Woodstock, GA, United States
Woodstock, GA, United States

Time filter

Source Type

Patel J.D.,Northwestern University | Socinski M.A.,University of Pittsburgh | Garon E.B.,University of California at Los Angeles | Reynolds C.H.,Us Oncology Research | And 14 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2013

Purpose PointBreak (A Study of Pemetrexed, Carboplatin and Bevacizumab in Patients With Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer) compared the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed (Pem) plus carboplatin (C) plus bevacizumab (Bev) followed by pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (PemCBev) with paclitaxel (Pac) plus carboplatin (C) plus bevacizumab (Bev) followed by bevacizumab (PacCBev) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB or IV nonsquamous NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1 were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 combined with carboplatin area under the curve 6 and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. Eligible patients received maintenance until disease progression: pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (for the PemCBev group) or bevacizumab (for the PacCBev group). The primary end point of this superiority study was overall survival (OS). Results Patients were randomly assigned to PemCBev (n = 472) or PacCBev (n = 467). For PemCBev versus PacCBev, OS hazard ratio (HR) was 1.00 (median OS, 12.6 v 13.4 months; P = .949); progression-free survival (PFS) HR was 0.83 (median PFS, 6.0 v 5.6 months; P = .012); overall response rate was 34.1% versus 33.0%; and disease control rate was 65.9% versus 69.8%. Significantly more study drug-related grade 3 or 4 anemia (14.5% v 2.7%), thrombocytopenia (23.3% v 5.6%), and fatigue (10.9% v 5.0%) occurred with PemCBev; significantly more grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.6% v 25.8%), febrile neutropenia (4.1% v 1.4%), sensory neuropathy (4.1% v 0%), and alopecia (grade 1 or 2; 36.8% v 6.6%) occurred with PacCBev. Conclusion OS did not improve with the PemCBev regimen compared with the PacCBev regimen, although PFS was significantly improved with PemCBev. Toxicity profiles differed; both regimens demonstrated tolerability. © 2013 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.


Schwartzberg L.,West Clinic | Hermann R.,Northwest Georgia Oncology Centers | Flinn I.,Sarah Cannon Research Institute | Flora D.,and Hills Inc. | And 7 more authors.
British Journal of Haematology | Year: 2014

This open-label, phase II study investigated whether enzastaurin, a protein kinase C-beta (PKCβ) inhibitor, had activity in patients with grade 1 or 2 follicular lymphoma (FL). Adults with grade 1 or 2 FL who had no more than one prior treatment received oral enzastaurin continuously for up to 3 years. Of the 66 patients who received enzastaurin, 53 were evaluable for response. Overall response rate (ORR, primary efficacy endpoint) was 26·4% (3·8% complete response). Median (95% confidence interval) progression-free survival, time to response, and duration of response were 18·1 (11·5-28·3), 4·9 (2·8-8·1), and 22·3 (8·8-not applicable) months, respectively. In patients with tumour tissue available for biomarker analysis, ORRs in low versus high PKCβ2 expression groups were 41·7% and 8·3%, respectively (P = 0·041). The most common, mainly low-grade drug-related adverse events were fatigue (25·8%), diarrhoea (25·8%), nausea (18·2%), and chromaturia (18·2%). Four (6·1%) patients had Grade 3 toxicity and one (1·5%) patient had Grade 4 toxicity. Enzastaurin demonstrated limited clinical activity in grade 1 or 2 FL. Patients with low PKCβ2 expression in tumours had higher ORR than those with high PKCβ2 expression. Enzastaurin was well tolerated with mostly grade 1 or 2 toxicities. Further studies may be warranted in select patient populations. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.


Marsh R.D.W.,University of Florida | George T.J.,University of Florida | Siddiqui T.,University of Florida | Mendenhall W.M.,University of Florida | And 6 more authors.
American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials | Year: 2010

Objective: Preoperative treatment of rectal cancer with combined chemotherapy and radiation therapy has become a widely accepted strategy. The current challenge is to improve outcomes whereas minimizing morbidity and maximizing the potential for a sphincter sparing procedure. This study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a combination of 2 novel approaches-accelerated, hyperfractionated radiation therapy and twice daily oral capecitabine. Methods: Consenting patients with locally advanced T3-T4, N0-1, M0 rectal adenocarcinoma, located no further than 15 cm from the anal verge, were treated with twice daily fractions of 1.2 Gy M-F to a total of 50.4 Gy for T3 lesions and 55.2 Gy for T4 lesions. Concomitantly, the patients received capecitabine 825 mg/m twice per day 7 days per week. Patients were operated on 4 to 6 weeks after completion of therapy. Results: Sixteen of 17 enrolled patients were eligible and all 16 completed the full course of treatment including definitive surgery. Eleven patients had a sphincter sparing procedure and 5 had an abdominoperineal resection. Tumor and/or nodal downstaging occurred in 81% of patients, 100% of resections were R0, and the sphincter preservation rate was 68%. There were 18% pathologic complete remissions and 68% of specimens were node negative with an additional 12% Nx owing to transanal excision. The therapy was well tolerated and there were no unexpected toxicities with only diarrhea reaching grade 3 in 4 patients. Conclusions: This novel approach to preoperative treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma was well tolerated and effective. Comparison with more established approaches appears justified. Copyright © 2010 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.


Spigel D.R.,Sarah Cannon Research Institute Tennessee Oncology PLLC | Patel J.D.,Northwestern University | Reynolds C.H.,Ocala Oncology | Reynolds C.H.,U.S. Oncology Research Inc. | And 10 more authors.
Journal of Thoracic Oncology | Year: 2015

INTRODUCTION:: Treatment impact on quality of life (QoL) informs treatment management decisions in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS NSCLC). QoL outcomes from the phase III PointBreak trial are reported. METHODS:: Chemonaive patients (n = 939) with stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 were randomized (1:1) to pemetrexed-carboplatin-bevacizumab (pemetrexed arm) or paclitaxel-carboplatin-bevacizumab (paclitaxel arm). Patients without progressive disease received maintenance pemetrexed-bevacizumab (pemetrexed arm) or bevacizumab (paclitaxel arm). QoL was assessed using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-General (FACT-G), FACT-Lung (FACT-L), and FACT/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT-Ntx) instruments. Subscale scores, total scores, and trial outcome indices were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. Post hoc analyses examined the association between baseline FACT scores and overall survival (OS). RESULTS:: Mean score differences in change from baseline significantly favored the pemetrexed arm for the neurotoxicity subscale score, FACT-Ntx total scores, and FACT-Ntx trial outcome index. They occurred at cycle 2 (p < 0.001) and persisted through induction cycles 2 to 4 and six maintenance cycles. Investigator-assessed, qualitative, drug-related differences in grade 2 (1.6% versus 10.6%) and grade 3 (0.0% versus 4.1%) sensory neuropathy and grade 3/4 fatigue (10.9% versus 5.0%, p = 0.0012) were observed between the pemetrexed and paclitaxel arms. Baseline FACT-G, FACT-L, and FACT-Ntx scores were significant prognostic factors for OS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:: Randomized patients reported similar changes in QoL, except for less change from baseline in neurotoxicity on the pemetrexed arm; investigators reported greater neurotoxicity on the paclitaxel arm and greater fatigue on the pemetrexed arm. Higher baseline FACT scores were favorable prognostic factors for OS. © 2014 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.


Berlin J.,Vanderbilt University | Bendell J.C.,Sarah Cannon Research Institute | Hart L.L.,Florida Cancer Specialists | Firdaus I.,Oncology Hematology Care | And 9 more authors.
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2013

Purpose: Vismodegib, a Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, has preclinical activity in colorectal cancer (CRC) models. This trial assessed the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of adding vismodegib to first-line treatment for metastatic CRC (mCRC). Experimental design: Patients were randomized to receive vismodegib (150 mg/day orally) or placebo, in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) every 2 weeks until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Key secondary objectives included evaluation of predictive biomarkers and pharmacokinetic drug interactions. Results: A total of 199 patients with mCRC were treated on protocol (124 FOLFOX, 75 FOLFIRI). The median PFS hazard ratio (HR) for vismodegib treatment compared with placebo was 1.25 (90% CI: 0.89-1.76; P = 0.28). The overall response rates for placebo-treated and vismodegib-treated patients were 51% (90% CI: 43-60) and46%(90% CI: 37-55), respectively. No vismodegib-associated benefit was observed in combination with either FOLFOX or FOLFIRI. Increased tumor tissue Hedgehog expression did not predict clinical benefit. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events reported for more than 5% of patients that occurred more frequently in the vismodegib-treated group were fatigue, nausea, asthenia, mucositis, peripheral sensory neuropathy, weight loss, decreased appetite, and dehydration. Vismodegib did not alter the pharmacokinetics of FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, or bevacizumab. Conclusions: Vismodegib does not add to the efficacy of standard therapy for mCRC. Compared with placebo, treatment intensity was lower for all regimen components in vismodegib-treated patients, suggesting that combined toxicity may have contributed to lack of efficacy. ©2012 AACR.


Schwartzberg L.S.,West Clinic | Tauer K.W.,West Clinic | Hermann R.C.,Northwest Georgia Oncology Centers | Makari-Judson G.,Hematology and Oncology mour Center for Cancer Care | And 18 more authors.
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2013

Purpose: We assessed adding the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib to gemcitabine or capecitabine in patients with advanced breast cancer whose disease progressed during/after bevacizumab. Experimental Design: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase IIb study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00493636) enrolled patients with locally advanced or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer and prior bevacizumab treatment. Patients were randomized to chemotherapy with sorafenib (400 mg, twice daily) or matching placebo. Initially, chemotherapy was gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 i.v., days 1, 8/21), but later, capecitabine (1,000 mg/m2 orally twice daily, days 1-14/21) was allowed as an alternative. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: One hundred and sixty patients were randomized. More patients received gemcitabine (82.5%) than capecitabine (17.5%). Sorafenib plus gemcitabine/capecitabine was associated with a statistically significant prolongation in PFS versus placebo plus gemcitabine/capecitabine [3.4 vs. 2.7 months; HR = 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.95; P = 0.02], time to progression was increased (median, 3.6 vs. 2.7 months; HR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44-0.93; P = 0.02), and overall response rate was 19.8% versus 12.7% (P = 0.23). Median survival was 13.4 versus 11.4 months for sorafenib versus placebo (HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.71-1.44; P = 0.95). Addition of sorafenib versus placebo increased grade 3/4 hand-foot skin reaction (39% vs. 5%), stomatitis (10% vs. 0%), fatigue (18% vs. 9%), and dose reductions that were more frequent (51.9% vs. 7.8%). Conclusion: The addition of sorafenib to gemcitabine/capecitabine provided a clinically small but statistically significant PFS benefit in HER2-negative advanced breast cancer patients whose disease progressed during/after bevacizumab. Combination treatment was associated with manageable toxicities but frequently required dose reductions. © 2013 AACR.


Hortobagyi G.N.,University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center | Young R.R.,Center for Cancer and Blood | Karwal M.,University of Iowa | Ibrahim N.K.,University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center | And 8 more authors.
Cancer | Year: 2010

BACKGROUND: UFT, a combination of uracil and ftorafur, was developed to combine the cytotoxic effects of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) with convenient oral dosing. Leucovorin is combined with UFT to further potentiate the effect of 5-FU on tumor cells. Orally administered UFT and leucovorin provide higher peak plasma concentrations of 5-FU and prolonged therapeutic 5-FU concentrations compared with continuous infusion of 5-FU. METHODS: Ninety-four patients with metastatic breast cancer who had been previously treated with anthracyclines and/or taxanes were treated with UFT and leucovorin, given orally, for the first 28 days of a 35-day cycle. The total daily dose of UFT was 300 mg/m 2, which was given in 2 divided doses every 12 hours. The primary endpoint was time to disease progression (TTP). Secondary objectives included overall tumor response rate (OR = complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 94 patients enrolled, 68 were evaluable for efficacy. Although no CRs were observed, 9 patients achieved PRs, for an OR of 13.2% in the evaluable population. The median TTP for the evaluable population was 10.3 weeks, and the proportion of patients free of disease progression at 6 months was 17%. The median OS was 61.6 weeks for all patients enrolled. The most common drug-related ≥ grade 3 adverse events (graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria version 2) were diarrhea, asthenia, nausea, and dehydration. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of UFT and leucovorin administered orally in a twice-daily regimen was found to have modest activity. Grade 3 toxicities were manageable with appropriate dose adjustments in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and/or taxanes. © 2010 American Cancer Society.


Ramalingam S.S.,Emory University | Owonikoko T.K.,Emory University | Behera M.,Emory University | Subramanian J.,University of Washington | And 12 more authors.
Journal of Thoracic Oncology | Year: 2013

We conducted a phase II study of docetaxel in combination with everolimus, a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor, for salvage therapy of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on promising preclinical and early-phase clinical data. Patients with advanced-stage NSCLC treated with one or two previous systemic therapy regimens were given docetaxel (60 mg/m 2) and everolimus (5 mg orally once daily on days 1-19) every 3 weeks. Archived tumor specimens were evaluated for markers of mTOR pathway activation (total and phosphorylated mTOR, Akt, S6, eIF4e, and 4EBP1). Twenty-eight patients were enrolled (median age: 62 years; male: 13; Caucasians: 19; adenocarcinoma: 20; performance status 0, 3; performance status 1, 23; 1 previous regimen, 16). A median of 3.5 cycles of therapy was administered. Two patients experienced partial response and 15 had stable disease (clinical benefit rate, 70%). The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 5%, and the median overall survival was 9.6 months. Low pAkt expression correlated with clinical benefit rate (p = 0.01) but not with progression-free survival or overall survival. The combination of everolimus and docetaxel was tolerated well, but the efficacy was relatively modest in an unselected population of patients with NSCLC. Copyright © 2013 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.


PubMed | Northwest Georgia Oncology Centers
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Journal of oncology practice | Year: 2014

This study tested the combination of an episode payment coupled with actionable use and quality data as an incentive to improve quality and reduce costs.Medical oncologists were paid a single fee, in lieu of any drug margin, to treat their patients. Chemotherapy medications were reimbursed at the average sales price, a proxy for actual cost.Five volunteer medical groups were compared with a large national payer registry of fee-for-service patients with cancer to examine the difference in cost before and after the initiation of the payment change. Between October 2009 and December 2012, the five groups treated 810 patients with breast, colon, and lung cancer using the episode payments. The registry-predicted fee-for-service cost of the episodes cohort was $98,121,388, but the actual cost was $64,760,116. The predicted cost of chemotherapy drugs was $7,519,504, but the actual cost was $20,979,417. There was no difference between the groups on multiple quality measures.Modifying the current fee-for-service payment system for cancer therapy with feedback data and financial incentives that reward outcomes and cost efficiency resulted in a significant total cost reduction. Eliminating existing financial chemotherapy drug incentives paradoxically increased the use of chemotherapy.


PubMed | TN and Tennessee Oncology PLLC, Eli Lilly and Company, University of Washington, Northwestern University and 6 more.
Type: Clinical Trial, Phase III | Journal: Clinical lung cancer | Year: 2015

African Americans have a greater incidence of lung cancer than whites and have been underrepresented in clinical trials. In the PointBreak trial (pemetrexed-carboplatin-bevacizumab and maintenance pemetrexed-bevacizumab [PemCBev] vs. paclitaxel-carboplatin-bevacizumab and maintenance bevacizumab [PacCBev]), 10% of the patients were African American. PointBreak had negative findings; PemCBev did not demonstrate superior overall survival (OS).PointBreak subgroup efficacy and safety data were retrospectively analyzed: African Americans versus whites for PemCBev; PemCBev versus PacCBev in African Americans; and academic versus community settings for African Americans. Hazard ratios (HRs) and P values were derived from a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model after adjusting for covariates.Of 939 intent-to-treat (ITT) patients, 94 were African American and 805 were white. African-American enrollment was uniform across the study sites (median, 1 African American per site). In the PemCBev arm, OS (HR, 1.125; P= .525), progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 1.229; P= .251), response (P= .607), and toxicity profiles were similar in African Americans versus whites. For African Americans, OS (HR, 1.375; P= .209), PFS (HR, 0.902; P= .670), response (P= 1.000), and toxicity profiles were similar in the PemCBev versus PacCBev arm. For African Americans, no significant differences were seen in OS (HR, 0.661; P= .191) or PFS (HR, 0.969; P= .915) in academic versus community practice settings.In the PemCBev arm, this exploratory analysis showed no significant differences between African Americans and whites for the efficacy outcomes or toxicity profiles. Consistent with the ITT population negative trial result, for African Americans, the median OS was not superior for either arm. For African Americans, PFS and OS were similar in theacademic and community settings. Additional outcomes data for African Americans should be collected in lung cancer studies.

Loading Northwest Georgia Oncology Centers collaborators
Loading Northwest Georgia Oncology Centers collaborators