← Clinical Trial Results
Colorectal CancerPhase 2CompletedNCT05217069

FIRE-6: Complete Statistical Analysis of FOLFIRI, Cetuximab and Avelumab in RAS Wild-type CRC

An independent statistical review of the FIRE-6 phase 2 clinical trial evaluating FOLFIRI plus cetuximab with avelumab maintenance in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

Scope of this record

This page provides an independent statistical analysis and educational interpretation of publicly reported results. ClinicalTrials.gov provides the official trial registry record.

1. Trial at a Glance

57
Enrollment
Phase 2
Trial Phase
1
Treatment Arm
8 months
Primary Endpoint Time Frame
FeatureFIRE-6
NCT IDNCT05217069
AcronymFIRE-6
TitleFOLFIRI + Cetuximab + Avelumab RAS Wild-type CRC
StatusCompleted
Start date2019-09-27
Primary completion date2023-09-01
SponsorLudwig-Maximilians - University of Munich
DesignSingle group, open label

2. Clinical Question

Population

Patients with RAS wild-type colorectal cancer receiving the study treatment regimen.

Intervention

5-FU, folinic acid, irinotecan, cetuximab, and avelumab.

Comparator

No comparator arm was specified because the study used a single-group design.

Primary Question

The trial evaluated progression free survival rate after 8 months according to RECIST 1.1.

3. Trial Design

Allocation

NA

Masking

None

Primary purpose

Treatment

Number of arms

1

Single-group phase 2 evaluation

The study evaluates outcomes within one treatment strategy rather than comparing randomized groups.

4. Treatment Regimen

ComponentIntervention
Fluoropyrimidine5-FU
Folate componentFolinic Acid
ChemotherapyIrinotecan
EGFR-directed therapyCetuximab
Maintenance therapyAvelumab

5. Endpoints

EndpointDefinitionTime Frame
Progression free survival (PFS) The primary clinical objective is to determine the efficacy of a standard 1st-line regimen (FOLFIRI plus cetuximab) in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC with Avelumab maintenance in terms of progression free survival rate after 8 months according to RECIST 1.1. up to 8 months

6. Planned Analysis

The ClinicalTrials.gov record identifies progression free survival as the primary endpoint. No posted statistical analyses or efficacy estimates are available in the registry record.

For a progression-free survival endpoint, analysis typically involves time-to-event methods that account for patients who have not experienced progression or death at the time of analysis. Common approaches include Kaplan-Meier estimation of the progression-free survival function and summary measures of the event distribution.

Primary endpoint interpretation

The endpoint is designed to evaluate disease-control duration over the specified follow-up period. Because the registry does not report results, the observed progression-free survival rate and associated statistical estimates are not available.

7. Statistical Methodology

Progression-free survival analysis

PFS is a time-to-event endpoint. The event is generally defined by disease progression or death, while patients without an event at the analysis cutoff contribute follow-up information through censoring.

RECIST 1.1 assessment

The registry specifies that progression-free survival is assessed according to RECIST 1.1. This framework provides standardized criteria for evaluating tumor response and progression.

Single-group trial interpretation

Because FIRE-6 uses a single-group design, the statistical interpretation differs from randomized comparative trials. Observed outcomes describe the treated population but do not provide a randomized estimate of treatment effect versus an external comparator.

8. Statistical Methods Explained

Why is progression-free survival analyzed as a time-to-event endpoint?

PFS incorporates both the timing of disease progression and the possibility that some patients have not yet experienced progression at the analysis date. This avoids requiring all patients to have identical follow-up durations.

What does RECIST 1.1 contribute to the analysis?

RECIST 1.1 provides standardized criteria for determining radiographic response and progression, helping make endpoint assessment more consistent.

Why does a single-group design affect interpretation?

Without a randomized comparator, differences between treated patients and other populations may reflect patient characteristics, disease factors, or other differences rather than treatment alone.

Why is censoring important in PFS?

Patients may remain progression-free when follow-up ends. Statistical methods must account for these incomplete observations rather than treating them as failures or excluding them.

9. Limitations

10. Why This Trial Matters Statistically

FIRE-6 illustrates several important principles in clinical trial statistics, including the interpretation of phase 2 single-group studies, the analysis of progression-free survival, and the role of standardized response criteria.

ConceptHow it appears in FIRE-6
Phase 2 methodologyEvaluation of a treatment strategy before larger confirmatory development.
Time-to-event analysisProgression-free survival measured over time.
CensoringPatients without observed progression contribute partial follow-up information.
RECIST 1.1Standardized assessment framework for progression.
Single-group interpretationOutcomes describe the treated cohort rather than a randomized comparison.

11. Sources