Time filter

Source Type

Gauting, Germany

von Pawel J.,Asklepios Fachkliniken | Gorbounova V.,Cancer Research Center | Reck M.,Member of German Center for Lung Research | Kowalski D.M.,Center of Oncology of Poland | And 5 more authors.
Lung Cancer | Year: 2014

Background: DISRUPT evaluated whether adding the vascular-disrupting agent ombrabulin to a taxane-platinum doublet in the first-line setting improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Patients were randomised to ombrabulin 35mg/m2 or placebo followed by a taxane-platinum regimen every 3 weeks. Results: Overall, 176 patients were randomised. After 124 events, median PFS was not significantly improved with ombrabulin vs placebo (5.65 vs 5.45 months; HR 0.948; 60% CI 0.813-1.106; one-sided P= 0.39). The two groups showed similar overall survival (median 11.0 months in both groups), objective response rate (32% ombrabulin; 31% placebo) and safety profiles. Conclusion: This study did not meet its primary endpoint of improving PFS by adding ombrabulin to a taxane-platinum regimen for first-line treatment of metastatic NSCLC. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Scagliotti G.V.,University of Turin | Germonpre P.,Universitair Ziekenhuis Antwerpen | Bosquee L.,University of Liege | Vansteenkiste J.,University Hospital Gasthuisberg | And 15 more authors.
Lung Cancer | Year: 2010

Background: This is a phase II randomized study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib and pemetrexed alone or in combination, in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary end point was assessment of response rate. Methods: A total of 155 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to pemetrexed (500mg/m2) on day 1 plus bortezomib (1.6mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 (Arm A) or pemetrexed (500mg/m2) on day 1 (Arm B) or bortezomib (1.6mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 (Arm C) of a 21 day cycle. Response rate was assessed by investigators using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria and toxicity assessed by the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) grading system. Results: Response rate was 7% in Arm A, 4% in Arm B, and 0% in Arm C; disease control rates were 73%, 62%, and 43%, respectively. Median overall survival was 8.6 months in Arm A, 12.7 months in Arm B, and 7.8 months in Arm C; time to progression was 4.0 months, 2.9 months, and 1.4 months, respectively. Most common reported adverse events ≥grade 3 were neutropenia (19%), thrombocytopenia (15%), and dyspnea (13%) in Arm A, neutropenia (10%) in Arm B, and dyspnea (13%) and fatigue (10%) in Arm C. Conclusion: In previously treated NSCLC the addition of bortezomib to pemetrexed was well tolerated but offered no statistically significant response or survival advantage versus pemetrexed alone, while bortezomib alone showed no clinically significant activity. © 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Paz-Ares L.G.,University of Seville | Biesma B.,Robert Bosch GmbH | Heigener D.,Krankenhaus Grosshansdorf | Von Pawel J.,Asklepios Fachkliniken | And 13 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2012

Purpose: This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib plus gemcitabine/cisplatin in chemotherapynaive patients with unresectable stage IIIB to IV nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods: Between February 2007 and March 2009, 904 patients were randomly assigned to daily sorafenib (400 mg twice a day) or matching placebo plus gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 on day 1) for up to six 21-day cycles. Because of safety findings from the Evaluation of Sorafenib, Carboplatin and Paclitaxel Efficacy in NSCLC (ESCAPE) trial, patients with squamous cell histology were withdrawn from the trial in February 2008 and excluded from analysis. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-progression (TTP). Results: The primary analysis population consisted of 772 patients (sorafenib, 385; placebo, 387); the two groups had similar demographic and baseline characteristics. Median OS was similar in the sorafenib and placebo groups (12.4 v 12.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; P = .401). By investigator assessment, sorafenib improved median PFS (6.0 v 5.5 months; HR, 0.83; P = .008) and TTP (6.1 v 5.5 months; HR, 0.73; P < .001). Grade 3 to 4 drug-related adverse events more than two-fold higher in the sorafenib group included hand-foot skin reaction (8.6% v 0.3%), fatigue (7.3% v 3.6%), rash (5.7% v 0.5%), and hypertension (4.2% v 1.8%). No unexpected toxicities were observed. Conclusion: This study did not meet its primary end point of improved OS when sorafenib was added to first-line gemcitabine/ cisplatin in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Identification of predictive biomarkers is warranted in future trials of sorafenib. © 2012 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Sequist L.V.,Harvard University | Von Pawel J.,Asklepios Fachkliniken | Garmey E.G.,ArQule | Akerley W.L.,Huntsman Cancer Institute | And 11 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2011

Purpose: c-MET (MET) receptor activation is associated with poor prognosis and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This global, randomized phase II trial examined erlotinib plus tivantinib (ARQ 197; ArQule, Woburn, MA), a novel MET inhibitor. Methods: Previously treated patients with EGFR TKI-naive advanced NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive oral erlotinib (150 mg daily) plus oral tivantinib (360 mg twice daily) or erlotinib plus placebo (EP). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). At the time of progression, cross-over from EP to erlotinib plus tivantinib (ET) was permitted. Archival tumor tissue specimens were required. Results: One hundred sixty-seven patients were randomly assigned to ET (n = 84) and to EP (n = 83). Median PFS was 3.8 months for ET and 2.3 months for EP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.16; P = .24). Exploratory analysis revealed that the small cohort with KRAS mutations achieved a PFS HR of 0.18 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.70; interaction P = .006). Objective responses were seen in 10% of patients on ET, 7% of patients on EP, and in two patients who crossed over from EP to ET, including one with EGFR mutation and MET gene copy number greater than 5. There were no significant differences in adverse events between study arms. Conclusion: The combination of the MET inhibitor tivantinib and erlotinib is well-tolerated. Although the study did not meet its primary end point, evidence of activity was demonstrated, especially among patients with KRAS mutations. Additional study of tivantinib and erlotinib in patients with NSCLC is planned. © 2011 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Von Pawel J.,Asklepios Fachkliniken | Jotte R.,Rocky Mountain Cancer Center | Spigel D.R.,Sarah Cannon Research Institute | O'Brien M.E.R.,Royal Marsden National Health Service NHS Foundation Trust | And 15 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2014

Purpose: Amrubicin, a third-generation anthracycline and potent topoisomerase II inhibitor, showed promising activity in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in phase II trials. This phase III trial compared the safety and efficacy of amrubicin versus topotecan as second-line treatment for SCLC. Patients and Methods: A total of 637 patients with refractory or sensitive SCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 to 21-day cycles of amrubicin 40 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on days 1 to 3 or topotecan 1.5 mg/m2 IV on days 1 to 5. Primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: Median OS was 7.5 months with amrubicin versus 7.8 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 0.880; P = .170); in refractory patients, median OS was 6.2 and 5.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.77; P = .047). Median PFS was 4.1 months with amrubicin and 3.5 months with topotecan (HR, 0.802; P < .018). ORR was 31.1% with amrubicin and 16.9% with topotecan (odds ratio, 2.223; P < .001). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in the amrubicin and topotecan arms were: neutropenia (41% v 54%; P = .004), thrombocytopenia (21% v 54%; P < .001), anemia (16% v 31%; P < .001), infections (16% v 10%; P = .043), febrile neutropenia (10% v 3%; P = .003), and cardiac disorders (5% v 5%; P = .759); transfusion rates were 32% and 53% (P < .001), respectively. NQO1 polymorphisms did not influence safety outcomes. Conclusion: Amrubicin did not improve survival when compared with topotecan in the second-line treatment of patients with SCLC. OS did not differ significantly between treatment groups, although an improvement in OS was noted in patients with refractory disease treated with amrubicin. © 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Discover hidden collaborations