Randomised,placebo-controlled,double-blind,parallel-group phase III study evaluating aflibercept in patients receiving first-line treatment with gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer

BackgroundThis phase III study investigated the addition of aflibercept to gemcitabine, in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.Patients and methodsPatients with metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous (i.v.) aflibercept, 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or matching placebo combined with gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m² i.v. weekly for 7 weeks out of 8, then weekly for 3 weeks out of 4 until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. The primary objective was to demonstrate an improvement in overall survival (OS) between the treatment arms.ResultsThe study was stopped for futility following a planned interim analysis of OS in 427 randomised patients. With a median follow-up of 7.9 months, based on the 546 patients at study termination, median OS was 7.8 months in the gemcitabine plus placebo arm (n = 275) versus 6.5 months in the gemcitabine plus aflibercept arm (n = 271), which was not significant (hazard ratio 1.165, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.921–1.473, p = 0.2034). Median progression-free survival was 3.7 months in both arms. Treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were more frequent in the aflibercept than in the placebo-containing arm (23% versus 12%).ConclusionAdding aflibercept to gemcitabine did not improve OS in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.     

Treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with long-acting octreotide: A phase III multicentre,randomised, double blind placebo-controlled study

BackgroundA previous study reported a significant survival benefit for octreotide compared with no treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This was investigated further in this multicentre study.Patients and methodsTwo hundred and seventy two patients with HCC who were ineligible for curative treatments or had relapsed following potentially curative therapies were randomised to receive long-acting octreotide, 30 mg as an intramuscular injection once every 4 weeks for up to 2 years, or placebo.ResultsAt the time of the final analysis, median overall survival (OS) was 6.53 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8–8.3) for octreotide versus 7.03 months (95% CI, 5.43–8.53) for placebo (p = 0.34). Progression-free survival (p = 0.26) also did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups. No objective responses were achieved in the octreotide group but 33% of patients achieved disease stabilisation for a mean time of 5.5 months (95% CI, 1.1–9.9). The median time until definitive global health score deterioration (according to QLQ-C30) was 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.4–3.7) in the octreotide and 4 months (95% CI, 2.2–5.7) in the placebo group (p = 0.09). There were four objective responses in the placebo group. Octreotide was well tolerated; seven patients reported severe adverse events possibly related to octreotide and there were no cases of haematoma or cholecystitis.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced HCC, octreotide has a favourable safety profile but does not improve OS and could have a negative impact on quality of life.     

Randomized phase III study of docetaxel plus bavituximab in previously treated advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundBavituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine in the presence of β₂ glycoprotein 1 (β2GP1) to exert an antitumor immune response. This phase III trial determined the efficacy of bavituximab combined with docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and methodsKey eligibility criteria included advanced non-squamous NSCLC with disease progression after treatment with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, evidence of disease control after at least two cycles of first-line therapy, presence of measurable disease, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, adequate bone marrow and organ function, and no recent history of clinically significant bleeding. Eligible patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive up to six 21-day cycles of docetaxel plus either weekly bavituximab 3 mg/kg or placebo until progression or toxicity. The primary end point was overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 597 patients were enrolled. Median OS was 10.5 months in the docetaxel + bavituximab arm and was 10.9 months in the docetaxel + placebo arm (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.88–1.29; P = 0.533). There was no difference in progression-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.82–1.22; P = 0.990). Toxicities were manageable and similar between arms. In subset analysis, among patients with high baseline serum β2GP1 levels ≥200 µg/ml, a nonsignificant OS trend favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.63–1.06; P = 0.134). Among patients who received post-study immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, OS favored the bavituximab arm (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26–0.81; P = 0.006).ConclusionsThe combination of bavituximab plus docetaxel is not superior to docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC. The addition of bavituximab to docetaxel does not meaningfully increase toxicity. The potential benefit of bavituximab observed in patients with high β2GP1 levels and in patients subsequently treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors requires further investigation.Clinical trial numberNCT01999673.     

Updated results from MONALEESA-2, a phase III trial of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in hormone receptor-positive,HER2-negative advanced breast cancer

BackgroundThe phase III MONALEESA-2 study demonstrated significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and a manageable toxicity profile for first-line ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer. Here, we report updated efficacy and safety data, together with exploratory biomarker analyses, from the MONALEESA-2 study.Patients and methodsA total of 668 postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2– recurrent/metastatic breast cancer were randomized (1 : 1; stratified by presence/absence of liver and/or lung metastases) to ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off; 28-day treatment cycles) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was locally assessed PFS. The key secondary end point was overall survival (OS). Other secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Biomarker analysis was an exploratory end point.ResultsAt the time of the second interim analysis, the median duration of follow-up was 26.4 months. Median PFS was 25.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.0–30.3] for ribociclib plus letrozole and 16.0 months (95% CI 13.4–18.2) for placebo plus letrozole (hazard ratio 0.568; 95% CI 0.457–0.704; log-rank P = 9.63 × 10⁻⁸). Ribociclib treatment benefit was maintained irrespective of PIK3CA or TP53 mutation status, total Rb, Ki67, or p16 protein expression, and CDKN2A, CCND1, or ESR1 mRNA levels. Ribociclib benefit was more pronounced in patients with wild-type versus altered receptor tyrosine kinase genes. OS data remain immature, with 116 deaths observed; 50 in the ribociclib arm and 66 in the placebo arm (hazard ratio 0.746; 95% CI 0.517–1.078). The ORR was 42.5% versus 28.7% for all patients treated with ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole, respectively, and 54.5% versus 38.8%, respectively, for patients with measurable disease. Safety results, after a further 11.1 months of follow-up, were comparable with those reported at the first analysis, with no new or unexpected toxicities observed, and no evidence of cumulative toxicity.ConclusionsThe improved efficacy outcomes and manageable tolerability observed with first-line ribociclib plus letrozole are maintained with longer follow-up, relative to letrozole monotherapy.Clinical trials numberNCT01958021     

Adjuvant everolimus in high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: final results from the PILLAR-2 randomized phase III trial

BackgroundPatients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with an International Prognostic Index (IPI) ≥3 are at higher risk for relapse after a complete response (CR) to first-line rituximab-based chemotherapy (R-chemo). Everolimus has single-agent activity in lymphoma. PILLAR-2 aimed to improve disease-free survival (DFS) with 1 year of adjuvant everolimus.Patients and methodsPatients with high-risk (IPI ≥3) DLBCL and a positron emission tomography/computed tomography-confirmed CR to first-line R-chemo were randomized to 1 year of everolimus 10 mg/day or placebo. The primary end point was DFS; secondary end points were overall survival, lymphoma-specific survival, and safety.ResultsBetween August 2009 and December 2013, 742 patients were randomized to everolimus (n = 372) or placebo (n = 370). Median follow-up was 50.4 months (range 24.0–76.9). Overall, 47% of patients were ≥65 years, 50% were male, and 42% had an IPI of 4 or 5. 48% and 67% completed everolimus and placebo, respectively. Primary reasons for everolimus discontinuation versus placebo were adverse events (AEs; 30% versus 12%) and relapsed disease (6% versus 13%). Everolimus did not significantly improve DFS compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.69–1.22; P = 0.276). Two-year DFS rate was 77.8% (95% CI 72.7–82.1) with everolimus and 77.0% (95% CI 72.1–81.1) with placebo. Common grade 3/4 AEs with everolimus were neutropenia, stomatitis, and decreased CD4 lymphocytes.ConclusionsAdjuvant everolimus did not improve DFS in patients already in PET/CT-confirmed CR. Future approaches should incorporate targeted agents such as everolimus with R-CHOP rather than as adjuvant therapy after CR has been obtained.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00790036     

A randomised,double-blind phase III study of pazopanib in patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Final overall survival results and safety update

BackgroundIn this randomised phase III study (VEG105192; NCT00334282), pazopanib previously demonstrated statistically and clinically meaningful improvement of progression-free survival versus placebo in patients with advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Final overall survival (OS) and updated safety results are now reported.MethodsTreatment-naive or cytokine-pretreated mRCC patients (n = 435) stratified and randomised (2:1) to pazopanib 800 mg daily or placebo, were treated until disease progression, death or unacceptable toxicity. Upon progression, placebo patients could receive pazopanib through an open-label study. Final OS in the intent-to-treat population was analysed using a stratified log-rank test. Rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) and inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) analyses were performed post-hoc to adjust for crossover.FindingsThe difference in final OS between pazopanib- and placebo-treated patients was not statistically significant (22.9 versus 20.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–1.16; one-sided P = .224). Early and frequent crossover from placebo to pazopanib and prolonged duration of crossover treatment confounded the OS analysis. In IPCW analyses, pazopanib decreased mortality (HR = 0.504; 95% CI, 0.315–0.762; two-sided P = .002). Similar, albeit non-significant, results were obtained in RPSFT analyses (HR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.215–1.388; two-sided P = .172). Since the last cutoff, cumulative exposure to pazopanib increased by 30%. The pazopanib safety profile showed no new safety signals or changes in the type, frequency and severity of adverse events.InterpretationAlthough no significant difference in OS was observed in this study, extensive crossover from placebo to pazopanib confounded final OS analysis. Post-hoc analyses adjusting for crossover suggest OS benefit with pazopanib treatment for mRCC patients.     

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.     

SALTO: a randomized, multicenter study assessing octreotide LAR in inoperable bowel obstruction

This phase II, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, non-comparative study assessed the efficacy and safety of immediate-release octreotide and octreotide LAR, in combination with corticosteroids and standard medical care, on the symptoms of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) due to peritoneal carcinomatosis. The primary efficacy endpoint was “success” at day 14 defined as a composite endpoint including the absence of a nasogastric tube, and vomiting less than twice per day and no use of anticholinergic agents. Patients in the octreotide arm received octreotide LAR 30 mg intramuscular (im) on days 1, 29 and 57, as well as daily immediate-release octreotide 600 μg per day plus methylprednisolone on days 1 to 6. Placebo-treated patients received methylprednisolone and matched placebo instead of octreotide. Difficulties associated with enrolling patients at palliative-care stage meant only 64 patients (instead of the planned 102 patients) were randomized, 32 to octreotide and 32 to placebo. Despite randomization, more patients in the octreotide arm (46.4%) than in the placebo arm (21.9%) had a baseline Karnofsky score less than 50. An intention-to-treat analysis showed that in the octreotide and placebo arms, 12 (38%) and nine (28%), respectively, patients were successfully treated at day 14, which increased to 9/15 (60%) and 7/25 (28%), respectively, among patients with a baseline Karnofsky score greater or equal to 50. Octreotide-treated patients reported three drug-related adverse events (AEs), and no drug-related serious AEs or deaths. Octreotide LAR may have a key role in treating patients with a MBO due to peritoneal carcinomatosis, particularly in those with moderately severe disease.     

Overall survival with cisplatin–gemcitabine and bevacizumab or placebo as first-line therapy for nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomised phase III trial (AVAiL)

BackgroundBevacizumab, the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent, provides clinical benefit when combined with platinum-based chemotherapy in first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We report the final overall survival (OS) analysis from the phase III AVAiL trial.Patients and methodsPatients (n = 1043) received cisplatin 80 mg/m² and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m² for up to six cycles plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (n = 345), bevacizumab 15 mg/kg (n = 351) or placebo (n = 347) every 3 weeks until progression. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); OS was a secondary end point.ResultsSignificant PFS prolongation with bevacizumab compared with placebo was maintained with longer follow-up {hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.75 (0.64–0.87), P = 0.0003 and 0.85 (0.73–1.00), P = 0.0456} for the 7.5 and 15 mg/kg groups, respectively. Median OS was >13 months in all treatment groups; nevertheless, OS was not significantly increased with bevacizumab [HR (95% CI) 0.93 (0.78–1.11), P = 0.420 and 1.03 (0.86–1.23), P = 0.761] for the 7.5 and 15 mg/kg groups, respectively, versus placebo. Most patients (∼62%) received multiple lines of poststudy treatment. Updated safety results are consistent with those previously reported.ConclusionsFinal analysis of AVAiL confirms the efficacy of bevacizumab when combined with cisplatin–gemcitabine. The PFS benefit did not translate into a significant OS benefit, possibly due to high use of efficacious second-line therapies.     

Effect of docetaxel duration on clinical outcomes: exploratory analysis of CLEOPATRA,a phase III randomized controlled trial

BackgroundCombination pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel (D) is considered standard first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer. This post hoc, exploratory analysis of CLEOPATRA study data evaluated the clinical effects of D treatment duration within this regimen. The clinical benefits of pertuzumab and trastuzumab by different durations of D treatment were also evaluated.Patients and methodsPatients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer received trastuzumab and D plus pertuzumab or placebo. Clinical outcomes were analyzed by the number of D cycles that patients received (<6D, 6D, or >6D). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for each treatment arm within each D cycle group were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier approach. Time-dependent, multivariate Cox regression was applied to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for HER2-targeted therapy and D cycle groups.ResultsOverall, 804 patients received <6D (n = 119), 6D (n = 210), or >6D (n = 475) cycles. After adjusting for pertuzumab benefits versus placebo (PFS HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.51–0.74, P < 0.0001; OS HR = 0.60, 95% CI, 0.49–0.74, P < 0.0001), >6D versus 6D cycles was not associated with statistically significant improvements in PFS (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.63–1.01, P = 0.0640) or OS (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.69–1.12, P = 0.3073). Consistent improvements in PFS and OS were observed with pertuzumab versus placebo, irrespective of D duration. The HRs for PFS were 0.395, 0.615, and 0.633 for <6D, 6D, and >6D cycles, respectively (P < 0.05 for all D cycle groups). Corresponding HRs for OS were 0.577, 0.700, and 0.612, respectively (P < 0.05 for <6D and >6D).ConclusionsAfter accounting for pertuzumab benefits, more than six cycles of D treatment was not associated with significant improvements in either PFS or OS compared with six cycles. The addition of pertuzumab to trastuzumab improved clinical outcomes versus trastuzumab plus placebo, regardless of D treatment duration.ClinicalTrials.gov identifierNCT00567190.     

Survival benefit of early androgen receptor inhibitor therapy in locally advanced prostate cancer: Long-term follow-up of the SPCG-6 study

BackgroundThe optimal timing of endocrine therapy in non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is still an issue of debate.MethodsA randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial comparing bicalutamide 150 mg once daily with placebo in addition to standard care in patients with hormone-naïve, non-metastatic PCa. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was performed to analyse time-to-event (death).FindingsA total of 1218 patients were included into the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (SPCG)-6 study of which 607 were randomised to receive bicalutamide in addition to their standard care and 611 to receive placebo. Median follow-up was 14.6 years. Overall, 866 (71.1%) patients died, 428 (70.5%) in the bicalutamide arm and 438 (71.7%) in the placebo arm, p = 0.87. Bicalutamide significantly improved OS in patient with locally advanced disease (hazard ratios (HR) = 0.77 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63–0.94, p = 0.01), regardless of baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA), with a survival benefit which was apparent throughout the study period. In contrast, survival favoured randomisation to the placebo arm in patients with localised disease (HR = 1.19 (95% CI: 1.00–1.43), p = 0.056). However, a survival gain from bicalutamide therapy was present in patients with localised disease and a baseline PSA greater than 28 ng/mL at randomisation. In multivariate Cox proportional hazard model, only including patients managed on watchful waiting as their standard of care (n = 991) OS depended on age, World Health Organisation (WHO) grade, baseline PSA, clinical stage and randomised treatment.InterpretationThroughout the 14.6 year follow-up period the addition of early bicalutamide to standard of care resulted in a significant OS benefit in patients with locally advanced PCa. In contrast, patients with localised PCa and low PSA derived no survival benefit from early bicalutamide. The optimal timing for initiating bicalutamide in non-metastatic PCa patients is dependent on disease stage and baseline PSA.     

Overall survival analysis of EXAM,a phase III trial of cabozantinib in patients with radiographically progressive medullary thyroid carcinoma

BackgroundPrimary analysis of the double-blind, phase III Efficacy of XL184 (Cabozantinib) in Advanced Medullary Thyroid Cancer (EXAM) trial demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival with cabozantinib versus placebo in patients with progressive medullary thyroid cancer (MTC). Final analysis of overall survival (OS), a key secondary endpoint, was carried out after long-term follow-up.Patients and methodsEXAM compared cabozantinib with placebo in 330 patients with documented radiographic progression of metastatic MTC. Patients were randomized (2:1) to cabozantinib (140 mg/day) or placebo. Final OS and updated safety data are reported.ResultsMinimum follow-up was 42 months. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed a 5.5-month increase in median OS with cabozantinib versus placebo (26.6 versus 21.1 months) although the difference did not reach statistical significance [stratified hazard ratio (HR), 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64–1.12; P = 0.24]. In an exploratory assessment of OS, progression-free survival, and objective response rate, cabozantinib appeared to have a larger treatment effect in patients with RET M918T mutation–positive tumors compared with patients not harboring this mutation. For patients with RET M918T-positive disease, median OS was 44.3 months for cabozantinib versus 18.9 months for placebo [HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38–0.94; P = 0.03 (not adjusted for multiple subgroup analyses)], with corresponding values of 20.2 versus 21.5 months (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.70–1.82; P = 0.63) in the RET M918T–negative subgroup. Median treatment duration was 10.8 months with cabozantinib and 3.4 months with placebo. The safety profile for cabozantinib remained consistent with that of the primary analysis.ConclusionThe secondary end point was not met in this final OS analysis from the trial of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic, radiographically progressive MTC. A statistically nonsignificant increase in OS was observed for cabozantinib compared with placebo. Exploratory analyses suggest that patients with RET M918T–positive tumors may experience a greater treatment benefit with cabozantinib.Trial Registration NumberNCT00704730     

Dabrafenib plus trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma: long-term survival and safety analysis of a phase 3 study

BackgroundPrevious analysis of COMBI-d (NCT01584648) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with combination dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. This study was continued to assess 3-year landmark efficacy and safety after ≥36-month follow-up for all living patients.Patients and methodsThis double-blind, phase 3 study enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Patients were randomized to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus trametinib (2 mg once daily) or dabrafenib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were OS, overall response, duration of response, safety, and pharmacokinetics.ResultsBetween 4 May and 30 November 2012, a total of 423 of 947 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n= 211) or dabrafenib monotherapy (n = 212). At data cut-off (15 February 2016), outcomes remained superior with the combination: 3-year PFS was 22% with dabrafenib plus trametinib versus 12% with monotherapy, and 3-year OS was 44% versus 32%, respectively. Twenty-five patients receiving monotherapy crossed over to combination therapy, with continued follow-up under the monotherapy arm (per intent-to-treat principle). Of combination-arm patients alive at 3 years, 58% remained on dabrafenib plus trametinib. Three-year OS with the combination reached 62% in the most favourable subgroup (normal lactate dehydrogenase and <3 organ sites with metastasis) versus only 25% in the unfavourable subgroup (elevated lactate dehydrogenase). The dabrafenib plus trametinib safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial observations, and no new safety signals were detected with long-term use.ConclusionsThese data demonstrate that durable (≥3 years) survival is achievable with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma and support long-term first-line use of the combination in this setting.     

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.     

Randomized trial on adjuvant treatment with FOLFIRI followed by docetaxel and cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid for radically resected gastric cancer

BackgroundSome trial have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant fluoropirimidine with or without platinum compounds compared with surgery alone. ITACA-S study was designed to evaluate whether a sequential treatment of FOLFIRI [irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/LV)] followed by docetaxel plus cisplatin improves disease-free survival in comparison with 5-FU/LV in patients with radically resected gastric cancer.Patients and methodsPatients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m² day 1, LV 100 mg/m² as 2 h infusion and 5-FU 400 mg/m² as bolus, days 1 and 2 followed by 600 mg/m²/day as 22 h continuous infusion, q14 for four cycles) followed by docetaxel 75 mg/m² day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m² day 1, q21 for three cycles (sequential arm) or De Gramont regimen (5-FU/LV arm).ResultsFrom February 2005 to August 2009, 1106 patients were enrolled, and 1100 included in the analysis: 562 in the sequential arm and 538 in the 5-FU/LV arm. With a median follow-up of 57.4 months, 581 patients recurred or died (297 sequential arm and 284 5-FU/LV arm), and 483 died (243 and 240, respectively). No statistically significant difference was detected for both disease-free [hazard ratio (HR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85–1.17; P = 0.974] and overall survival (OS) (HR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82–1.18; P = 0.865). Five-year disease-free and OS rates were 44.6% and 44.6%, 51.0% and 50.6% in the sequential and 5-FU/LV arm, respectively.ConclusionsA more intensive regimen failed to show any benefit in disease-free and OS versus monotherapy.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01640782.     

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).     

The addition of pravastatin to chemotherapy in advanced gastric carcinoma: A randomised phase II trial

PurposeStatins have for long been considered to play a potential role in anticancer treatment based upon their ability to inhibit the mevalonate synthesis pathway. This randomised phase II trial compared the efficacy and safety of pravastatin added to epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECC versus ECC + P) in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma.MethodsPatients were randomised to receive up to six cycles of 3-weekly ECC with or without pravastatin (40 mg, once daily from day 1 of the first cycle until day 21 of the last cycle). Primary end-point was progression-free rate at 6 months (PFR_6months). Secondary end-points were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. For early termination in case of futility, a two-stage design was applied (P₀ = 50%; P₁ = 70%; α = 0.05; β = 0.10).ResultsThirty patients were enrolled. PFR_6months was 6/14 patients (42.8%) in the ECC + P arm, and 7/15 patients (46.7%) in the control arm, and therefore the study was terminated after the first stage. In the ECC and ECC + P arm, RR was 7/15 (46.7%) and 5/15 (33.3%), median PFS was 5 and 6 months and median OS was 6 and 8 months, respectively. Toxicity data showed no significant differences, although there was a trend towards more gastrointestinal side-effects such as diarrhoea and stomatitis in the ECC + P arm.ConclusionIn this randomised phase II trial the addition of pravastatin to ECC did not improve outcome in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Therefore, further testing of this combination in a randomised phase III trial cannot be recommended.     

Health-related quality of life in women with recurrent ovarian cancer receiving paclitaxel plus trebananib or placebo (TRINOVA-1)

BackgroundTo evaluate the influence of treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in 919 women with recurrent ovarian cancer enrolled in the TRINOVA-1 study, a randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study that demonstrated that trebananib 15 mg/kg QW plus weekly paclitaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus weekly paclitaxel (7.2 versus 5.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval 0.57–0.77; P < 0.001).Patients and methodsHRQoL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Ovary [FACT-O; comprising FACT-G and the ovarian cancer–specific subscale (OCS)] and EuroQOL EQ-5D instruments before treatment on day 1 of weeks 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, and every 8 weeks thereafter and at the safety follow-up visit. A pattern-mixture model was used to evaluate the influence of patient dropout on FACT-O and OCS scores over time.ResultsOf 919 randomized patients, 834 (91%) had a baseline and ≥1 post-baseline HRQoL assessment. At baseline, scores for all instruments were similar for both arms. At 25 weeks, mean ± SD changes from baseline were negligible, with mean ± SD changes typically <1 unit from baseline: -2.4 ± 16.6 in the trebananib arm and -1.6 ± 15.2 in the placebo arm for FACT-O, -0.71 ± 5.5 in the trebananib arm and -0.86 ± 4.9 in the placebo arm for OCS, and -0.02 ± 0.22 in the trebananib arm and 0.02 ± 0.19 in the placebo arm for EQ-5D. Distribution of scores was similar between treatment arms at baseline and over the course of the study. In pattern-mixture models, there was no evidence that patient dropout affected differences in mean FACT-O or OCS scores. Edema had limited effect on either FACT-O or OCS scores in patients with grade ≥2 edema or those with grade 1 or no edema.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that the improvement in PFS among patients in the trebananib arm in the TRINOVA-1 study was achieved without compromising HRQoL.ClinicalTrials.gov identifierNCT01204749.     

KRAS mutations are associated with inferior clinical outcome in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer,but are not predictive for benefit with cediranib

PurposeThe prognostic potential of KRAS mutations in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and the impact of KRAS mutation status on the effectiveness of chemotherapy or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signalling inhibitor therapy remain unclear. KRAS mutation status was evaluated retrospectively as a potential prognostic/predictive marker of clinical outcomes using tumour samples from patients with metastatic CRC receiving cediranib or placebo plus FOLFOX/XELOX in a Phase III trial (HORIZON II; NCT00399035).MethodsKRAS codon 12 and 13 mutation analyses were performed using a commercially available, allele-specific, amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS)-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Retrospective analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to KRAS mutation status were performed for patients randomised to cediranib 20 mg or placebo.ResultsKRAS status was determined in 599/1076 patients (cediranib 20 mg, n = 285/502; cediranib 30 mg, n = 110/216; placebo, n = 204/358). Baseline characteristics were similar across KRAS mutant (n = 258; 24.0%), wild-type (n = 341; 31.7%) and status unknown (n = 477; 44.3%) groups. There was a trend towards improved PFS and OS in the wild-type versus mutant subgroups independent of treatment (cediranib 20 mg and placebo: PFS hazard ratio (HR) = 0.85 [median PFS: wild-type = 8.5 months; mutant = 8.3 months]; OS HR = 0.71 [median OS: wild-type = 20.9 months; mutant = 16.9 months]). Treatment effects were similar between KRAS subgroups for cediranib 20 mg versus placebo (PFS: wild-type HR = 0.78, mutant HR = 0.82; OS: wild-type HR = 0.92, mutant HR = 1.01).ConclusionData from this large randomised Phase III study show that KRAS codon 12/13 mutations have negative prognostic value in metastatic CRC patients receiving treatment with FOLFOX/XELOX, but KRAS mutation status is not predictive of treatment benefit with cediranib, using PFS or OS.     

A randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled phase II study of maintenance therapy with tasquinimod in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer responsive to or stabilized during first-line docetaxel chemotherapy

BackgroundThis phase II study was conducted to assess clinical efficacy of tasquinimod maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer not progressing during first-line docetaxel-based therapy.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive tasquinimod (0.25–1.0 mg/day orally) or placebo. The primary end point was radiologic progression-free survival (rPFS); secondary efficacy end points included: overall survival (OS); PFS on next-line therapy (PFS 2) and symptomatic PFS, assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) questionnaire and analgesic use. Quality of life was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire and by the EuroQol-5 Dimension Quality of Life Instrument (EQ-5D). Adverse events were recorded.ResultsA total of 219 patients were screened and 144 patients randomized. The median duration of treatment was 18.7 weeks (range 0.6–102.7 weeks) for the tasquinimod arm and 19.2 weeks (range 0.4–80.0 weeks) for the placebo arm. Median (90% CI) rPFS was 31.7 (24.3–53.7) and 22.7 (16.1–25.9) weeks in the tasquinimod and placebo arms, respectively [HR (90% CI) 0.6 (0.4–0.9), P = 0.0162]. The median OS was not reached because only 14 deaths occurred by the cut-off date. No statistically significant differences between treatment arms were noted for symptomatic PFS, PFS 2, BPI score, FACT-P score, or EQ-5D. The incidence of any treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE) was similar in the tasquinimod and placebo arms (97.2% versus 94.3%, respectively), whereas severe TEAEs (NCI-CTC Grade 3–5) incidence was higher in the tasquinimod group (50.7% versus 27.1%).ConclusionsRandomized trials testing new drugs as maintenance can be successfully conducted after chemotherapy in castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Maintenance tasquinimod therapy significantly reduced the risk of rPFS by 40%.ClinicalTrialsgov identifier NCT01732549.