aims to determine the relative toxicity of the combination of capecitabine and bevacizumab and the combination of capecitabine, mitomycin C (MMC) and bevacizumab with that of capecitabine monotherapy and to assess tumour response rate (RECIST criteria) for each arm
For Phase III stage the primary objective is to compare progression-free survival (PFS) on the three arms. Secondary objectives are to determine treatment related toxicity; to determine tumour response rates (RECIST criteria); to determine overall survival for each treatment arm; to compare disease related symptoms and Quality of life and to determine cost effectiveness of bevacizumab containing treatments.
Research Plan Synopsis - Trial Design: Randomised, stratified multicentre phase II/III study. The study will proceed in 2 phases, initially a randomised phase II stage evaluating safety after 60 patients (approx 20 per arm) and 150 patients (approx 50 per arm) have completed at least 6 weeks' treatment. This will continue with a randomised phase III stage evaluating activity, toxicity and quality of life measures.
Treatments: Patients will be randomised to treatment in either one of the three arms: I) Capecitabine as monotherapy ; 2) Capecitabine and bevacizumab; or 3) Capecitabine and bevacizumab and MMC.
Drug administration: Arm 1: Capecitabine 2500mg/m2/d (in 2 divided doses) d1-14 q3weekly. Arm 2: Capecitabine administered as per Arm 1 plus Bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg q3weekly. Arm 3: Capecitabine and Bevacizumab administered as per Arm 2 plus Mitomycin C 7 mg/m2 q 6weekly (maximum dose 14 mg, maximum 4 treatments).
Analysis: A total sample size of 333 patients (111 per group) will be required to detect an improvement of at least 3.1 months in progression free survival from 5.5 to 8.6 months using a 2-tailed comparison, 2.5% level of significance, 3-year accrual and 1-year follow-up. The 12-month survival rate for patients on capecitabine alone is 50%. A sample size of 111 per arm will have 80% power to detect an increase of 17% in the 1-year rate from 50% to 67% based on a significance level of 2.5%, 3-year accrual and 1-year follow-up. For both endpoints (PFS and survival) the difference between capecitabine alone and the regimen containing MMC is expected to be greater (in the order of 4.5 months) which will yield > 80% power to detect the difference in PFS.
Whilst not a primary comparison, the study will nevertheless still have 80% power to detect a 5.5 month difference between the two experimental arms as a secondary comparison based on a level of significance of 1.7%. Secondary endpoints include treatment related toxicity. Toxicity analyses will include treatment-received population, which includes all patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Toxicity will be described by tabulating the proportions of patients with a worst toxicity grade of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 for each of the relevant NCI CTC AE scales.
Phase II: Confidence intervals for the difference in the incidence of bevacizumab and MMC associated grade 3/4 toxicities on the three arms will be calculated. If the incidence of these toxicities in the triple combination regimen (Capecitabine/MMC/ bevacizumab) exceeds the rate of toxicity experienced in the capecitabine/bevacizumab combination by more than 20% then consideration will be given to dose adjustment or stopping recruitment into the triple combination arm.
Phase III: The PFS for capecitabine chemotherapy alone is expected to be about 5.5 months and this is expected to increase to 9 months with the addition of bevacizumab, which is considered to be clinically meaningful. Using an overall 95% confidence level and 80% power and a 2.5% significance level for each comparison 111 patients per arm are required to detect differences based on a 36-month accrual and 12-month follow-up.
Outcomes and Significance - This randomised phase II/III study aims to compare capecitabine monotherapy with capecitabine plus bevacizumab and capecitabine plus bevacizumab plus MMC in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.
The use of either MMC or bevacizumab to 5FU based chemotherapy appears to result in improved activity without substantial increases in toxicity. Thus regimens incorporating these agents could have significant activity and be well tolerated. These regimens could be suitable as a low toxicity palliative regimen for a broad range of the population of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer including older patients with co-morbidities.
As it is anticipated that rates of acute toxicity with each regimen will be lower than those observed with oxaliplatin or CPT-11-based regimens, the target population may be more broad ranging than most other studies. Thus, it may include older patients, patients with limited performance status (PS2), patients with co-morbidities or patients in whom there are concerns relating to toxicity with oxaliplatin or CPT-11-based combination chemotherapy. However, it is not restricted to this population and younger, fitter patients may also be enrolled in the study as a lower rate of side effects is likely to be associated with improved quality of life.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (14 listed)
- Histological diagnosis of colorectal cancer
- Metastatic disease that is not resectable
- Age > 18 years
- Any patient in whom the investigator considers capecitabine monotherapy appropriate
- Measurable and/or non-measurable disease as assessed by CT scan
Key exclusion criteria (14 listed)
- Medical or psychiatric conditions that compromise the patient's ability to give informed consent or to complete the protocol
- Patients with a lack of physical integrity of the upper gastrointestinal tract, or known malabsorption syndromes.
- Uncontrolled hypertension
- Active bleeding disorders within the last 3 months
- Patients on full anticoagulation with warfarin. (Patients who require full anticoagulation and who wish to participate in the study should be converted to low molecular weight heparin). (Note: patients receiving full anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin should have no evidence of tumour invading or abutting major blood vessels on any prior CT scan)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab | Drug | – |
Primary outcome
Phase II: - treatment related toxicity
Phase III: - progression free survival
7 secondary outcomes
Phase II: - treatment response
Phase III:
- treatment related toxicity
- treatment response
- overall survival
- symptoms of disease, treatment and quality of life
- cost of therapy and assessment of gain in quality-adjusted progression free survival
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Aug 2007.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30247524Mooi JK, Wirapati P, Asher R, Lee CK, Savas P, Price TJ, Townsend A, Hardingham J, Buchanan D, Williams D, Tejpar S, Mariadason JM, Tebbutt NC. The prognostic impact of consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) and its predictive effects for bevacizumab benefit in metastatic colorectal cancer: molecular analysis of the AGITG MAX clinical trial. Ann Oncol. 2018 Nov 1;29(11):2240-2246. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy410.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25954110Roohullah A, Wong HL, Sjoquist KM, Gibbs P, Field K, Tran B, Shapiro J, Mckendrick J, Yip D, Nott L, Gebski V, Ng W, Chua W, Price T, Tebbutt N, Chantrill L. Gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases receiving bevacizumab. World J Gastroenterol. 2015 May 7;21(17):5352-8. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i17.5352.
Related trials for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Hepatic Artery Infusion of Carfilzomib in Participants With Liver Metastatic Disease Previously Treated With Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Therapy
Colorectal Neoplasms, Neoplasms
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Targeted Therapies in Subpopulations of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (INTRINSIC)
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
SAMe in Prevention of Oxaliplatin-associated Liver Injury
Colorectal Cancer, Liver Metastases
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study of ERAS-0015 in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors
Metastatic Solid Tumors
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
A Phase Ib/II Study of GFH276 in Combination With Chemotherapy (± Bevacizumab) or Cetuximab in Patients With RAS-mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
CRC
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Niall C Tebbutt, BA (Hons) BM BCh PhD MRCP FRAC principal investigator
Ludwig Oncology Unit, Austin Health
36 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2/3 study testing Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab in people with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, run by Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group at 36 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 14 inclusion and 14 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Aug 2007. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 36 sites in Australia, New Zealand. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Phase II: - treatment related toxicity. The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00294359, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Aug 2007.