Gemcitabine plus sorafenib versus gemcitabine alone in advanced biliary tract cancer: A double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre phase II AIO study with biomarker and serum programme

BackgroundSince sorafenib has shown activity in different tumour types and gemcitabine regimens improved the outcome for biliary tract cancer (BTC) patients, we evaluated first-line gemcitabine plus sorafenib in a double-blind phase II study.Patients and methods102 unresectable or metastatic BTC patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of gallbladder or intrahepatic bile ducts, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 0–2 were randomised to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m² once weekly, first 7-weeks + 1-week rest followed by once 3-weeks + 1-week rest) plus sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or placebo. Treatment continued until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tumour samples were prospectively stained for sorafenib targets and potential biomarkers. Serum samples (first two cycles) were measured for vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR-2) and stromal cell-derived factor 1 (SDF1)α by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).ResultsGemcitabine plus sorafenib was generally well tolerated. Four and three patients achieved partial responses in the sorafenib and placebo groups, respectively. There was no difference in the primary end-point, median progression-free survival (PFS) for gemcitabine plus sorafenib versus gemcitabine plus placebo (3.0 versus 4.9 months, P = 0.859), and no difference for median overall survival (OS) (8.4 versus 11.2 months, P = 0.775). Patients with liver metastasis after resection of primary BTC survived longer with sorafenib (P = 0.019) compared to placebo. Patients who developed hand-foot syndrome (HFS) showed longer PFS and OS than patients without HFS. Two sorafenib targets, VEGFR-2 and c-kit, were not expressed in BTC samples. VEGFR-3 and Hif1α were associated with lymph node metastases and T stage. Absence of PDGFRβ expression correlated with longer PFS.ConclusionThe addition of sorafenib to gemcitabine did not demonstrate improved efficacy in advanced BTC patients. Biomarker subgroup analysis suggested that some patients might benefit from combined treatment.     

First-line treatment of metastatic or locally advanced unresectable soft tissue sarcomas with conatumumab in combination with doxorubicin or doxorubicin alone: a phase I/II open-label and double-blind study

BackgroundConatumumab is a fully human monoclonal agonist antibody that binds to death receptor 5 and induces apoptosis in sensitive cells. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of doxorubicin ± conatumumab as first-line systemic therapy for metastatic or locally advanced/unresectable soft-tissue sarcoma.MethodsIn Phase I, six patients received doxorubicin (75 mg/m²) with conatumumab (15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks. In Phase II, patients were randomised (2:1) to receive doxorubicin with either double-blind conatumumab 15 mg/kg (conatumumab–doxorubicin; n = 86) or placebo (placebo–doxorubicin; n = 42). Patients who progressed on placebo–doxorubicin could receive open-label conatumumab monotherapy post-chemotherapy (n = 21).FindingsThe expected histopathologic subtypes (e.g. leiomyosarcoma, liposarcoma, others) were represented in this trial. No unexpected adverse events were noted in either Phase I or II. Median progression-free survival in Phase II was 5.6 and 6.4 months in the conatumumab–doxorubicin and placebo–doxorubicin arms, respectively (stratified HR: 1.00; p = 0.973), with more early progressions noted in the first 3.5 months in the conatumumab–doxorubicin arm. Median overall survival was not reached after 8.6 months median follow-up in either arm. Common adverse events were nausea (conatumumab–doxorubicin: 66%; placebo–doxorubicin: 80%), alopecia (55%; 63%), fatigue (60%; 38%) and neutropenia (32%; 50%). Post-chemotherapy results were not notably improved by conatumumab dosing.InterpretationAddition of conatumumab to doxorubicin appeared to be safe but did not improve disease control in a heterogeneous unselected group of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. The results of this trial are very useful for estimating the outcomes of first-line therapy of sarcoma patients treated with standard doxorubicin.FundingThis study was supported by Amgen Inc.     

Pentoxifylline and vitamin E treatment for prevention of radiation-induced side-effects in women with breast cancer: A phase two, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trial (Ptx-5)

BackgroundA previous study has shown that pentoxifylline in combination with vitamin E can reverse radiation-induced fibrosis. The aim of the present study is to investigate if the same drugs could prevent radiation-induced side-effects in women with breast cancer.Patients and methodsA randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial was performed. Women with breast cancer were treated for 12 months with 400 mg pentoxifylline t.i.d. or placebo, in combination with 100 mg vitamin E t.i.d., starting 1–3 months after the completion of radiotherapy. The primary end-point was passive abduction of the shoulder, and the secondary end-point was difference in arm volumes. The trial is registered on the ISRCTN.org website, number ISRCTN39143623.Results83 patients were included in the study; 42 in the pentoxifylline + vitamin E group and 41 in the placebo + vitamin E group. Both treatments were generally well tolerated. Seven patients were withdrawn from the treatment due to disease progression; four in the pentoxifylline group and three in the placebo group. At inclusion, patients had impaired passive abduction of the shoulder. During treatment, both the groups improved significantly. Median improvement from baseline was 3.7° (p = 0.0035) on pentoxifylline and was 9.4° (p = 0.0041) in the placebo group, but no difference between the groups was detected (p = 0.20). Arm volumes increased over time in the placebo group (1.04%), but not on pentoxifylline (0.50%), and differed significantly between the groups (p = 0.0172).ConclusionsThe combination of pentoxifylline and vitamin E was safe and may be used for the prevention of some radiation-induced side-effects.     

Economic impact of transarterial chemoembolization with drug eluting beads in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the standard treatment in patients with unresectable non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). New drug eluting beads aim at improving efficacy of TACE in retaining as long as possible the anticancer drug within the tumor. Our monocentric study compares direct hospital medical costs, according to two different methods, for a first course of conventional TACE and for a first course of TACE using drug eluting beads in 30 patients with HCC. The average cost of a first course of conventional TACE valued by the analytic accounting system is 4 332 € versus 3 577 € for a first course of TACE using drug eluting beads. The average cost of a first course of conventional TACE valued by the official tariffs from the new French Diagnosis Related Group prospective payment system is 4 507 € (+175 €) versus 2 852 € (?725 €) for a first course of TACE using drug eluting beads. Our study shows that a first TACE using drug eluting beads, valued by the official tariffs from the new French Diagnosis Related Group prospective payment system, is significantly (p = 0.006) less expensive than a first conventional TACE.     

Randomised phase II/III study of docetaxel with or without risedronate in patients with metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC), the Netherlands Prostate Study (NePro)

BackgroundThis multicentre, randomised, open label, phase II/III study aimed to investigate the potential benefit of adding risedronate (R) to docetaxel (D) in patients with metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC).Patients and methodsCRPC patients with bone metastasis were randomly assigned to receive D 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks and prednisone as first line chemotherapy, with or without R 30 mg oral once daily. The primary end-point was time to progression (TTP). A composite end-point of objective progression by RECIST criteria, PSA progression, or pain progression, whichever occurred first, was applied. The study had 80% power to detect an improvement of 30% in median TTP in the DR group (two-sided α = 0.05).ResultsFive hundred and ninety-two men (301 D versus 291 DR) were randomised. TTP was 7.4 [D] versus 6.5 [DR] months (p = 0.75). PSA and pain response rates were similar, 66.3% [D] versus 65.9% [DR] and 27.9% [D] versus 31.2% [DR], respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 18.4 [D] versus 19.2 [DR] months (p = 0.33). There were no differences in toxicity.ConclusionThe addition of the third generation bisphosphonate, risedronate, in the setting of effective first line docetaxel based chemotherapy did not increase efficacy, as indicated by the lack of improvement in TTP, OS, PSA- and pain response.     

Everolimus in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Subgroup analysis of patients with 1 or 2 previous vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapies enrolled in the phase III RECORD-1 study

IntroductionIn the phase III RECORD-1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00410124), patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who progressed on previous vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFr-TKI) therapy were randomised 2:1 to everolimus 10 mg once daily (n = 277) or placebo (n = 139). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.9 months with everolimus and 1.9 months with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.33; P < .001). This preplanned, prospective sub-analysis evaluated PFS benefit of everolimus versus placebo in patients who had previously received 1 or 2 VEGFr-TKIs.Patients and methodsMedian PFS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyse differences in PFS.ResultsAll patients (100%) received ⩾1 previous VEGFr-TKI; 26% of patients received 2 previous VEGFr-TKIs. Among patients who received 1 previous VEGFr-TKI, median PFS was 5.4 months with everolimus and 1.9 months with placebo (HR, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24–0.43; P < .001). Among patients who received 2 previous VEGFr-TKIs, median PFS was 4.0 months with everolimus and 1.8 months with placebo (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.19–0.54; P < .001). The everolimus safety profile was similar for both groups.ConclusionsEverolimus was associated with prolonged PFS relative to placebo in patients who received 1 or 2 previous VEGFr-TKIs. Patients who received only 1 previous VEGFr-TKI had apparently longer PFS with everolimus in reference to those who received 2 previous VEGFr-TKIs. These results support the use of everolimus as the standard of care in patients who fail initial VEGFr-TKI therapy.     

A double-blind,randomised, placebo-controlled,phase 2b study evaluating sorafenib in combination with paclitaxel as a first-line therapy in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer

BackgroundWe conducted a phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled screening trial to evaluate the addition of the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib (antiproliferative/antiangiogenic) to first-line paclitaxel for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer.MethodsPatients were randomised to paclitaxel (90 mg/m², weekly, intravenously, 3 weeks on/1 week off) plus sorafenib (400 mg, orally, twice daily) or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). A sample size of 220 patients was planned with relative risk ?0.82 (1-sided α = 0.14) after 120 events supporting a treatment effect.FindingsPatients were randomised in India (n = 170), the United States (n = 52) and Brazil (n = 15). Median PFS was 6.9 months for sorafenib versus 5.6 months for placebo (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.788; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.558–1.112; P = 0.1715 [1-sided P = 0.0857]). The addition of sorafenib increased time to progression (median, 8.1 versus 5.6 months; HR = 0.674; 95% CI 0.465–0.975; P = 0.0343) and improved overall response (67% versus 54%; P = 0.0468). Overall survival did not statistically differ (median, 16.8 versus 17.4 months; HR = 1.022; 95% CI 0.715–1.461; P = 0.904). Grade 3/4 toxicities (sorafenib versus placebo) included hand-foot skin reaction (31% versus 3%), neutropenia (13% versus 7%) and anaemia (11% versus 6%). Two treatment-related deaths occurred (malaria and liver dysfunction) in the sorafenib arm.InterpretationThe addition of sorafenib to paclitaxel improved disease control but did not significantly improve PFS to support a phase 3 trial of similar design. Toxicity of the combination was manageable with dose reductions.FundingNorthwestern University, Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals.     

Transarterial chemoembolization followed by moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: Long-term results of RTF3 regimen

PurposeIn early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients merely fit for surgery, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) achieve low long-term disease control. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of its combination with moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (hRT) using RTF3 regimen.Material and methodsBetween 2006 and 2016, 61 consecutive patients treated in our single expert center for a Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) A HCC by TACE followed by hRT 3 Gy/fraction were retrospectively included.ResultsSixty of the 61 included presented Child-Pugh A cirrhosis (A5, n = 41, 67.2%; A6: n = 19, 31.1%). Fourteen patients (22.9%) were already treated for a HCC, mainly by radiofrequency (n = 12). All patient received a TACE followed by 3 Gy per fraction hRT. Mean radiation dose was 54 Gy (range: 48–60). After a median follow-up of 118 months, median time-to-progression, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was 21.3, 18.1, and 31.5 months, respectively. In univariate analysis, PFS was related to dose > 54 Gy (HR: 2, P = 0.036), and OS was correlated to Child-Pugh A6 or B7 (HR: 1.93, P = 0.03) and overall hRT time (HR: 1.06, P = 0.015). At progression, orthotopic liver transplantation was performed in 8 patients (13.1%). Severe symptomatic adverse events occurred in 12 patients (19.7%), mainly ascites (n = 7).ConclusionIn BCLC-A Child-Pugh A HCC patients ineligible to surgery or thermoablation, TACE-hRT is a safe and effective treatment. Prospective studies are needed to compare this association with radioembolization, TACE-stereotactic radiotherapy, and systemic treatments combinations.     

Relative telomere length: a novel non-invasive biomarker for the risk of non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection

Background and aimsTelomere length has emerged as a promising risk predictor of various cancers including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the majority of studies in this area measured telomere length in hepatocytes and one in lymphocytes with conflicting results. Moreover, no studies have been reported on using circulating DNA telomere length as a non-invasive HCC biomarker.MethodsWe conducted a nested case-control study to determine the relative telomere length (RTL) in serum DNA from 140 hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related HCC cases and 280 frequency-matched cancer-free HBV controls.ResultsCases had a significantly longer RTL (median, 0.31; range, 0.02–2.31) than controls (median, 0.20; range, 0.01–1.60) (P = 0.003). Consistently, longer RTLs conferred a significantly increased HCC risk compared to short RTLs in a univariate logistic regression analysis (odds ratio [OR] = 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02–2.33, P = 0.038). This association attenuated after multivariate adjustment (OR = 1.40, 95% CI = 0.90–2.19, P = 0.132). In a quartile analysis, a significant dose-response relationship was noted in univariate analysis (P_trend = 0.017) which was again attenuated in multivariate analysis (P_trend = 0.079). Further analyses revealed that the significant association between serum RTL and HCC risk was evident in non-cirrhotic (OR = 3.54, 95% CI 1.58–7.93 P = 0.002), but not cirrhotic (OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.55–1.64, P = 0.860) HBV patients. Moreover, the significantly increased HCC risk conferred by cirrhosis was modulated by RTL with a significant interaction effect (P_interaction = 0.013).ConclusionsRTL in circulating cell-free serum DNA could potentially be used as a novel non-invasive biomarker for non-cirrhotic HCC. Prospective cohort studies are warranted to validate this finding and assess its clinical significance in HCC prevention.     

Effect of the UK Postcode Lottery on Survival of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cancer: an Audit of Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cancer Suitable for Treatment with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

AimsTo determine whether primary care trusts’ agreement or refusal to fund sorafenib or sunitinib affects outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.Materials and methodsThis retrospective audit was conducted in a tertiary referral centre for urological cancer. Requests to prescribe drugs not approved by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence are recorded on a trust database. We obtained details of all requests made for sunitinib and sorafenib for patients with renal cell carcinoma since licence in 2006. Outcome measures analysed were overall survival measured from the date of request for funding and hospital resource use as measured from Payment by Results data. Known prognostic factors and the patient's Index of Multiple Deprivation score were assessed at baseline as potential confounders of survival difference.ResultsSeventy-nine patients were identified. The groups were similar with respect to prognostic factors and Index of Multiple Deprivation scores. Thirty-seven and eight patients had funding approved for sunitinib and sorafenib, respectively; 21 and 13 were turned down. Seven patients who were denied funding received one or other of these drugs by self-funding treatment. Survival was longer for patients who received treatment with a drug for which they had applied for funding than for those who did not (hazards ratio 0.46; 95% confidence interval 0.21–1.01; χ² = 3.80; 1 d.f.; P = 0.05); the advantage was similar for patients receiving sunitinib (hazards ratio = 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.18–1.36; χ² = 1.86; 1 d.f.; P = 0.17) and sorafenib (hazard ratio = 0.44; 95% confidence interval 0.11–1.69; χ² = 1.58; 1 d.f.; P = 0.21). Overall National Health Service resource use apart from funding for the renal cancer drugs was similar for both groups.ConclusionsCompared with patients receiving treatment, patients denied access to sunitinib and sorafenib had substantially worse survival outcomes, despite receiving treatment from the same clinical team. Access to the new drugs did not have an effect on overall use of National Health Service resources by funded patients. Modern treatments for advanced renal cancer should be available to all National Health Service patients with the disease.     

A randomized, dose-response, multicenter phase II study of radium-223 chloride for the palliation of painful bone metastases in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer

PurposeTo investigate the dose–response relationship and pain-relieving effect of radium-223, a highly bone-targeted alpha-pharmaceutical.MethodsOne hundred patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and painful bone metastases were randomized to a single intravenous dose of 5, 25, 50 or 100 kBq/kg radium-223. The primary end-point was pain index (visual analogue scale [VAS] and analgesic use), also used to classify patients as responders or non-responders.ResultsA significant dose response for pain index was seen at week 2 (P = .035). At week 8 there were 40%, 63%, 56% and 71% pain responders (reduced pain and stable analgesic consumption) in the 5, 25, 50 and 100 kBq/kg groups, respectively. On the daily VAS, at week 8, pain decreased by a mean of −30, −31, −27 and −28 mm, respectively (P = .008, P = .0005, P = .002, and P < .0001) in these responders (post-hoc analysis). There was also a significant improvement in the brief pain inventory functional index for all dose-groups (P = .04, .01, .002 and .02, Wilcoxon signed rank test). Furthermore, a decrease in bone alkaline phosphatase in the highest dose-group was demonstrated (P = .0067). All doses were safe and well tolerated.ConclusionPain response was seen in up to 71% of the patients with a dose response observed 2 weeks after administration. The highly tolerable side-effect profile of radium-223 previously reported was confirmed.     

To predict progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic renal cancer treated with sorafenib: pilot study using dynamic contrast-enhanced Doppler ultrasound

IntroductionThe objective of this study was to evaluate dynamic contrast-enhanced Doppler ultrasound (DCE-US) with perfusion software (Vascular Recognition Imaging) and contrast agent injection as a predictor of tumour response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).Patients and methodsThirty patients with a metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) already enrolled in a double-blind randomised study were evaluated. Examinations were performed at baseline, and after 3 and 6 weeks on sorafenib or a placebo in patients with tumour targets that were accessible to DCE-US.ResultsA total of 85 examinations were performed, 30 at baseline, 28 at 3 weeks and 27 at 6 weeks. The combination of a decrease in contrast uptake exceeding 10% and stability or a decrease in tumour volume allowed us to discriminate seven good responders and 20 poor responders at 3 weeks. There was a statistically significant difference in PFS (p = 10⁻⁴) and OS (p = 10⁻⁴) between good and poor responders.ConclusionDCE-US is a new noninvasive imaging technique which might be an effective tool for evaluating antiangiogenic drugs in renal cancer.     

Maintenance pazopanib versus placebo in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients non-progressive after first line chemotherapy: A double blind randomised phase III study of the lung cancer group,EORTC 08092 (EudraCT: 2010-018566-23, NCT01208064)

BackgroundSwitch maintenance is an effective strategy in the treatment of advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Pazopanib is an oral, multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). EORTC 08092 evaluated pazopanib given as maintenance treatment following standard first line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.MethodsPatients with non-progressive disease after 4–6 cycles of chemotherapy were randomised to receive either pazopanib 800 mg/day or matched placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end-point was overall survival and secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety.ResultsA total of 600 patients were planned to be randomised. The trial was prematurely stopped following an early interim analysis, after 102 patients were randomised to pazopanib (n = 50) or placebo (n = 52). Median age was 64 years in both arms. Median overall survival was 17.4 months for pazopanib and 12.3 months for placebo (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40–1.28]; p = 0.257). Median PFS was 4.3 months versus 3.2 months (HR 0.67, [95% CI 0.43–1.03], p = 0.068). PFS rates at 4 months were 56% and 45% respectively. The majority of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were grade 1–2. Grade 3–4 AEs (pazopanib versus placebo) were hypertension (38% versus 8%), neutropenia (8% versus 0%), and elevated SGPT (6% versus 0%). Of the patients randomised to pazopanib, 22% withdrew due to a treatment-related AE.ConclusionsSwitch maintenance with pazopanib following platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients had limited side-effects. This study was stopped due to lack of efficacy by stringent criteria for PFS at a futility interim analysis.     

NovoTTF-100A versus physician's choice chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma: A randomised phase III trial of a novel treatment modality

PurposeNovoTTF-100A is a portable device delivering low-intensity, intermediate frequency electric fields via non-invasive, transducer arrays. Tumour Treatment Fields (TTF), a completely new therapeutic modality in cancer treatment, physically interfere with cell division.MethodsPhase III trial of chemotherapy-free treatment of NovoTTF (20–24 h/day) versus active chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Primary end-point was improvement of overall survival.ResultsPatients (median age 54 years (range 23–80), Karnofsky performance status 80% (range 50–100) were randomised to TTF alone (n = 120) or active chemotherapy control (n = 117). Number of prior treatments was two (range 1–6). Median survival was 6.6 versus 6.0 months (hazard ratio 0.86 [95% CI 0.66–1.12]; p = 0.27), 1-year survival rate was 20% and 20%, progression-free survival rate at 6 months was 21.4% and 15.1% (p = 0.13), respectively in TTF and active control patients. Responses were more common in the TTF arm (14% versus 9.6%, p = 0.19). The TTF-related adverse events were mild (14%) to moderate (2%) skin rash beneath the transducer arrays. Severe adverse events occurred in 6% and 16% (p = 0.022) of patients treated with TTF and chemotherapy, respectively. Quality of life analyses favoured TTF therapy in most domains.ConclusionsThis is the first controlled trial evaluating an entirely novel cancer treatment modality delivering electric fields rather than chemotherapy. No improvement in overall survival was demonstrated, however efficacy and activity with this chemotherapy-free treatment device appears comparable to chemotherapy regimens that are commonly used for recurrent glioblastoma. Toxicity and quality of life clearly favoured TTF.     

Cediranib monotherapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: results of a randomised phase II study

BackgroundCediranib is a highly potent vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signalling inhibitor with activity against VEGF receptors 1, 2 and 3. This Phase II, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy of cediranib with placebo in patients with metastatic or recurrent clear cell renal cell carcinoma who had not previously received a VEGF signalling inhibitor.MethodsPatients were randomised (3:1) to cediranib 45 mg/day or placebo. The primary objective was comparison of change from baseline in tumour size after 12 weeks of therapy. Secondary objectives included response rate and duration, progression-free survival (PFS) and safety and tolerability. Patients in the placebo group could cross over to open-label cediranib at 12 weeks or earlier if their disease had progressed. This study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423332.FindingsPatients (n = 71) were randomised to receive cediranib (n = 53) or placebo (n = 18). The primary study outcome revealed that, after 12 weeks of therapy, there was a significant difference in mean percentage change from baseline in tumour size between the cediranib (–20%) and placebo (+20%) arms (p < 0.0001). Eighteen patients (34%) on cediranib achieved a partial response and 25 (47%) experienced stable disease. Cediranib treatment prolonged PFS significantly compared with placebo (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.45, 90% confidence interval: 0.26–0.76, p = 0.017; median PFS 12.1 versus 2.8 months). The most common adverse events in patients receiving cediranib were diarrhoea (74%), hypertension (64%), fatigue (58%) and dysphonia (58%).InterpretationCediranib monotherapy demonstrated significant evidence of antitumour activity in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. The adverse event profile was consistent with previous studies of cediranib 45 mg.     

Regorafenib as second-line therapy for intermediate or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Multicentre,open-label,phase II safety study

PurposeWe assessed the safety of the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that had progressed following first-line sorafenib.Patients and methodsThirty-six patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C HCC and preserved to mildly impaired liver function (Child–Pugh class A) received regorafenib 160 mg once daily in cycles of 3 weeks on/1 week off treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death or patient/physician decision to discontinue. The primary end-point was safety; secondary end-points included efficacy (including time to progression and overall survival).ResultsThe median treatment duration was 19.5 weeks (range 2–103). At data cutoff, three patients remained on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (n = 20), disease progression (n = 10), consent withdrawal (n = 2) and death (n = 1). Seventeen patients required dose reductions (mostly for adverse events [n = 15]); 35 patients had treatment interruption (mostly for adverse events [n = 32] or patient error [n = 11]). The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were hand–foot skin reaction (any grade n = 19; grade ?3 n = 5), diarrhoea (n = 19; n = 2), fatigue (n = 19; n = 6), hypothyroidism (n = 15; n = 0), anorexia (n = 13; n = 0), hypertension (n = 13; n = 1), nausea (n = 12; n = 0) and voice changes (n = 10; n = 0). Disease control was achieved in 26 patients (partial response n = 1; stable disease n = 25). Median time to progression was 4.3 months. Median overall survival was 13.8 months.ConclusionRegorafenib had acceptable tolerability and evidence of antitumour activity in patients with intermediate or advanced HCC that progressed following first-line sorafenib.     

Phase I trial to investigate the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of sorafenib combined with docetaxel in patients with advanced refractory solid tumours

AimThe safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of sorafenib plus docetaxel in patients with advanced refractory cancer were investigated in a Phase I, dose-escalation trial.MethodsTwenty-seven patients in four Cohorts received docetaxel on Day 1 (Cohorts 1 and 4: 75 mg/m²; Cohorts 2 and 3: 100 mg/m²) plus sorafenib on Days 2–19 (Cohorts 1 and 2: 200 mg twice-daily (bid); Cohorts 3 and 4: 400 mg bid) in 21-day cycles.ResultsMost common adverse events (AEs) (Grade 3–5) included neutropenia (89%), leucopaenia (81%), hand–foot skin reaction (30%) and fatigue (30%). The most common drug-related AEs leading to dose reduction/interruption or permanent discontinuation were dermatologic (41%), gastrointestinal (26%) and constitutional (22%). Coadministration of sorafenib altered the pharmacokinetics of docetaxel. On average, docetaxel area under the concentration–time curve (AUC)_0–24 increased by 5% (Cohort 1), 54% (Cohort 2), 36% (Cohort 3) and 80% (Cohort 4) with docetaxel plus sorafenib, while C_max increased by 16–32%, independent of sorafenib/docetaxel doses. Three of 25 evaluable patients (11%) had partial responses; 14 (52%) had stable disease.ConclusionDose-limiting dermatologic AEs were more common than expected for either therapy alone. A starting dose of docetaxel 75 mg/m² plus sorafenib 400 mg bid (with dose reductions for dermatological toxicities) is proposed for Phase II.     

Ovarian function suppression and fulvestrant as endocrine therapy in premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer

BackgroundEndocrine therapy is the preferred treatment for hormone-receptor (HR) positive metastatic breast cancer. In premenopausal patients, ovarian function suppression with goserelin in combination with anastrozole yielded promising results in phase II studies. Fulvestrant, a pure antioestrogen, yields high rates of disease stabilisation in postmenopausal women. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility and safety of fulvestrant plus goserelin in premenopausal women with HR-positive metastatic breast cancer.MethodsPremenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer eligible for endocrine treatment received fulvestrant 250 mg and goserelin 3.6 mg every four weeks as first- to fourth-line therapy. Clinical benefit rate (CBR; response rate plus disease stabilisation ⩾6 months) was defined as the primary study end-point. Time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier product limit method.FindingsTwenty-six patients received treatment as scheduled. 81% were pre-treated with tamoxifen and 69% had received prior aromatase inhibitors in combination with goserelin. The majority of patients (69%) presented with visceral metastases.Complete response was observed in a single patient, partial response in three and disease stabilisation ⩾6 months in eleven patients, resulting in a CBR of 58%. Median TTP was 6 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.4–9.6) and OS 32 months (95% CI, 14.28–49.72), respectively.InterpretationResults suggest that the combination of fulvestrant and goserelin offers promising activity in premenopausal patients and further investigation is warranted.     

Transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib: a sequential therapeutic scheme for HCV-related intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized clinical trial

Background.

Recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major problem after surgical or ablative treatments. The aim of this prospective, single-center, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical study was to evaluate the effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib as a sequential treatment regimen in delaying time to progression (TTP) of intermediate-stage HCC in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

Material and Methods.

Between October, 2007 and January, 2011, 80 HCV-infected patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B HCC underwent the TACE procedure. All had Child-Pugh class A disease. They were randomized 1:1 to receive sorafenib at a dose of 400 mg twice daily or placebo. Endpoints were the TTP and the rates of adverse events and toxicity.

Results.

Sixty-two of 80 patients (77%), 31 in the sorafenib group and 31 in the control group, completed the study. The median TTP was 9.2 months in the sorafenib group and 4.9 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.66–7.56; p < .001). Metachronous, multicentric HCC progression occurred less frequently in sorafenib-treated patients (p < .05). Adverse reactions to sorafenib caused withdrawal from the study of 9 (22%) patients.

Conclusion.

A conventional TACE procedure followed by sorafenib treatment resulted in a significantly longer TTP in patients with intermediate-stage HCV-related HCC, with no unexpected side effects.     

Incidence of brain metastases in renal cell carcinoma treated with sorafenib

Background: This retrospective study evaluated the incidence of brain metastases in a subgroup of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who were randomly assigned to receive sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor (400 mg b.i.d.), versus placebo in the phase III Treatment Approaches in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGET).Patients and methods: Patients enrolled in TARGET at two centres (Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France, n = 85; Central Clinical Hospital of Military Medical Academy, Warsaw, Poland, n = 54) made up the current subgroup, who were retrospectively evaluated for the incidence of brain metastases during follow-up. The association between treatment (sorafenib versus placebo) and occurrence of brain metastases was evaluated by univariate analysis.Results: The overall incidence of brain metastases in patients receiving sorafenib was 3% (2 of 70 patients) compared with 12% (8 of 69 patients) in patients receiving placebo (P < 0.05). The incidence of brain metastases was also significantly lower in the sorafenib group after 1 (P = 0.0447) and 2 years (P = 0.005) of treatment compared with the placebo group.Conclusions: In this subpopulation, sorafenib may reduce the occurrence of brain metastases. Antiangiogenic therapy, such as sorafenib, could be an effective preventive therapy for brain metastases in advanced RCC.