KEYNOTE-033: Randomized phase 3 study of pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated,PD-L1-positive,advanced NSCLC

KEYNOTE-033 (NCT02864394) was a multicountry, open-label, phase 3 study that compared pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with most patients enrolled in mainland China. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival and were evaluated sequentially using stratified log-rank tests, first in patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and then in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% (significance threshold: P < .025, one-sided). A total of 425 patients were randomized to pembrolizumab (N = 213) or docetaxel (N = 212) between 8 September 2016 and 17 October 2018. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥50% (n = 227), median OS was 12.3 months with pembrolizumab and 10.9 months with docetaxel; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-1.14; P = .1276). Because the significance threshold was not met, sequential testing of OS and PFS was ceased. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, the HR for OS for pembrolizumab vs docetaxel was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60-0.95). In patients from mainland China (n = 311) with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, HR for OS was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.51-0.89). Incidence of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs was 11.3% with pembrolizumab vs 47.5% with docetaxel. In summary, pembrolizumab improved OS vs docetaxel in previously treated, PD-L1-positive NSCLC without unexpected safety signals; although the statistical significance threshold was not reached, the numerical improvement is consistent with that previously observed for pembrolizumab in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.     

Randomized phase III trial comparing docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine as first-line treatment in women with advanced breast cancer

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine combinations as front-line treatment in women with advanced breast cancer (ABC).Patients and MethodsPreviously untreated patients with ABC were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m² plus epirubicin 75 mg/m² (DE) on day 1 or docetaxel 75 mg/m² on day 1 plus capecitabine 950 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1–14 (DC) in 21-day cycles. Previous anthracycline-based (neo)-adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed if completed >1 year before enrollment. The primary objective of the study was to compare time to disease progression (TTP).ResultsOne hundred and thirty-six women were treated on each arm and median TTP was 10.6 versus 11.0 months (P = 0.7), for DE and DC, respectively. According to RECIST criteria we observed 15 (11%) versus 11 (8%) complete responses and 55 (40%) versus 61 (45%) partial responses (P = 0.8), with DE and DC, respectively. Severe toxicity included grade 3–4 neutropenia (57% versus 46%; P = 0.07), febrile neutropenia (11% versus 8%; P = 0.4), hand–foot syndrome (0% versus 4%; P = 0.02), grade 2–3 anemia (20% versus 7%; P = 0.001) and asthenia (12% versus 6%; P = 0.09) with DE and DC, respectively.ConclusionsThe DE and DC regimens have similar efficacy but different toxicity. Either regimen can be used as front-line treatment of ABC.     

Antitumor activity and safety of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced recurrent ovarian cancer: results from the phase II KEYNOTE-100 study

BackgroundAdvanced recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) is the leading cause of gynecologic cancer-related death in developed countries and new treatments are needed. Previous studies of immune checkpoint blockade showed low objective response rates (ORR) in ROC with no identified predictive biomarker.Patients and methodsThis phase II study of pembrolizumab (NCT02674061) examined two patient cohorts with ROC: cohort A received one to three prior lines of treatment with a platinum-free interval (PFI) or treatment-free interval (TFI) between 3 and 12 months and cohort B received four to six prior lines with a PFI/TFI of ≥3 months. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was administered intravenously every 3 weeks until cancer progression, toxicity, or completion of 2 years. Primary end points were ORR by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 per blinded independent central review by cohort and by PD-L1 expression measured as combined positive score (CPS). Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.ResultsCohort A enrolled 285 patients; the first 100 served as the training set for PD-L1 biomarker analysis. Cohort B enrolled 91 patients. ORR was 7.4% for cohort A and 9.9% for cohort B. Median DOR was 8.2 months for cohort A and not reached for cohort B. DCR was 37.2% and 37.4%, respectively, in cohorts A and B. Based on the training set analysis, CPS 1 and 10 were selected for evaluation in the confirmation set. In the confirmation set, ORR was 4.1% for CPS <1, 5.7% CPS ≥1, and 10.0% for CPS ≥10. PFS was 2.1 months for both cohorts. Median OS was not reached for cohort A and was 17.6 months for cohort B. Toxicities were consistent with other single-agent pembrolizumab trials.ConclusionsSingle-agent pembrolizumab showed modest activity in patients with ROC. Higher PD-L1 expression was correlated with higher response.Clinical Trial NumberClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02674061     

Prognostic score for second-line chemotherapy of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: external validation in a phase III trial comparing vinflunine with docetaxel

A prognostic index for second-line chemotherapy of NSCLC was previously developed, based on individual patient data (IPD) of nine randomized trials. In order to validate the prognostic score in an external dataset, we analysed IPD of a non-inferiority phase III trial comparing vinflunine vs. docetaxel in second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. Primary endpoint of this analysis was overall survival (OS). The following variables were considered for survival analysis and score calculation: gender, performance status, stage of disease, tumour histology, type of first-line treatment, response to first-line treatment. Cox model, stratified by treatment arm, was used for multivariate analysis. Individual prognostic scores were derived, and patients were divided into 3 categories: <5 (best), 5-9 (intermediate), >9 (worst). All 551 patients enrolled in the trial had complete information for the calculation of prognostic score. Median OS in the whole group was 6.9 months, with similar efficacy in the two treatment arms. Median OS was 12.9, 6.9 and 3.8 months in the best, intermediate and worst category, respectively. Cox model showed a significant effect comparing intermediate vs. best category (Hazard Ratio 1.79, 95%CI 1.31-2.47, p=0.0003) and comparing worst vs. best category (Hazard Ratio 3.25, 95%CI 2.18-4.83, p<0.0001). The C-index of the model was high (0.926), indicating a good discrimination according to the proposed three risk categories. Prognostic ability of our score for candidates to second-line treatment in advanced NSCLC was successfully validated, allowing the identification of subgroups of patients with more vs. less favourable outcome. Prognostic score could be useful in daily decision-making in clinical practise, because a better understanding of factors conditioning life expectancy of patients could greatly help a careful evaluation of risks and benefits associated with therapeutic decisions.     

Randomized phase III study of docetaxel compared with paclitaxel in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This randomized, controlled, multicenter, open-label, phase III study compared docetaxel versus paclitaxel in patients with advanced breast cancer that had progressed after an anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 449) were randomly assigned to receive either docetaxel 100 mg/m2 (n = 225) or paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (n = 224) on day 1, every 21 days until tumor progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population, both the median overall survival (OS, 15.4 v 12.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.73; P = .03) and the median time to progression (TTP, 5.7 months v 3.6 months; HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.33 to 2.02; P < .0001) for docetaxel were significantly longer than for paclitaxel, and the overall response rate (ORR, 32% v 25%; P = .10) was higher for docetaxel. These results were confirmed by multivariate analyses. The incidence of treatment-related hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities was greater for docetaxel than for paclitaxel; however, quality-of-life scores were not statistically different between treatment groups over time. CONCLUSION: Docetaxel was superior to paclitaxel in terms of OS and TTP. ORR was higher for docetaxel. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities occurred more frequently in the docetaxel group. The global quality-of-life scores were similar for both agents over time.     

A randomized,phase III multicenter trial of gemcitabine in combination with carboplatin or paclitaxel versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundPaclitaxel–carboplatin is used as the standard regimen for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was designed to compare gemcitabine + carboplatin or gemcitabine + paclitaxel to the standard regimen.Patients and methodsA total of 1135 chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomly allocated to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) 5.5 on day 1 (GC), gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m² on day 1 (GP), or paclitaxel 225 mg/m² plus carboplatin AUC 6.0 on day 1 (PC). Stratification was based on disease stage, baseline weight loss, and presence or absence of brain metastases. Cycles were repeated every 21 days for up to six cycles or disease progression.ResultsMedian survival (months) with GC was 7.9 compared with 8.5 for GP and 8.7 for PC. Response rates (RRs) were as follows: GC, 25.3%; GP, 32.1%; and PC, 29.8%. The GC arm was associated with a greater incidence of grade 3 or 4 hematologic events but a lower rate of neurotoxicity and alopecia when compared with GP and PC.ConclusionsNon-platinum and non-paclitaxel gemcitabine-containing doublets demonstrate similar overall survival and RR compared with the standard PC regimen. However, the treatment arms had distinct toxicity profiles.     

Randomized phase III study of 3-weekly versus weekly docetaxel in pretreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a Spanish Lung Cancer Group trial.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel is a widely accepted second-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a risk of myelotoxicity. This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity profile of two docetaxel regimens in NSCLC patients who had failed first-line non-docetaxel-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 259 patients from 33 Spanish centers were randomized to receive either docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) administered every 3 weeks (3W arm) or docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) given weekly (1W arm) for 6 weeks followed by 2 weeks of rest. The primary end point was 1-year survival; secondary end points were median survival, time to progression, response and toxicity. RESULTS: One-year survival was 27% in the 3W and 22% in the 1W arm. Median time to progression was also similar in the two arms. Median survival was 6.6 months in the 3W arm versus 5.4 months in the 1W arm (P = 0.075). Response rates were 9.3% in the 3W arm and 4.8% in the 1W arm. More patients in the 1W arm experienced mucositis [1W, nine patients (7.2%); 3W, two patients (1.6%); P = 0.032], while febrile neutropenia was significantly higher in the 3W arm [3W, 10 patients (7.8%); 1W, one patient (0.8%); P = 0.010]. CONCLUSIONS: Both weekly and 3-weekly docetaxel were effective and well-tolerated, with different toxicity profiles. In general, there was no indication to recommend the weekly schedule. However, the significant lower rate of febrile neutropenia observed in the weekly schedule makes it a good alternative for patients at risk of severe neutropenia.     

Vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus docetaxel plus gemcitabine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE To compare the activity and tolerability of docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG) and vinorelbine/cisplatin (VC) combinations in chemotherapy-naive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either DG (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) [days 1 and 8] plus docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) [day 8]) or VC (vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) [days 1 and 8] plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) [day 8]) and prophylactic recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (150 microg/m(2) subcutaneously [day 9 through 15]) every 3 weeks. Results A total of 413 randomly assigned patients were analyzed for response and toxicity (DG, n = 197; VC, n = 192). Median survival was 9.0 and 9.7 months (P = .965) for DG and VC arms, respectively; the corresponding 1-year survival rates were 34.3% and 40.8%, respectively. Overall response rate was 30% (95% CI, 23.9% to 36.3%) and 39.2% (95% CI, 32.5% to 45.9%; P = .053) for DG and VC, respectively. Toxicity was as follows (DG v VC): grade 2 to 4 anemia, 34% v 55% (P = .0001); grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, 16% v 37% (P = .0001); febrile neutropenia, 6% v 11% (P = .009); and grade 3 to 4 nausea and vomiting, 1% v 15% (P = .003). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 8% and ototoxicity in 2% of VC-treated patients. There were five and six treatment-related deaths in the DG and VC arms, respectively. Quality of life was improved in DG but not in VC patients. CONCLUSION Although the two regimens produced comparable overall survival, the DG regimen had a better toxicity profile. Therefore, DG could be used in the first-line setting of advanced NSCLC, especially for patients who cannot tolerate cisplatin.