# OrigAMI-3: HCP commentary report

> 141 verified statements (89 from speakers with a confirmed clinical role) from 14 commentary sources · 7 findings · updated Oct 19, 2026

## Report

- Trial: A Randomized, Open-label Phase 3 Study of Amivantamab + FOLFIRI Versus Cetuximab/Bevacizumab + FOLFIRI in Participants With KRAS/NRAS and BRAF Wild-type Recurrent, Unresectable or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Have Received Prior Chemotherapy
- NCT ID: NCT06750094
- Registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06750094
- Sponsor: Janssen Research & Development, LLC
- Phase: Phase 3
- Status: Recruiting
- Drugs: amivantamab, cetuximab, bevacizumab, fluorouracil, irinotecan
- Version: v1.0.0, edition 1
- Accepted: 2026-10-19
- Last checked: 2026-10-19
- Release hash: 3e78d98559705be29c2e076c532c55ff5da0b5f63707a79aab866fca202d9ef3

## Counts

- HCP commentary sources screened: 14
- Sources cited by verified statements: 14
- Verified statements: 141
- From speakers with a confirmed clinical role: 89
- Findings: 7
- People found in screened sources: 11
- People identity-verified: 5
- Voices cited: 9

Counts describe the retained sources. They do not estimate how many HCPs hold a view.

## Abstract

OrigAMI-3 asks whether amivantamab plus FOLFIRI improves outcomes over cetuximab or bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in second-line RAS/BRAF-wild-type advanced colorectal cancer. Clinicians in the sources reviewed for this edition discuss trial participation conditionally and question how the study fits treatment sequencing. These clinicians express interest in the EGFR/MET rationale while scrutinizing second-line benefit in right-sided disease. Comparative benefit and the approach’s eventual treatment role remain open questions in their commentary.

## Open Medical Affairs question

What evidence and toxicity information would clinicians need to discuss a trial for right-sided disease without equating response with durable benefit?

Raised by the leading finding. The report shows what clinicians said and the sources behind it; it does not settle the question.

## Findings (titles)

- F1. Right-sided activity prompted trial discussion, not a conclusion of superior second-line benefit
- F2. Prior intolerance and patient preferences could redirect treatment away from chemotherapy rechallenge
- F3. The EGFR/MET rationale and early activity generated interest while leaving validation open
- F4. Molecular confirmation matters, but repeat-testing schedules remained experience-based
- F5. Prior biologic exposure and rechallenge timing complicate where the study fits
- F6. ctDNA-guided selection was limited by testing access, drug access and responsibility for payment
- F7. Enrollment advocacy must be distinguished from public assertions of successful trial results

## What sits behind each finding

Counts describe what the report retained, not how many clinicians hold a view. A statement can support more than one finding.

| Finding | Statements | Passages | Sources | Named voices | Counterview | Limitations |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- | ---: |
| F1 | 9 | 8 | 2 | 3 | none recorded | 3 |
| F2 | 14 | 10 | 2 | 1 | none recorded | 4 |
| F3 | 20 | 12 | 6 | 4 | recorded | 4 |
| F4 | 12 | 11 | 4 | 2 | none recorded | 4 |
| F5 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | none recorded | 4 |
| F6 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 1 | none recorded | 3 |
| F7 | 9 | 9 | 8 | 6 | none recorded | 4 |

### What the statements are

| Finding | Views | Questions and uncertainty | Clinical experience | Comparisons | Restated results and context | Passages supporting | Passages giving context | Sources by kind | Feeds the Medical Affairs question |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- | --- |
| F1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 20 | 1 | 2 podcasts and video | yes |
| F2 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 3 | 2 podcasts and video | yes |
| F3 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 23 | 6 | 1 post or article, 5 podcasts and video | yes |
| F4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 21 | 3 | 4 podcasts and video | yes |
| F5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 1 podcast or video | yes |
| F6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 1 podcast or video | yes |
| F7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 10 | 2 | 6 posts and articles, 2 podcasts and video | yes |

### Trial dimensions

- Primary endpoint: Progression-Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR): F1 (1 shared claims)
- Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS): no finding draws on it directly
- Secondary endpoints: no finding draws on it directly
- Population and setting: F1 (7 shared claims), F7 (1 shared claims)
- The comparison: F1 (2 shared claims), F7 (2 shared claims)
- Safety and tolerability: F1 (1 shared claims), F2 (4 shared claims)
- Design and conduct: F1 (1 shared claims), F3 (1 shared claims), F5 (1 shared claims), F7 (4 shared claims)

## Sample findings

Paraphrased; the full report links each statement to its source.

### F3. The EGFR/MET rationale and early activity generated interest while leaving validation open

A podcast speaker asked whether acquired KRAS/NRAS mutations could explain resistance following progression, and what might enable amivantamab or EGFR targeting to overcome it.

Source: podcast, 2026-02-11.

### F1. Right-sided activity prompted trial discussion, not a conclusion of superior second-line benefit

In a YouTube case discussion, a speaker asked how to choose second-line treatment, whether an amivantamab study could be considered and which patient characteristics would matter for eligibility.

Source: YouTube video, 2026-07-01.

## What's inside

| Section | Items | Access |
| --- | ---: | --- |
| Findings with interpretation, counterviews and limits | 7 | Titles free |
| Detailed analysis | 8 sections | Paid |
| Verified statements with short source quotes and links | 141 | Paid |
| Trial aspects mapped | 13 | Free |
| Sources with links | 14 | Counts free |
| Speaker attribution for cited voices | 9 | Paid |

## Trial aspects

11 discussed · 2 no commentary found · 0 assessment incomplete.

| Aspect | Coverage | Statements | Sources |
| --- | --- | ---: | ---: |
| Primary endpoint: Progression-Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) | discussed | 1 | 1 |
| Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS) | no commentary found | 0 | 0 |
| Secondary endpoints | no commentary found | 0 | 0 |
| Population and setting | discussed | 8 | 3 |
| The comparison | discussed | 4 | 4 |
| Safety and tolerability | discussed | 5 | 2 |
| Design and conduct | discussed | 7 | 8 |
| EGFR/MET rationale and interpretation of early-phase evidence | discussed | 20 | 6 |
| Prior biologic exposure and anti-EGFR rechallenge sequencing | discussed | 8 | 1 |
| Molecular confirmation and selective repeat testing | discussed | 12 | 4 |
| ctDNA access, payment and equitable treatment selection | discussed | 8 | 1 |
| Toxicity-constrained alternatives and selected immunotherapy | discussed | 14 | 2 |
| Enrollment, referral and public evidence-status communication | discussed | 8 | 7 |

An aspect marked incomplete is a question the public commentary did not let us answer. We show it rather than hide it.

## Sources

| Channel | Screened | Cited |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| X threads | 7 | 7 |
| YouTube | 5 | 5 |
| Podcasts | 2 | 2 |

- Screened window: 2024-12-27 to 2026-09-18
- Cited window: 2024-12-27 to 2026-09-18
- Retrieved: 2026-10-19

Screened sources were retrieved for this trial. Cited sources back at least one verified statement and include primary sources used for context.

## The trial

From ClinicalTrials.gov.

- Title: A Randomized, Open-label Phase 3 Study of Amivantamab + FOLFIRI Versus Cetuximab/Bevacizumab + FOLFIRI in Participants With KRAS/NRAS and BRAF Wild-type Recurrent, Unresectable or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Have Received Prior Chemotherapy
- Registry: NCT06750094 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06750094)
- Study IDs: 61186372COR3002 · 2024-513853-66-00 (EUCT number)
- Sponsor: Janssen Research & Development, LLC
- Design: Phase 3 · interventional, randomized, parallel, phase3
- Status: Recruiting
- Enrollment: 700 (estimated)
- Start: 2024-12-12 (actual)
- Primary completion: 2027-12-15 (estimated)
- Primary endpoint: Progression-Free Survival (PFS) as Assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (Up to 2 years 1 month)
- Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS) (Up to 4 years 4 months)
- Intervention: Amivantamab (biological)
- Intervention: Cetuximab (biological)
- Intervention: Bevacizumab (biological)
- Intervention: 5-fluorouracil (drug)
- Intervention: Leucovorin calcium/Levoleucovorin (drug)
- Intervention: Irinotecan (drug)

## Scope and limits

This report does not judge efficacy, estimate HCP prevalence or consensus or give treatment advice.

- Discussion that does not name the trial may be missing from this edition.
- Some clinician views in the sources used in this report are not yet captured as evidence in this edition; the next refresh takes them up.
- Some passages in the sources used in this report were not fully assessed for clinician views, so a view there may be missing from this edition.
- Out of scope: 7 passages in the reviewed sources discuss other trials or topics outside this report's scope; they are not part of this edition.
- 83 statements in the sources reviewed for this edition discuss other treatment settings or topics unrelated to this trial's question and are not included.
- Further source limits: discussion that describes the trial without naming it may be incomplete; some discussion that describes the trial without naming it may be missing; sources about other trials are not included.
- The sources reviewed do not represent all HCPs or all public discussion. Discussion that did not use recognizable trial names or identifiers may be missing.
- Some recordings reproduce substantially overlapping panel material. Source counts cannot be interpreted as independent HCP counts or consensus.
- No protocol document or publication reporting results for the exact OrigAMI-3 trial was available. Earlier OrigAMI-1 observations and trial-design descriptions do not establish OrigAMI-3 efficacy or safety.
- Several consequential panel replies remain unidentified. Clinical roles for Kotani, Di Giacomo and A.n.n. are not established in the sources reviewed; unidentified social accounts are not confirmed HCPs.
- The publisher posts relay talks and do not establish the advertised presenters' detailed clinical assessments. Post and publication dates do not establish session dates or changes of opinion.
- Eng's right-sided case did not state BRAF status. The separate toxicity-constrained case and reported immunotherapy outcome should not be assumed to establish OrigAMI-3 eligibility.
- The meaning and assay behind ctDNA-negative rechallenge selection were not specified. Favorable ctDNA sensitivity comments concerned untreated patients, while repeat-NGS views were explicitly experience-based.
- Some potentially relevant discussion was not fully assessed, particularly treatment cessation after response and local treatment of residual lesions. Conclusions about the complete range of clinician views on those decisions are therefore limited.
- Recruitment and implementation statements describe the sources' observations at the time. They do not independently confirm current enrollment, reimbursement or country-wide testing practice.

How reports are built and checked: https://www.erudio.com/methods

## Editions and corrections

- v1.0.0, accepted 2026-10-19: current edition

Last checked for new commentary 2026-10-19. No corrections. Versions follow semver: a new or changed finding is a minor version, more evidence without a material change is a patch.

## Offer

- Size: Focused (141 verified statements)
- Current edition: $750. A purchase starts a check for new commentary and any newer edition follows at no charge
- 3 months of weekly updates: $1,300
- 6 months of weekly updates: $1,900
- 12 months of weekly updates: $2,600
- Optional identity linkages (12-month updates only, product updates-12-identities; speakers are named and described in every report): NPI and other verified IDs at $15 per identity-verified person in the edition at purchase (5 now), at most $750; people verified later in the term at no charge
- Pricing: https://www.erudio.com/pricing
- Buy now (card, through Stripe): https://www.erudio.com/reports/origami-3-nct06750094
- Agents: POST https://www.erudio.com/api/orders with {"report": "origami-3-nct06750094", "product": "edition" | "updates-3" | "updates-6" | "updates-12" | "updates-12-identities", "buyer_email": "...", "licence_key": "<your key, if you hold one>"}; it returns a payment link for your user (and a pay_url your own MPP or x402 payment client can pay over HTTP 402, when offered), and once paid the status_url returns your license key. Send the same key with every later order so all reports sit on one key. The buyer gets their account key by email, which reads every report bought with their address; recover_key (POST https://www.erudio.com/api/keys/recover) sends it again
- Talk to Audun Utengen and Tom Lee (invoice, PO, questions): https://www.erudio.com/contact?report=origami-3-06750094

## Cite

Erudio Health. OrigAMI-3 (NCT06750094): HCP commentary report. Edition 1, v1.0.0. Accepted Oct 19, 2026. https://www.erudio.com/reports/origami-3-nct06750094

## Machine access

- JSON: https://www.erudio.com/reports/origami-3-nct06750094.json
- Markdown: https://www.erudio.com/reports/origami-3-nct06750094.md
- MCP: https://mcp.erudio.com/mcp, tool `get_report_card` with `{"slug": "origami-3-06750094"}`