Search

Background: Anti-PD1/PD-L1 directed immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are widely used to treat patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The activity of ICI across NSCLC harboring oncogenic alterations is poorly characterized. The aim of our study was to address the efficacy of ICI in the context of oncogenic addiction., Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study for patients receiving ICI monotherapy for advanced NSCLC with at least one oncogenic driver alteration. Anonymized data were evaluated for clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes for ICI therapy: best response (RECIST 1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation. The primary end point was PFS under ICI. Secondary end points were best response (RECIST 1.1) and OS from ICI initiation., Results: We studied 551 patients treated in 24 centers from 10 countries. The molecular alterations involved KRAS (n = 271), EGFR (n = 125), BRAF (n = 43), MET (n = 36), HER2 (n = 29), ALK (n = 23), RET (n = 16), ROS1 (n = 7), and multiple drivers (n = 1). Median age was 60 years, gender ratio was 1 : 1, never/former/current smokers were 28%/51%/21%, respectively, and the majority of tumors were adenocarcinoma. The objective response rate by driver alteration was: KRAS = 26%, BRAF = 24%, ROS1 = 17%, MET = 16%, EGFR = 12%, HER2 = 7%, RET = 6%, and ALK = 0%. In the entire cohort, median PFS was 2.8 months, OS 13.3 months, and the best response rate 19%. In a subgroup analysis, median PFS (in months) was 2.1 for EGFR, 3.2 for KRAS, 2.5 for ALK, 3.1 for BRAF, 2.5 for HER2, 2.1 for RET, and 3.4 for MET. In certain subgroups, PFS was positively associated with PD-L1 expression (KRAS, EGFR) and with smoking status (BRAF, HER2)., Conclusions: : ICI induced regression in some tumors with actionable driver alterations, but clinical activity was lower compared with the KRAS group and the lack of response in the ALK group was notable. Patients with actionable tumor alterations should receive targeted therapies and chemotherapy before considering immunotherapy as a single agent., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: This phase Ib study aimed to establish the feasible everolimus dose given with standard-dose etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC)., Patients and Methods: An adaptive Bayesian dose-escalation model and investigator opinion were used to identify feasible daily or weekly everolimus doses given with EP in adults with treatment-naive extensive-stage SCLC. A protocol amendment mandated prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Primary end point was cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate. Secondary end points included safety, relative EP dose intensity, pharmacokinetics, and tumor response., Results: Patients received everolimus 2.5 or 5 mg/day without G-CSF (n=10; cohort A), 20 or 30 mg/week without G-CSF (n=18; cohort B), or 2.5 or 5 mg/day with G-CSF (n=12; cohort C); all received EP. Cycle 1 DLT rates were 50.0%, 22.2%, and 16.7% in cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. Cycle 1 DLTs were neutropenia (cohorts A and B), febrile neutropenia (all cohorts), and thrombocytopenia (cohorts A and C). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hematologic. Best overall response was partial response (40.0%, 61.1%, and 58.3% in cohorts A, B, and C, respectively)., Conclusions: Everolimus 2.5 mg/day plus G-CSF was the only feasible dose given with standard-dose EP in untreated extensive-stage SCLC.

Background: This phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability and preliminary efficacy of sorafenib combined with vorinostat in patients with solid tumors., Patients and Methods: Patients were treated with sorafenib 400 mg po bid daily and vorinostat 200-400 mg po days 1-14 of a 21 day cycle to establish the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). The tolerability and efficacy of the RP2D was further tested in two cohorts of 6-12 patients each with advanced RCC and NSCLC., Results: 17 patients were treated in the dose escalation phase that established the RP2D at sorafenib 400 mg po bid daily, vorinostat 300 mg po days 1-14. Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) included intolerable grade 2 hand-foot syndrome and multiple grade 1 toxicities causing dose interruption for more than 14 days. Despite good tolerance in the all-comers population, the RP2D was poorly tolerated in the RCC and NSCLC cohorts with the majority being unable to finish 2 full cycles of therapy. Although there were no confirmed responses, 1 patient each with NSCLC adenocarcinoma and renal sarcoma had unconfirmed partial responses and 5 of 8 patients with RCC having durable minor responses (11-26 %), including 2 who were on treatment for nearly a year., Conclusions: Although tolerable in other tumor types, sorafenib 400 mg po bid with vorinostat 300 mg po daily days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle is not tolerable without dose reductions/delays in RCC and NSCLC patients. These patients may require lower doses than the RP2D explored within this study. No confirmed responses were seen but minor responses particularly in RCC were observed.

Background: BIBF 1120 is an oral potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, fibroblast growth factor receptor and platelet-derived growth factor receptor, the three key receptor families involved in angiogenesis. This phase I, open-label dose-escalation study investigated BIBF 1120 combined with paclitaxel (Taxol) and carboplatin in first-line patients with advanced (IIIB/IV) non-small-cell lung cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients received BIBF 1120 (starting dose 50 mg b.i.d.) on days 2-21 and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) and carboplatin [area under curve (AUC)=6 mg/ml/min] on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Primary end points were safety and BIBF 1120 maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in this combination. Pharmacokinetics (PK) profiles were evaluated., Results: Twenty-six patients were treated (BIBF 1120 50-250 mg b.i.d.). BIBF 1120 MTD was 200 mg b.i.d. in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin. Six dose-limiting toxicity events occurred during treatment cycle 1 (liver enzyme elevations, thrombocytopenia, abdominal pain, and rash). Best responses included 7 confirmed partial responses (26.9%); 10 patients had stable disease. BIBF 1120 200 mg b.i.d. had no clinically relevant influence on the PK of paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 6 mg/ml/min and vice versa., Conclusions: BIBF 1120 MTD was 200 mg b.i.d when given with paclitaxel and carboplatin; this combination demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. No relevant changes in PK parameters of the backbone chemotherapeutic agents or BIBF 1120 were observed.

Purpose: This phase I study assessed the safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor effects of sunitinib combined with modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6)., Methods: Patients with advanced solid malignancies received mFOLFOX6 in 2-week cycles with escalating sunitinib doses (25, 37.5, and 50 mg/day) on three schedules: 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off (2/2); 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off (4/2); or continuous daily dosing (CDD). Patients received up to 8 treatment cycles (Schedule 2/2 and CDD schedule) or 6 cycles (Schedule 4/2). An expansion cohort enrolled patients with metastatic colorectal cancer at the Schedule 2/2 MTD., Results: Overall, 53 patients were enrolled, with 43 evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). On Schedule 2/2 (n = 18), DLTs occurred in three patients at 50 mg/day (grade 4 neutropenia [n = 1]; grades 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia [n = 2]) and two patients achieved partial responses (PRs). On Schedule 4/2 (n = 13), 37.5 mg/day exceeded the MTD with two DLTs (febrile neutropenia and grade 4 hypokalemia, respectively). On the CDD schedule (n = 12), the MTD was 25 mg/day; one DLT (grade 3 stomatitis) was reported and two patients achieved PRs. The most common adverse events were neutropenia, fatigue, and thrombocytopenia. No clinically significant drug-drug interactions were apparent between sunitinib, its metabolite SU12662, and mFOLFOX6., Conclusions: Sunitinib combined with mFOLFOX6 had acceptable tolerability. The MTDs were sunitinib 50 mg/day on Schedule 2/2 and 25 mg/day on the CDD schedule. A MTD for Schedule 4/2 was not established.

Purpose: The primary objective of this phase I dose-escalation study was to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of sunitinib plus pemetrexed in patients with advanced cancer., Methods: Using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, patients received oral sunitinib qd by continuous daily dosing (CDD schedule; 37.5 or 50 mg) or 2 weeks on/1 week off treatment schedule (Schedule 2/1; 50 mg). Pemetrexed (300-500 mg/m(2) IV) was administered q3w. At the proposed recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), additional patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were enrolled., Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled on the CDD schedule and seven on Schedule 2/1. MTDs were sunitinib 37.5 mg/day (CDD/RP2D) or 50 mg/day (Schedule 2/1) with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2). Dose-limiting toxicities included grade (G) 5 cerebral hemorrhage, G3 febrile neutropenia, and G3 anorexia. Common G3/4 drug-related non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) at the CDD MTD included fatigue, anorexia, and hand-foot syndrome. G3/4 hematologic AEs included lymphopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. No significant drug-drug interactions were identified. Five (24%) NSCLC patients had partial responses., Conclusions: In patients with advanced solid malignancies, the MTD of sunitinib plus 500 mg/m(2) pemetrexed was 37.5 mg/day (CDD schedule) or 50 mg/day (Schedule 2/1). The CDD schedule MTD was tolerable and demonstrated promising clinical benefit in NSCLC.