Is there a role of surgery in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours responding to imatinib: A prospective randomised trial in China

ObjectivesFor advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) patients who are responding to imatinib mesylate, the role of surgery has not been formally demonstrated. This multicenter randomised controlled trial was designed to assess whether surgery to treat residual disease for patients with recurrent/metastatic GISTs responding to imatinib mesylate (IM) improved progression free survival (PFS) compared with IM treatment alone.MethodsBetween 3 and 12 months after starting IM for recurrent/metastatic GISTs, eligible patients were randomised to two arms: Arm A (surgery for residual disease) and Arm B (IM treatment alone). In Arm A (19 pts), surgery was performed to remove residual macroscopic lesions as completely as possible, and IM treatment continued after surgery. In Arm B (22 pts), IM was given alone at a dose of 400 mg per day until disease progression. The primary end-point was PFS measured from the date IM started. This study was registered in the ChiCTR registry with the ID number ChiCTR-TRC-00000244.ResultsThis randomised trial was closed early due to poor accrual. Only 41 patients were enrolled as opposed to 210 patients planned. 2-year PFS was 88.4% in the surgery arm and 57.7% in the IM-alone arm (P = 0.089). Median overall survival (mOS) was not reached in the surgery arm and 49 months in patients with IM-alone arm (P = 0.024).ConclusionsWhile no significant differences were observed in the two arms, this study suggests that surgical removal of the metastatic lesion may improve the outcome of advanced GIST patients and should stimulate additional research on this topic.     

No benefit of adjuvant Fluorouracil Leucovorin chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cancer of the rectum (LARC): Long term results of a randomized trial (I-CNR-RT)

Background and purposeTo evaluate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACT-RT). The study was funded by the Italian National Research Council (CNR).MethodsFrom September 1992 to January 2001, 655 patients with LARC (clinically T3–4, any N) treated with NACT-RT and surgery, were randomized in two arms: follow-up (Arm A) or 6 cycles of ACT with 5 fluorouracil (5FU)-Folinic Acid (Arm B). NACT-RT consisted of 45 Gy/28/ff concurrent with 5FU (350 mg/sqm) and Folinic Acid (20 mg/sqm) on days 1–5 and 29–33; surgery was performed after 4–6 weeks. Median follow up was 63·7 months. Primary end point was overall survival (OS).Results634/655 patients were evaluable (Arm A 310, Arm B 324); 92·5% of Arm A and 91% of Arm B patients received the preoperative treatment as in the protocol; 294 patients of Arm A (94·8%) and 296 of Arm B (91·3%) underwent a radical resection; complete pathologic response and overall downstaging rates did not show any significant difference in the two arms. 83/297 (28%) patients in Arm B, never started ACT. Five year OS and DFS did not show any significant difference in the two treatment arms. Distant metastases occurred in 62 patients (21%) in Arm A and in 58 (19·6%) in Arm B.ConclusionsIn patients with LARC treated with NACT-RT, the addition of ACT did not improve 5 year OS and DFS and had no impact on the distant metastasis rate.     

A randomised non-comparative phase II trial of cixutumumab (IMC-A12) or ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) plus mitoxantrone and prednisone in men with metastatic docetaxel-pretreated castration-resistant prostate cancer

BackgroundCixutumumab, a human monoclonal antibody (HuMAb), targets the insulin-like growth factor receptor. Ramucirumab is a recombinant HuMAb that binds to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. A non-comparative randomised phase II study evaluated cixutumumab or ramucirumab plus mitoxantrone and prednisone (MP) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).Patients and methodsMen with progressive mCRPC during or after docetaxel therapy received mitoxantrone 12 mg/m² on day 1 and prednisone 5 mg twice daily and were randomised 1:1 to receive either cixutumumab or ramucirumab 6 mg/kg intravenously weekly in a 21-day cycle. Primary end-point was composite progression-free survival (cPFS). Secondary end-points included safety, response, radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Sample size was based on a 50% increase in median cPFS from 2.6 (MP) to 3.9 months (either combination).Results132 men were treated (66 per arm). Median cPFS was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.2–5.6) for cixutumumab and 6.7 months (95% CI, 4.5–8.3) for ramucirumab. Median time to radiographic progression was 7.5 months for cixutumumab and 10.2 months for ramucirumab, with a median OS of 10.8 and 13.0 months, respectively. Fatigue was the most frequent adverse event (AE). Incidence of most non-haematologic grade 3–4 AEs was <10% on both arms. Grade 3 cardiac dysfunction occurred in 7.6% of patients on ramucirumab.ConclusionCombinations of cixutumumab or ramucirumab plus MP were feasible and associated with moderate toxicities in docetaxel-pretreated men with mCRPC. Of the two regimens, the ramucirumab regimen is worthy of further testing based on the observed cPFS relative to the historical control.     

Adjuvant low-dose interferon α2a with or without dacarbazine compared with surgery alone: a prospective-randomized phase III DeCOG trial in melanoma patients with regional lymph node metastasis

BackgroundMore than half of patients with melanoma that has spread to regional lymph nodes develop recurrent disease within the first 3 years after surgery. The aim of the study was to improve disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) with interferon (IFN) α2a with or without dacarbazine (DTIC) compared with observation alone.Patients and methodsA total of 444 patients from 42 centers of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group who had received a complete lymph node dissection for pathologically proven regional node involvement were randomized to receive either 3 MU s.c. of IFNα2a three times a week for 2 years (Arm A) or combined treatment with same doses of IFNα2a plus DTIC 850 mg/m² every 4–8 weeks for 2 years (Arm B) or to observation alone (Arm C). Treatment was discontinued at first sign of relapse.ResultsA total of 441 patients were eligible for intention-to-treat analysis. Kaplan–Meier 4-year OS rate of those who had received IFNα2a was 59%. For those with surgery alone, survival was 42% (A versus C, P = 0.0045). No improvement of survival was found for the combined treatment Arm B with 45% survival rate (B versus C, P = 0.76). Similarly, DFS rates showed significant benefit for Arm A, and not for Arm B. Multivariate Cox model confirmed that Arm A has an impact on OS (P = 0.005) but not Arm B (P = 0.34).Conclusions3 MU interferon α2a given s.c. three times a week for 2 years significantly improved OS and DFS in patients with melanoma that had spread to the regional lymph nodes. Interestingly, the addition of DTIC reversed the beneficial effect of adjuvant interferon α2a therapy.     

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.     

Randomised phase III trial of trabectedin versus doxorubicin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in translocation-related sarcomas

AimThis randomised phase III trial evaluated first-line trabectedin versus doxorubicin-based chemotherapy (DXCT) in patients with advanced/metastatic translocation-related sarcomas (TRS).MethodsPatients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive trabectedin 1.5 mg/m² 24-h intravenous (i.v.) infusion every 3 weeks (q3wk) (Arm A), or doxorubicin 75 mg/m² i.v. q3wk, or doxorubicin 60 mg/m² i.v. plus ifosfamide (range, 6–9 g/m²) i.v. q3wk (Arm B). Progression-free survival (PFS) by independent review was the primary efficacy end-point.ResultsOne hundred and twenty-one patients were randomised; 88 of them had TRS confirmed by central pathology review (efficacy population). Twenty-nine PFS events were assessed by independent review (16 with trabectedin; 13 with DXCT). PFS showed non-significant difference between arms (stratified log rank test, p = 0.9573; hazard ratio = 0.86, p = 0.6992). At the time of this analysis, 63.9% and 58.3% of patients were alive in trabectedin and DXCT arms, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in survival curves. Response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) v.1.0 was significantly higher in DXCT arm (27.0% versus 5.9%), but response according to Choi criteria showed fewer differences between treatment arms (45.9% versus 37.3%). Safety profile was as expected for both arms, with higher incidence of severe neutropenia, alopecia and mucositis in the DXCT arm.ConclusionNeither trabectedin nor doxorubicin-based chemotherapy showed significant superiority in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced translocation-related sarcoma.     

90Y-clivatuzumab tetraxetan with or without low-dose gemcitabine: A phase Ib study in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer after two or more prior therapies

BackgroundFor patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, there are no approved or established treatments beyond the 2nd line. A Phase Ib study of fractionated radioimmunotherapy was undertaken in this setting, administering ⁹⁰Y-clivatuzumab tetraxetan (yttrium-90-radiolabelled humanised antibody targeting pancreatic adenocarcinoma mucin) with or without low radiosensitising doses of gemcitabine.MethodsFifty-eight patients with three (2–7) median prior treatments were treated on Arm A (N = 29, ⁹⁰Y-clivatuzumab tetraxetan, weekly 6.5 mCi/m² doses × 3, plus gemcitabine, weekly 200 mg/m² doses × 4 starting 1 week earlier) or Arm B (N = 29, ⁹⁰Y-clivatuzumab tetraxetan alone, weekly 6.5 mCi/m² doses × 3), repeating cycles after 4-week delays. Safety was the primary endpoint; efficacy was also evaluated.ResultsCytopaenias (predominantly transient thrombocytopenia) were the only significant toxicities. Fifty-three patients (27 Arm A, 26 Arm B, 91% overall) completed ⩾1 full treatment cycles, with 23 (12 Arm A, 11 Arm B; 40%) receiving multiple cycles, including seven (6 Arm A, 1 Arm B; 12%) given 3–9 cycles. Two patients in Arm A had partial responses by RECIST criteria. Kaplan–Meier overall survival (OS) appeared improved in Arm A versus B (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% CI: 0.29–0.86; P = 0.017, log-rank) and the median OS for Arm A versus Arm B increased to 7.9 versus 3.4 months with multiple cycles (HR 0.32, P = 0.004), including three patients in Arm A surviving >1 year.ConclusionsClinical studies of ⁹⁰Y-clivatuzumab tetraxetan combined with low-dose gemcitabine appear feasible in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients beyond 2nd line and a Phase III trial of this combination is now underway in this setting.     

Multicentre randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine + platinum,with or without trastuzumab,in advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma overexpressing Her2

AimTo investigate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and platinum salt, with or without trastuzumab, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma overexpressing Her2.MethodsThe main eligibility criterion was Her2 overexpression on immunohistochemistry (IHC 2+ or 3+) of primary tumour tissue confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). Patients were randomised to Arm A: gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (days 1 and 8) plus either cisplatin (70 mg/m²) or carboplatin (AUC = 5) (day 1 every 3 weeks) or Arm B: added trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 21 days until progression). The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsAmong 563 screened patients, 75 (13.3%) were Her2 positive (IHC 2+/3+ and FISH+) and 61 met all eligibility criteria (median age, 64 years; 54/61 males; 50/61 baseline ECOG-PS 0-1; 11 locally advanced and 50 metastatic). There was no significant difference between Arms A and B in median PFS (10.2 versus 8.2 months, respectively, p = 0.689), objective response rate (65.5% versus 53.2%, p = 0.39), and median overall survival (15.7 versus 14.1 months, respectively, p = 0.684). In an exploratory analysis, trastuzumab-treated patients receiving cisplatin rather than carboplatin-based chemotherapy fared better (PFS: 10.6 versus 8.0; OS: 33.1 versus 9.5 months). Myelosuppression was the main grade 3/4 toxicity. A case of grade 3 cardiotoxicity and one death from febrile neutropenia occurred in arm B.ConclusionThe unexpectedly low incidence of Her2 overexpression precluded the detection of a significant difference in efficacy on addition of trastuzumab to platinum-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine. However, the satisfactory tolerance of the combination warrants further studies, especially of the cisplatin-based combination, in well-defined patient subsets.     

Analysis of angiogenesis biomarkers for ramucirumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from RAISE,a global,randomized, double-blind,phase III study

BackgroundThe phase III RAISE trial (NCT01183780) demonstrated that the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor (VEGFR)-2 binding monoclonal antibody ramucirumab plus 5-fluororuracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo + FOLFIRI as second-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment. To identify patients who benefit the most from VEGFR-2 blockade, the RAISE trial design included a prospective and comprehensive biomarker program that assessed the association of biomarkers with ramucirumab efficacy outcomes.Patients and methodsPlasma and tumor tissue collection was mandatory. Overall, 1072 patients were randomized 1 : 1 to the addition of ramucirumab or placebo to FOLFIRI chemotherapy. Patients were then randomized 1 : 2, for the biomarker program, to marker exploratory (ME) and marker confirmatory (MC) groups. Analyses were carried out using exploratory assays to assess the correlations of baseline marker levels [VEGF-C, VEGF-D, sVEGFR-1, sVEGFR-2, sVEGFR-3 (plasma), and VEGFR-2 (tumor tissue)] with clinical outcomes. Cox regression analyses were carried out for each candidate biomarker with stratification factor adjustment.ResultsBiomarker results were available from >80% (n = 894) of patients. Analysis of the ME subset determined a VEGF-D level of 115 pg/ml was appropriate for high/low subgroup analyses. Evaluation of the combined ME + MC populations found that the median OS in the ramucirumab + FOLFIRI arm compared with placebo + FOLFIRI showed an improvement of 2.4 months in the high VEGF-D subgroup [13.9 months (95% CI 12.5–15.6) versus 11.5 months (95% CI 10.1–12.4), respectively], and a decrease of 0.5 month in the low VEGF-D subgroup [12.6 months (95% CI 10.7–14.0) versus 13.1 months (95% CI 11.8–17.0), respectively]. PFS results were consistent with OS. No trends were evident with the other antiangiogenic candidate biomarkers.ConclusionsThe RAISE biomarker program identified VEGF-D as a potential predictive biomarker for ramucirumab efficacy in second-line mCRC. Development of an assay appropriate for testing in clinical practice is currently ongoing.Clinical trials registrationNCT01183780.     

Three-arm randomised controlled phase 2 study comparing pemetrexed and erlotinib to either pemetrexed or erlotinib alone as second-line treatment for never-smokers with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer

BackgroundThis randomised controlled phase 2 study compared pemetrexed and erlotinib in combination with either agent alone in terms of efficacy and safety as second-line treatment in a clinically selected population of never-smokers with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsPatients who had failed only one prior chemotherapy regimen and had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS) ?2 were randomised to either: pemetrexed 500 mg/m² on day 1 plus erlotinib 150 mg daily on days 2–14; erlotinib 150 mg daily; or pemetrexed 500 mg/m² on day 1 of a 21-day cycle until discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS), was analysed using a multivariate Cox model. Firstly, a global comparison across the three arms was performed. If the global null hypothesis was rejected at a two-sided 0.2 significance level, pairwise comparisons of pemetrexed–erlotinib versus erlotinib or pemetrexed were then conducted using the same model. Statistical significance was claimed only if both global and pairwise null hypotheses were rejected at a two-sided 0.05 significance level.FindingsA total of 240 patients (male, 35%; East Asian, 55%; ECOG PS 0–1, 93%) were included. A statistically significant difference in PFS was found across the three arms (global p = 0.003), with pemetrexed–erlotinib significantly better than either single agent: HR = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40–0.81, p = 0.002 versus erlotinib; HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.39–0.85, p = 0.005 versus pemetrexed. Median PFS (95% CI) was 7.4 (4.4, 12.9) months in pemetrexed–erlotinib, 3.8 (2.7, 6.3) months in erlotinib and 4.4 (3.0, 6.0) months in pemetrexed. Safety analyses showed a higher incidence of drug-related grade 3/4 toxicity in pemetrexed–erlotinib (60.0%) than in pemetrexed (28.9%) or erlotinib (12.0%); the majority being neutropenia, anaemia, rash and diarrhoea.InterpretationPemetrexed–erlotinib significantly improved PFS compared to either drug alone in this clinically selected population. The combination had more toxicity, but was clinically manageable.     

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.     

Phase III,randomised trial of avelumab versus physician’s choice of chemotherapy as third-line treatment of patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer: primary analysis of JAVELIN Gastric 300

BackgroundThere currently are no internationally recognised treatment guidelines for patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) in whom two prior lines of therapy have failed. The randomised, phase III JAVELIN Gastric 300 trial compared avelumab versus physician’s choice of chemotherapy as third-line therapy in patients with advanced GC/GEJC.Patients and methodsPatients with unresectable, recurrent, locally advanced, or metastatic GC/GEJC were recruited at 147 sites globally. All patients were randomised to receive either avelumab 10 mg/kg by intravenous infusion every 2 weeks or physician’s choice of chemotherapy (paclitaxel 80 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 or irinotecan 150 mg/m² on days 1 and 15, each of a 4-week treatment cycle); patients ineligible for chemotherapy received best supportive care. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety.ResultsA total of 371 patients were randomised. The trial did not meet its primary end point of improving OS {median, 4.6 versus 5.0 months; hazard ratio (HR)=1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9–1.4]; P = 0.81} or the secondary end points of PFS [median, 1.4 versus 2.7 months; HR=1.73 (95% CI 1.4–2.2); P > 0.99] or ORR (2.2% versus 4.3%) in the avelumab versus chemotherapy arms, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 90 patients (48.9%) and 131 patients (74.0%) in the avelumab and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 17 patients (9.2%) in the avelumab arm and in 56 patients (31.6%) in the chemotherapy arm.ConclusionsTreatment of patients with GC/GEJC with single-agent avelumab in the third-line setting did not result in an improvement in OS or PFS compared with chemotherapy. Avelumab showed a more manageable safety profile than chemotherapy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02625623.     

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.     

Biomarker assessment of the CBCSG006 trial: a randomized phase III trial of cisplatin plus gemcitabine compared with paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

BackgroundCBCSG006 trial reported the superior efficacy of cisplatin plus gemcitabine (GP) regimen than paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (GT) regimen as first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This study focused on the updated survival data and the explorations of potential biomarkers for efficacy.Patients and methodsGerm-line mutations of homologous recombination (HR) panel, BRCA1/2 included, were evaluated in 55.9% (132/236) patients. PD-L1 expression was evaluated in 48.3% (114/236) patients. A nonparametric sliding-window subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) methodology was used to analyze the absolute survival benefits. All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsMedian progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.73 [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.46–9.00] months for GP arm and 6.07 (95% CI 5.32–6.83) months for GT arm (P = 0.005). No significant difference in overall survival (OS) was observed. There was significant interaction between HR status and treatment for PFS and status of HR deficient significantly correlated with higher objective response rate (ORR) and longer PFS in GP arm than in GT arm (71.9% versus 38.7%, P = 0.008; 10.37 versus 4.30 months, P = 0.011). There was no significant interaction between germ-line BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) status and treatment for PFS. Patients with gBRCA1/2 mutation had numerically higher ORR and prolonged PFS in GP arm than in GT arm (83.3% versus 37.5%, P = 0.086; 8.90 versus 3.20 months, P = 0.459). There was no significant interaction between PD-L1 status and treatment for PFS, and no significant differences in ORR, PFS or OS between two arms regardless of PD-L1 status. In STEPP analysis, patients with lower composite risks had more absolute benefits in PFS than those with higher composite risks.ConclusionsGP regimen has superior efficacy than GT regimen as first-line chemotherapy for mTNBC patients. Germ-line mutations of BRCA1/2 and HR panel are possible biomarkers for better performance of cisplatin-based regimens. A composite risk model was developed to guide patient selection for GP treatment in TNBC patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01287624.     

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.     

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.     

Sunitinib objective response in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Analysis of 1059 patients treated on clinical trials

BackgroundRetrospective analyses were performed in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) to characterise the objective response (OR) rate to sunitinib and differentiate pretreatment features and outcomes of patients with early (response by ⩽12 weeks) versus late response, and responders versus non-responders.MethodsData were pooled from 1059 patients in six trials. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Brookmeyer and Crowley method and compared between groups by log-rank test. Baseline characteristics were compared by Fisher-exact, t-, or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Associations between characteristics and survival were investigated by Cox proportional regression analysis.Results398 patients (38%) had confirmed OR (12 complete responses); 26%, 61%, 79% and 86% responded by 6, 12, 18 and 24 weeks, respectively. Median (range) time to tumour response (TTR) was 10.6 (2.7–94.4) weeks and was similar in treatment-naïve and cytokine-refractory patients. Median response duration in early and late responders was 52.0 and 55.0 weeks, respectively. Median PFS in early versus late responders was 13.8 versus 20.2 months (P = 0.001); however, median OS did not significantly differ (37.8 versus 40.8 months; P = 0.144). Early responders had more lung metastases (P < 0.01), but baseline characteristics were otherwise mostly similar. Median PFS (16.3 versus 5.3 months) and OS (40.1 versus 14.5 months) were longer in responders versus non-responders (both P < 0.001); responders had more favourable prognostic factors.ConclusionsOR occurred in 38% of sunitinib-treated mRCC patients. Sixty-one percent of responses occurred by 12 weeks of therapy, and responders had favourable pretreatment features and significantly longer survival.     

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.     

Randomised phase III trial of vinflunine plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in patients with advanced breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and resistant to taxane

BackgroundCapecitabine is an approved standard therapy for anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (BC). Vinflunine has demonstrated single-agent activity in phase II studies in this setting and activity and tolerability when combined with capecitabine. We compared the combination of vinflunine plus capecitabine (VC) with single-agent capecitabine.Patients and methodsPatients with locally recurrent/metastatic BC previously treated or resistant to an anthracycline and resistant to taxane therapy were randomly assigned to either vinflunine (280 mg/m², day 1) plus oral capecitabine [825 mg/m² twice daily (b.i.d.), days 1–14] every 3 weeks (q3w) or single-agent oral capecitabine (1250 mg/m² b.i.d., days 1–14) q3w. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee. The study had 90% power to detect a 30% improvement in PFS.ResultsOverall, 770 patients were randomised. PFS was significantly longer with VC than with capecitabine alone [hazard ratio, 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71–0.99; log-rank P = 0.043; median 5.6 versus 4.3 months, respectively]. Median overall survival was 13.9 versus 11.7 months with VC versus capecitabine alone, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83–1.15; log-rank P = 0.77). No difference in quality of life was observed between the two treatment arms. The most common adverse events (NCI CTCAE version 3.0) in the combination arm were haematological and gastrointestinal. Grade 4 neutropenia was more frequent with VC (12% versus 1% with capecitabine alone); febrile neutropenia occurred in 2% versus 0.5%, respectively. Hand-foot syndrome was less frequent with VC (grade 3: 4% versus 19% for capecitabine alone). Peripheral neuropathy was uncommon in both arms (grade 3: 1% versus 0.3%).ConclusionsVinflunine combined with capecitabine demonstrated a modest improvement in PFS and an acceptable safety profile compared with capecitabine alone in patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated locally recurrent/metastatic BC.ClinicalTrials.govNCT01095003.