Elez E.,Autonomous University of Barcelona |
Kocakova I.,Comprehensive Care |
Hohler T.,Prosper Hospital |
Martens U.M.,Cancer Center Heilbronn Franken |
And 12 more authors.
Annals of Oncology | Year: 2015
Background: Integrins are involved in tumour progression and metastasis, and differentially expressed on colorectal cancer (CRC) cells. Abituzumab (EMD 525797), a humanised monoclonal antibody targeting integrin αv heterodimers, has demonstrated preclinical activity. This trial was designed to assess the tolerability of different doses of abituzumab in combination with cetuximab and irinotecan (phase I) and explore the efficacy and tolerability of the combination versus that of cetuximab and irinotecan in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) (phase II part). Methods: Eligible patients had KRAS (exon 2) wild-type mCRC and had received prior oxaliplatin-containing therapy. The trial comprised an initial safety run-in using abituzumab doses up to 1000 mg combined with a standard of care (SoC: cetuximab plus irinotecan) and a phase II part in which patients were randomised 1: 1: 1 to receive abituzumab 500 mg (arm A) or 1000 mg (arm B) every 2 weeks combined with SoC, or SoC alone (arm C). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), response rate (RR) and tolerability. Associations between tumour integrin expression and outcomes were also assessed. Results: Phase I showed that abituzumab doses up to 1000 mg were well tolerated in combination with SoC. Seventythree (arm A), 71 (arm B) and 72 (arm C) patients were randomised to the phase II part. Baseline characteristics were balanced. PFS was similar in the three arms: arm A versus SoC, hazard ratio (HR) 1.13 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.64]; arm B versus SoC, HR 1.11 (95% CI 0.77-1.61). RRs were also similar. A trend toward improved OS was observed: arm A versus SoC, HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.54-1.28); arm B versus SoC, HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.52-1.25). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 72%, 78% and 67% of patients. High tumour integrin avß6 expression was associated with longer OS in arms A [HR 0.55 (0.30-1.00)] and B [HR 0.41 (0.21-0.81)] than in arm C. Conclusion: The primary PFS end point was not met, although predefined exploratory biomarker analyses identified subgroups of patients in whom abituzumab may have benefit. The tolerability of abituzumab combined with cetuximab and irinotecan was acceptable. Further study is warranted. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.
Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): A multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial
Garon E.B.,University of California at Los Angeles |
Ciuleanu T.-E.,University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca |
Arrieta O.,Instituto Nacional Of Cancerologia Incan |
Prabhash K.,Tata Memorial Center |
And 20 more authors.
The Lancet | Year: 2014
Background Ramucirumab is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGFR-2. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of treatment with docetaxel plus ramucirumab or placebo as second-line treatment for patients with stage IV non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based therapy. Methods In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial (REVEL), we enrolled patients with squamous or non-squamous NSCLC who had progressed during or after a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) with a centralised, interactive voice-response system (stratified by sex, region, performance status, and previous maintenance therapy [yes vs no]) to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 and either ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo on day 1 of a 21 day cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or death. The primary endpoint was overall survival in all patients allocated to treatment. We assessed adverse events according to treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01168973. Findings Between Dec 3, 2010, and Jan 24, 2013, we screened 1825 patients, of whom 1253 patients were randomly allocated to treatment. Median overall survival was 10·5 months (IQR 5·1-21·2) for 628 patients allocated ramucirumab plus docetaxel and 9·1 months (4·2-18·0) for 625 patients who received placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·75-0·98; p=0·023). Median progression-free survival was 4·5 months (IQR 2·3-8·3) for the ramucirumab group compared with 3·0 months (1·4-6·9) for the control group (0·76, 0·68-0·86; p<0·0001). We noted treatment-emergent adverse events in 613 (98%) of 627 patients in the ramucirumab safety population and 594 (95%) of 618 patients in the control safety population. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (306 patients [49%] in the ramucirumab group vs 246 [40%] in the control group), febrile neutropenia (100 [16%] vs 62 [10%]), fatigue (88 [14%] vs 65 [10%]), leucopenia (86 [14%] vs 77 [12%]), and hypertension (35 [6%] vs 13 [2%]). The numbers of deaths from adverse events (31 [5%] vs 35 [6%]) and grade 3 or worse pulmonary haemorrhage (eight [1%] vs eight [1%]) did not differ between groups. Toxicities were manageable with appropriate dose reductions and supportive care. Interpretation Ramucirumab plus docetaxel improves survival as second-line treatment of patients with stage IV NSCLC. Funding Eli Lilly. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.
PubMed | Institute of Clinical Oncology, Siriraj Hospital, Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Sumy State University and 15 more.
Type: Journal Article | Journal: JAMA | Year: 2016
Treatment with the anti-ERBB2 humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab and chemotherapy significantly improves outcome in patients with ERBB2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer; a clinically effective biosimilar may help increase access to this therapy.To compare the overall response rate and assess the safety of a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar plus a taxane or trastuzumab plus a taxane in patients without prior treatment for ERBB2-positive metastatic breast cancer.Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, phase 3 equivalence study in patients with metastatic breast cancer. From December 2012 to August 2015, 500 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a proposed biosimilar or trastuzumab plus a taxane. Chemotherapy was administered for at least 24 weeks followed by antibody alone until unacceptable toxic effects or disease progression occurred.Proposed biosimilar (n=230) or trastuzumab (n=228) with a taxane.The primary outcome was week 24 overall response rate (ORR) defined as complete or partial response. Equivalence boundaries were 0.81 to 1.24 with a 90% CI for ORR ratio (proposed biosimilar/trastuzumab) and -15% to 15% with a 95% CI for ORR difference. Secondary outcome measures included time to tumor progression, progression-free and overall survival at week 48, and adverse events.Among 500 women randomized, the intention-to-treat population included 458 women (mean [SD] age, 53.6 [11.11] years) and the safety population included 493 women. The ORR was 69.6% (95% CI, 63.62%-75.51%) for the proposed biosimilar vs 64.0% (95% CI, 57.81%-70.26%) for trastuzumab. The ORR ratio (1.09; 90% CI, 0.974-1.211) and ORR difference (5.53; 95% CI, -3.08 to 14.04) were within the equivalence boundaries. At week 48, there was no statistically significant difference with the proposed biosimilar vs trastuzumab for time to tumor progression (41.3% vs 43.0%; -1.7%; 95% CI, -11.1% to 6.9%), progression-free survival (44.3% vs 44.7%; -0.4%; 95% CI, -9.4% to 8.7%), or overall survival (89.1% vs 85.1%; 4.0%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 10.3%). In the proposed biosimilar and trastuzumab groups, 239 (98.6%) and 233 (94.7%) had at least 1 adverse event, the most common including neutropenia (57.5% vs 53.3%), peripheral neuropathy (23.1% vs 24.8%), and diarrhea (20.6% vs 20.7%).Among women with ERBB2-positive metastatic breast cancer receiving taxanes, the use of a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar compared with trastuzumab resulted in an equivalent overall response rate at 24 weeks. Further study is needed to assess safety and long-term clinical outcome.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02472964; EudraCT Identifier: 2011-001965-42.
Quality of life results from the phase 3 REVEL randomized clinical trial of ramucirumab-plus-docetaxel versus placebo-plus-docetaxel in advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients with progression after platinum-based chemotherapy
PubMed | Charing Cross Hospital, Eli Lilly and Company, Airway Research Center North, Wojewodzkie Centrum Onkologii and 12 more.
Type: | Journal: Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) | Year: 2016
REVEL demonstrated that ramucirumab+docetaxel (RAM+DTX) improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate in patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with progression after platinum-based chemotherapy. This analysis examined quality of life (QoL) as assessed by the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and clinician-reported functional status.The LCSS includes 6 symptom and 3 global items measured on a 0-100-mm scale; higher scores represent greater symptom burden. LCSS and ECOG PS data were collected at baseline, every 3-week cycle, the summary visit, and at the 30-day follow-up. LCSS total score and Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) were calculated. The primary analysis compared time to deterioration (TtD) between treatment arms for all individual items and summary scores, defined as increase from baseline by 15 mm using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression. TtD to ECOG PS 2 was analyzed.There were 1253 patients randomized to receive RAM+DTX or placebo+docetaxel (PL+DTX). Across all assessments, LCSS compliance was approximately 75% and balanced across arms. The mean (SD) baseline LCSS total score was 27.3mm (17.08 mm) on RAM+DTX and 29.6mm (17.59 mm) on PL+DTX. At 30-day follow-up, mean (SD) LCSS total score was 32.0 (19.03) on RAM+DTX and 32.5 (19.87) on PL+DTX. The TtD for all LCSS scores was similar between treatment arms. Stratified HRs (95% CI) for LCSS total score and ASBI were HR=0.99 (0.81, 1.22), p=0.932 and HR=0.93 (0.75, 1.15), p=0.514 with approximately 70% of patients censored. TtD to PS 2 was similar between treatment arms (HR=1.03 [95% CI: 0.85, 1.26], p=0.743) with approximately two-thirds of the patients censored.In addition to improvement of clinical efficacy outcomes demonstrated in REVEL, these results suggest that adding ramucirumab to docetaxel did not impair patient QoL, symptoms, or functioning.
PubMed | Public Clinical Treatment and Prophylaxis Institution, Republic Oncology Dispensary, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Oncology Dispensary and 10 more.
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research | Year: 2016
To prospectively determine the efficacy of naptumomab estafenatox (Nap) + IFN versus IFN in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).In a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase II/III study, 513 patients with RCC received Nap (15 g/kg i. v. in three cycles of four once-daily injections) + IFN (9 MU s.c. three times weekly), or the same regimen of IFN monotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).This phase II/III study did not meet its primary endpoint. Median OS/PFS for Nap + IFN patients was 17.1/5.8 months versus 17.5/5.8 months for the patients receiving IFN alone (P = 0.56; HR, 1.08/P = 0.41; HR, 0.92). Post hoc exploratory subgroup and trend analysis revealed that the baseline plasma concentrations of anti-SEA/E-120 (anti-Nap antibodies) for drug exposure and IL6 for immune status could be used as predictive biomarkers. A subgroup of patients (SG; n = 130) having concentrations below median of anti-SEA/E-120 and IL6 benefitted greatly from the addition of Nap. In SG, median OS/PFS for the patients treated with Nap + IFN was 63.3/13.7 months versus 31.1/5.8 months for the patients receiving IFN alone (P = 0.02; HR, 0.59/P = 0.02; HR, 0.62). Addition of Nap to IFN showed predicted and transient immune related AEs and the treatment had an acceptable safety profile.The study did not meet its primary endpoint. Nap + IFN has an acceptable safety profile, and results from post hoc subgroup analyses showed that the treatment might improve OS/PFS in a baseline biomarker-defined RCC patient subgroup. The results warrant further studies with Nap in this subgroup. Clin Cancer Res; 22(13); 3172-81. 2016 AACR.
PubMed | Clinical Oncology Dispensary, University of Nottingham, Instituto Oncologico Of Lima, Osaka University and 10 more.
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Lancet (London, England) | Year: 2016
Aromatase inhibitors are a standard of care for hormone receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We investigated whether the selective oestrogen receptor degrader fulvestrant could improve progression-free survival compared with anastrozole in postmenopausal patients who had not received previous endocrine therapy.In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind trial, we recruited eligible patients with histologically confirmed oestrogen receptor-positive or progesterone receptor-positive, or both, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer from 113 academic hospitals and community centres in 20 countries. Eligible patients were endocrine therapy-naive, with WHO performance status 0-2, and at least one measurable or non-measurable lesion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscular injection; on days 0, 14, 28, then every 28 days thereafter) or anastrozole (1 mg orally daily) using a computer-generated randomisation scheme. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 11, intervention by surgery or radiotherapy because of disease deterioration, or death from any cause, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety outcomes were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of randomised treatment (including placebo). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01602380.Between Oct 17, 2012, and July 11, 2014, 524 patients were enrolled to this study. Of these, 462 patients were randomised (230 to receive fulvestrant and 232 to receive anastrozole). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the fulvestrant group than in the anastrozole group (hazard ratio [HR] 0797, 95% CI 0637-0999, p=00486). Median progression-free survival was 166 months (95% CI 1383-2099) in the fulvestrant group versus 138 months (1199-1659) in the anastrozole group. The most common adverse events were arthralgia (38 [17%] in the fulvestrant group vs 24 [10%] in the anastrozole group) and hot flushes (26 [11%] in the fulvestrant group vs 24 [10%] in the anastrozole group). 16 (7%) of 228 patients in in the fulvestrant group and 11 (5%) of 232 patients in the anastrozole group discontinued because of adverse events.Fulvestrant has superior efficacy and is a preferred treatment option for patients with hormone receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who have not received previous endocrine therapy compared with a third-generation aromatase inhibitor, a standard of care for first-line treatment of these patients.AstraZeneca.
Lisyanskaya A.S.,City Clinical Oncology Dispensary
Voprosy Onkologii | Year: 2014
Ovarian cancer is one of the most aggressive malignant tumors in women. The role of hormone therapy in the treatment for ovarian cancer is not fully studied up to now. The literature contains data on the efficacy and safety of treatment with antiestrogens and aromatase inhibitors for recurrent ovarian cancer. The article summarizes the epidemiology, preclinical and clinical studies related to the role of estrogen and aromatase expression in this disease as well as the role of aromatase inhibitors in the treatment for ovarian cancer.
Baselga J.,Sloan Kettering Cancer Center |
Baselga J.,SOLTI Breast Cancer Research Group |
Manikhas A.,City Clinical Oncology Dispensary |
Cortes J.,SOLTI Breast Cancer Research Group |
And 13 more authors.
Annals of Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: Nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin liposomal doxorubicin, (Myocet™; Sopherion Therapeutics, Inc Canada, and Cephalon, Europe) (NPLD; Myocet®) in combination with trastuzumabHerceptin® (Hoffmann-La Roche) has shown promising activity and cardiac safety. We conducted a randomized phase III trial of first-line NPLD plus trastuzumab and paclitaxel (Pharmachemie B.V.) (MTP) versus trastuzumab plus paclitaxel (TP) in patients with human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to NPLD (M, 50 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for six cycles), trastuzumab (T, 4 mg/kg loading dose followed by 2 mg/kg weekly), and paclitaxel (P, 80 mg/m2 weekly) or T + P at the same doses until progression or toxicity. The primary efficacy outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: One hundred and eighty-one patients were allocated to receive MTP, and 183 to TP. Median PFS was 16.1 and 14.5 months with MTP and TP, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.84; two-sided P = 0.174]. In patients with estrogen receptor (ER)- and progesterone receptor (PR)-negative tumors, PFS was 20.7 and 14.0 months, respectively [HR 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.99]. Median overall survival (OS) was 33.6 and 28.9 months with MTP and TP, respectively (HR 0.79; two-sided P = 0.083). In ER- and PR-negative tumors, OS was 38.2 and 27.9 months, respectively (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.42-0.93). The frequency of adverse events was higher with MTP, but there was no significant difference in cardiac toxicity between treatment arms. Conclusion(s): The trial failed to demonstrate a significant clinical improvement with the addition of M to TP regimen. The clinical benefit observed in an exploratory analysis in the ER- and PR-negative population deserves consideration for further clinical trials. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.
Efficacy and safety of NEPA, an oral combination of netupitant and palonosetron, for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy: A randomized dose-ranging pivotal study
Hesketh P.J.,Lahey Hospital and Medical Center |
Rossi G.,Data Management |
Rizzi G.,Data Management |
Palmas M.,Data Management |
And 4 more authors.
Annals of Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: NEPA is a novel oral fixed-dose combination of netupitant (NETU), a new highly selective neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonist (RA) and palonosetron (PALO), a pharmacologically and clinically distinct 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) RA. This study was designed to determine the appropriate clinical dose of NETU to combine with PALO for evaluation in the phase 3 NEPA program. Patients and methods: This randomized, double-blind, parallel group study in 694 chemotherapy naïve patients undergoing cisplatin-based chemotherapy for solid tumors compared three different oral doses of NETU (100, 200, and 300 mg) + PALO 0.50 mg with oral PALO 0.50 mg, all given on day 1. A standard 3-day aprepitant (APR) + IV ondansetron (OND) 32 mg regimen was included as an exploratory arm. All patients received oral dexamethasone on days 1-4. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (CR: no emesis, no rescue medication) during the overall (0-120 h) phase. Results: All NEPA doses showed superior overall CR rates compared with PALO (87.4%, 87.6%, and 89.6% for NEPA100, NEPA200, and NEPA300, respectively versus 76.5%PALO; P < 0.050) with the highest NEPA300 dose studied showing an incremental benefit over lower NEPA doses for all efficacy endpoints. NEPA300 was significantly more effective than PALO and numerically better than APR + OND for all secondary efficacy endpoints of no emesis, no significant nausea, and complete protection (CR plus no significant nausea) rates during the acute (0-24 h), delayed (25-120 h), and overall phases. Adverse events were comparable across groups with no dose response. The percent of patients developing electrocardiogram changes was also comparable. Conclusions: Each NEPA dose provided superior prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) compared with PALO following highly emetogenic chemotherapy; however, NEPA300 was the best dose studied, with an advantage over lower doses for all efficacy endpoints. The combination of NETU and PALO was well tolerated with a similar safety profile to PALO and APR + OND. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.
PubMed | City Clinical Oncology Dispensary and North State Medical University
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Arkhiv patologii | Year: 2016
Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a tumor that is typical of late metastases detected within 3 years after radical nephrectomy in 85% of cases. RCC most commonly metastasizes to the lung, bone, liver, and brain; the pancreas is involved in no more than 0.25-3% of cases. The paper describes a unique clinical case of multiple late pancreatic metastases from clear cell RCC in a 77-year-old woman 27 years after removal of the primary tumor.