Docetaxel–cisplatin might be superior to docetaxel–capecitabine in the first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

BackgroundTriple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) may be more sensitive to platinum. This study was to compare platinum-based regimen with nonplatinum regimen in the first-line treatment of advanced TNBC.Patients and methodsEligible metastatic TNBC (mTNBC) women without prior treatment for advanced disease were randomized (1 : 1) to receive either docetaxel–cisplatin (TP) or docetaxel –capecitabine (TX) q3w for up to 6 cycles, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) and the secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In total 53 patients were enrolled.ResultsThe median follow-up was 24 months. ORR was higher in the TP group than in the TX group (63.0% versus 15.4%, P = 0.001). PFS was more than doubled (10.9 months versus 4.8 months, P < 0.001) and median OS was also greatly improved (32.8 months versus 21.5 months, P = 0.027). Toxic effects were not different except G3/4 vomiting and G2/3 hand-foot syndrome.ConclusionsThis study suggested that cisplatin-based chemotherapy was superior to capecitabine-based regimen in the first-line treatment of mTNBC, as measured by ORR, PFS and OS. Further large-scale study should be warranted. These results are not sufficient to change clinical practice.     

A randomized multicenter phase II study comparing capecitabine with irinotecan or cisplatin in metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction

BackgroundThe combination of irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil demonstrates efficacy with tolerable safety in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (mGC). This randomized phase II trial compared for the first time capecitabine with irinotecan or cisplatin in this setting.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned to receive 3-week cycles of capecitabine 1000 mg/m², twice daily for 14 days, with on day 1 either irinotecan 250 mg/m² (XI) or cisplatin 80 mg/m² (XP). The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) and secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety.ResultsOf 118 patients recruited, 112 were eligible for safety analysis and 103 for efficacy analysis. In the XI and XP treatment arms, there were no marked differences in ORR, 37.7% versus 42.0%, and median PFS, 4.2 versus 4.8 months, although median OS was longer, 10.2 versus 7.9 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicity was higher in the XP regimen for thrombocytes (18.2% versus 1.8%), nausea (23.6% versus12.3%) and vomiting (16.4% versus 1.8%) and in the XI arm for diarrhea (22.8% versus 7.3%).ConclusionThe comparable activity and safety of the XI and XP regimens establish XI as a relevant platinum-free first-line treatment choice for patients with mGC.     

Pooled analysis of individual patient data from capecitabine monotherapy clinical trials in locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer

We assessed the efficacy and safety of capecitabine across treatment lines, and the impact of patient and disease characteristics on outcomes using data from phase II/III trials. Individual patient data were pooled from seven Roche/Genentech-led trials conducted from 1996 to 2008 where single-agent capecitabine was the test or control regimen for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Data were analyzed from 805 patients: 268 in the first-line metastatic setting and 537 in the second-line or later setting. Baseline characteristics were balanced across treatment lines. Patients receiving second-line or later versus first-line capecitabine had lower objective response rates (ORR: 19.0 vs. 25.0?%, respectively, odds ratio 0.70; 95?% CI: 0.5?C1.0) and significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS: median 112.0?days [3.7?months] vs. 150.0?days [4.9?months]; p?<?0.0001) and overall survival (OS: median 396.0?days [13.0?months] vs. 666.0?days [21.9?months]; p?<?0.0001). In multivariate analysis by backward elimination, significantly improved ORR (p?=?0.0036), PFS (p?<?0.0001) and OS (p?<?0.0001) with capecitabine were demonstrated in patients with estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR)-positive versus both ER and PgR-negative tumors. Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) was the most common adverse event (AE) in 63?% of patients. Overall, 7?% of patients discontinued and two patients (<1?%) died from treatment-related AEs. Significantly improved survival was observed in patients developing capecitabine-related HFS (p?<?0.0001 PFS/OS) or diarrhea (p?=?0.004 OS; p?=?0.0045 PFS) versus patients without these events. In this pooled analysis of individual patient data, first-line capecitabine was associated with improved ORR, PFS, and OS versus second or later lines. Multivariate analyses identified greater ORR, PFS, and OS with capecitabine in patients with ER and/or PgR-positive versus ER/PgR-negative tumors. Safety was in-line with previous phase III trials in MBC.     

North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N0432: phase II trial of docetaxel with capecitabine and bevacizumab as first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer

BackgroundDocetaxel (T; Taxotere) with capecitabine (X) is active against metastatic breast cancer (MBC); bevacizumab (BV) has demonstrated efficacy with taxanes in the first-line setting. This study was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of TX-BV in patients with MBC.Patients and methodsIn this single-arm, multicenter phase II study, patients received first-line bevacizumab 15 mg/kg and docetaxel 75 mg/m² on day 1 and capecitabine 825 mg/m² twice per day on days 1–14 every 21 days. Primary and secondary end points were tumor response rate (RR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity.ResultsA total of 45 assessable patients received TX-BV for a median of seven cycles. Two complete and 20 partial responses were observed (overall RR 49%); nine patients had stable disease >6 months, for a clinical benefit rate of 69%. Median response duration was 11.8 months. Median OS and PFS were 28.4 and 11.1 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 adverse events included hand–foot syndrome (29%), fatigue (20%), febrile neutropenia (18%), and diarrhea (18%). In cycles 3–10, median dose levels of docetaxel and capecitabine were 60 mg/m² and 660 mg/m², respectively.ConclusionTX-BV demonstrated significant activity; dose modifications were required to manage drug-related toxic effects.     

Biweekly Cetuximab Plus FOLFOX6 as First-Line Therapy in Patients With RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The CEBIFOX Trial

BackgroundThe multicenter, single-arm, phase II study CEBIFOX evaluated the efficacy of a biweekly cetuximab administration in combination with FOLFOX6 as first-line therapy in KRAS (exon 2) wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Patients and methodsPatients received FOLFOX6 with cetuximab (500 mg/m²) every second week. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), among others secondary endpoints were safety, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and patient-reported outcome (PRO). The impact on the treatment efficacy was evaluated in explorative subgroup analyses, including extended molecular profiling and primary tumor location.ResultsIn total, 57 were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. New RAS mutations were detected in 14.0% by post hoc next-generation sequencing analysis in 43 patients. The ORR in the all RASwt population was 70.3% with a median PFS and OS of 10.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.0-12.9) and 33.8 (95% CI, 21.1-45.5) months. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 66.7% of the ITT, without significant impact on the PRO. Patients with right-sided primary tumors had a reduced ORR (54.5%), and median PFS and OS (10.1 and 23.8 months). BRAF mutations were detected in 11.3%. These patients had a significantly lower ORR, and median PFS and OS. Patients with RASwt/BRAFwt tumors had a notably high median PFS and OS of 14.3 and 38.9 months.ConclusionsThis study supports the efficacy and safety of biweekly cetuximab given in combination with FOLFOX6 in patients with RASwt/BRAFwt mCRC with left-sided primary tumor. CEBIFOX is the first trial reporting the complete dataset, including extended molecular profiling and tumor location of a biweekly administered cetuximab/FOLFOX6 in mCRC. Clinical trial number: NCT01051167.     

First-line bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: pooled and subgroup analyses of data from 2447 patients

BackgroundBevacizumab has consistently demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate when combined with first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). However, the lack of a significant overall survival (OS) difference continues to attract debate, and identification of patients deriving greatest benefit from bevacizumab remains elusive.Patients and methodsIndividual patient data from three randomised phase III trials in the first-line HER2-negative mBC setting were analysed, focusing specifically on efficacy in poor-prognosis patients.ResultsThe meta-analysis (n = 2447) demonstrated a PFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57–0.71; median 9.2 months with bevacizumab versus 6.7 months with non-bevacizumab therapy) and response rate of 49% versus 32%, respectively. The OS HR was 0.97 (95% CI 0.86–1.08); median 26.7 versus 26.4 months, respectively. In patients with triple-negative mBC, the HRs for PFS and OS were 0.63 (95% CI 0.52–0.76) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.79–1.16), respectively. Median PFS was 8.1 months with bevacizumab versus 5.4 months with chemotherapy alone, median OS was 18.9 versus 17.5 months, respectively, and 1-year OS rates were 71% versus 65%.ConclusionsBevacizumab improves efficacy, including 1-year OS rates, both overall and in subgroups of poor-prognosis patients with limited treatment options.     

T-DM1 Efficacy in Patients With HER2-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Progressing After a Taxane Plus Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab: An Italian Multicenter Observational Study

BackgroundT-DM1 improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2⁺) breast cancer progressing on prior trastuzumab plus a taxane. A paucity of data is available on T-DM1 efficacy after dual anti-HER2 blockade with pertuzumab and trastuzumab plus a taxane, which represents the current first-line standard of care. The present study is a retrospective/prospective evaluation of the efficacy and activity of second-line T-DM1 after front-line pertuzumab-based therapy.Patients and MethodsEligible patients were identified within the Gruppo Italiano Mammella (GIM) 14/BIOMETA study, a retrospective/prospective multicenter study on treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with metastatic breast cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02284581). We searched for patients who received second-line T-DM1 after taxane plus trastuzumab and pertuzumab between November 15, 2013 and May 31, 2018. We calculated median PFS, median time to treatment failure (TTF), prolonged duration of therapy (PDT), objective response rate (ORR), and 1-year OS.ResultsOf 445 patients with HER2⁺ metastatic breast cancer, 77 were eligible for the analysis. At a median follow-up of 7 months, median PFS was 6.3 months (95% confidence intervals [CI], 4.8-7.7 months), and median TTF was 6.2 months (95% CI, 4-8.6 months). More than one-third of patients (37.6%; n = 29) experienced PDT with an ORR of 27.1%. At data cutoff, the median OS was not reached, and the 1-year OS was 82%.ConclusionsOur results show meaningful activity of T-DM1 after front-line pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and a taxane, with about 27% of patients having an objective response and 40% of patients achieving durable disease control.     

First-Line Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibition in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Analysis of Practice Patterns From the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium

Introduction/BackgroundApproval of the mTOR inhibitors for the treatment of mRCC was based on efficacy in poor-risk patients in the first-line setting for temsirolimus and in vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-refractory patients for everolimus. We strove to characterize temsirolimus and everolimus use and effectiveness in the first-line setting.Patients and MethodsWe performed a retrospective database analysis of mRCC patients who received mTOR inhibitors as first-line targeted therapy. The Kaplan-Meier product-limit method was used to estimate the distribution of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsWe identified 127 mRCC patients who had received a first-line mTOR inhibitor. Temsirolimus was administered in 93 patients (73%) and everolimus in 34 patients (27%). The main reasons for choice of temsirolimus were poor-risk disease (38%), non-clear cell histology (27%), and clinical trial availability (15%), whereas clinical trial (82%) and non-clear cell histology (6%) drove everolimus selection. Of the temsirolimus and everolimus patients, 58% and 32% were poor-risk according to the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria, respectively. The median PFS and OS were 3.4 and 12.5 months and 4.8 and 15.9 months with temsirolimus and everolimus, respectively. Although limited by small numbers, this study characterizes a real-world, international experience with the use of mTOR inhibition in treatment-naive mRCC patients.ConclusionPoor-risk RCC, non-clear cell histology, and clinical trials were the predominant reasons for mTOR inhibitor selection in the front-line setting. Because of the different patient populations in which they were administered, direct comparisons of the front-line efficacy of temsirolimus and everolimus cannot be made.     

Systemic Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Xp11.2 Translocation Renal Cell Carcinoma

BackgroundXp11.2 translocation renal cell carcinoma (Xp11.2 tRCC) is a unique subtype with poor prognosis, its response to systemic therapy is not fully understood, we evaluated the benefit of systemic therapy in these patients.Patients and MethodsBetween May 2006 and December 2019, patients diagnosed with Xp11.2 tRCC from Peking university cancer hospital were collected. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) distributions.ResultsMetastatic Xp11.2 tRCC was found in 45 patients. The median PFS and median OS was 7.4 months (4.5-8.8) and 17.9 months (12.4-24.4), respectively. First-line treatment mainly included sunitinib (n = 14), sorafenib (n = 15), axitinib (n = 6), and pazopanib (n = 5), and the median PFS of these regimens were 7.4 months, 5.4 months, 9.4 months, 8.9 months, respectively. Two patients who received Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor - tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR-TKI) plus immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) as first line therapy had a PFS of more than 16.6 months and more than 25.6 months, respectively. Twenty-four patients received subsequent therapies, which included VEGFR-TKI/ICI, VEGFR-TKI and mTOR inhibitor. The ORR and median PFS was 33% and 7.1 months, 7.7% and 4.3 months, 0% and 2.1 months for these treatments, respectively. The estimated median OS was 17.3 months (95% CI, 11.2 to not reached) in patients with TKI/ICI treatment and 11.0 months (95% CI, 6.1 to not reached) without TKI/ICI treatment in subsequent therapies (P = .04). Patients with serous cavity effusion or IMDC poor risk groups had significantly shorter median PFS and median OS.ConclusionMetastatic Xp11.2 tRCC is an aggressive disease. VEGFR-TKI agents appeared to demonstrate some efficacy, VEGFR-TKI /ICI combination might be a useful tool for the treatment of metastatic Xp11.2 tRCC.     

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab With Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Metastatic NSCLC in CheckMate 9LA: 3-Year Clinical Update and Outcomes in Patients With Brain Metastases or Select Somatic Mutations

IntroductionIn the phase 3 CheckMate 9LA study, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy alone. We report updated efficacy and safety (≥3 y of follow-up), clinical outcomes in patients with baseline brain metastases, and exploratory somatic mutation analyses.MethodsAdults with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC, no known sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than or equal to 1 were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks with chemotherapy (two cycles) or chemotherapy alone (four cycles). Assessments included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate. Exploratory analyses included systemic and intracranial efficacy in patients with or without baseline brain metastases, in addition to OS and PFS by KRAS, TP53, STK11, and KEAP1 somatic mutation status in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.ResultsWith a minimum follow-up of 36.1 months, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy continued to prolong OS versus chemotherapy alone in the intent-to-treat population (median [hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval] OS: 15.8 versus 11.0 mo [0.74; 0.62–0.87]; 3-y OS: 27% versus 19%). Efficacy outcomes were improved in patients with pretreated baseline brain metastases (median [hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval] OS: 19.3 versus 6.8 mo [0.45; 0.29–0.70]; systemic PFS: 9.7 versus 4.1 mo [0.44; 0.28–0.69]; intracranial PFS: 11.4 versus 4.6 mo [0.42; 0.26–0.68]). A trend of OS benefit was observed in patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, despite KRAS, TP53, and STK11 tumor mutations. Extended follow-up revealed no new safety signals.ConclusionsWith a 3-year minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy continued to have long-term, durable efficacy versus chemotherapy alone; a manageable safety profile; and survival benefit in patients with or without baseline brain metastases or select somatic mutations, further supporting the regimen as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic NSCLC.     

Safety and efficacy of first-line bevacizumab with FOLFOX,XELOX, FOLFIRI and fluoropyrimidines in metastatic colorectal cancer: the BEAT study

BackgroundBevacizumab significantly improves survival when added to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The Bevacizumab Expanded Access Trial (BEAT) evaluated the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab plus first-line chemotherapy in a general cohort of patients with mCRC.Patients and methodsPatients with unresectable mCRC received chemotherapy (physician's choice) plus bevacizumab [5 mg/kg every 2 weeks (5-fluorouracil regimens) or 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (capecitabine regimens)]. The primary end point was safety, including prospective data collection in patients receiving unanticipated surgery during the study. Secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe final analysis comprised 1914 assessable patients (male 58%; median age 59 years). Chemotherapy included 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) + oxaliplatin (29%), irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV (26%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (18%) and monotherapy (16%). Serious/grade 3–5 adverse events of interest for bevacizumab included bleeding (3%), gastrointestinal perforation (2%), arterial thromboembolism (1%), hypertension (5.3%), proteinuria (1%) and wound-healing complications (1%). Sixty-day mortality was 3%. Median PFS was 10.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.4–11.3 months] and median OS reached 22.7 months (95% CI 21.7–23.8 months).ConclusionsThe BEAT study shows that the efficacy and safety profile of bevacizumab in routine clinical practice is consistent with results observed in prospective randomised clinical trials and another large observational study in the United States (BRiTE study).     

A Randomized,Placebo-Controlled Trial of Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Squamous NSCLC: Protocol-Specified Final Analysis of KEYNOTE-407

IntroductionIn the randomized KEYNOTE-407 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02775435), pembrolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel (chemotherapy) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic squamous NSCLC. We report updated efficacy outcomes from the protocol-specified final analysis and, for the first time, progression on next line of treatment.MethodsEligible patients were randomized to chemotherapy plus either pembrolizumab (n = 278) or placebo (n = 281). After positive results from the second interim analysis, patients still receiving placebo could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy at the time of confirmed progressive disease. The primary end points were OS and PFS. PFS-2 (time from randomization to progression on next-line treatment/death, whichever occurred first) was an exploratory end point.ResultsAfter median (range) follow-up of 14.3 (0.1–31.3) months, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy continued to exhibit a clinically meaningful improvement over placebo plus chemotherapy in OS (median, 17.1 mo [95% confidence interval (CI): 14.4‒19.9] versus 11.6 mo [95% CI: 10.1‒13.7]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI: 0.58‒0.88]) and PFS (median, 8.0 mo [95% CI: 6.3‒8.4] versus 5.1 mo [95% CI: 4.3‒6.0]; HR, 0.57 [95% CI: 0.47‒0.69]). PFS-2 was longer for patients randomized to first-line pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (HR, 0.59 [95% CI: 0.49‒0.72]). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 74.1% and 69.6% of patients receiving pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and placebo plus chemotherapy, respectively.ConclusionsPembrolizumab plus chemotherapy continued to exhibit substantially improved OS and PFS in patients with metastatic squamous NSCLC. The PFS-2 outcomes support pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as a standard first-line treatment in patients with metastatic squamous NSCLC.     

Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the phase II BEVACOLOR study

BackgroundThis prospective phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy regimens commonly used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).MethodsPatients with mCRC who progressed or relapsed after first-line oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based treatment received bevacizumab 2.5 mg/kg/week plus chemotherapy until disease progression. The primary endpoint was disease-control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.ResultsFifty-three patients (66% men; median age, 62 years old) received second-line bevacizumab plus folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI; 57%), folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX; 26%), irinotecan (15%), or capecitabine plus irinotecan (XELIRI; 2%). The DCR was 87% (95% CI, 77%-97%); ORR was 32% (95% CI, 19%-46%). Median PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.8-7.8 months) and median OS 19.3 months, (95% CI, 14.2-25.1 months).The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (21%), diarrhea (15%), asthenia, and vomiting (9% each). Five patients (9%) had grade 3/4 targeted toxicities: grade 3 hypertension (n = 2), grade 3 venous thromboembolism (n = 2), and grade 4 arterial thromboembolism (n = 1). None of these events led to death during the study.ConclusionBevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy is highly active in patients with mCRC and has an acceptable safety profile.     

Phase II Trial of Fulvestrant With Metronomic Capecitabine for Postmenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive,HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

BackgroundIn this phase II study, we explored efficacy and toxicity of combined endocrine and low-dose metronomic chemotherapy therapy consisting of fulvestrant and capecitabine in estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive, HER2-negative MBC.Patients and MethodsPatients with ≤ 1 previous hormonal treatment in the metastatic setting received an injection fulvestrant loading dose 500 mg on day 1, 250 mg on days 15 and 29 followed by 250 mg every 28 days along with continuous oral capecitabine in divided doses. The total fixed daily dose of capecitabine was either 1500 mg or 2000 mg, depending on the patient’s weight (< 80 kg vs. ≥ 80 kg). Primary end points were PFS and TTP. Toxicity was assessed by continuous evaluations of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and changes from baseline in laboratory values.ResultsForty-one women, with a mean age of 64.5 years, were enrolled. Patients completed a median of 11 monthly treatment cycles. Median PFS was 14.98 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.26-upper limit [UL] not estimated) and median TTP was 26.94 months (95% CI, 7.26-UL not estimated). Median overall survival was 28.65 months (95% CI, 23.95-UL not estimated). Treatment was well tolerated with < 10% Grade 3 palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. Overall, the most frequent AEs were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, fatigue, and nausea.ConclusionFulvestrant with metronomic capecitabine demonstrates substantial activity in hormone receptor-positive MBC and is well tolerated. Combined chemoendocrine approaches should be further explored considering the low toxicity of the combination with meaningful TTP.     

First-line panitumumab plus capecitabine for the treatment of older patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer. The phase II,PANEL study

BackgroundDespite the high morbidity and mortality of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in older patients, they have been underrepresented in clinical trials and their optimal treatment is yet to be determined. This open-label phase II study evaluated the benefits of panitumumab and capecitabine as a first-line chemotherapy regimen in older patients with wild-type [WT] RAS mCRC.Patients and MethodsPatients (≥70 years; ECOG≤2) received 3-week cycles of panitumumab (9 mg/kg on day 1) plus capecitabine (850 mg/m² twice daily on days 1–14) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response was evaluated every 9 weeks according to RECIST_1.1. Outcome measures were: objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), time to response (TTR), progression (TTP) and treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.ResultsTwenty-seven patients (11 women; median age: 78 years; ECOG: 0 [26%], 1 [67%], 2 [7%]) were evaluated. Median follow-up was 17.7 months. Confirmed ORR (95%CI) was 44.4% (25.7–63.2), with 25.9% of patients achieving at least stable disease. Median (95%CI) DoR was 8.7 (5.5–10.4) months, and median TTR was 2.2 (1.9–2.8) months. Median TTP was 9.6 (4.8–11.5) months, with a median TTF of 5.2 (2.8–7.2) months. The median PFS was 7.5 (4.4–10.4) months, and the median OS was 23.7 (7.4–27.5) months. Seventeen (63%) patients reported panitumumab and/or capecitabine-related adverse events grade 3–4, with skin toxicity (18.5%) being the most common. Two (7.4%) deaths were treatment-related.ConclusionThis study suggests that panitumumab plus capecitabine is a safe and effective regimen in older patients with WT RAS mCRC.     

A randomized phase II study of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan plus capecitabine with or without isosorbide-5-mononitrate in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundWe investigated the efficacy of irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) versus irinotecan/capecitabine (IX) with or without isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN) in chemo-naïve advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.Patients and methodsInitially, 74 patients were randomly assigned to either IP or IX. Given the potential benefits of ISMN on chemotherapy, the protocol was amended during the study. Subsequently, 72 patients were randomly assigned to either IP + ISMN or IX + ISMN. Patients were treated with predefined second-line therapies (docetaxel/capecitabine for IP or IP + ISMN, docetaxel/cisplatin for IX or IX + ISMN) when disease progressed.ResultsA total of 146 received treatment. Response rate (RR), median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 49%, 5.5 months, 14.5 months in IP; 33%, 3.3 months, 13.0 months in IP + ISMN; 30%, 4.3 months, 16.1 months in IX; and 25%, 3.4 months, 13.6 months in IX + ISMN, respectively. While IP arm showed a trend toward higher RR and longer PFS than IX arm, IX arm showed a trend toward longer OS than IP arm. No significant differences were observed between IP + ISMN and IX + ISMN.ConclusionIP showed better RR and PFS but no OS benefit when compared with IX. The addition of ISMN to IP or IX chemotherapy did not seem to improve the treatment outcome.     

Real-World Evidence Data on Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Treatment in Austria: The RELACS Study

BackgroundTreatment decisions in routine clinical practice are based on reports of clinical trials, which represent highly selected populations. Limited studies reported real-world evidences representing routine clinical practices in patients with renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) in Europe. The aim of this retrospective, noninterventional chart review was to collect data on the treatment landscape for patients with advanced/metastatic RCC in routine clinical practice in a broader patient population in Austria.Patients and MethodsPatients with advanced/metastatic RCC receiving systemic treatment between June 2010 and June 2016 across 12 centers in Austria were included. Parameters were entered into an electronic case report form from the participating sites via the application Hermesoft electronic data capture system. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the 2 primary end points.ResultsThe median PFS and OS were 12 months and 44 months, respectively (first-line PFS was 14 months for pazopanib and 13 months for sunitinib; first-line OS was 44 months for pazopanib and 48 months for sunitinib). Factors influencing the OS were sex, with female patients at a significantly higher risk than male patients (hazard ratio = 1.719), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status > 0 increased the risk twice (hazard ratio = 2.048), and number of metastases > 3 before the first line doubled the risk compared to metastases (hazard ratio = 2.064).ConclusionOS in this retrospective chart review was considerably longer than the previous reports in real-world patients, underlining the benefit of current RCC treatment options in routine clinical practice.     

Aflibercept in Combination With FOLFIRI as First-line Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): A Phase II Study (FFCD 1302)

BackgroundFOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) + aflibercept improves median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Our aim was to investigate efficacy and tolerability of this combination in the first line.Patients and MethodsPatients with untreated documented mCRC received aflibercept plus FOLFIRI every 14 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity in an open, phase II single-arm, multicenter trial. The primary endpoint was the 6-month PFS rate. Secondary endpoints were OS and tolerability. A 2-step Simon design was used with H₀: 55% and H₁= 75%. Data were analyzed in intention to treat.ResultsForty-one patients were included, and 40 were analyzed (1 consent withdrawal) in 9 French centers between October 2014 and February 2017. The median age was 65 years (range, 46-81 years), 55% had ≥ 2 metastatic sites, and 50% and 15% had RAS and BRAF mutations, respectively. Twenty-two (54.5%; 95% confidence interval, 38.9%-68.5%) patients were alive and non-progressive at 6 months. FOLFIRI + aflibercept was considered ineffective, resulting in the cessation of inclusions. The median follow-up was 34 months. The overall response rate was 55%, and the disease control rate was 80%. The median duration of treatment was 5.3 months; the median PFS and OS were 8.2 and 18.6 months, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events were mainly gastrointestinal (47.5%) and vascular (32.5%). Of the patients, 87.5% had at least 1 dose modification.ConclusionAlthough the primary objective was not met, first-line FOLFIRI + aflibercept for mCRC leads to median PFS and OS close to those reported with classical doublet and targeted agents, but with significant toxicities needing dose reduction.     

Progression-Free Survival for Real-World Use of Palbociclib in Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

BackgroundAdditional use of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors with endocrine therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced hormone receptor (HR)-positive HER2-negative breast cancer. However, neutropenia is a common reason for dose reductions, leading to concerns about palbociclib efficacy at lower doses. A safety analysis confirmed no PFS differences between palbociclib doses in the second-line setting, but to our knowledge, this has not been evaluated for first-line treatment.Patients and MethodsIn this retrospective, single-center cohort study we evaluated real-world use of first-line palbociclib with aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment in HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer patients who received treatment between February 2015 and July 2017. The primary objective was to determine PFS of treatment with palbociclib and an AI in a real-world first-line setting. Secondary objectives included determining the PFS for patients treated with palbociclib on the basis of final doses, time to first dose reduction, time to treatment failure (TTF), and safety.ResultsSeventy patients were included in the final analysis. Median PFS was 26.4 months. No significant differences in PFS were observed on the basis of final doses of palbociclib (P = .77). Time to first dose reduction was 2.3 months. Median TTF was 26.1 months. Dose delays, reductions, and Grade 3/4 neutropenia were common (63%, n = 44; 57%, n = 40; and 62%, n = 43, respectively).ConclusionReal-world first-line palbociclib treatment produced outcomes similar to those in PALOMA-2 (Palbociclib and Letrozole in Advanced Breast Cancer) (median PFS 26.4 months vs. 24.8 months) despite more dose reductions (57%, n = 40 vs. 36%, n = 160) and shorter time to first dose reduction (2.3 vs. 3.0 months). No significant differences in PFS were observed for the varying palbociclib doses. Palbociclib dose reductions might not significantly affect PFS in the first-line setting.     

Retreatment With Anti-EGFR Antibodies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Multi-institutional Analysis

BackgroundOn the basis of retrospective analyses and phase 2 studies, metastatic colorectal cancer patients whose disease responded to a first-line regimen containing an anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agent may experience benefit from anti-EGFR readministration in later therapy lines. While the analysis of circulating tumor DNA seems a promising tool to select the best candidates for this strategy, identifying clinical predictors of anti-EGFR sensitivity would be useful to drive treatment choices in daily practice.Patients and MethodsA real-life database of 5530 patients treated at 6 institutions was queried. Included were patients who were retreated with anti-EGFRs, who had RAS/BRAF wild-type–status tissue samples, who had received a first-line anti-EGFR–based regimen with at least stable disease as best response, and who had received at least one further line of therapy before anti-EGFR retreatment. The association with overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of variables potentially related to anti-EGFR sensitivity was investigated.ResultsA total of 86 patients were identified. The ORR during anti-EGFR retreatment was 19.8%; median PFS and OS were 3.8 and 10.2 months, respectively. No significant association of clinical features of anti-EGFR sensitivity with ORR, PFS, and OS was observed. Among the 56 patients with a time from the last anti-EGFR administration to first-line progressive disease of < 3 months (rechallenge group), > 2 prior therapy lines and a longer anti-EGFR–free interval were associated with higher ORR, but not with longer PFS or OS.ConclusionClinical features we deemed surrogates of anti-EGFR sensitivity were not reliable predictors of benefit from anti-EGFR retreatment.