***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 In metastatic colorectal cancer , phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil ( FU ) with leucovorin ( LV ) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone . This phase III study investigated two sequences : folinic acid , FU , and irinotecan ( FOLFIRI ) followed by folinic acid , FU , and oxaliplatin ( FOLFOX6 ; arm A ) , and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI ( arm B ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were r and omly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m(2 ) or dl-LV 400 mg/m(2 ) followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m(2 ) and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m(2 ) every 46 hours every 2 weeks , either with irinotecan 180 mg/m(2 ) or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2 ) as a 2-hour infusion on day 1 . At progression , irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin ( arm A ) , or oxaliplatin by irinotecan ( arm B ) . RESULT Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI ( P = .99 ) . Median second progression-free survival ( PFS ) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B ( P = .64 ) . In first-line therapy , FOLFIRI achieved 56 % response rate ( RR ) and 8.5 months median PFS , versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54 % RR and 8.0 months median PFS ( P = .26 ) . Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4 % RR and 2.5 months median PFS , versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15 % RR and 4.2 months PFS . In first-line therapy , National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis , nausea/vomiting , and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI , and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6 . CONCLUSION Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy . The toxicity profiles were different PURPOSE To compare the efficacy of cediranib ( a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor [ VEGFR TKI ] ) with that of bevacizumab ( anti-VEGF-A monoclonal antibody ) in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer ( mCRC ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS HORIZON III [ Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ] had an adaptive phase II/III design . Patients r and omly assigned 1:1:1 received mFOLFOX6 [ oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2 ) and leucovorin 400 mg/m(2 ) intravenously followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2 ) intravenously on day 1 and then continuous infusion of 2,400 mg/m(2 ) over the next 46 hours every 2 weeks ] with cediranib ( 20 or 30 mg per day ) or bevacizumab ( 5 mg/kg every 14 days ) . An independent end-of-phase II analysis concluded that mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg met predefined criteria for continuation ; subsequent patients received mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg or mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab ( r and omly assigned 1:1 ) . The primary objective was to compare progression-free survival ( PFS ) . RESULTS In all , 1,422 patients received mFOLFOX6/cediranib  20 mg ( n = 709 ) or mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab ( n = 713 ) . Primary analysis revealed no significant difference between arms for PFS ( hazard ratio [ HR ] , 1.10 ; 95 % CI , 0.97 to 1.25 ; P = .119 ) , overall survival ( OS ; HR , 0.95 ; 95 % CI , 0.82 to 1.10 ; P = .541 ) , or overall response rate ( 46.3 % v 47.3 % ) . Median PFS and OS were 9.9 and 22.8 months for mFOLFOX6/cediranib and 10.3 and 21.3 months for mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab . The PFS upper 95 % CI was outside the predefined noninferiority limit ( HR < 1.2 ) . Common adverse events with more than 5 % incidence in the cediranib arm included diarrhea , neutropenia , and hypertension .  Cediranib-treated patients completed fewer chemotherapy cycles than bevacizumab-treated patients ( median 10 v 12 cycles ) . Patient-reported outcomes ( PROs ) were significantly less favorable in cediranib-treated versus bevacizumab-treated patients ( P < .001 ) . CONCLUSION Cediranib activity , in terms of PFS and OS , was comparable to that of bevacizumab when added to mFOLFOX6 ; however , the predefined boundary for PFS noninferiority was not met . The cediranib  safety profile was consistent with previous studies but led to less favorable PROs compared with bevacizumab . Investigation of oral TKIs in CRC continues PURPOSE Patients with advanced , incurable thyroid cancer not amenable to surgery or radioactive iodine ( (131)I ) therapy have few satisfactory therapeutic options . This multi-institutional study assessed the activity and safety of axitinib , an oral , potent , and selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors ( VEGFR ) 1 , 2 , and 3 in patients with advanced thyroid cancer . PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with thyroid cancer of any histology that was resistant or not appropriate for (131)I were enrolled onto a single-arm phase II trial to receive axitinib orally ( starting dose , 5 mg twice daily ) . Objective response rate ( ORR ) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors was the primary end point . Secondary end points included duration of response , progression-free survival ( PFS ) , overall survival , safety , and modulation of soluble ( s ) VEGFR . RESULTS Sixty patients were enrolled . Partial responses were observed in 18 patients , yielding an ORR of 30 % ( 95 % CI , 18.9 to 43.2 ) . Stable disease lasting > or = 16 weeks was reported in another 23 patients ( 38 % ) . OBJECTIVE responses were noted in all histologic subtypes . Median PFS was 18.1 months ( 95 % CI , 12.1 to not estimable ) . Axitinib was generally well tolerated , with the most common grade > or = 3 treatment-related adverse event being hypertension ( n = 7 ; 12 % ) . Eight patients ( 13 % ) discontinued treatment because of adverse events . Axitinib selectively decreased sVEGFR-2 and sVEGFR-3 plasma concentrations versus sKIT , demonstrating its targeting of VEGFR . CONCLUSION Axitinib is a selective inhibitor of VEGFR with compelling antitumor activity in all histologic subtypes of advanced thyroid cancer BACKGROUND No effective systemic therapy exists for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma . A preliminary study suggested that sorafenib , an oral multikinase inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor , the platelet-derived growth factor receptor , and Raf may be effective in hepatocellular carcinoma . METHODS In this multicenter , phase 3 , double-blind , placebo-controlled trial , we r and omly assigned 602 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who had not received previous systemic treatment to receive either sorafenib ( at a dose of 400 mg twice daily ) or placebo . Primary outcomes were overall survival and the time to symptomatic progression . Secondary outcomes included the time to radiologic progression and safety . RESULTS At the second planned interim analysis , 321 deaths had occurred , and the study was stopped . Median overall survival was 10.7 months in the sorafenib group and 7.9 months in the placebo group ( hazard ratio in the sorafenib group , 0.69 ; 95 % confidence interval , 0.55 to 0.87 ; P<0.001 ) . There was no significant difference between the two groups in the median time to symptomatic progression ( 4.1 months vs. 4.9 months , respectively , P=0.77 ) . The median time to radiologic progression was 5.5 months in the sorafenib group and 2.8 months in the placebo group ( P<0.001 ) . Seven patients in the sorafenib group ( 2 % ) and two patients in the placebo group ( 1 % ) had a partial response ; no patients had a complete response . Diarrhea , weight loss , h and -foot skin reaction , and hypophosphatemia were more frequent in the sorafenib group . CONCLUSIONS In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma  , median survival and the time to radiologic progression were nearly 3 months longer for patients treated with sorafenib than for those given placebo . ( Clinical Trials.gov number , NCT00105443 . PURPOSE We performed this phase III study to compare the irinotecan , leucovorin ( LV ) , and fluorouracil ( FU ) regimen ( FOLFIRI ) versus the oxaliplatin , LV , and FU regimen ( FOLFOX4 ) in previously untreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer . PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 360 chemotherapy-naive patients were r and omly assigned to receive , every 2 weeks , either arm A ( FOLFIRI : irinotecan 180 mg/m(2 ) on day 1 with LV 100 mg/m(2 ) administered as a 2-hour infusion before FU 400 mg/m(2 ) administered as an intravenous bolus injection , and FU 600 mg/m(2 ) as a 22-hour infusion immediately after FU bolus injection on days 1 and 2 [ LV5FU2 ] ) or arm B ( FOLFOX4 : oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2 ) on day 1 with LV5FU2 regimen ) . RESULTS One hundred sixty-four and 172 patients were assessable in arm A and B , respectively . Overall response rates ( ORR ) were 31 % in arm A ( 95 % CI , 24.6 % to 38.3 % ) and 34 % in arm B ( 95 % CI , 27.2 % to 41.5 % ; P = .60 ) . In both arms A and B , median time to progression ( TTP ; 7 v 7 months , respectively ) , duration of response ( 9 v 10 months , respectively ) , and overall survival ( OS ; 14 v 15 months , respectively ) were similar , without any statistically significant difference . Toxicity was mild in both groups : alopecia and gastrointestinal disturbances were the most common toxicities in arm A ; thrombocytopenia and neurosensorial were the most common toxicities in arm B. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were uncommon in both arms , and no statistical significant difference was observed . CONCLUSION There is no difference in ORR , TTP , and OS for patients treated with the FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4 regimen . Both therapies seemed effective as first-line treatment in these patients . The difference between these two combination therapies is mainly in the toxicity profile PURPOSE This phase II study evaluated efficacy and safety of single-agent axitinib , an oral , potent , selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors ( VEGFR ) -1 , -2 , and -3 , in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer ( NSCLC ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS This was an open-label , single-arm , multicenter , phase II study with a Simon two-stage minimax design . Patients received a starting dose of axitinib 5 mg orally BID . The primary end point was Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors ( RECIST ) -defined objective response rate . Secondary end points included safety and tolerability , overall survival ( OS ) , and progression-free survival ( PFS ) . RESULTS Thirty-two patients were enrolled , with a median age of 66.5 years . The majority of patients ( 75 % ) had adenocarcinoma . Nine patients ( 28 % ) had received no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease , and 23 ( 72 % ) had received > or = one regimen . Three patients ( 9 % ) had a RECIST investigator-assessed , confirmed partial response ( PR 
    Output:
    
In conclusion , the addition of VEGFR TKIs to chemotherapy result ed in a modest but significantly shorter PFS but not in OS and ORR compared with bevacizumab .
The VEGFR TKIs group showed a less favorable AE profile with higher rates of diarrhea , fatigue , hypertension , neutropenia and thrombocytopenia , whereas a higher incidence of peripheral neuropathy associated with the bevacizumab was observed