Search

Background:This phase 2 study evaluated trebananib (AMG 386), an investigational peptide-Fc fusion protein that neutralises the interaction between angiopoietins-1/2 and the Tie2 receptor, plus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.Methods:Patients had adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum with progression within 6 months of receiving only one prior fluoropyrimidine/oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease. All patients received FOLFIRI and were randomised 2 : 1 to also receive intravenous trebananib 10 mg kg−1 once weekly (QW) (Arm A) or placebo QW (Arm B). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS).Results:One hundred and forty-four patients were randomised (Arms A/B, n=95/49). Median PFS in Arms A and B was 3.5 and 5.2 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.23; 95% CI, 0.81-1.86; P=0.33) and median overall survival (OS) was 11.9 and 8.8 months, respectively (HR 0.90; 95% CI; 0.53-1.54; P=0.70). Objective response rate (ORR) was 14% and 0% in Arms A and B, respectively. Incidence of grade 3 adverse events was similar between treatment arms (Arm A, 61%; Arm B, 65%) and included pulmonary embolism (1%/4%), deep vein thrombosis (5%/2%), and hypertension (1%/0%).Conclusion:Administration of trebananib plus FOLFIRI did not prolong PFS compared with placebo plus FOLFIRI. Toxicities were manageable and consistent with those known for FOLFIRI and trebananib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the tolerability and efficacy of the trifunctional antibody removab (anti-EpCAM x anti-CD3) in patients with malignant ascites due to ovarian cancer. The bispecific trifunctional antibody removab belongs to a new class of intact antibodies that has been developed for targeted therapy of epithelial tumors. It reveals that intraperitoneal treatment with removab is safe, well tolerated and shows encouraging efficacy in patients with malignant ascites due to ovarian cancer.

Abstract: Background: The aim of developing oral fluorouracil (5-FU) is to provide a more convenient administration route with similar efficacy and the best achievable tolerance. S-1, a novel oral fluoropyrimidine, was specifically designed to overcome the limitations of intravenous fluoropyrimidine therapies. Patients and methods: A multicentre, randomised phase 3 trial was undertaken to compare S-1/cisplatin (CS) with infusional 5-FU/cisplatin (CF) in 1053 patients with untreated, advanced gastric/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. This report discusses a post-hoc noninferiority overall survival (OS) and safety analyses. Results: Results (1029 treated; CS=521/CF=508) revealed OS in CS (8.6 months) was statistically noninferior to CF (7.9 months) [hazard ratio (HR)=0.92 (two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.80–1.05)] for any margin equal to or greater than 1.05. Statistically significant safety advantages for the CS arm were observed [G3/4 neutropenia (CS, 18.6%; CF, 40.0%), febrile neutropenia (CS, 1.7%; CF, 6.9%), G3/4 stomatitis (CS, 1.3%; CF, 13.6%), diarrhoea (all grades: CS, 29.2%; CF, 38.4%) and renal adverse events (all grades: CS, 18.8%; CF, 33.5%)]. Hand–foot syndrome, infrequently reported, was mainly grade 1/2 in both arms. Treatment-related deaths were significantly lower in the CS arm than the CF arm (2.5% and 4.9%, respectively; P <0.047). Conclusion: CS is noninferior to CF with a better safety profile and provides a new treatment option for patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

BACKGROUND: A subcutaneous formulation of trastuzumab has been developed, offering potential improvements in patient convenience and resource use compared with the standard intravenous infusion of the drug. We compared the pharmacokinetic profile, efficacy, and safety of the subcutaneous and intravenous formulations in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. METHODS: The HannaH study was a phase 3, randomised, international, open-label, trial in the (neo)adjuvant setting. Patients with HER2-positive, operable, locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer were randomly assigned to eight cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered concurrently with trastuzumab every 3 weeks either intravenously (8 mg/kg loading dose, 6 mg/kg maintenance dose) or subcutaneously (fixed dose of 600 mg); 1:1 ratio. Chemotherapy consisted of four cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) followed by four cycles of fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)), epirubicin (75 mg/m(2)), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2)), every 3 weeks. After surgery, patients continued trastuzumab to complete 1 year of treatment. Coprimary endpoints were serum trough concentration (C(trough)) at pre-dose cycle 8 before surgery (non-inferiority margin for the ratio between groups of 0·80) and pathological complete response (pCR; non-inferiority margin for the difference between groups of -12·5%), analysed in the per-protocol population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00950300. FINDINGS: 299 patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous trastuzumab and 297 to receive subcutaneous trastuzumab. The geometric mean presurgery C(trough) was 51·8 [mu]g/mL (coefficient of variation 52·5%) in the intravenous group and 69·0 [mu]g/mL (55·8%) in the subcutaneous group. The geometric mean ratio of C(trough) subcutaneous to C(trough) intravenous was 1·33 (90% CI 1·24-1·44). 107 (40·7%) of 263 patients in the intravenous group and 118 (45·4%) of 260 in the subcutaneous group achieved a pCR. The difference between groups in pCR was 4·7% (95% CI -4·0 to 13·4). Thus subcutaneous trastuzumab was non-inferior to intravenous trastuzumab for both coprimary endpoints. The incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was similar between groups. The most common of these adverse events were neutropenia (99 [33·2%] of 298 patients in the intravenous group vs 86 [29·0%] of 297 in the subcutaneous group), leucopenia (17 [5·7%] vs 12 [4·0%]), and febrile neutropenia (10 [3·4%] vs 17 [5·7%]). However, more patients had serious adverse events in the subcutaneous group (62 [21%] of 297 patients) than in the intravenous group (37 [12%] of 298); the difference was mainly attributable to infections and infestations (24 [8·1%] in the subcutaneous group vs 13 [4·4%] in the intravenous group). Four adverse events led to death (one in the intravenous group and three in the subcutaneous group), all of which occurred during the neoadjuvant phase. Of these, two-both in the subcutaneous group-were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Subcutaneous trastuzumab, administered over about 5 min, has a pharmacokinetic profile and efficacy non-inferior to standard intravenous administration, with a similar safety profile to intravenous trastuzumab, and therefore offers a valid treatment alternative. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To compare capecitabine/cisplatin with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The COmparisoN of Faslodex In Recurrent or Metastatic breast cancer (CONFIRM) trial (NCT00099437 ) compared fulvestrant 500 mg with fulvestrant 250 mg in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer who had recurred or progressed following prior endocrine therapy. Fulvestrant 500 mg was associated with a statistically significant increase in progression-free survival compared with fulvestrant 250 mg (Di Leo A et al. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 4594-4600). At the time of the primary analysis approximately 50% of patients had died. Median overall survival was 25.1 months and 22.8 months for fulvestrant 500 mg and 250 mg, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69, 1.03; p = 0.091). A follow-up analysis of overall survival was subsequently planned for when 75% of patients had died and the results are presented here. Methods: CONFIRM was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, Phase III study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either fulvestrant 500 mg (500 mg i.m. on Days 0, 14 and 28 and every 28 days thereafter) or fulvestrant 250 mg (250 mg i.m. every 28 days). After the primary analysis, patients on fulvestrant 250 mg were permitted to switch to 500 mg and all patients were followed up for overall survival, regardless of treatment discontinuation, unless consent was withdrawn. Overall survival was analyzed using an unadjusted log-rank test. No adjustments were made for multiplicity. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were also reported. Results: In total, 736 women (median age 61.0 years) were randomized between February 2005 and August 2007 from 128 centers in 17 countries (fulvestrant 500 mg: n=362; fulvestrant 250 mg: n=374). At time of follow-up analysis, 63 (9.0%) patients were lost to follow-up, 16 (2.2%) patients had withdrawn consent, 103 (14.0%) patients were still ongoing (21 [2.9%] on treatment and 82 [11.1%] not on treatment), and 554 (75.3%) patients had died. Eight (2.1%) patients crossed over from fulvestrant 250 mg to 500 mg. Median overall survival was 26.4 months for fulvestrant 500 mg and 22.3 months for fulvestrant 250 mg (HR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69, 0.96; nominal p = 0.016). During the treatment period, a total of 32 (8.9%) patients had at least one SAE in the fulvestrant 500 mg and 25 (6.7%) patients in the fulvestrant 250 mg groups, and SAEs that were causally related to study treatment were reported for 6 (1.7%) and 3 (0.8%) patients, respectively. SAEs with an outcome of death were reported for 5 (1.4%) and 6 (1.6%) patients, respectively, during the treatment period. Overall, there were no clinically important differences in the profiles of SAEs between the treatment groups and no clustering of SAEs could be detected in either treatment group. Conclusions: Overall survival data from CONFIRM demonstrate that, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic ER positive breast cancer, fulvestrant 500 mg is associated with a clinically relevant 4.1 month difference in median overall survival and 19% reduction in risk of death compared with fulvestrant 250 mg. There were no new safety concerns associated with the use of fulvestrant 500 mg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC)., Patients and Methods: Patients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: A total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials., Conclusion: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.

Background: The American Joint Committee on Cancer-8 (AJCC) classification of melanoma was implemented in January 2018. It was based on data gathered when checkpoint inhibitors were not used as adjuvant therapy in stage III melanoma. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325/KEYNOTE-054 double-blind phase III trial evaluated pembrolizumab vs placebo in AJCC-7 stage IIIA (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm), IIIB or IIIC (without in-transit metastasis) patients after complete lymphadenectomy., Patients, Methods and Results: Patients (n = 1019) were randomised 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks (total of 18 doses, ∼1 year). At 1.25-year median follow-up, pembrolizumab prolonged relapse-free survival (RFS) in the total population (1-year RFS rate: 75.4% vs 61.0%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; logrank P < 0.0001) and consistently in the AJCC-7 subgroups. Prognostic and predictive values of AJCC-8 for RFS were evaluated in this study. Patient distribution according to the AJCC-8 stage subgroups was 8% (IIIA), 34.7% (IIIB), 49.7% (IIIC), 3.7% (IIID) and 3.8% (unknown). AJCC-8 classification was strongly associated with RFS (HRs for stage IIIB, IIIC and IIID vs IIIA were 4.0, 5.7 and 12.2, respectively) but showed no predictive importance for the treatment comparison regarding RFS (test for interaction: P = 0.68). The 1-year RFS rate for pembrolizumab vs placebo and the HRs (99% confidence interval) within each AJCC-8 subgroup were as follows: stage IIIA (92.7% vs 92.5%; 0.76 [0.11-5.43]), IIIB (79.0% vs 65.5%; 0.59 [0.35-0.99]), IIIC (73.6% vs 53.9%; 0.48 [0.33-0.70]) and IIID (50.0% vs 33.3%; 0.69 [0.24-2.00])., Conclusions: AJCC-8 staging had a strong prognostic importance for RFS but no predictive importance: the RFS benefit of pembrolizumab was observed across AJCC-8 subgroups in resected high-risk stage III melanoma patients., (Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)