Search

Purpose We report the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib (BRAF inhibitor) and trametinib (MEK inhibitor) combination therapy in BRAF V600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid cancer, a rare, aggressive, and highly lethal malignancy with poor patient outcomes and no systemic therapies with clinical benefit. Methods In this phase II, open-label trial, patients with predefined BRAF V600E-mutated malignancies received dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily and trametinib 2 mg once daily until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or death. The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate. Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results Sixteen patients with BRAF V600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid cancer were evaluable (median follow-up, 47 weeks; range, 4 to 120 weeks). All patients had received prior radiation treatment and/or surgery, and six had received prior systemic therapy. The confirmed overall response rate was 69% (11 of 16; 95% CI, 41% to 89%), with seven ongoing responses. Median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were not reached as a result of a lack of events, with 12-month estimates of 90%, 79%, and 80%, respectively. The safety population was composed of 100 patients who were enrolled with seven rare tumor histologies. Common adverse events were fatigue (38%), pyrexia (37%), and nausea (35%). No new safety signals were detected. Conclusion Dabrafenib plus trametinib is the first regimen demonstrated to have robust clinical activity in BRAF V600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid cancer and was well tolerated. These findings represent a meaningful therapeutic advance for this orphan disease.

Purpose: We evaluated the activity of regorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma., Patients and Methods: We conducted an international (Australia and New Zealand, South Korea, and Canada) randomized phase II trial in which patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio and stratified by lines of prior chemotherapy for advanced disease (one v two) and region. Eligible patients received best supportive care plus regorafenib 160 mg or matching placebo orally on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle until disease progression or prohibitive adverse events occurred. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Final analysis included data to December 31, 2014., Results: A total of 152 patients were randomly assigned from November 7, 2012, to February 25, 2014, yielding 147 evaluable patients (regorafenib, n = 97; placebo, n = 50). Baseline characteristics were balanced. Median PFS significantly differed between groups (regorafenib, 2.6 months; 95% CI, 1.8 to 3.1 and placebo, 0.9 months; 95% CI, 0.9 to 0.9; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.59; P < .001). The effect was greater in South Korea than in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada combined (HR, 0.12 v 0.61; interaction P < .001) but consistent across age, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, primary site, lines of chemotherapy, peritoneal metastasis presence, number of metastatic sites, and plasma vascular endothelial growth factor A. A survival trend in favor of regorafenib was seen (median, 5.8 months; 95% CI, 4.4 to 6.8 v 4.5 months; 95% CI, 3.4 to 5.2; HR, 0.74; P = .147). Twenty-nine patients assigned to placebo received open-label regorafenib after disease progression. Regorafenib toxicity was similar to that previously reported., Conclusion: In this phase II trial, regorafenib was effective in prolonging PFS in refractory advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. Regional differences were found, but regorafenib was effective in both regional groups. A phase III trial is planned., Competing Interests: Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Gastric cancer cell lines, particularly those with low levels of ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), a key activator of DNA damage response, are sensitive to the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib. We compared the efficacy of olaparib plus paclitaxel (olaparib/paclitaxel) with paclitaxel alone in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer and assessed whether low ATM expression is predictive of improved clinical outcome for olaparib/paclitaxel., Patients and Methods: In this phase II, double-blind study (Study 39; NCT01063517), patients were randomly assigned to oral olaparib 100 mg twice per day (tablets) plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2) per day intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle) or placebo plus paclitaxel (placebo/paclitaxel), followed by maintenance monotherapy with olaparib (200 mg twice per day) or placebo. The study population was enriched to 50% for patients with low or undetectable ATM levels (ATMlow). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: One hundred twenty-three of 124 randomly assigned patients received treatment (olaparib/paclitaxel, n = 61; placebo/paclitaxel, n = 62). The screening prevalence of ATMlow patients was 14%. Olaparib/paclitaxel did not lead to a significant improvement in PFS versus placebo/paclitaxel (overall population: hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; median PFS, 3.91 v 3.55 months, respectively; ATMlow population: HR, 0.74; median PFS, 5.29 v 3.68 months, respectively). However, olaparib/paclitaxel significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus placebo/paclitaxel in both the overall population (HR, 0.56; 80% CI, 0.41 to 0.75; P = .005; median OS, 13.1 v 8.3 months, respectively) and the ATMlow population (HR, 0.35; 80% CI, 0.22 to 0.56; P = .002; median OS, not reached v 8.2 months, respectively). Olaparib/paclitaxel was generally well tolerated, with no unexpected safety findings., Conclusion: Olaparib/paclitaxel is active in the treatment of patients with metastatic gastric cancer, with a greater OS benefit in ATMlow patients. A phase III trial in this setting is under way., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Aim: To identify molecular biologic differences between two gastric adenocarcinoma subgroups presenting different prognoses through the analysis of microRNA and protein expression., Methods: Array technologies were used to generate 1146 microRNAs and 124 proteins expression profiles of samples from 60 patients with gastric cancer. For the integrative analysis, we used established mRNA expression data published in our previous study. Whole mRNA expression levels were acquired from microarray data for 60 identical gastric cancer patients. Two gastric adenocarcinoma subgroups with distinct mRNA expression profiles presented distinctly different prognoses. MicroRNA and protein expression patterns were compared between gastric cancer tissue and normal gastric tissue and between two different prognostic groups. Aberrantly expressed microRNA, associated mRNA, and protein in patients with poor-prognosis gastric cancer were validated by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and immunochemistry in independent patients., Results: We obtained the expression data of 1146 microRNAs and 124 cancer-related proteins. Four microRNAs were aberrantly expressed in the two prognostic groups and in cancer vs non-cancer tissues (P < 0.05). In the poor-prognosis group, miR-196b, miR-135b, and miR-93 were up-regulated and miR-29c* was down-regulated. miR-196b expression positively correlated with Homeobox A10 (HOXA10) expression (r = 0.726, P < 0.001), which was significantly increased in poor-prognosis patients (P < 0.001). Comparing gastric cancer with non-cancer tissues, 46/124 proteins showed differential expression (P < 0.05); COX2 (P < 0.001) and cyclin B1 (P = 0.017) were clearly over-expressed in the poor-prognosis group., Conclusion: Co-activation of miR-196b and HOXA10 characterized a poor-prognosis subgroup of patients with gastric cancer. Elucidation of the biologic function of miR-196b and HOXA10 is warranted.