Search

Background: In this analysis we compared quality-adjusted survival outcomes between nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) and standard paclitaxel (Pac) using data from the nab-P phase III registration trial in metastatic breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Quality-adjusted overall survival was estimated using the quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) approach. Overall survival was partitioned into time without progression/Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) toxicity (TWiST), time with Grade ≥ 3 AE toxicity (TOX), and time after relapse (REL). Q-TWiST was calculated by multiplying mean time in each health state by its assigned utility (base-case utility values: time without symptoms of disease progression or toxicity of Grade ≥ 3 adverse events [TWiST] = 1.0, TOX = 0.5, and REL = 0.5). In threshold analyses, TOX and REL varied from 0.0 to 1.0 whereas TWiST was maintained at 1.0. Comparisons were made for the intent-to-treat population and the subset of patients initiating the study drugs as second or subsequent lines (2L+) of chemotherapy (per approved nab-P indication; 2L+ subpopulation). A ≥ 15% relative Q-TWiST gain (vs. mean Pac overall survival) was considered clearly clinically important., Results: In the intent-to-treat population, nab-P (n = 229) versus Pac (n = 225) resulted in nonsignificant gains of 1.4 months of mean Q-TWiST (11.6 vs. 10.2 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.03 to 2.8). In the 2L+ subpopulation, nab-P (n = 132) versus Pac (n = 136) resulted in a statistically significant gain of 2.2 months of mean Q-TWiST (10.5 vs. 8.4 months; 95% CI, 0.6-3.8), with a 17.1% relative Q-TWiST gain (threshold analysis range, 14.0%-19.5%, both figures significant)., Conclusion: In its approved indication for metastatic breast cancer, nab-P showed a statistically significant and clearly clinically important improvement in quality-adjusted survival time versus Pac in the 2L+ subpopulation., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Limited data on elderly patients with squamous advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) preclude optimal treatment. Here, we report the outcomes of a retrospective analysis of a subset of patients ≥70 years with squamous histology from the Phase III trial that evaluated nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin vs paclitaxel/carboplatin., Patients and Methods: Patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received (1:1) nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m 2 on days 1, 8, and 15 or paclitaxel 200 mg/m 2 on day 1, both with carboplatin area under the curve 6 mg×min/mL on day 1 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was independently assessed overall response rate as per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.0. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety., Results: Sixty-five patients ≥70 years with squamous histology were included (nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin, n=35; paclitaxel/carboplatin, n=30). nab-Paclitaxel/carboplatin vs paclitaxel/carboplatin, respectively, resulted in an overall response rate of 46% vs 20% (response rate ratio, 2.29, P =0.029) and a median overall survival of 16.9 vs 8.6 months (hazard ratio, 0.50, P =0.018). No difference was observed in median progression-free survival (5.7 months for both). Incidences of grade 3/4 neutropenia (50% vs 63%), leukopenia (29% vs 37%), fatigue (3% vs 13%), and peripheral neuropathy (3% vs 13%) were lower, but those of thrombocytopenia (21% vs 10%) and anemia (21% vs 7%) were higher with nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin vs paclitaxel/carboplatin., Conclusion: nab-Paclitaxel/carboplatin was efficacious and tolerable in patients ≥70 years with squamous NSCLC. These results build upon prior analyses, indicating that nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin is effective for this difficult-to-treat patient subgroup., Competing Interests: Disclosure TC, AK, TJO: employment or leadership position and stock ownership, Celgene Corporation. MEO: advisory role, Celgene, GSK, BMS, Pierre Fabre, Medimmune, MSD, Pfizer, Daichii Sankyo. MAS: honoraria and speaker’s bureau, Celgene. PEP: advisory board member of Celgene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Halozyme, Teva, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: nab-Paclitaxel is an albumin-bound formulation of paclitaxel approved for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This analysis was designed to characterize the treatment patterns, efficacy, and safety of nab-paclitaxel for MBC treatment using health claims data from US health plans associated with Optum., Methods: Women aged ≥ 18 years who initiated nab-paclitaxel for MBC treatment from January 1, 2005, to September 30, 2012, and who met eligibility criteria were selected from the Optum Research Database for this analysis. Patients were required to have complete medical coverage and pharmacy benefits, ≥ 6 months of continuous enrollment, and a diagnosis of MBC prior to nab-paclitaxel initiation. The pattern of use for nab-paclitaxel (eg, regimen, schedule, duration, and administration) and claims-captured toxicities were characterized by line of therapy. Overall survival (OS) and time to next therapy or death (TNTD) were described by line of therapy, regimen, and schedule., Results: Of the 664 nab-paclitaxel patients, 172 (25.9%) received it as first-line therapy, 211 (31.8%) as second-line therapy, and 281 (42.3%) as third-line or later therapy. Overall, the majority of patients received monotherapy (61%) and followed a weekly (71%) rather than an every 3 weeks treatment schedule. nab-Paclitaxel was often (31.7%) combined with targeted therapy (57.5% with bevacizumab and 23.9% with trastuzumab or lapatinib). The median duration of therapy was 128 days (4.2 months). For the overall population, median OS was 17.4 months (22.7, 17.4, and 15.1 months in first-, second-, and third-line or later therapy, respectively). Median TNTD was 6.1 months (7.1, 6.6, and 5.3 months in first-, second-, and third-line or later therapy, respectively). For patients aged ≤ 50 years or with ≥ 3 metastatic sites, median OS was 15.6 months. No new safety signal was identified., Conclusions: In this US healthcare system, the majority of patients received nab-paclitaxel as second-line or later therapy, monotherapy, and weekly treatment. The efficacy and safety outcomes of nab-paclitaxel observed in this real-world setting appear consistent with those from clinical trial data.

Background: Triple-negative breast cancer is an aggressive disease with unmet clinical needs. In a phase III study of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, first-line gemcitabine/carboplatin resulted in a median progression-free survival of 4.6 months. nab-paclitaxel-based regimens (with gemcitabine or carboplatin±bevacizumab) also demonstrated efficacy and safety in first-line phase II trials of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer., Trial Design: In this international, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase II/III trial, the efficacy and safety of first-line nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine or with carboplatin will be compared with gemcitabine/carboplatin (control arm) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer., Methods: In the phase II portion, 240 patients with measurable metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and treatment-naive for metastatic disease will be randomized 1:1:1 (stratified by disease-free interval: ≤1 versus>1 year) to nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 plus carboplatin area under the curve 2 mg×min/mL, or gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 plus carboplatin area under the curve 2 mg×min/mL, all given on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (primary endpoint), overall response rate, overall survival, and safety will be assessed. A ranking algorithm of five efficacy and safety parameters will be used to pick the "winner" of the nab-paclitaxel regimens. In the phase III portion, 550 patients will be randomized 1:1 (stratified by disease-free interval: ≤1 versus >1 year, and prior adjuvant/neoadjuvant taxane use) to the nab-paclitaxel combination arm selected from the phase II portion or to the control arm. Patients in phase II will not be part of the phase III population. The phase III primary endpoint is blinded, independently-assessed progression-free survival; secondary endpoints include blinded, independently-assessed overall response rate, overall survival, disease control rate, duration of response, and safety. Biomarker and circulating tumor-cell exploratory analyses and quality-of-life assessments will also be performed. A list of approving ethical bodies was provided in Additional file 1., Discussion: The tnAcity trial aims to identify a new standard cytotoxic chemotherapy regimen for first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01881230 . Date of registration: 17 June 2013.

Background: A partial response according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors includes a wide range of changes in tumor size. This study evaluated whether further specification of tumor reduction based on the depth of response (DpR) would provide a more precise association with outcomes for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed for the randomized phase 3 CA031 trial in patients with NSCLC treated with carboplatin in combination with nab-paclitaxel or solvent-based paclitaxel. Quartiles according to the maximum tumor reduction from the baseline were defined (quartile 1 [Q1], >0% to 25%; quartile 2 [Q2], >25% to 50%; quartile 3 [Q3], >50% to 75%; and quartile 4 [Q4], >75%) and were compared with those patients with no tumor reduction (NTR). The primary objective was to evaluate the association between DpR and overall survival (OS).Results: Of the 1052 patients enrolled in the CA031 trial, 959 (91%) were evaluable, and they included 365 (38.1%) who were classified as Q1, 327 (34.1%) who were classified as Q2, 131 (13.7%) who were classified as Q3, and 34 (3.5%) who were classified as Q4; 102 had NTR (10.6%). The median OS values for patients in the NTR, Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 groups were 4.8, 10.4, 14.5, 19.3, and 23.5 months, respectively. The maximum DpR on treatment was an independent predictor of improved OS in comparison with patients with NTR; the hazard ratio decreased from 0.43 in Q1 to 0.16 in Q4.Conclusions: DpR was strongly associated with OS in patients with NSCLC receiving first-line platinum-based therapy. Additional studies may help to define the role of DpR in solid tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A correction to the article "Phase I/III Weekly Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine or Carboplatin Versus Gemcitabine/Carboplatin As First-Line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (the tnAcity Study): Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial" by Denise A. Yardley et al. that was published in a 2015 issue is presented.