Search

Supplementary Data from Clinical Activity of Single-Agent Cabozantinib (XL184), a Multi-receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients with Refractory Soft-Tissue Sarcomas

Purpose:Soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) are a rare, heterogeneous group of mesenchymal tumors. For decades the mainstay of treatment for advanced, unresectable STS has been palliative chemotherapy. High levels of activated MET receptor have been reported in various sarcoma cell lines, together with elevated vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels in patients with STS, suggesting that dual targeting of the VEGF and MET pathways with the multi-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib would result in clinical benefit in this population.Patients and Methods:We performed an open-label, multi-institution, single-arm phase II trial of single-agent cabozantinib in adult patients with advanced STS and progressive disease after at least 1 standard line of systemic therapy. Patients received 60 mg oral cabozantinib once daily in 28-day cycles, and dual primary endpoints of overall response rate and 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. Changes in several circulating biomarkers were assessed as secondary endpoints.Results:Six (11.1%; 95% CI, 4.2%–22.6%) of the 54 evaluable patients enrolled experienced objective responses (all partial responses). Six-month PFS was 49.3% (95% CI, 36.2%–67.3%), with a median time on study of 4 cycles (range, 1–99). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hypertension (7.4%) and neutropenia (16.7%). Patients' levels of circulating hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), soluble MET, and VEGF-A generally increased after a cycle of therapy, while soluble VEGFR2 levels decreased, regardless of clinical outcome.Conclusions:Cabozantinib single-agent antitumor activity was observed in patients with selected STS histologic subtypes (alveolar soft-part sarcoma, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma, and leiomyosarcoma) highlighting the biomolecular diversity of STS.

We consider the design of phase II trials evaluating combinations of experimental therapies. In the modern era, many immunotherapy and targeted therapy regimens are being developed as combination regimens, including combinations consisting only of experimental agents. In some clinical or drug development scenarios, it may be difficult to isolate the effect of the individual agents composing a combination of this type, which makes the evaluation of the combination challenging. One such scenario arises when none of the agents making up the experimental combination have demonstrated single-agent activity in the clinical setting of interest. One solution to this problem is to use a randomized comparative trial in which the combination of interest is compared with 1 or both of its component agents, but some modifications to more traditional randomized comparative phase II trials must be made because all arms in such a trial would be experimental. In this manuscript, we present sensible modifications to randomized phase II trial designs that can be used in 2 common drug development scenarios of this type and provide a detailed discussion of the practical aspects of designing these trials. We also include 2 worked examples to further illustrate how to design such a trial.

Purpose: Soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) are a rare, heterogeneous group of mesenchymal tumors. For decades the mainstay of treatment for advanced, unresectable STS has been palliative chemotherapy. High levels of activated MET receptor have been reported in various sarcoma cell lines, together with elevated vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels in patients with STS, suggesting that dual targeting of the VEGF and MET pathways with the multi-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib would result in clinical benefit in this population. Patients and Methods: We performed an open-label, multi-institution, single-arm phase II trial of single-agent cabozantinib in adult patients with advanced STS and progressive disease after at least 1 standard line of systemic therapy. Patients received 60 mg oral cabozantinib once daily in 28-day cycles, and dual primary endpoints of overall response rate and 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. Changes in several circulating biomarkers were assessed as secondary endpoints. Results: Six (11.1%; 95% CI, 4.2%–22.6%) of the 54 evaluable patients enrolled experienced objective responses (all partial responses). Six-month PFS was 49.3% (95% CI, 36.2%–67.3%), with a median time on study of 4 cycles (range, 1–99). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hypertension (7.4%) and neutropenia (16.7%). Patients' levels of circulating hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), soluble MET, and VEGF-A generally increased after a cycle of therapy, while soluble VEGFR2 levels decreased, regardless of clinical outcome. Conclusions: Cabozantinib single-agent antitumor activity was observed in patients with selected STS histologic subtypes (alveolar soft-part sarcoma, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma, and leiomyosarcoma) highlighting the biomolecular diversity of STS.

PURPOSEThe Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007, provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer clinical trial end points. Given the evolution of breast cancer clinical trials and improvements in outcomes, a panel of experts reviewed the STEEP criteria to determine whether modifications are needed.METHODSWe conducted systematic searches of ClinicalTrials.gov for adjuvant systemic and local-regional therapy trials for breast cancer to investigate if the primary end points reported met STEEP criteria. On the basis of common STEEP deviations, we performed a series of simulations to evaluate the effect of excluding non–breast cancer deaths and new nonbreast primary cancers from the invasive disease–free survival end point.RESULTSAmong 11 phase III breast cancer trials with primary efficacy end points, three had primary end points that followed STEEP criteria, four used STEEP definitions but not the corresponding end point names, and four used end points that were not included in the original STEEP manuscript. Simulation modeling demonstrated that inclusion of second nonbreast primary cancer can increase the probability of incorrect inferences, can decrease power to detect clinically relevant efficacy effects, and may mask differences in recurrence rates, especially when recurrence rates are low.CONCLUSIONWe recommend an additional end point, invasive breast cancer–free survival, which includes all invasive disease–free survival events except second nonbreast primary cancers. This end point should be considered for trials in which the toxicities of agents are well-known and where the risk of second primary cancer is small. Additionally, we provide end point recommendations for local therapy trials, low-risk populations, noninferiority trials, and trials incorporating patient-reported outcomes.

Designing and interpreting single-arm phase II trials of combinations of agents is challenging because it can be difficult, based on historical data, to identify levels of activity for which the combination would be worth pursuing. We identified Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program single-arm combination trials that were activated in 2008–2017 and tabulated their design characteristics and results. Positive trials were evaluated as to whether they provided credible evidence that the combination was better than its constituents. A total of 125 trials were identified, and 120 trials had results available. Twelve had designs where eligible patients were required to be resistant or refractory to all but one element of the combination. Only 17.8% of the 45 positive trials were deemed to provide credible evidence that the combination was better than its constituents. Of the 10 positive trials with observed rates 10 percentage points higher than their upper (alternative hypothesis) targets, only five were deemed to provide such credible evidence. Many trials were definitively negative, with observed clinical activity at or below their lower (null hypothesis) targets. Ideally, use of single-arm combination trials should be restricted to settings where each agent is known to have minimal monotherapy activity (and a randomized trial is infeasible). In these settings, an observed signal is attributable to synergy and thus could be used to decide whether the combination is worth pursuing. In other settings, credible evidence can still be obtained if the observed activity is much higher than expected, but experience suggests that this is a rare occurrence.

PURPOSEThis trial assessed the utility of applying tumor DNA sequencing to treatment selection for patients with advanced, refractory cancer and somatic mutations in one of four signaling pathways by comparing the efficacy of four study regimens that were either matched to the patient's aberrant pathway (experimental arm) or not matched to that pathway (control arm).MATERIALS AND METHODSAdult patients with an actionable mutation of interest were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive either (1) a study regimen identified to target the aberrant pathway found in their tumor (veliparib with temozolomide or adavosertib with carboplatin [DNA repair pathway], everolimus [PI3K pathway], or trametinib [RAS/RAF/MEK pathway]), or (2) one of the same four regimens, but chosen from among those not targeting that pathway.RESULTSAmong 49 patients treated in the experimental arm, the objective response rate was 2% (95% CI, 0% to 10.9%). One of 20 patients (5%) in the experimental trametinib cohort had a partial response. There were no responses in the other cohorts. Although patients and physicians were blinded to the sequencing and random assignment results, a higher pretreatment dropout rate was observed in the control arm (22%) compared with the experimental arm (6%; P = .038), suggesting that some patients may have had prior tumor mutation profiling performed that led to a lack of participation in the control arm.CONCLUSIONFurther investigation, better annotation of predictive biomarkers, and the development of more effective agents are necessary to inform treatment decisions in an era of precision cancer medicine. Increasing prevalence of tumor mutation profiling and preference for targeted therapy make it difficult to use a randomized phase II design to evaluate targeted therapy efficacy in an advanced disease setting.

Key Points Question Has inclusion of people living with HIV in anti–programmed death 1 and anti–programmed death ligand 1 (anti–PD1/PDL1) immunotherapy trials changed during ongoing Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program advocacy efforts by the National Cancer Institute? Findings In this quality improvement analysis of 87 anti–PD1/PDL1 trials approved by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program from January 2014 to May 2019, the proportion of studies including people living with HIV increased from 16% of letters of intent to 70% of approved protocols. Inclusion of people living with HIV on submitted letters of intent increased over time. Meaning This study’s findings suggest that the increasing inclusion rates of people living with HIV in anti–PD1/PDL1 clinical trials are encouraging and that advocacy for these and other underrepresented populations should continue., This quality improvement study evaluates trends in the inclusion of people living with HIV in anti–programmed death 1 and anti–programmed death ligand 1 (anti–PD1/PDL1) clinical trials concurrent with ongoing Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program efforts by the National Cancer Institute to promote inclusion of this patient population., Importance Anti–programmed death 1 and anti–programmed death ligand 1 (anti–PD1/PDL1) immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) constitutes the therapeutic backbone for multiple malignant neoplasms. People living with HIV (PLWH) have routinely been excluded from ICB clinical trials, thus inhibiting broad implementation of ICB to PLWH with cancer. Objective To evaluate trends in the inclusion of PLWH in ICB cancer clinical trials that have occurred in association with ongoing efforts by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), National Cancer Institute, to promote inclusion of PLWH. Design, Setting, and Participants This quality improvement study of ICB letters of intent (LOIs) included anti–PD1/PDL1 agents (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, and durvalumab) submitted to CTEP that proceeded to approved protocols between January 2014 to May 2019. The setting was ICB clinical trial development and inclusion of underrepresented populations, specifically PLWH. All 97 submitted cancer clinical trial LOIs that included the aforementioned ICB agents were eligible for inclusion. Ten proposals were excluded, of which 3 were designed specifically for PLWH and 7 were LOIs that did not advance to approved protocols within the study period. Statistical analysis was performed from April to September 2020. Exposures CTEP advocacy included the requirement for justification of exclusion of PLWH and formal discussion of inclusion criteria during conference calls between CTEP and trial investigators. Main Outcomes and Measures The frequency of inclusion of PLWH in initially submitted LOIs was compared with final approved protocols using descriptive statistics. The probability of inclusion of PLWH in submitted LOIs and approved protocols over time was assessed using logistic regression. Results Eighty-seven studies were included, of which 68 (78%) were pilot, phase 1, phase 1/2, or phase 2 studies and 19 (22%) were phase 2/3 or phase 3 studies. Thirty-nine studies (45%) included nivolumab, 23 (26%) included pembrolizumab, 19 (22%) included atezolizumab, and 6 (7%) included durvalumab. At initial LOI stage, 14 of 87 (16%) included PLWH. Following CTEP advocacy efforts, 61 of 87 protocols (70%) included PLWH. Of 36 LOIs to initially exclude PLWH, 24 (67%) included PLWH in final protocols. Among the 25 protocols to exclude PLWH, 21 (84%) were earlier phase studies (pilot to phase 2) and 4 (16%) were later phase studies (phase 2/3 to phase 3). Only 13 of 25 protocols (52%) provided justification for exclusion of PLWH, with safety being the most frequently cited concern (9 of 13 studies). The inclusion of PLWH on submitted LOIs increased over time (odds ratio, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.14-3.91), whereas inclusion on final protocols did not increase over time (odds ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 0.81-1.59). Conclusions and Relevance This study identified encouraging trends in the inclusion of PLWH in anti–PD1/PDL1 cancer trials that occurred in the period following the initiation of CTEP advocacy. Work is needed to examine what impact this will have on enrollment of PLWH in such trials. Similar advocacy may help to promote inclusion of other underrepresented populations in cancer clinical trials, including those with organ dysfunction and chronic infections.

11528 Background: Chondrosarcoma is one of the most common bone malignancies in adults, and the third most common in pediatric patients (pts). The most prevalent subtype, conventional chondrosarcoma, is a slow growing tumor that is historically known to be refractory to chemotherapy. Anecdotal reports indicated a role for anti-PD-(L)1 in the treatment of this disease. This is the first prospective report on the efficacy of the PD-L1-targeting agent, atezolizumab, in this rare disease. Methods: Patients (pts) ages 2 and older with unresectable grade 2 or 3 conventional chondrosarcoma were eligible. No prior anti-PD-(L)1 treatment was allowed, otherwise pts were eligible irrespective of prior therapies as long as protocol-specified washout period requirements were met. Pts received atezolizumab 1200 mg (15 mg/kg with 1200 mg cap in pediatric pts) once every 21 days. Imaging was carried out at end of cycle 3, and then every two cycles. Research biopsies were collected from adult pts prior to C1D1, prior to C3D1, and at progression. Immuno-pharmacodynamic (IO-PD) studies were performed on paired tumor samples and circulating immune cells to help elucidate signaling pathways mediating the immune response, with focus on subsets of effector cells in the tumor microenvironment. Results: A total of 9 pts (7 males, 2 females) were enrolled in 6 centers across the US and Canada. Six pts were Caucasian/White, 1 Asian, 1 Hispanic, and 1 unknown. Median age was 49 years (42-72). No objective responses were seen. Three pts (33%) experienced disease stability (SD) per RECIST 1.1, for a median duration of 21 weeks as of data cutoff (January 2022). A patient with SD remains on active treatment (tx) for 35 weeks. Three patients had no tx-related adverse events (AEs). Six pts (67%) experienced at least one tx-related AE. Two patients experienced > G2 AEs, but only one was considered tx-related (lymphopenia). Immune-related AEs were all G1/2 and included hepatitis (2), hypothyroidism (1), hyperthyroidism (1), and maculopapular rash (1). IO-PD studies are ongoing and will be reported at the conference if available. Conclusions: Atezolizumab was well-tolerated but demonstrated limited activity in this cohort of pts with few treatment options. Ongoing IO-PD studies will provide insight into atezolizumab’s effect upon immune cell content and activation in the tumor microenvironment that will help design future immunotherapy trials in this disease and other sarcoma types. The study was funded by NCI Contract HHSN261201500003I. Clinical trial information: NCT04458922.

BACKGROUND A nocebo is an inert substance associated with adverse events. Although previous studies have examined the positive (placebo) effects of such inert substances, few have examined negative (nocebo) adverse event profiles, particularly in older patients who have higher morbidity and can experience frequent and severe adverse events from cancer therapy. METHODS This study focused on placebo/nocebo-exposed patients who participated in 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, cancer therapeutic studies, namely, North Central Cancer Therapy Group trial NCCTG 97-24-51 and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z9001, with the goal of reporting the comparative, age-based adverse event rates, as reported during the conduct of these trials. RESULTS Among the 446 patients who received only placebo/nocebo and who were the focus of the current report, 161 were aged ≥65 years at the time of respective trial entry, and 5234 adverse events occurred. Unadjusted adverse event rates did not differ significantly between patients aged ≥65 years and younger patients (rate ratio, 1.01; 99% confidence interval, 0.47-2.02), and the findings were similar findings for grade 2 or worse adverse events and for all symptom-driven adverse events (for example, pain, loss of appetite, anxiety). Adjustment for sex, ethnicity, baseline performance score, and individual trial resulted in no significant age-based differences in adverse event rates. Similar findings were observed with an age threshold of 70 years. CONCLUSIONS Adverse events are equally common in older and younger cancer patients who are exposed to nocebo and thus require the same degree of clinical consideration regardless of age. Cancer 2017;123:4193-4198. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

11519 Background: ASPS constitutes < 1% of soft tissue sarcomas and frequently presents in adolescents and young adults. There are no approved therapies for ASPS. We are currently evaluating the clinical activity of atezolizumab (atezo), an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients (pts) with advanced ASPS. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase II study where atezo is administered at a fixed dose of 1200 mg in adults or 15 mg/kg (1200 mg max) in pediatric pts age ≥2 once Q21 days. The primary objective is to determine the objective response rate (ORR) of atezo using RECIST 1.1. Secondary objectives include duration of response and correlating response with the immune effects of atezo in blood and paired tumor biopsies (pre- and post-treatment). Tumor specimens were analyzed with multiplex immunofluorescence immuno-oncology panels to quantify CD8+, PD-1+, and PD-L1+ cells/mm2 in the tumor microenvironment. CD8+ density was calculated as the total number of CD8+ cells divided by the entire area (mm2) of the tumor and invasive margins of the biopsy. Results: As of February 4, 2021, 44 pts have been enrolled. The median age in the study was 31 years (range, 12–70) with equal male: female distribution. 54.5% of pts were Caucasian. Baseline ECOG ≤1 was present in 97.7%. The median time on study was 11.5 months (range, 0.8–40.3 months). At data cutoff, response evaluation was available for 43 pts with an ORR of 37.2% (16/43). One pt experienced a complete response and 15 pts experienced a partial response (PR), of which 14 were confirmed. The median time to confirmed response was 3.5 months (range, 2.1–14.9 months). The median duration of confirmed response was 16.5 months (range, 4.9–38.1 months). Stable disease (SD) was present in 58.1% (25/43). One or more grade 3 adverse events potentially related to atezo were identified in 16.3% (7/43) pts. These include diarrhea, hypothyroidism, transaminitis, anemia, vertigo, extremity pain, myalgia, pneumonitis, rash, and stroke (n = 1 each). No grade 4 or 5 events have been reported. Among 8 cases with evaluable biopsy pairs, both baseline and C3D1 specimens in all cases demonstrated CD8+ T cell infiltration and PD-L1 expression. PD-1 expression was detected at baseline in 5 cases and at C3D1 in 7 cases. In 6 cases (3 SDs and 3 PRs), treatment did not change CD8+ cell density. In the other 2 cases (both PRs), CD8+ density increased > 3x above baseline by C3D1. Analysis of T cell activation using pharmacodynamic response biomarkers, along with whole exome and RNA-seq to evaluate the genomic and transcriptomic landscape of ASPS, are ongoing. Conclusions: Atezo is well tolerated and demonstrates promising single agent activity with durable responses in advanced ASPS. Preliminary tumor biomarker analysis confirms the presence of multiple PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint (IC) components, indicating that advanced ASPS is an ideal candidate for therapeutic IC inhibition. Funded by NCI Contract No HHSN261200800001E. Clinical trial information: NCT03141684.

Purpose Despite increasing awareness of accrual challenges, it is unknown if accrual of older patients to breast cancer treatment trials is improving. Methods We examined accrual of older patients to Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology systemic therapy breast cancer trials during 1985-2012 and compared disease characteristics and reasons for therapy cessation for older (age ≥ 65 years and ≥ 70 years) versus younger (age < 65 years and < 70 years) participants. To examine accrual trends, we modeled age as a function of time, using logistic regression. Results Overall, 17% of study participants were ≥ 65 years of age. Approximately 15%, 24%, and 24% of participants in adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and metastatic trials were age ≥ 65 years, and 7%, 15%, and 13% were age ≥ 70 years, respectively. The odds of a patient age ≥ 65 years enrolling significantly increased over time for adjuvant trials (odds ratio [OR] per year, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.05) but decreased significantly for neoadjuvant and metastatic trials (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.67 and OR, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.00). Similar trends were seen for those age ≥ 70 years but these were statistically significant for adjuvant and neoadjuvant trials only (OR, 1.05, 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.07; and OR, 0.57, 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.62). In general, those age ≥ 65 years ( v those < 65 years) in adjuvant studies had a higher mean number of lymph nodes involved and more hormone receptor-negative tumors, although tumor sizes were similar. Early protocol treatment cessation was also more frequent in those age ≥ 65 years (50%) versus < 65 years (35.9%) across trials. Conclusion Older patients with breast cancer remain largely underrepresented in cooperative group therapeutic trials. We observed some improvement in accrual to adjuvant trials but worsening of accrual for neoadjuvant/metastatic trials. Novel strategies to increase accrual of older patients are critical to meaningfully change the evidence base for this growing patient population.

We examined acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) events among 9679 women treated for breast cancer on four adjuvant Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trials with >90 months of follow-up in order to better characterize the risk for AML/MDS in older patients receiving anthracyclines. We used multivariable Cox regression to examine factors associated with AML/MDS, adjusting for age (≥65 vs.

Summary Longitudinal monitoring of biomarkers is often helpful for predicting disease or a poor clinical outcome. We consider the prediction of both large and small for gestational age births by using longitudinal ultrasound measurements, and we attempt to identify subgroups of women for whom prediction is more (or less) accurate, should they exist. We propose a tree-based approach to identifying such subgroups, and a pruning algorithm which explicitly incorporates a desired type I error rate, allowing us to control the risk of false discovery of subgroups. The methods proposed are applied to data from the Scandinavian Fetal Growth Study and are evaluated via simulations.

This exploratory longitudinal study examined behavioral outcomes and parenting stress among families with children adopted from foster care, taking into account environmental and biological risk factors. Child internalizing and externalizing problems and parenting stress were assessed in 82 adopted children and their families at 2 months post-placement, 12 months post-placement, and then yearly until 5 years post-placement. A history of abuse/neglect predicted significantly higher externalizing and internalizing problems at a borderline level of statistical significance. In the initial stages after placement, externalizing problems were significantly higher among children who were 4 years or older at placement versus those who were younger than 4, although differences were no longer significant 5 years post-placement. Statistical trends in parenting stress reflected reduced stress in the first 12 months followed by a plateau for parents who adopted older children and greater stress for parents who adopted younger children. Familiar limitations for observational cohort data apply. Nonetheless, the availability of longitudinal follow-up on a sizable sample of children adopted from foster care adds insight to the psychological dynamics for adoptive families and suggests that families of children adopted from the foster care system may have unique needs for ongoing support around behavioral issues.

OBJECTIVE Older patients with cancer suffer from chemotherapy-related toxicities more frequently than younger patients. As novel agents are being used more commonly in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), toxicities of these agents in older patients have not been well studied. Further, impact of these toxicities on outcomes in the elderly is unknown. This study aimed to answer both questions. PATIENTS AND METHODS We reviewed 14 Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trials that enrolled CLL and/or NHL patients between 2004-2014. Toxicity was assessed per the NCI-CTCAE (version 3-5). Probabilities of experiencing grade three or four hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities were modeled as a function of clinical and disease-related factors using logistic regression. RESULTS 1199 patients (409 age ≥ 65; 790 age

Purpose Skeletal-related events (SREs) such as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, or the necessity for radiation or surgery to bone metastasis cause considerable morbidity, decrements in quality of life, and costs to the health care system. The results of a recent large randomized trial (Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology [CALGB/Alliance 70604]) showed that zoledronic acid (ZA) every 3 months was noninferior to monthly ZA in reducing the risks of SREs. We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness (CE) of monthly ZA, ZA every 3 months, and monthly denosumab in women with breast cancer and skeletal metastases. Methods Using a Markov model, costs per SRE avoided were calculated for the three treatments. Sensitivity analyses were performed where denosumab SRE probabilities were assumed to be 50%, 75%, and 90% lower than the ZA SRE probabilities. Quality-adjusted life-years were also calculated. The analysis was from the US payer perspective. Results The mean costs of the denosumab treatment strategy are nine-fold higher than generic ZA every 3 months. Quality-adjusted life-years were virtually identical in all the three treatment arms; hence, the optimal treatment would be ZA every 3 months because it was the least costly treatment. The sensitivity analyses showed that relative to ZA every 3 months, the incremental costs per mean SRE avoided for denosumab ranged from $162,918 to $347,655. Conclusion ZA every 3 months was more CE in reducing the risks of SRE than monthly denosumab. This analysis was one of the first to incorporate the costs of generic ZA and one of the first independent CE analyses not sponsored by either Novartis or Amgen, the makers of ZA and denosumab, respectively. ZA every 3 months is the more CE option and more reasonable alternative to monthly denosumab.

A nocebo is an inert substance associated with adverse events. Although previous studies have examined the positive (placebo) effects of such inert substances, few have examined negative (nocebo) adverse event profiles, particularly in older patients who have higher morbidity and can experience frequent and severe adverse events from cancer therapy.This study focused on placebo/nocebo-exposed patients who participated in 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, cancer therapeutic studies, namely, North Central Cancer Therapy Group trial NCCTG 97-24-51 and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z9001, with the goal of reporting the comparative, age-based adverse event rates, as reported during the conduct of these trials.Among the 446 patients who received only placebo/nocebo and who were the focus of the current report, 161 were aged ≥65 years at the time of respective trial entry, and 5234 adverse events occurred. Unadjusted adverse event rates did not differ significantly between patients aged ≥65 years and younger patients (rate ratio, 1.01; 99% confidence interval, 0.47-2.02), and the findings were similar findings for grade 2 or worse adverse events and for all symptom-driven adverse events (for example, pain, loss of appetite, anxiety). Adjustment for sex, ethnicity, baseline performance score, and individual trial resulted in no significant age-based differences in adverse event rates. Similar findings were observed with an age threshold of 70 years.Adverse events are equally common in older and younger cancer patients who are exposed to nocebo and thus require the same degree of clinical consideration regardless of age. Cancer 2017;123:4193-4198. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Background With the development of targeted agents, the approach to combination cancer therapy has evolved to focus on identifying ways in which pathway inhibition by one agent may enhance the activity of other agents. In theory, this implies that under this new paradigm, agents are no longer required to show single-agent activity, as the pathway inhibited by the targeted agent may only have a therapeutic effect when given with other agents. This raises the question of the extent to which anticancer agents without single-agent activity can contribute to effective combination regimens. Patients and methods We reviewed outcomes of randomised phase 2 combination trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program that were activated in 2008 to 2017 and noted the single-agent activity of the experimental agents. Results Fifty-three trials were identified, and 50 had available results: 7 (14%), 15 (30%) and 28 (56%) had experimental agents with single-agent activity classified as active, inactive and indeterminate, respectively. Thirteen per cent (95% CI=1.7% to 40.5%) of trials evaluating inactive agents and 11.6% (95% CI=3.9% to 25.1%) of trials evaluating agents without known single-agent activity (pooled inactive and indeterminate) were positive, compared with 42.9% (95% CI=9.9% to 81.6%) for agents with single-agent activity. Conclusions Incorporating agents without documented single-agent activity into treatment regimens is unlikely to produce meaningful improvements in activity unless there is compelling biological rationale. This finding has important implications for the prioritisation of anticancer agents for combination testing, and for the allocation of clinical trial resources.

We consider the use of randomized clinical trial (RCT) data to identify simple treatment regimes based on some subset of the covariate space, \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} }{}$A$\end{document}. The optimal subset, \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} }{}$\hat {A}$\end{document}, is selected by maximizing the expected outcome under a treat-if-in-\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} }{}$A$\end{document} regime, and is restricted to be a simple, as it is desirable that treatment decisions be made with only a limited amount of patient information required. We consider a two-stage procedure. In stage 1, non-parametric regression is used to estimate treatment effects for each subject, and in stage 2 these treatment effect estimates are used to systematically evaluate many subgroups of a simple, prespecified form to identify \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{upgreek} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} }{}$\hat {A}$\end{document}. The proposed methods were found to perform favorably compared with two existing methods in simulations, and were applied to prehypertension data from an RCT.

A recent article (Zhang et al., 2012, Biometrics 168, 1010-1018) compares regression based and inverse probability based methods of estimating an optimal treatment regime and shows for a small number of covariates that inverse probability weighted methods are more robust to model misspecification than regression methods. We demonstrate that using models that fit the data better reduces the concern about non-robustness for the regression methods. We extend the simulation study of Zhang et al. (2012, Biometrics 168, 1010-1018), also considering the situation of a larger number of covariates, and show that incorporating random forests into both regression and inverse probability weighted based methods improves their properties.

To determine whether improved monitoring through close follow-up with a nurse practitioner (NP) could enhance treatment compliance and decrease frequency of hospitalizations.Retrospective chart review.An academic National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center.151 patients aged 45-65 years diagnosed with stage III or IV oropharyngeal cancer.Patients were nonrandomized to one of two groups: a prechemotherapy clinic group and a weekly NP-led clinic group. After examination of descriptive statistics, multiple linear and logistic regressions were used to compare groups across patient outcomes.Hospitalization, chemotherapy dose deviations, and chemotherapy treatment completion.The average number of visits during traditional treatment was three and, after initiation of the NP-led clinic, the number was six. The hospitalization rate was 28% in the traditional clinic group compared to 12% in the NP-led group. The rate of chemotherapy dose deviations was 48% in the traditional clinic group compared to 6% in the NP-led clinic group. Forty-six percent of patients in the traditional clinic group received the full seven scheduled doses of chemotherapy compared to 90% of patients seen in the NP-led clinic group.A weekly NP-led symptom management clinic reduces rates of hospitalization and chemotherapy dose deviations and increases chemotherapy completion in patients receiving intensive chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer.Patients receiving chemoradiotherapy benefit from close monitoring for toxicities by NPs to successfully complete their treatment and avoid hospitalization.Early interventions to manage toxicities in patients with head and neck cancer can improve outcomes. NPs are in a key position to manage these toxicities and, when symptoms are controlled, costs are reduced.

We consider the problem of identifying a subgroup of patients who may have an enhanced treatment effect in a randomized clinical trial, and it is desirable that the subgroup be defined by a limited number of covariates. For this problem, the development of a standard, pre-determined strategy may help to avoid the well-known dangers of subgroup analysis. We present a method developed to find subgroups of enhanced treatment effect. This method, referred to as 'Virtual Twins', involves predicting response probabilities for treatment and control 'twins' for each subject. The difference in these probabilities is then used as the outcome in a classification or regression tree, which can potentially include any set of the covariates. We define a measure Q(Â) to be the difference between the treatment effect in estimated subgroup  and the marginal treatment effect. We present several methods developed to obtain an estimate of Q(Â), including estimation of Q(Â) using estimated probabilities in the original data, using estimated probabilities in newly simulated data, two cross-validation-based approaches, and a bootstrap-based bias-corrected approach. Results of a simulation study indicate that the Virtual Twins method noticeably outperforms logistic regression with forward selection when a true subgroup of enhanced treatment effect exists. Generally, large sample sizes or strong enhanced treatment effects are needed for subgroup estimation. As an illustration, we apply the proposed methods to data from a randomized clinical trial.

2542Background: AE reporting is required in the conduct of clinical trials for patient safety and to understand the toxicities from treatment interventions. This analysis used a uniquely comprehens...

We consider the problem of using permutation-based methods to test for treatment–covariate interactions from randomized clinical trial data. Testing for interactions is common in the field of personalized medicine, as subgroups with enhanced treatment effects arise when treatment-by-covariate interactions exist. Asymptotic tests can often be performed for simple models, but in many cases, more complex methods are used to identify subgroups, and non-standard test statistics proposed, and asymptotic results may be difficult to obtain. In such cases, it is natural to consider permutation-based tests, which shuffle selected parts of the data in order to remove one or more associations of interest; however, in the case of interactions, it is generally not possible to remove only the associations of interest by simple permutations of the data. We propose a number of alternative permutation-based methods, designed to remove only the associations of interest, but preserving other associations. These methods estimate the interaction term in a model, then create data that “looks like” the original data except that the interaction term has been permuted. The proposed methods are shown to outperform traditional permutation methods in a simulation study. In addition, the proposed methods are illustrated using data from a randomized clinical trial of patients with hypertension.

Zoledronic acid, a third-generation aminobisphosphonate, reduces the incidence of skeletal-related events and pain in patients with bone metastases. The optimal dosing interval for zoledronic acid is uncertain.To determine whether zoledronic acid administered every 12 weeks is noninferior to zoledronic acid administered every 4 weeks.Randomized, open-label clinical trial conducted at 269 academic and community sites in the United States. Patients (n = 1822) with metastatic breast cancer, metastatic prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma who had at least 1 site of bone involvement were enrolled between May 2009 and April 2012; follow-up concluded in April 2014.Patients were randomized to receive zoledronic acid administered intravenously every 4 weeks (n = 911) vs every 12 weeks (n = 911) for 2 years.The primary end point was the proportion of patients having at least 1 skeletal-related event (defined as clinical fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation to bone, or surgery involving bone) within 2 years after randomization and a between-group absolute difference of 7% as the noninferiority margin. Secondary end points included the proportion of patients with at least 1 skeletal-related event by disease type, pain as assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (range, 0-10; higher scores indicate worse pain), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (range, 0-4; higher scores indicate worse disability), incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw, kidney dysfunction, skeletal morbidity rate (mean number of skeletal-related events per year), and, in a subset of 553 patients, suppression of bone turnover (assessed by C-terminal telopeptide levels).Among 1822 patients who were randomized (median age, 65 years; 980 [53.8%] women; 855 with breast cancer, 689 with prostate cancer, and 278 with multiple myeloma), 795 completed the study at 2 years. A total of 260 patients (29.5%) in the zoledronic acid every 4-week dosing group and 253 patients (28.6%) in the every 12-week dosing group experienced at least 1 skeletal-related event within 2 years of randomization (risk difference of -0.3% [1-sided 95% CI, -4% to ∞]; P .001 for noninferiority). The proportions of skeletal-related events did not differ significantly between the every 4-week dosing group vs the every 12-week dosing group for patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma. Pain scores, performance status scores, incidence of jaw osteonecrosis, and kidney dysfunction did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. Skeletal morbidity rates were numerically identical in both groups, but bone turnover was greater (C-terminal telopeptide levels were higher) among patients who received zoledronic acid every 12 weeks.Among patients with bone metastases due to breast cancer, prostate cancer, or multiple myeloma, the use of zoledronic acid every 12 weeks compared with the standard dosing interval of every 4 weeks did not result in an increased risk of skeletal events over 2 years. This longer interval may be an acceptable treatment option.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00869206.

e21545 Background: A nocebo is an inert substance that causes adverse events. Although previous studies have examined the favorably positive (placebo) effects of an inert substance, few studies have examined negative (nocebo) effects, particularly in older patients who sometimes experience frequent and severe adverse events from cancer therapy. Methods: This study focused on placebo/nocebo-exposed patients who participated in two double-blind, placebo-controlled, cancer therapeutic studies, namely, North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) 97-24-51 and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z9001, with the goal of reporting comparative, age-based adverse event rates. Results: Among the 446 patients who received placebo/nocebo exclusively, 161 were 65 years of age or older at the time of respective trial entry; 5234 adverse events occurred. Unadjusted adverse event rates did not differ significantly between patients 65 years of age or older and those younger: rate ratio (99% confidence intervals (CI): 1.01 (0.47, 2.02) with similar findings for grade 2 or worse adverse events and for all symptom-driven adverse events (for example, pain, loss of appetite, anxiety). Adjustment for sex, ethnicity, baseline performance score, and trial resulted in no significant age-based rate differences in adverse event rates. Similar findings were observed with an age threshold of 70. Conclusions: A nocebo effect appears to occur irrespective of age. This observation suggests that adverse events should be taken no less seriously in older than in younger cancer patients and that education to manage patients’ expectations from cancer therapy might improve tolerability. [Table: see text]

A recent article (Zhang et al., 2012, Biometrics 168, 1010-1018) compares regression based and inverse probability based methods of estimating an optimal treatment regime and shows for a small number of covariates that inverse probability weighted methods are more robust to model misspecification than regression methods. We demonstrate that using models that fit the data better reduces the concern about non-robustness for the regression methods. We extend the simulation study of Zhang et al. (2012, Biometrics 168, 1010-1018), also considering the situation of a larger number of covariates, and show that incorporating random forests into both regression and inverse probability weighted based methods improves their properties.

We consider the problem of variable selection for monotone single-index models. A single-index model assumes that the expectation of the outcome is an unknown function of a linear combination of covariates. Assuming monotonicity of the unknown function is often reasonable, and allows for more straightforward inference. We present an adaptive LASSO penalized least squares approach to estimating the index parameter and the unknown function in these models for continuous outcome. Monotone function estimates are achieved using the pooled adjacent violators algorithm, followed by kernel regression. In the iterative estimation process, a linear approximation to the unknown function is used, therefore reducing the situation to that of linear regression, and allowing for the use of standard LASSO algorithms, such as coordinate descent. Results of a simulation study indicate that the proposed methods perform well under a variety of circumstances, and that an assumption of monotonicity, when appropriate, noticeably improves performance. The proposed methods are applied to data from a randomized clinical trial for the treatment of a critical illness in the intensive care unit.

Background: Contemporary approaches to non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) incorporate chemo-immunotherapy, biologic combinations, and immune modulating agents; toxicities in elderly pts (³65 years) receiving these therapies are not well studied. Further, clinical and biologic factors predicting these toxicities in pts receiving biologic therapy remain undefined. Methods: We reviewed data on NHL and/or CLL pts treated prospectively on 14 studies by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology from 2004-2014 (Table 1). Toxicity was assessed per the NCI CTCAE at the time of trial enrollment, and the probabilities of experiencing grade 3 and grade 4 hematologic (hem) and non-hematologic (non-hem) toxicities were modeled as a function of age (³65 years vs. < 65), time on study, treatment (biologics only vs. biologic + chemotherapy), gender, race, LDH, performance status (PS), stage, and an age-by-treatment interaction using logistic regression. Results: A total of 1199 pts (409 age ³ 65; 790 age < 65; 736=CLL and 463=NHL) were included. Among these patients, 493 received only biologic therapy (166 age ³ 65; 327 age < 65; 104 CLL; 389 NHL), and 706 received biologic + chemotherapy (243 age ³ 65; 463 age < 65; 632 CLL; 74 NHL). Among CLL pts (259 pts ³ 65), the effect of age on the probability of experiencing a grade 3 heme toxicity differed by treatment type (age-by-treatment interaction p = 0.047). Specifically, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) (age ³ 65 vs. < 65) for pts receiving only biologic therapy was 3.075 (95% CI: 1,15-8.25), and that for pts receiving biologic + chemotherapy was 1.044 (95% CI: 0.69 - 1.57). Similar results were seen in CLL pts for grade 4 heme toxicities (age-by-treatment interaction p = 0.033; biologic OR 6.937, 95% CI: 1.76-27.35; biologic + chemo OR 1.484, 95% CI: 1.04-2.13). No such interactions were found in CLL pts for grade 3 and 4 non-hem toxicities; however, older pts had significantly higher odds of experiencing a grade 3 non-hem toxicity than younger pts (adjusted OR 1.40; p = 0.047; 95% CI: 1.004-1.96). No age group differences were found in CLL pts for grade 4 non-hem toxicity. Similar analyses were performed for NHL pts (150 pts ³ 65), but no significant age group differences were found. Among CLL pts, women had significantly higher odds of experiencing a grade 3 heme toxicity than men (OR 2.01; p = 0.0007); no difference in grade 3 non-hem or any grade 4 toxicity was noted. Non-Caucasian CLL pts had higher odds of experiencing a grade 4 non-hem toxicity than Caucasians (OR 2.892; p = 0.0029), but no other toxicity differences were found. Worse PS was associated with increased toxicities (OR 1.871; p = 0.0009: grade 3 heme; OR 1.647; p = 0.0025: grade 3 non-hem; OR 1.410; p = 0.0448: grade 4 heme, and OR 1.931; p = 0.0252: grade 4 non-hem). CLL pts with advanced stage disease had higher odds of experiencing a heme toxicity (grade 3: OR 1.95; p = 0.0007, grade 4: OR 1.451; p = 0.0329), but no stage associations were found for non-hem toxicities. Among NHL pts, men had significantly higher odds of experiencing a grade 4 hematologic toxicity than women (OR 4.351; p = 0.0169), but no other toxicity differences were found. An increase in LDH was associated with significantly higher odds of experiencing grade 3 non-hem and grade 4 heme toxicities (grade 3 non-heme: OR 1.633; p = 0.021, grade 4 heme: OR 2.039, p = 0.0182), but no such effect was found for grade 3 heme or grade 4 non-hem. Worse PS was associated with higher odds of experiencing grade 3 toxicities (heme: OR 2.025; p = 0.0344, non-hem: OR 2.458; p = 0.0013), but no such differences were found for grade 4 toxicities. No significant stage or race effects were found in NHL patients. Conclusion: In pts ³65 years who have CLL or NHL, we identified several clinical and disease-related factors as potential predictors of developing grade 3 and/or 4 heme and non-hem toxicities (Table 2). A prognostic model is being constructed to predict toxicities in these under-studied pts to guide management and monitoring. Further, the impact of these toxicities on outcomes is being analyzed and will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Hurria: Celgene: Other: Research; Optum Health Care SOlutions: Consultancy, Other: Conference panel, research; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Carevive: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Research; GTx, Inc: Consultancy. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy. Cheson:Gilead: Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nabhan:Infinity: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Cardinal Health: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding.