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     

A randomized phase II study comparing erlotinib versus erlotinib with alternating chemotherapy in relapsed non-small-cell lung cancer patients: the NVALT-10 study

BackgroundEpidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) administered concurrently with chemotherapy did not improve outcome in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, in preclinical models and early phase noncomparative studies, pharmacodynamic separation of chemotherapy and TKIs did show a synergistic effect.Patients and methodsA randomized phase II study was carried out in patients with advanced NSCLC who had progressed on or following first-line chemotherapy. Erlotinib 150 mg daily (monotherapy) or erlotinib 150 mg during 15 days intercalated with four 21-day cycles docetaxel for squamous (SQ) or pemetrexed for nonsquamous (NSQ) patients was administered (combination therapy). After completion of chemotherapy, erlotinib was continued daily. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsTwo hundred and thirty-one patients were randomized, 115 in the monotherapy arm and 116 in the combination arm. The adjusted hazard ratio for PFS was 0.76 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58–1.02; P = 0.06], for overall survival (OS) 0.67 (95% CI 0.49–0.91; P = 0.01) favoring the combination arm. This improvement was primarily observed in NSQ subgroup. Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3+ toxic effect occurred in 20% versus 56%, rash in 7% versus 15% and febrile neutropenia in 0% versus 6% in monotherapy and combination therapy, respectively.ConclusionsPFS was not significantly different between the arms. OS was significantly improved in the combination arm, an effect restricted to NSQ histology.Study Registration numberNCT00835471.     

A phase II study of a paclitaxel and oxaliplatin combination in platinum-sensitive recurrent advanced ovarian cancer patients.

PURPOSE: A multicentric, phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination paclitaxel and oxaliplatin in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received 175 mg/m(2) paclitaxel (over 3 h) followed by 130 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin (over 2 h) every 21 days for up to nine cycles without hydration or primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis. Patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and to have received no more than one prior cisplatin- and/or carboplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen with a platinum-progression-free interval > or =6 months. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients enrolled and treated, 98 were eligible. An overall response rate of 81% (79 of 98 patients) (95% confidence interval 71% to 88%) was observed according to RECIST criteria (third party reviewed), and 88% (86 of 98) when this was complemented with CA-125 response. With a median follow up of 43.6 months (range 30.2-64.2) the median progression-free survival was 10.2 months (range 0.3-21.4) and the overall survival 32.4 months. Seven hundred and eight cycles were administered (median seven per patient; range one to nine). A total of 67% of patients experienced National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3-4 neutropenia, including 8% with concomitant febrile episode, without treatment-related deaths. Ninety-three per cent of patients experienced neuropathy of grade 1 or more, including 25% with cumulative reversible peripheral neuropathy of grade 3-4. Oxaliplatin doses were reduced in 30 patients due to neurotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The oxaliplatin/paclitaxel combination can be administered in an outpatient setting every 3 weeks without specific measures. The high level of activity and its duration observed warrants further evaluation of this combination in pretreated platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer patients.     

A randomized,double-blind phase II study evaluating cediranib versus cediranib and saracatinib in patients with relapsed metastatic clear-cell renal cancer (COSAK)

BackgroundPreclinical work suggests SRC proteins have a role in the development of resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeted therapy in metastatic clear-cell renal cancer (mRCC). This hypothesis was tested in this trial using the SRC inhibitor saracatinib and the VEGF inhibitor cediranib.Patients and methodsPatients with disease progression after ≥1 VEGF-targeted therapy were eligible to participate in this double-blind, randomized (1:1) phase II study. The study compared the combination cediranib 30 mg once daily (o.d.) and saracatinib 175 mg o.d. (CS) (n = 69) or cediranib 45 mg o.d. and placebo o.d. (C) (n = 69). Archived tissue was used for biomarker analysis [SRC, focal adhesion kinase (FAK), von Hippel–Lindau, protein tyrosine phosphatase 1b and hypoxia-inducible factor 2α: n = 86]. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2012, 138 patients were randomized across 16 UK sites. The characteristics of the two groups were well balanced. Partial responses were seen in 13.0% for C and 14.5% for CS (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS [5.4 months (3.6–7.3 months) for C and 3.9 (2.4–5.3 months) for CS; hazard ratio (HR) 1.18 (0.94–1.48)] or overall survival (OS) [14.2 months (11.2–16.8 months) for C and 10.0 (6.7–13.2 months) for CS; HR 1.28 (1.00–1.63)]. There was no significant difference in the frequency of key adverse events, dose reductions or drug discontinuations. None of the biomarkers were prognostic for PFS or OS. FAK overexpression correlated with an OS benefit [HR 2.29 (1.09–4.82), P > 0.05], but not PFS, for CS.ConclusionsSaracatinib did not increase the efficacy of a VEGF-targeted therapy (cediranib) in this setting. Biomarker analysis did not identify consistent predictive biomarkers.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00942877.     

Phase II study of NGR-hTNF in combination with doxorubicin in relapsed ovarian cancer patients

Background:

The NGR-hTNF (asparagine–glycine–arginine–human tumour necrosis factor) is able to promote antitumour immune responses and to improve the intratumoural doxorubicin uptake by selectively damaging tumour blood vessels.

Methods:

Patients progressing after ⩾1 platinum/taxane-based regimen received NGR-hTNF 0.8 μg m⁻² and doxorubicin 60 mg m⁻² every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was a Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors-defined response rate with a target of more than 6 out of 37 responding patients.

Results:

A total of 37 patients with platinum-free interval lower than 6 months (PFI<6; n=25), or between 6 and 12 months (PFI=6–12; n=12) were enrolled. Median baseline peripheral blood lymphocyte count (PBLC) was 1.6 per ml (interquartile range, 1.2–2.1). In all, 18 patients (49%) received more than 6 cycles. Febrile neutropaenia was registered in one patient (3%). Among 35 assessable patients, 8 (23% 95% CI 12–39%) had partial response (2 with PFI<6; 6 with PFI=6–12) and 15 (43%) had stable disease (10 with PFI<6; 5 with PFI=6–12). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.0 months for all patients, 3.8 months for patients with PFI<6, and 7.8 months for patients with PFI=6–12. Median overall survival (OS) was 17.0 months. Patients with baseline PBLC higher than the first quartile had improved PFS (P=0.01) and OS (P=0.001).

Conclusion:

Tolerability and activity of this combination warrant further randomised testing in patients with PFI<6. The role of PBLC as a blood-based biomarker deserves further investigation.     

A randomized study evaluating radiotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer

A combination of cisplatin (70 mg/m2 i.v. day one) and etoposide (100 mg/m2 i.v. day one, 200 mg/m2 orally days 2 and 3) repeated every third week to a maximum of 4 cycles were compared with high voltage radiotherapy, 42 Gy given in 15 fractions over a 3-week period to patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (a shield was used in the posterior field to reduce the total spinal dose less than 40 Gy). One hundred and eighteen patients received radiotherapy; the median survival was 10.6 months compared to 10.5 months for the 116 chemotherapy patients (p = 0.81). The objective response rate (CR + PR) was 42% for the radiotherapy and 21% for the chemotherapy group (p = 0.009). At progression it was optional to cross over to the other treatment modality or to receive phase II chemotherapy. Thirty patients primarily treated with radiotherapy and 54 allocated to chemotherapy received second line antineoplastic treatment.     

A randomized phase II trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with uracil/tegafur and gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone in patients with resected pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND: There have been few randomized studies of adjuvant chemotherapy using gemcitabine (GEM) in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with invasive ductal pancreatic cancer who underwent radical surgery were enrolled and assigned to receive uracil/tegafur (UFT) and GEM together (GU) or GEM alone (G). GEM was administrated at a dosage of 1 g/m(2) intravenously weekly 3 of 4 weeks and UFT at a dosage of 200 mg/day orally continuously. Eligibility included resection status 0 or 1, and no previous chemo- or/and radiation therapy. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), and secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2005, 100 patients were randomized into the 2 arms of the trial (50 patients to GU and 50 to G). One patient in the G group was found to be ineligible. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the 2 groups. With a median observation period of 21 months, the 1- and 3-year DFS rates were 50.0% and 17.7% in the GU group and 49.0% and 21.6% in the G group, respectively. The median OS was 21.2 months in the GU group and 29.8 months in the G group. Toxicity was minor and acceptable, less than grade 4 in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative GEM-based adjuvant chemotherapy was safe and well tolerated. However, addition of UFT with GEM did not improve DFS as compared with GEM alone. Further clinical trial resources for adjuvant chemotherapy should address other combinations and novel agents.     

A phase II study of lenalidomide in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian carcinoma

BackgroundLenalidomide has dual antiangiogenic and immunomodulatory properties and confirmed antitumor activity in hematologic malignancies. A phase II study investigating the safety and efficacy of continuous lenalidomide in recurrent ovarian cancer patients was initiated.Patients and methodsPatients with histologically confirmed epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal carcinoma, with asymptomatic recurrence 6 months after prior therapy were treated with continuous oral lenalidomide (20 mg/day). The primary end point was to evaluate efficacy according to the rate of disease control at 4 months. Secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety.ResultsMost of the 45 patients enrolled and treated had serous histology (78%) and a single line of prior chemotherapy (73%). Median platinum-free interval (PFI) was 11.3 months (range 6.9–56.8). Clinical benefit at 4 months was 38% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23% to 53%]. A 59% disease control rate was reported in patients with a PFI >12 months versus 24% with PFI of 6–12 months (P = 0.023). Four patients had RECIST partial responses and 21 had stable disease. CA125 responses were reported in eight patients, including one complete response. Median PFS was 3.4 months (95% CI 2.4–4.4). Most frequent toxicity was hematologic, notably grade 3–4 neutropenia in 29% of patients, along with fatigue (69%), gastrointestinal toxicity (constipation 53%, abdominal pain 49%, diarrhea 38%, nausea/vomiting 36%) and thrombosis (11%). Eight patients withdrew due to related toxicity.ConclusionsLenalidomide shows interesting efficacy in late recurrent ovarian cancer patients. Toxicity was mainly hematologic, gastrointestinal and venous thrombosis. Future studies will evaluate combination of lenalidomide with chemotherapy agents.Clinicaltrials.govNCT01111903.     

A phase II study of topotecan plus gemcitabine in the treatment of patients with relapsed ovarian cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Second-line chemotherapy for patients with ovarian cancer who failed platinum and paclitaxel treatment remains a therapeutic challenge. We investigated the toxicity profile and therapeutic efficacy of a novel combination regimen, topotecan plus gemcitabine, in a clinical phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer after platinum and paclitaxel treatment were eligible to participate in this trial. Topotecan was given at an initial dose of 0.5 mg/m(2) daily (days 1-5), combined with gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) and 600 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, respectively. Precluding good tolerability, this protocol facilitated subsequent dose increases of topotecan up to 1.0 mg/m(2). The primary objective was to determine the dose-limiting toxicity, whereas secondary objectives comprised measurable and CA-125 response rates, disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS: The twenty-one patients (median age 57 years, range 37-70 years) who were allocated to this trial received a total of 94 courses of chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 20.5 months. Topotecan dosage could be escalated to 0.75 mg/m(2) in nine patients and 1 mg/m(2) in another two patients. Dose reduction was not necessary in any case. There were no episodes of neutropenic fever, sepsis or chemotherapy-related fatalities. Only one patient developed CTC grade 4 leukopenia after the first treatment cycle, whereas three patients showed grade 3/4 anaemia. Five patients experienced thrombocytopenia grade 4 without clinical sequelae. Non-hematological toxicities were mild and rare. Eleven patients could be evaluated for clinical tumour response, with three complete, and four partial remissions. Two patients each had stable and progressive diseases. The median progression-free survival rate was 8.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.3-13.4 months]. The median overall survival rate was 21.1 months (95% CI 14.8-22.1 months). CONCLUSIONS: Topotecan combined with gemcitabine has a favourable toxicity profile and encouraging efficacy in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.     

A randomized study of sequential versus alternating combination chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma

The concept of using either alternating or sequential combination chemotherapy with non-cross-resistant combinations was tested in a randomized trial including 301 previously untreated patients with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma. The sequential schedule consisted of CAF (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil) followed by PH (cisplatin, hexamethylmelamine) in nonresponders, CAF- greater than PH (n = 157), and the alternating regimen consisted of CAF/PH (n = 144). With a median observation time of 54 months, no statistically significant differences were found between the pathologically complete response (PCR) rates of 17% and 16%, respectively, nor were there any statistical differences in median disease-free survival for PCR patients (CAF- greater than PH 34+ months and CAF/PH 26+ months), in overall survival (28 and 24 months, respectively), or in time to treatment failure (10 and 11 months). The overall estimated cure rate was 13%. An equal degree of myelosuppression was seen with the two regimens, whereas neuro- and nephrotoxicity were more pronounced when PH was given sequentially to CAF than with the alternating schedule. We conclude that the sequential and the alternated use of doxorubicin- and platinum-based regimens yield equivalent results and that other approaches should be investigated to improve treatment effects.     

A randomized phase II study of cisplatin alone versus cisplatin plus disulfiram

Preclinical evidence has suggested that disulfiram (DS) and related compounds can decrease the toxicity and enhance the therapeutic index of cisplatin (CP). To study this further, we have performed a prospective randomized study wherein 53 patients with CP-sensitive malignancies were assigned to therapy with CP 100 mg/m2 alone (group I) or CP 100 mg/m2 and oral DS 2,000 mg/m2 (group II). Both groups were comparable with regard to sex distribution, age, performance status, prior chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Twenty-three patients were not evaluable for response (3 refused follow-up, 18 had less than two courses, one had an early death, and one had excessive toxicity during the first cycle of treatment). Of the 30 evaluable patients (16 in group I, 14 in group II), only one in group II achieved a complete response. There was no statistically significant difference in response rate, time to progression, or median survival between the two groups. Fifty-two patients (98.1%) were evaluable for toxicity. Significant differences in toxicities were observed between the two groups: patients in group I encountered lower [Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 0-1)] grades of nausea, vomiting, and ototoxicity, and patients in group II experienced higher grades (ECOG 2-3) of toxicity in general. In addition, there was no difference in nephrotoxicity between the two groups, as measured by the change in serum creatine or 24-h urine creatinine clearance over the first course of treatment. We conclude that, contrary to previously published reports, DS does not afford significant nephroprotection against CP and, in fact, enhances gastrointestinal and ototoxicities.     

Phase 2 single-arm study on the safety of maintenance niraparib in Japanese patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer

ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of niraparib 300 mg/day in Japanese patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer in a maintenance setting.MethodsPhase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study enrolled Japanese patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer who had received ≥2 platinum-based regimens. The primary endpoint (incidence of grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia-related events within 30 days after initial niraparib administration) was justified by the incidences of a global pivotal phase 3 study and its post-hoc safety analysis on thrombocytopenia, the major hematological adverse event of niraparib. The overall safety analysis examined other treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).ResultsEnrolled patients (n=19) had a median (min, max) body weight of 53.9 (40.8–79.1) kg; all but one patient weighed <77 kg. Most (94.7%) patients initially received niraparib 300 mg/day but this decreased in subsequent cycles (mean±standard deviation dose intensity, 191.6±65.7 mg/day). In total, 6/19 (31.6%) patients experienced grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia-related events within 30 days of initial niraparib administration. Other common TEAEs included nausea, and decreased platelet or neutrophil counts. No progression-free or overall survival events occurred; only 1 of 4 response-evaluable patients had a post-baseline tumor assessment (stable disease).ConclusionThe incidence of grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia-related events in Japanese ovarian cancer patients was similar to that in the corresponding non-Japanese study. Overall, the safety profile was acceptable and consistent with the known safety profile and previous experience with niraparib.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03759587","term_id":"NCT03759587"}}NCT03759587     

A phase II randomized trial evaluating gefitinib intercalated with pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy or pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy alone in unselected patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

Current pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy does not produce a satisfactory therapeutic response in advanced lung cancer patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether the administration of gefitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), intercalated with pemetrexed/platinum could improve the efficacy in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC without subsequent gefitinib maintenance therapy. Treatment-naïve patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m² d1) and either cisplatin (75 mg/m² d1) or carboplatin (AUC = 5 d1) plus gefitinib (250 mg/d on days 3 to 16 of a 3-week cycle) (PC-G) or pemetrexed–platinum (PC) alone. Randomization was stratified according to the tobacco smoking status and EGFR mutational status of the patients. The primary endpoint was the non-progression rate (NPR) at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and biosafety. The NPR at 12 weeks was 84.5% for the PC-G treatment arm and 83.1% for the PC treatment arm (P = 0.87). Median PFS was 7.9 months for the PC-G arm and 7.0 months for the PC arm (P = 0.57). The ORR was 50.0% for the PC-G arm and 47.4% for the PC arm (P = 0.78). Median survival was 25.4 mo for the PC-G arm and 20.8 mo for the PC arm (P = 0.54). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two treatment arms, except for a higher incidence of skin rash with PC-G. Predefined subgroup analyses demonstrated that PC-G significantly increased the PFS compared with the PC regimen in patients with EGFR mutations (P = 0.017). Although gefitinib intercalated with pemetrexed/platinum chemotherapy did not improve the NPR at 12 weeks compared with chemotherapy, an improvement in the PFS for the intercalated treatment arm was seen in the subgroup of patients with EGFR mutations.     

A phase II study of capecitabine and docetaxel combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer

Capecitabine and docetaxel have considerable single-agent activity in gastric cancer with distinct mechanisms of action and no overlap of key toxicities. A synergistic interaction between these two drugs is mediated by taxane-induced upregulation of thymidine phosphorylase. We investigated the activity and the feasibility of capecitabine and docetaxel combination chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (AGC). From September 2001 to March 2003, 42 patients with AGC received 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine (1250 mg x m(-2) twice daily on days 1-14) and docetaxel (75 mg x m(-2) i.v. on day 1). The patients received a total of 164 cycles of chemotherapy. The median age was 53.5 years (range 33-73 years). The overall response rate in the 38 efficacy-evaluable patients was 60% (95% confidence interval, 45-74%). The median progression-free survival was 5.2 months (range, 1.0-15.5+ months) and the median overall survival was 10.5 months (range, 2.9-23.7+ months). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome (HFS: G3 50%), neutropenia (15%) and leucopenia (12%). Further studies of this combination are clearly warranted, albeit with lower doses of both agents (1000 mg x m(-2) twice daily and 60 mg x m(-2)) to reduce the rate of HFS and onycholysis.