Search

Background: Talazoparib is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor approved in the US for HER2-negative germline BRCA1/2-mutated (gBRCA1/2mut) locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Approval was based on results from the Phase 3 EMBRACA trial comparing efficacy and safety of talazoparib (1 mg/day) to physician's choice of therapy ([PCT]; capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine) in patients with HER2-negative gBRCA1/2mut locally advanced/ metastatic breast cancer. Objectives: The purpose of this analysis was to describe efficacy and safety outcomes of talazoparib vs PCT in US patients included in the pivotal EMBRACA study. Methods: Clinical findings from US patients enrolled in EMBRACA were analyzed. Patient characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and safety/adverse events (AEs) were among the parameters assessed. Results: Of 431 randomized patients, 156 patients (36%) were from the US (talazoparib: 99 patients; PCT: 57 patients). Patient characteristics were balanced, although a higher percentage in the talazoparib arm had more poor prognostic features (e.g. triple-negative breast cancer, disease-free interval <12 months, and more disease sites). A total of 53 patients (53.5%) had hormone receptor (HR)+ breast cancer in the talazoparib arm and 37 patients (64.9%) had HR+ breast cancer in the PCT arm. Talazoparib improved PFS (median 9.0 [95% confi- dence interval (CI), 7.0-12.9] months) vs PCT (median 5.8 [95% CI, 4.2-6.7] months); hazard ratio (HR [95% CI]), 0.5 (0.3-0.7). ORR occurred in 51 patients (63.0%) receiving talazoparib and 11 patients (24.4%) receiving PCT. CBR was 68.7% (95% CI, 58.6-77.6) for talazoparib and 33.3% (95% CI, 21.4-47.1) for PCT; odds ratio (95% CI), 4.7 (2.2-10.6). Median duration of response was 5.0 months and 3.1 months for talazoparib and PCT, respectively. The most common AEs in the talazoparib arm included anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, nausea, alopecia, and headache; hematologic grade 3/4 AEs occurred more often than nonhematologic AEs. Six out of 99 (6.1%) patients in the talazoparib arm and 6/43 (14.0%) patients in the PCT arm discontinued treatment. Conclusions: In US patients with HER2-negative gBRCA1/2mut locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer, talazoparib demonstrated significant improvements in outcomes vs PCT with a manageable safety profile. Note: © 2019 American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. Reused with permission. This abstract was accepted and previously presented at the 2019 ASCO Annual Meeting. All rights reserved. Clinical trial identification: NCT01945775 Funding: This study was sponsored by Medivation, which was acquired by Pfizer in September 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The Janus-associated kinase (JAK)/signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway is a key regulator of inflammatory signaling, associated with tumorigenesis, cell survival, and progression. This randomized phase 2 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of the addition of ruxolitinib, a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, to capecitabine in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer and high systemic inflammation (modified Glasgow Prognostic Score [mGPS] ≥ 1)., Methods: Patients with ≤ 2 prior chemotherapy regimens for advanced or metastatic disease or hormone receptor-positive patients with disease progression on prior hormonal therapies were randomized 1:1 to 21-day cycles of ruxolitinib (n = 76) or placebo (n = 73) plus capecitabine. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS)., Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. For ruxolitinib plus capecitabine versus placebo plus capecitabine, median OS was 11.2 months versus 10.9 months (log-rank test P = 0.762); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.5 months versus 2.5 months (log-rank test P = 0.151); and overall response rate (ORR) was 28.9% versus 13.7% (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test P = 0.024), respectively. A more favorable change in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was observed with ruxolitinib plus capecitabine versus placebo plus capecitabine. Both regimens were generally tolerable. A higher incidence of grade 3/4 anemia (25.4% vs 5.6%) and a lower incidence of grade 3/4 palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (1.4% vs 12.7%) occurred with ruxolitinib plus capecitabine versus placebo plus capecitabine., Conclusions: The addition of ruxolitinib to capecitabine for patients with advanced breast cancer and high systemic inflammation was generally tolerable; ORR was numerically greater, a more favorable change in HRQoL was observed, but neither OS nor PFS was improved compared with placebo plus capecitabine.

Background: Patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction/stomach are treated by combination chemotherapy, with minimal improvements in survival. We evaluated adding cetuximab to combination chemotherapy in these patients., Methods: The primary objective was progression-free survival. Secondary objectives were response rate, time to response, duration of response and safety. Treatment Arm 1: docetaxel+oxaliplatin (DOCOX)=docetaxel 60 mg/m(2) plus oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Arm 2: docetaxel+oxaliplatin+cetuximab (DOCOX+C)=DOCOX with C 400mg/m(2) first dose then 250 mg/m(2) weekly. The protocol was amended to allow collection of tissue to correlate responses with KRAS status., Findings: One hundred fifty patients were enrolled (75/arm). DOCOX/DOCOX+C: gastric 44%/41%, gastroesophageal junction 51%/55%, both 5%/4%. Response rate/arm: 26.5%/38.0%. Median progression-free survival: 4.7/5.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0-5.6/4.3-5.9); 1 year survival: 39.1%/33.0%, median overall survival: 8.5/9.4 months; median duration of response: 7.3/5.6months. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (%) included neutropenia (50%/44%), febrile neutropenia (13%/19%), diarrhoea (12%/17%), fatigue (12%/17%) and leukopenia (7%/14%). Discontinuation was due to progressive disease 39/32 and adverse events 21/34. KRAS was collected on some patients 2 years into the study because of new American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) findings., Interpretation: Cetuximab added to DOCOX may improve response rate minimally; there appears to be no improvement in progression-free survival, overall survival or 1-year survival. Cetuximab added to DOCOX did not produce clinically significant outcomes. Toxicities were consistent with the study drugs' known safety profiles. KRAS mutation was infrequent; no conclusions can be drawn from KRAS response data. ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT00517829., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The question of the breast cancer in elderly is enlightened by two constituted epidemiological data bases in the United-States: the data basis of San Antonio and the SEER (Surveillance Epidemology and End Results) which represent a follow-up of 26% of the American population. The listed data allow an approach of the clinical and biological constituents according to the age of the disease as well as the factors of comorbidity. The informations relative to the therapeutic choices are more fragmentary and must be developed first and foremost during the programs. double dagger.

Purpose: This study was conducted to assess the feasibility of administering the oral diarylsulfonylurea (DSU) ILX-295501 on a weekly for 3 weeks every 4-week schedule. The study also sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ILX-295501 on this schedule, characterize its pharmacokinetic behavior, and seek preliminary evidence of anticancer activity., Experimental Design: The initial starting dose of ILX-295501 was 100 mg/m(2), which was equivalent to one-sixth of the highest dose that did not induce irreversible toxicity in dogs, and, using a modified Fibonnaci search scheme to guide dose level selection, the following dose levels were evaluated: 100, 200, 400, 600, 900, 1350, and 1800 mg/m(2). Because severe toxicities were being reported in other trials at doses that encompassed this range and a cumulative toxicity profile was emerging, the study was suspended and then reinitiated to further reevaluate the lower dosing range. In the second part of the study, the following dose levels were selected a priori for evaluation: 400, 800, 1000, 1250, and 1500 mg/m(2); and a modified continual reassessment model was used for dose assignment to determine the MTD, which was defined a priori as the highest dose in which the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity in the first course did not exceed 20%., Results: Forty-nine patients were treated with 142 courses of ILX-295501 at doses ranging from 100 to 1800 mg/m(2). The incidences of dose-limiting toxicity, principally neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, were unacceptably high at ILX-295501 doses exceeding 1000 mg/m(2), which was determined to be the MTD for both minimally pretreated and heavily pretreated (HP) patients. In contrast to the first generation of DSUs, particularly sulofenur, clinically relevant levels of oxidized hemoglobin (methemoglobin) and secondary hemolytic anemia, were not noted. One HP patient with non-small cell lung carcinoma experienced a partial response. Pharmacokinetic studies revealed that ILX-295501 was absorbed slowly, with peak plasma concentrations (C(max)) achieving 6.02 h, on average, after oral administration. The pharmacokinetic behavior of ILX-295501 was characterized by dose proportionality, a relatively small apparent volume of distribution at steady state (V(ss)/F), averaging 8.02 +/- 14.08 liters, and low apparent total body clearance (CL(t)/F) rate (mean, 0.036 +/- 0.116 liters/h). The initial drug distribution phase was rapid [harmonic mean half-life (t(1/2alpha)), 2.1 +/- 7.0 min], whereas the terminal elimination phase was slow (harmonic mean t(1/2beta,) 150.6 +/- 80.2 h)., Conclusions: The recommended dose for Phase II studies of the oral DSU ILX-295501 administered weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks is 1000 mg/m(2)/day for both minimally pretreated and HP patients. The characteristics of the myelosuppressive effects of ILX-295501, the paucity of severe nonhematological toxicities, and preliminary antitumor activity warrant disease-directed evaluations of ILX-295501.