***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: PURPOSE Combining cisplatin or cetuximab with radiation improves overall survival ( OS ) of patients with stage III or IV head and neck carcinoma ( HNC ) .  Cetuximab plus platinum regimens also increase OS in metastatic HNC . The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group launched a phase III trial to test the hypothesis that adding cetuximab to the radiation-cisplatin platform improves progression-free survival ( PFS ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with stage III or IV HNC were r and omly assigned to receive radiation and cisplatin without ( arm A ) or with ( arm B ) cetuximab .  Acute and late reactions were scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ( version 3 ) . Outcomes were correlated with patient and tumor features and markers . RESULTS Of 891 analyzed patients , 630 were alive at analysis ( median follow-up , 3.8 years ) . Cetuximab plus cisplatin-radiation , versus cisplatin-radiation alone , result ed in more frequent interruptions in radiation therapy ( 26.9 % v. 15.1 % , respectively ) ; similar cisplatin delivery ( mean , 185.7 mg/m2 v. 191.1 mg/m2 , respectively ) ; and more grade 3 to 4 radiation mucositis ( 43.2 % v. 33.3 % , respectively ) , rash , fatigue , anorexia , and hypokalemia , but not more late toxicity . No differences were found between arms A and B in 30-day mortality ( 1.8 % v. 2.0 % , respectively ; P = .81 ) , 3-year PFS ( 61.2 % v. 58.9 % , respectively ; P = .76 ) , 3-year OS ( 72.9 % v. 75.8 % , respectively ; P = .32 ) , locoregional failure ( 19.9 % v. 25.9 % , respectively ; P = .97 ) , or distant metastasis ( 13.0 % v. 9.7 % , respectively ; P = .08 ) . Patients with p16-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma ( OPC ) , compared with patients with p16-negative OPC , had better 3-year probability of PFS ( 72.8 % v. 49.2 % , respectively ; P < .001 ) and OS ( 85.6 % v. 60.1 % , respectively ; P < .001 ) , but tumor epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) expression did not distinguish outcome . CONCLUSION Adding cetuximab to radiation-cisplatin did not improve outcome and hence should not be prescribed routinely . PFS and OS were higher in patients with p16-positive OPC , but outcomes did not differ by EGFR expression BACKGROUND Two arms with FOLFIRI , with or without cetuximab , were initially included in the r and omized phase III intergroup clinical trial NCCTG ( North Central Cancer Treatment Group ) N0147 . When other contemporary trials demonstrated no benefit to using irinotecan as adjuvant therapy , the FOLFIRI-containing arms were discontinued . We report the clinical outcomes for patients r and omized to FOLFIRI with or without cetuximab .  PATIENTS AND METHODS After resection , patients were r and omized to 12 biweekly cycles of FOLFIRI , with or without cetuximab . KRAS ( Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog ) mutation status was retrospectively determined in a central lab . The primary end point was disease-free survival ( DFS ) . Secondary end points included overall survival ( OS ) and toxicity . RESULTS One hundred and six patients received FOLFIRI and 40 received FOLFIRI plus cetuximab . Median follow-up was 5.95 years ( range , 0.1 - 7.0 years ) . The addition of cetuximab showed a trend toward improved DFS ( hazard ratio [ HR ] , 0.53 ; 95 % CI , 0.26 - 1.1 ; P = .09 ) and OS ( HR , 0.45 ; 95 % CI , 0.17 - 1.16 ; P = .10 ) in the overall group , regardless of KRAS status , and in patients with wild type KRAS . Grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic adverse effects were significantly increased in the cetuximab versus FOLFIRI-alone arm ( 68 % vs. 46 % ; P = .02 ) . Adjuvant FOLFIRI result ed in a 3-year DFS less than that expected for FOLFOX . CONCLUSION In this small r and omized subset of patients with resected stage III colon cancer , the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward improved DFS and OS . Nevertheless , considering the limitations of this analysis , FOLFOX without the addition of a biologic agent remains the st and ard of care for adjuvant therapy in resected stage III colon cancer BACKGROUND Clinical data showed promising antitumour activity with feasible tolerability for matuzumab plus epirubicin , cisplatin and capecitabine ( ECX ) chemotherapy in untreated advanced oesophago-gastric ( OG ) cancer . The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of matuzumab plus ECX versus ECX alone . PATIENTS AND METHODS In this multicentre , r and omised open-label phase II study , 72 patients with metastatic OG cancer were r and omly assigned to either 800 mg matuzumab weekly plus epirubicin 50 mg/m² , cisplatin 60 mg/m² on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m² daily in a 21-day cycle ( ECX ) or the same ECX regimen alone . The primary end point was objective response . Secondary end points included progression-free survival ( PFS ) , overall survival ( OS ) , quality of life , safety and tolerability . RESULTS Following r and om assignment , 35 patients ( median age 59 years ) received ECX/matuzumab and 36 patients ( median age 64 years ) ECX . The addition of matuzumab to ECX did not improve objective response : 31 % for ECX/matuzumab [ 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) 17 - 49 ] compared with 58 % for the ECX arm ( 95 % CI 41 - 74 ) P = 0.994 ( one sided ) . There was no significant difference in median PFS : 4.8 months ( 95 % CI 2.9 - 8.1 ) for ECX/matuzumab versus 7.1 months ( 95 % CI 4.4 - 8.5 ) for ECX , or in median OS : 9.4 months ( 95 % CI 7.5 - 16.2 ) , compared with 12.2 months ( 95 % CI 9.8 - 13.8 months ) . Grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicity was observed in 27 and 25 patients in the ECX/matuzumab and ECX groups , respectively . CONCLUSION Matuzumab 800 mg weekly combined with ECX chemotherapy does not increase response or survival for patients with advanced OG cancer .  Therefore , ECX/matuzumab should not be examined further in phase III trials PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab plus taxane/carboplatin ( TC ) as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer ( NSCLC ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS This multicenter , open-label , phase III study enrolled 676 chemotherapy-naïve patients with stage IIIB ( pleural effusion ) or IV NSCLC , without restrictions by histology or epidermal growth factor receptor expression . Patients were r and omly assigned to cetuximab/TC or TC . TC consisted of paclitaxel ( 225 mg/m(2 ) ) or docetaxel ( 75 mg/m(2 ) ) , at the investigator 's discretion , and carboplatin ( area under the curve = 6 ) on day 1 every 3 weeks for < or = six cycles ; cetuximab ( 400 mg/m(2 ) on day 1 , 250 mg/m(2 ) weekly ) was administered until progression or unacceptable toxicity . The primary end point was progression-free survival assessed by independent radiologic review committee ( PFS-IRRC ) ; overall response rate ( ORR ) , overall survival ( OS ) , quality of life ( QoL ) , and safety were key secondary end points . PFS and ORR assessed by investigators were also evaluated . Results Median PFS-IRRC was 4.40 months with cetuximab/TC versus 4.24 months with TC ( hazard ratio [ HR ] = 0.902 ; 95 % CI , 0.761 to 1.069 ; P = .236 ) . Median OS was 9.69 months with cetuximab/TC versus 8.38 months with TC ( HR = 0.890 ; 95 % CI , 0.754 to 1.051 ; P = .169 ) . ORR-IRRC was 25.7 % with cetuximab/TC versus 17.2 % with TC ( P = .007 ) . The safety profile of this combination was manageable and consistent with its individual components . CONCLUSION The addition of cetuximab to TC did not significantly improve the primary end point , PFS-IRRC . There was significant improvement in ORR by IRRC . The difference in OS favored cetuximab but did not reach statistical significance BACKGROUND Cetuximab , an IgG1 chimeric monoclonal antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) , has activity against colorectal cancers that express EGFR . METHODS From December 2003 to August 2005 , 572 patients who had colorectal cancer expressing immunohistochemically detectable EGFR and who had been previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine , irinotecan , and oxaliplatin or had contraindications to treatment with these drugs underwent r and omization to an initial dose of 400 mg of cetuximab per square meter of body-surface area followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg per square meter plus best supportive care  ( 287 patients ) or best supportive care alone  ( 285 patients ) . The primary end point was overall survival . RESULTS In comparison with best supportive care alone , cetuximab treatment was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival ( hazard ratio for death , 0.77 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 0.64 to 0.92 ; P=0.005 ) and in progression-free survival ( hazard ratio for disease progression or death , 0.68 ; 95 % CI , 0.57 to 0.80 ; P<0.001 ) . These benefits were robust after adjustment in a multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model . The median overall survival was 6.1 months in the cetuximab group and 4.6 months in the group assigned to supportive care alone . Partial responses occurred in 23 patients ( 8.0 % ) in the cetuximab group but in none in the group assigned to supportive care alone ( P<0.001 ) ; the disease was stable in an additional 31.4 % of patients assigned to cetuximab and in 10.9 % of patients assigned to supportive care alone ( P<0.001 ) . Quality of life was better preserved in the cetuximab group , with less deterioration in physical function and global health status scores ( both P<0.05 ) . Cetuximab treatment was associated with a characteristic rash ; a rash of grade 2 or higher was strongly associated with improved survival ( hazard ratio for death , 0.33 ; 95 % CI , 0.22 to 0.50 ; P<0.001 ) . The incidence of any adverse event of grade 3 or higher was 78.5 % in the cetuximab group and 59.1 % in the group assigned to supportive care alone ( P<0.001 ) . CONCLUSIONS Cetuximab improves overall survival and progression-free survival and preserves quality -of-life measures in patients with colorectal cancer in whom other treatments have failed . ( Clinical Trials.gov number , NCT00079066 [ Clinical Trials.gov ] . ) BACKGROUND We conducted a r and omized , phase II , multicenter study to evaluate the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR ) mAb panitumumab ( P ) in combination with chemoradiotherapy ( CRT ) with st and ard-dose capecitabine as neoadjuvant treatment for wild-type KRAS locally advanced rectal cancer ( LARC ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with wild-type KRAS , T3 - 4 and /or N+ LARC were r and omly assigned to receive CRT with or without P ( 6 mg/kg ) . The primary end-point was pathological near-complete or complete tumor response ( pNC/CR ) , defined as grade 3 ( pNCR ) or 4 ( pCR ) histological regression by Dworak classification ( DC ) . RESULTS Forty of 68 patients were r and omly assigned to P + CRT and 28 to CRT . pNC/CR was achieved in 21 patients ( 53 % ) treated with P + CRT [ 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) 36%-69 % ] versus 
    Output:
    
Conclusion The present study suggested that anti-EGFR MAbs may increase the risk of fatigue in cancer patients