Second-line treatments consisted of cetuximab plus irinotecan for arm A , and oxaliplatin plus either 5-fluorouracil ( FOLFOX ) or capecitabine ( CapeOX ) for the control arms .
Second-line cetuximab/irinotecan versus oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidines for metastatic colorectal cancer with wild-type KRAS. The goal of the present study was to compare the efficacy of the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan to the combination of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidines as second-line chemotherapy in patients with irinotecan-refractory and oxaliplatin-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) harboring wild-type KRAS. The study included 120 patients with mCRC who had progressed after irinotecan-containing first-line chemotherapy and were never treated with oxaliplatin; 40 patients with wild-type KRAS were accrued prospectively in the experimental arm (arm A), and 80 patients accrued retrospectively were divided into control arms B (n = 46) and C (n = 34) according to KRAS genotype. Second-line treatments consisted of cetuximab plus irinotecan for arm A , and oxaliplatin plus either 5-fluorouracil ( FOLFOX ) or capecitabine ( CapeOX ) for the control arms . The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.3, 5.8 and 3.9 months, for arms A, B and C, respectively, with statistical significance favoring arm A (P = 0.007). Differences in overall survival did not reach statistical significance (18.3 vs 12.6 vs 12.9, P = 0.138), although there was a trend toward longer overall survival in arm A. In terms of benefit from oxaliplatin-containing regimens either as second-line or third-line therapy, the median PFS was 5.0 months in arms B and C as second-line therapy, and 4.0 months in arm A as third-line therapy, with no statistical significance (P = 0.385). Second-line cetuximab plus irinotecan is a valid treatment strategy for mCRC patients with irinotecan-refractory and oxaliplatin-naïve tumors harboring wild-type KRAS. oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy resulted in equivalent PFS both as a second-line and a third-line therapy, enabling delay of the administration of FOLFOX and CapeOX until subsequent treatment cycles.
### Instruction:
            Given the context about compound efficacy for the given treatment mentioned within the input, mentioned the compounds 
            that can co-occur for the mentioned treatment

            ### Input:
            Second-line cetuximab/irinotecan versus oxaliplatin/fluoropyrimidines for metastatic colorectal cancer with wild-type KRAS. The goal of the present study was to compare the efficacy of the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan to the combination of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidines as second-line chemotherapy in patients with irinotecan-refractory and oxaliplatin-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) harboring wild-type KRAS. The study included 120 patients with mCRC who had progressed after irinotecan-containing first-line chemotherapy and were never treated with oxaliplatin; 40 patients with wild-type KRAS were accrued prospectively in the experimental arm (arm A), and 80 patients accrued retrospectively were divided into control arms B (n = 46) and C (n = 34) according to KRAS genotype. Second-line treatments consisted of cetuximab plus irinotecan for arm A , and oxaliplatin plus either 5-fluorouracil ( FOLFOX ) or capecitabine ( CapeOX ) for the control arms . The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.3, 5.8 and 3.9 months, for arms A, B and C, respectively, with statistical significance favoring arm A (P = 0.007). Differences in overall survival did not reach statistical significance (18.3 vs 12.6 vs 12.9, P = 0.138), although there was a trend toward longer overall survival in arm A. In terms of benefit from oxaliplatin-containing regimens either as second-line or third-line therapy, the median PFS was 5.0 months in arms B and C as second-line therapy, and 4.0 months in arm A as third-line therapy, with no statistical significance (P = 0.385). Second-line cetuximab plus irinotecan is a valid treatment strategy for mCRC patients with irinotecan-refractory and oxaliplatin-naïve tumors harboring wild-type KRAS. oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy resulted in equivalent PFS both as a second-line and a third-line therapy, enabling delay of the administration of FOLFOX and CapeOX until subsequent treatment cycles.

            ### Response:
            cetuximab, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine
            