Efficacy and tolerability of trabectedin in elderly patients with sarcoma: subgroup analysis from a phase III,randomized controlled study of trabectedin or dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma

BackgroundTreatment options for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients aged ≥65 years (elderly) can be limited by concerns regarding the increased risk of toxicity associated with standard systemic therapies. Trabectedin has demonstrated improved disease control in a phase III trial (ET743-SAR-3007) of patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after failure of anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Since previous retrospective analyses have suggested that trabectedin has similar safety and efficacy outcomes regardless of patient age, we carried out a subgroup analysis of the safety and efficacy observed in elderly patients enrolled in this trial.Patients and methodsPatients were randomized 2 : 1 to trabectedin (n = 384) or dacarbazine (n = 193) administered intravenously every-3-weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), time-to-progression, objective response rate (ORR), duration of response, symptom severity, and safety. A post hoc analysis was conducted in the elderly patient subgroup.ResultsAmong 131 (trabectedin = 94; dacarbazine = 37) elderly patients, disease characteristics were well-balanced and consistent with those of the total study population. Treatment exposure was longer in patients treated with trabectedin versus dacarbazine (median four versus two cycles, respectively), with a significantly higher proportion receiving prolonged therapy (≥6 cycles) in the trabectedin arm (43% versus 23%, respectively; P = 0.04). Elderly patients treated with trabectedin showed significantly improved PFS [4.9 versus 1.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR)=0.40; P = 0.0002] but no statistically significant improvement in OS (15.1 versus 8.0 months, respectively; HR = 0.72; P = 0.18) or ORR (9% versus 3%, respectively; P = 0.43). The safety profile for elderly trabectedin-treated patients was comparable to that of the overall trabectedin-treated study population.ConclusionsThis subgroup analysis of the elderly population of ET743-SAR-3007 suggests that elderly patients with STS and good performance status can expect clinical benefit from trabectedin similar to that observed in younger patients.Trial registrationwww.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01343277.     

A phase IIb multicentre study comparing the efficacy of trabectedin to doxorubicin in patients with advanced or metastatic untreated soft tissue sarcoma: The TRUSTS trial

PurposeTo evaluate whether trabectedin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma prolongs progression-free survival (PFS), compared to doxorubicin and, in the phase IIb part here, to select the most appropriate trabectedin treatment schedule (3-hour or 24-hour infusion) in terms of safety, convenience and efficacy.Patients and methodsIn this randomised multicentre prospective dose-selection phase IIb superiority trial, 133 patients were randomised between doxorubicin (n = 43), trabectedin (3-hour infusion, T3h) (n = 47) and trabectedin (24-hour infusion, T24h) (n = 43). PFS was defined as time from random assignment until objective progression by response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST 1.1), a global deterioration of the health status requiring discontinuation of the treatment, or death from any cause.ResultsThe study was terminated due to lack of superiority in both trabectedin treatment arms as compared to the doxorubicin control arm. Median PFS was 2.8 months in the T3h arm, 3.1 months in the T24h arm and 5.5 months in the doxorubicin arm. No significant improvements in PFS were observed in the trabectedin arms as compared to the doxorubicin arm (T24h versus doxorubicin: hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67–1.90, P = .675; T3h versus doxorubicin: HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.91–2.48, P = .944). Only one toxic death occurred in the T3h arm, but treatment had to be stopped due to toxicity in 7 (15.2%) (T3h), 8 (19.5%) (T24h) and 1 (2.5%) doxorubicin patients.ConclusionDoxorubicin continues to be the standard treatment in eligible patients with advanced/metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (STS). Trabectedin 1.5 mg/m²/24-hour infusion is the overall proven approach to delivering this agent in the second-line setting for patients with advanced or metastatic STS.     

First-line anthracycline-based chemotherapy for angiosarcoma and other soft tissue sarcoma subtypes: Pooled analysis of eleven European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group trials

BackgroundAngiosarcoma is a rare subtype of soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Doxorubicin is the standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced STS. It is not known whether angiosarcoma response to anthracycline-based chemotherapy is different to other STS subtypes.MethodsPooled data were analysed from 11 prospective randomised and non-randomised European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) clinical trials of first-line anthracycline-based chemotherapy for advanced STS. Baseline patient characteristics, chemotherapy response, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of angiosarcoma patients were compared with other STS patients. Analysis was performed to identify factors prognostic for angiosarcoma response to chemotherapy, PFS and OS.ResultsWith a median follow-up of 4.2 years, data from 108 locally advanced and metastatic angiosarcoma patients and 2557 patients with other STS histologies were analysed. 25% of angiosarcoma patients had a complete or partial response to chemotherapy compared to 21% for other STS histotypes. The median PFS was 4.9 months and OS 9.9 months, which were not significantly different from other STS histotypes. In univariate analysis, bone metastases were an adverse prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio (HR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03–2.67; p = 0.036). Tumour grade was as an adverse prognostic factor for PFS (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.01–2.92; p = 0.044) and OS (HR 2.03; 95% CI 1.16–3.56; p = 0.011). Compared to single agent anthracyclines, doxorubicin + ifosfamide was associated with improved PFS (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33–0.86; p = 0.010) and OS (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.90; p = 0.018).ConclusionsAngiosarcoma response and survival following first-line anthracycline-based chemotherapy was similar to other STS histotypes. Our analysis provides a useful measure of angiosarcoma response to chemotherapy for comparison with future clinical trials.     

Long-term results of weekly paclitaxel carboplatin induction therapy: An effective and well-tolerated treatment in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer

BackgroundWeekly paclitaxel/cisplatin is effective in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). To reduce toxicity, paclitaxel/cisplatin was replaced by paclitaxel/carboplatin.Patients and methodsPatients with progressive EOC after prior 3-weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin were treated with six cycles weekly paclitaxel 90 mg/m² and carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 4 mg/ml/min, followed by six cycles 3-weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin. End-points were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR) and toxicity.ResultsMedian progression free interval after last platinum was 9 (0–81) months in 108 patients; 43 were platinum-resistant, of whom 13 started weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin <6 months after progression. During 633 weekly cycles grade 3/4 toxicity included; thrombocytopenia 8%, neutropenia 30%, febrile neutropenia 0.5%. Non-haematologic toxicity was low. Treatment was delayed in 16%, and dose reduced in 2% of cycles. RR was 58% for platinum-resistant and 76% for platinum-sensitive patients, median PFS were 8 (range 1–21) and 13 (1–46) months, median OS 15 (1–69) and 26 (4–93) months, respectively. The 13 platinum-resistant patients with a platinum-therapy free interval <6 months had a significant shorter PFS (4 versus 10 months, p = 0.035) and OS (9 versus 15 months, p = 0.002).ConclusionSix cycles weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin followed by six 3-weekly cycles is well-tolerated and highly active in platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive patients.     

Progression-free survival at 24 months (PFS24) and subsequent outcome for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) enrolled on randomized clinical trials

BackgroundPatients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with first-line anthracycline-based immunochemotherapy and remaining in remission at 2 years have excellent outcomes. This study assessed overall survival (OS) stratified by progression-free survival (PFS) at 24 months (PFS24) using individual patient data from patients with DLBCL enrolled in multi-center, international randomized clinical trials as part of the Surrogate Endpoint for Aggressive Lymphoma (SEAL) Collaboration.Patients and methodsPFS24 was defined as being alive and PFS24 after study entry. OS from PFS24 was defined as time from identified PFS24 status until death due to any cause. OS was compared with each patient’s age-, sex-, and country-matched general population using expected survival and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs).ResultsA total of 5853 patients enrolled in trials in the SEAL database received rituximab as part of induction therapy and were included in this analysis. The median age was 62 years (range 18–92), and 56% were greater than 60 years of age. At a median follow-up of 4.4 years, 1337 patients (23%) had disease progression, 1489 (25%) had died, and 5101 had sufficient follow-up to evaluate PFS24. A total of 1423 assessable patients failed to achieve PFS24 with a median OS of 7.2 months (95% CI 6.8–8.1) after progression; 5-year OS after progression was 19% and SMR was 32.1 (95% CI 30.0–34.4). A total of 3678 patients achieved PFS24; SMR after achieving PFS24 was 1.22 (95% CI 1.09–1.37). The observed OS versus expected OS at 3, 5, and 7 years after achieving PFS24 was 93.1% versus 94.4%, 87.6% versus 89.5%, and 80.0% versus 83.7%, respectively.ConclusionPatients treated with rituximab containing anthracycline-based immunochemotherapy on clinical trials who are alive without progression at 24 months from the onset of initial therapy have excellent outcomes with survival that is marginally lower but clinically indistinguishable from the age-, sex-, and country-matched background population for 7 years after achieving PFS24.     

Overall survival and updated progression-free survival outcomes in a randomized phase II study of combination cediranib and olaparib versus olaparib in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer

BackgroundOlaparib is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor and cediranib is an oral anti-angiogenic. In the primary analysis of this phase II study, combination cediranib/olaparib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with olaparib alone in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. This updated analysis was conducted to characterize overall survival (OS) and update PFS outcomes.Patients and methodsNinety patients were enrolled to this randomized, open-label, phase II study between October 2011 and June 2013 across nine United States-based academic centers. Data cut-off was 21 December 2016, with a median follow-up of 46 months. Participants had relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer of high-grade serous or endometrioid histology or had a deleterious germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCAm). Participants were randomized to receive olaparib capsules 400 mg twice daily or cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib capsules 200 mg twice daily until disease progression.ResultsIn this updated analysis, median PFS remained significantly longer with cediranib/olaparib compared with olaparib alone (16.5 versus 8.2 months, hazard ratio 0.50; P = 0.007). Subset analyses within stratum defined by BRCA status demonstrated statistically significant improvement in PFS (23.7 versus 5.7 months, P = 0.002) and OS (37.8 versus 23.0 months, P = 0.047) in gBRCA wild-type/unknown patients, although OS was not statistically different in the overall study population (44.2 versus 33.3 months, hazard ratio 0.64; P = 0.11). PFS and OS appeared similar between the two arms in gBRCAm patients. The most common CTCAE grade 3/4 adverse events with cediranib/olaparib remained fatigue, diarrhea, and hypertension.ConclusionsCombination cediranib/olaparib significantly extends PFS compared with olaparib alone in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Subset analyses suggest this margin of benefit is driven by PFS prolongation in patients without gBRCAm. OS was also significantly increased by the cediranib/olaparib combination in this subset of patients. Additional studies of this combination are ongoing and should incorporate analyses based upon BRCA status.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT0111648     

Comparison of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours and Choi criteria for response evaluation in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma treated with trabectedin: A retrospective analysis

BackgroundTo assess the additional value of density measurement using contrast-enhancement sequences (Choi assessment) in a real-life cohort of adult soft tissue sarcoma patients treated with trabectedin.MethodsEligibility criteria included adults (age ⩾18) treated between 01/2007 and 12/2011, with at least two trabectedin cycles after failure or intolerance to doxorubicin/ifosfamide. Baseline and first computed tomography (CT)-scans were centrally reviewed by an experienced radiologist.ResultsThe retrospective cohort consists of 134 (73 female) patients treated with trabectedin 1.5 mg/m² given as a 24-h infusion every 3 weeks. Patients received a median of five trabectedin cycles (range: 2–33) and the main cause of discontinuation was progressive disease (PD) (n = 105, 78.4%). Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) assessment was feasible in 128 (95.5%) patients, with Choi assessment performed in 92 (68.7%) patients, generally due to inadequate sequences or exclusive lung metastases. Concordance between both methods was fair (Kappa = 0.290). We identified five patients with false PD (i.e. PD according to RECIST but stable disease/partial response as per Choi). Univariate analysis did not identify any predictive factors for false PD. Median overall survival (OS) of patients with PD as per RECIST but stable disease/partial response (SD/PR) according to Choi was better than for patients with PD according to both RECIST and Choi (14 months versus 8 months; p = 0.052).ConclusionsChoi assessment may identify patients with false PD who achieved improved efficacy outcomes, suggesting that trabectedin may delay tumour progression even in the case of non-dimensional response. Dual size and tumour density assessment may be more suitable to evaluate responses to trabectedin in sarcoma patients as well as to improve the decision-making strategies for the continuation of trabectedin therapy.     

Postprogression survival for first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer

BackgroundWith the increasing availability of active agents, the importance of postprogression survival (PPS) has been recognised for several malignancies. However, little is known of PPS in advanced gastric cancer.Patients and methodsA literature search identified 43 randomised trials in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced gastric cancer. We partitioned overall survival (OS) into progression-free survival (PFS) and PPS, and then examined the correlation between median OS and either median PFS or median PPS. The correlation between differences in OS (ΔOS) and those in PFS (ΔPFS) between trial arms was also investigated.ResultsThe average median OS was significantly longer in recent (2006 and later) trials than in older (2005 and earlier) trials (10.60 versus 8.64 months, P < 0.001), as was the average median PPS (5.34 versus 3.74 months, P = 0.001). Median PPS was correlated with median OS for all trials (r = 0.732), and this correlation was more pronounced in recent trials (r = 0.850). By contrast, the correlation between median PFS and median OS was less pronounced in recent trials (r = 0.282), as was that between ΔPFS and ΔOS (r = 0.365).ConclusionAn increase in median PPS was found in accordance with an increase in median OS in recent trials compared with older trials for patients with advanced gastric cancer.     

Nintedanib for the treatment of patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (LUME-Colon 1): a phase III,international, randomized,placebo-controlled study

BackgroundAngiogenesis is critical to colorectal cancer (CRC) growth and metastasis. Phase I/II studies have demonstrated the efficacy of nintedanib, a triple angiokinase inhibitor, in patients with metastatic CRC. This global, randomized, phase III study investigated the efficacy and safety of nintedanib in patients with refractory CRC after failure of standard therapies.Patients and methodsEligible patients (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1, with histologically/cytologically confirmed metastatic/locally advanced CRC adenocarcinoma unamenable to surgery and/or radiotherapy) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or placebo (twice daily), until disease progression or undue toxicity. Patients were stratified by previous regorafenib, time from onset of metastatic disease to randomization, and region. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by central review. Secondary end points included objective tumor response and disease control by central review.ResultsFrom October 2014 to January 2016, 768 patients were randomized; 765 were treated (nintedanib n = 384; placebo n = 381). Median follow-up was 13.4 months (interquartile range 11.1–15.7). OS was not improved [median OS 6.4 months with nintedanib versus 6.0 months with placebo; hazard ratio (HR), 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.86–1.19; P = 0.8659]. There was a significant but modest increase in PFS with nintedanib versus placebo (median PFS 1.5 versus 1.4 months, respectively; HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.49–0.69; P < 0.0001). There were no complete or partial responses. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 97% of 384 nintedanib-treated patients and 93% of 381 placebo-treated patients. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were liver-related AEs (nintedanib 16%; placebo 8%) and fatigue (nintedanib 9%; placebo 6%).ConclusionsThe study failed to meet both co-primary end points. Nintedanib did not improve OS and was associated with a significant but modest increase in PFS versus placebo. Nintedanib was well tolerated.ClinicalTrials.gov numberNCT02149108 (LUME-Colon 1).     

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.     

Cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) and persistent jaundice despite optimal stenting: Effective intervention in patients with luminal disease

IntroductionThe advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC)-02 study established cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) as a reference 1^st-line regimen for patients with advanced/metastatic biliary tract cancer; patients with bilirubin ⩾1.5 × upper limit of normal (ULN) were excluded and there are few extant data for systemic treatment in the context of elevated bilirubin.MethodsPatients with ABC, receiving CisGem with a baseline bilirubin of ⩾1.5×ULN were eligible for this retrospective analysis; response, toxicity and survival data were collected.ResultsThirty-three patients of 545 screened; median age 59 years, range 23–79; 58% male, 58% with metastases (79% in the liver) of performance status (PS) 0 (33%), 1 (64%) or 2 (3%) were eligible. The median baseline bilirubin was 55 μmol/L (range 32–286); due to biliary tract obstruction (BTO, 76%) or liver metastases (LM, 24%). Toxicity was comparable to the ABC-02 study; bilirubin normalised in 64% during chemotherapy/follow-up. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.9 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.4–9.0) and median overall survival (OS) 9.5 months (95% CI: 5.7–12.8). Patients with BTO had a longer PFS and OS than those with LM (7.0 versus 2.6 months; p = 0.1633 and 9.8 versus 4.4 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.74; p = 0.465, respectively); not statistically significant (due to small sample size). Normalisation of bilirubin and completion of eight CisGem cycles were associated with longer OS (11.4 versus 2.9 months, HR 0.49; p = 0.08 and 15.2 versus 5.4 months, HR 0.12 p < 0.001, respectively). No difference in OS was shown between the bilirubin percentiles (for either PFS or OS).ConclusionFor PS 0-1 patients with ABC and high bilirubin due to luminal disease despite optimal stenting CisGem can be used safely with results similar to those in patients with normal bilirubin.     

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.     

A randomized,phase 2 study of cetuximab plus cisplatin with or without paclitaxel for the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BackgroundB490 (EudraCT# 2011-002564-24) is a randomized, phase 2b, noninferiority study investigating the efficacy and safety of first-line cetuximab plus cisplatin with/without paclitaxel (CetCis versus CetCisPac) in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN).Patients and methodsEligible patients had confirmed R/M SCCHN (oral cavity/oropharynx/larynx/hypopharynx/paranasal sinus) and no prior therapy for R/M disease. Cetuximab was administered on day 1 (2-h infusion, 400 mg/m²), then weekly (1-h infusions, 250 mg/m²). Cisplatin was given as a 1-h infusion (CetCis arm: 100 mg/m²; CetCisPac arm: 75 mg/m²) on day 1 of each cycle for a maximum of six cycles. Paclitaxel was administered as a 3-h infusion (175 mg/m²) on day 1 of each cycle. After six cycles, maintenance cetuximab was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). We assumed a noninferiority margin of 1.40 as compatible with efficacy.ResultsA total of 201 patients were randomized 1 : 1 to each regimen; 191 were assessable. PFS with CetCis (median, 6 months) was noninferior to PFS with CetCisPac (median, 7 months) [HR for CetCis versus CetCisPac 0.99; 95% CI: 0.72–1.36,P = 0.906; margin of noninferiority (90% CI of 1.4) not reached]. Median overall survival was 13 versus 11 months (HR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.53–1.11,P = 0.117). The overall response rates were 41.8% versus 51.7%, respectively (OR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.38–1.20,P = 0.181). Grade ≥3 adverse event rates were 76% and 73% for CetCis versus CetCisPac, respectively, while grade 4 toxicities were lower in the two-drug versus three-drug arm (14% versus 33%,P = 0.015). No toxic death or sepsis were reported and cardiac events were negligible (1%).ConclusionThe two-drug CetCis regimen proved to be noninferior in PFS to a three-drug combination with CetCisPac. The median OS of both regimens is comparable with that observed in EXTREME, while the life-threatening toxicity rate appeared reduced.Clinical trial numberEudraCT# 2011-002564-24.     

A randomised,double-blind,placebo-controlled trial of trametinib,an oral MEK inhibitor,in combination with gemcitabine for patients with untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas

BackgroundTrametinib, an oral mitogen/extracellular signal-related kinase (MEK)1/2 inhibitor, holds promise for malignancies with rat sarcoma (RAS) mutations, like pancreas cancer. This phase II study was designed to determine overall survival (OS) in patients with pancreas cancer treated with trametinib and gemcitabine. Secondary end-points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR); safety end-points were also assessed.MethodsAdults with untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomised (1:1) to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (weekly × 7 for 8 weeks, then days 1, 8 and 15 of 28-day cycles) plus trametinib or placebo 2 mg daily. RAS mutations were determined in circulating free DNA (cfDNA) and archival tumour tissue. OS was evaluated in kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutant and wild-type subgroups.ResultsBaseline characteristics for 160 patients were similar in both treatment arms. There was no significant difference in OS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.67–1.44; P = .453); median OS was 8.4 months with gemcitabine plus trametinib and 6.7 months with gemcitabine plus placebo. Median PFS (16 versus 15 weeks), ORR (22% versus 18%) and median DOR (23.9 versus 16.1 weeks) were also similar for trametinib and placebo arms, respectively. KRAS mutation-positive patients (n = 103) showed no difference in OS between arms. Thrombocytopenia, diarrhoea, rash and stomatitis were more frequent with trametinib, as was grade 3 anaemia.ConclusionsThe addition of trametinib to gemcitabine did not improve OS, PFS, ORR or DOR in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreas cancer. Outcomes were independent of KRAS mutations determined by cfDNA.     

First-line erlotinib versus gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: analyses from the phase III,randomized, open-label,ENSURE study

BackgroundThe phase III, randomized, open-label ENSURE study (NCT01342965) evaluated first-line erlotinib versus gemcitabine/cisplatin (GP) in patients from China, Malaysia and the Philippines with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and methodsPatients ≥18 years old with histologically/cytologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–2 were randomized 1:1 to receive erlotinib (oral; 150 mg once daily until progression/unacceptable toxicity) or GP [G 1250 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8 (3-weekly cycle); P 75 mg/m² i.v. day 1, (3-weekly cycle) for up to four cycles]. Primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Other end points include objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety.ResultsA total of 217 patients were randomized: 110 to erlotinib and 107 to GP. Investigator-assessed median PFS was 11.0 months versus 5.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22–0.51; log-rank P < 0.0001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed median PFS was consistent (HR, 0.42). Median OS was 26.3 versus 25.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively (HR, 0.91, 95% CI 0.63–1.31; log-rank P =.607). ORR was 62.7% for erlotinib and 33.6% for GP. Treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 2.7% versus 10.6% of erlotinib and GP patients, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were rash (6.4%) with erlotinib, and neutropenia (25.0%), leukopenia (14.4%), and anemia (12.5%) with GP.ConclusionThese analyses demonstrate that first-line erlotinib provides a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus GP in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC (NCT01342965).     

Long-term results of a randomised phase III trial of weekly versus three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum induction therapy followed by standard or extended three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum in European patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

BackgroundWeekly paclitaxel/carboplatin might improve survival in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We compared efficacy of first-line weekly to three-weekly paclitaxel/cis- or carboplatin (PCw and PC3w) induction therapy, followed by either three or six PC3w cycles.Patients and methodsIn this multicentre, randomised phase III trial with 2×2 design, patients with FIGO stage IIb–IV EOC were randomised to six cycles PCw (paclitaxel 90 mg/m², cisplatin 70 mg/m² or carboplatin AUC 4) or three cycles PC3w (paclitaxel 175 mg/m², cisplatin 75 mg/m² or carboplatin AUC 6), followed by either three or six cycles PC3w. Primary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were response rate (RR) and toxicity.ResultsOf 267 eligible patients, 133 received PCw and 134 PC3w. The first 105 patients received cisplatin, after protocol amendment the subsequent 162 patients received carboplatin. Weekly cisplatin was less well tolerated than weekly carboplatin. All PC3w cycles were well tolerated. At the end of all treatments, RR was 90.8% with no differences between the treatment arms. After a follow-up of median 10.3 years (range 7.1–14.8), median PFS was 18.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.9–21.0) months for PCw and 16.4 (95% CI 13.5–19.2) months for PC3w (p = 0.78). Median OS was 44.8 (95% CI 33.1–56.5) months for PCw and 41.1 (95% CI 34.4–47.7) months for PC3w (p = 0.98).ConclusionsThere was no benefit in terms of OS, PFS or RR for a weekly regimen nor for extended chemotherapy as first-line treatment for EOC in European patients.     

Class III β-tubulin,but not ERCC1, is a strong predictive and prognostic marker in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

BackgroundRecent researches revealed that class III β-tubulin (TUBB3) is a prognostic marker in various tumors and role of TUBB3 in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is not defined yet. We analyzed the significance of TUBB3 expression along with p53 and ERCC1 in locally advanced HNSCC patients receiving cisplatin-based induction chemotherapy.Materials and methodsRetrospective review of medical records at Seoul National University Hospital between 1998 and 2007 was carried out. Immunohistochemical stain of TUBB3, p53, and ERCC1 was done in paraffin-embedded tumor tissue. We assessed response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS).ResultsEighty-five patients with oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, and laryngeal cancers received induction chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin (n = 55), or 5-FU, cisplatin, and docetaxel (Taxotere) (n = 30). Eighty-three received definitive treatment after induction chemotherapy, where 62 received radiotherapy and 21 received surgery. TUBB3-positive patients showed lower response rate than TUBB3-negative patients (69% versus 88%, P = 0.039). Shorter median PFS was observed in TUBB3-positive group (12 versus 47 months, P = 0.001). Shorter median OS was observed in TUBB-positive group not reaching statistical significance (30 versus 59 months, P = 0.072). TUBB3 status significantly influenced CSS (35 months versus not reached, P = 0.017). Positive p53 status was related to poorer OS and CSS. ERCC1 showed no influence on chemotherapy response, PFS, OS, and CSS.ConclusionTUBB3 is a predictive and prognostic marker along with well-known p53 in HNSCC patients receiving cisplatin-based induction chemotherapy. Clinical impact of ERCC1 is not evident in this setting.     

Impact of TP53 mutation status on systemic treatment outcome in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundWe analyzed whether co-occurring mutations influence the outcome of systemic therapy in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and methodsALK-rearranged stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients were analyzed with next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses on a centralized diagnostic platform. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined in the total cohort and in treatment-related sub-cohorts. Cox regression analyses were carried out to exclude confounders.ResultsAmong 216 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC, the frequency of pathogenic TP53 mutations was 23.8%, while other co-occurring mutations were rare events. In ALK/TP53 co-mutated patients, median PFS and OS were significantly lower compared with TP53 wildtype patients [PFS 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.4–5.6) versus 10.3 months (95% CI: 8.6–12.0), P < 0.001; OS 15.0 months (95% CI: 5.0–24.9) versus 50.0 months (95% CI: 22.9–77.1), P = 0.002]. This difference was confirmed in all treatment-related subgroups including chemotherapy only [PFS first-line chemotherapy 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.3–4.1) versus 6.2 months (95% CI: 1.8–10.5), P = 0.021; OS 2.0 months (95% CI: 0.0–4.6) versus 9.0 months (95% CI: 6.1–11.9), P = 0.035], crizotinib plus chemotherapy [PFS crizotinib 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.9–7.2) versus 14.0 months (95% CI: 8.0–20.1), P < 0.001; OS 17.0 months (95% CI: 6.7–27.3) versus not reached, P = 0.049] and crizotinib followed by next-generation ALK-inhibitor [PFS next-generation inhibitor 5.4 months (95% CI: 0.1–10.7) versus 9.9 months (95% CI: 6.4–13.5), P = 0.039; OS 7.0 months versus 50.0 months (95% CI: not reached), P = 0.001).ConclusionsIn ALK-rearranged NSCLC co-occurring TP53 mutations predict an unfavorable outcome of systemic therapy. Our observations encourage future research to understand the underlying molecular mechanisms and to improve treatment outcome of the ALK/TP53 co-mutated subgroup.     

Impact of primary tumour resection on survival of patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous metastases treated by chemotherapy: Results from the multicenter,randomised trial Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive 9601

ObjectiveTo assess the impact of primary tumour resection on overall survival (OS) of patients diagnosed with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC).DesignAmong the 294 patients with non-resectable colorectal metastases enrolled in the Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) 9601 phase III trial, which compared different first-line single-agent chemotherapy regimens, 216 patients (73%) presented with synchronous metastases at study entry and constituted the present study population. Potential baseline prognostic variables including prior primary tumour resection were assessed by univariate and multivariate Cox analyses. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS curves were compared with the logrank test.ResultsAmong the 216 patients with stage IV CRC (median follow-up, 33 months), 156 patients (72%) had undergone resection of their primary tumour prior to study entry. The resection and non-resection groups did not differ for baseline characteristics except for primary tumour location (rectum, 14% versus 35%; p = 0.0006). In multivariate analysis, resection of the primary was the strongest independent prognostic factor for PFS (hazard ratio (HR), 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4–0.8; p = 0.0002) and OS (HR, 0.4; CI, 0.3–0.6; p < 0.0001). Both median PFS (5.1 [4.6–5.6] versus 2.9 [2.2–4.1] months; p = 0.001) and OS (16.3 [13.7–19.2] versus 9.6 [7.4–12.5]; p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the resection group. These differences in patient survival were maintained after exclusion of patients with rectal primary (n = 43).ConclusionResection of the primary tumour may be associated with longer PFS and OS in patients with stage IV CRC starting first-line, single-agent chemotherapy.