CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT00294359Updated Aug 22, 2007

The MAX Study: Mitomycin C, Avastin and Xeloda in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

A Phase 2/3 interventional study of Mitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, sponsored by Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group. Completed at 36 sites in 2 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2007-08-22.

Sponsored by Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group · Phase 2/3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 2/3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
333
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study 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. 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.

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.

02

Conditions studied

  • Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Keywords

  • colorectal neoplasm
03

In context

Colorectal Neoplasms

5,599 studies on the registry are indexed under Colorectal Neoplasms; 1,459 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 333 is above the median of 77 across 4,123 interventional studies indexed under Colorectal Neoplasms.

Browse Colorectal Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group is the lead sponsor of 16 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • 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
  • 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

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • 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
  • 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
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2 / Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
333 participants (estimated)

Interventions

  • DrugMitomycin C; Capecitabine; Bevacizumab
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Phase II: - treatment related toxicity

  2. Phase III: - progression free survival

Secondary outcomes

  1. Phase II: - treatment response

  2. Phase III:

  3. - treatment related toxicity

  4. - treatment response

  5. - overall survival

  6. - symptoms of disease, treatment and quality of life

  7. - cost of therapy and assessment of gain in quality-adjusted progression free survival

07

Study locations

36 sites
  • Lismore Hospital
    Lismore, New South Wales, Australia
  • Newcastle Mater Hospital
    Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
  • Bankstown Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Campbelltown Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Liverpool Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Nepean Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • North Shore Private Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Prince of Wales Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Royal North Shore Hosp
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • St George Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Sydney Cancer Centre, Concord Repat General Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Westmead Hospital
    Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Tamworth Base Hospital
    Tamworth, New South Wales, Australia
  • Tweed Heads Hospital
    Tweed Heads, New South Wales, Australia
  • Southern Medical Daycare
    Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
  • Royal Brisbane Hospital
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  • Flinders Medical Centre
    Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  • Queen Elizabeth Hospital / Lyell McEwin Centre
    Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  • Royal Adelaide Hospital
    Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  • Royal Hobart Hospital
    Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
  • Bendigo Public Hospital
    Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
  • Geelong Hospital
    Geelong, Victoria, Australia
  • Austin Health
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Box Hill Hospital
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Frankston Hospital
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Monash Medical Centre
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • St Vincent's Hospital
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Border Medical Oncology
    Wodonga, Victoria, Australia
  • Fremantle Hospital
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • Royal Perth Hospital
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • St John of God Hospital, Subiaco
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • Christchurch Hospital
    Christchurch, New Zealand
  • Palmerston North Hospital
    Palmerston, New Zealand
08

References and documents

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 30247524 ↗
  • Roohullah 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 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 22, 2007, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00294359
Lead sponsor
Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group
First posted
Feb 22, 2006
Start date
Jun 2005
Completion
Jul 2007
Last update
Aug 22, 2007

Study contacts

Niall C Tebbutt, BA (Hons) BM BCh PhD MRCP FRAC
principal investigator · Ludwig Oncology Unit, Austin Health
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2007. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion