Search

Third part of the appendix

Purpose: Abemaciclib, a dual inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6, has demonstrated preclinical activity in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label phase Ib study was conducted to test safety, MTD, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of abemaciclib in combination with other therapies for treatment in patients with metastatic NSCLC.Patients and Methods: An initial dose escalation phase was used to determine the MTD of twice-daily oral abemaciclib (150, 200 mg) plus pemetrexed, gemcitabine, or ramucirumab, followed by an expansion phase for each drug combination. Pemetrexed and gemcitabine were administered according to label. The abemaciclib plus ramucirumab study examined two dosing schedules.Results: The three study parts enrolled 86 patients; all received ≥1 dose of combination therapy. Across arms, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue, diarrhea, neutropenia, decreased appetite, and nausea. The trial did not identify an abemaciclib MTD for the combination with pemetrexed or gemcitabine but did so for the combination of abemaciclib with days 1 and 8 ramucirumab (8 mg/kg). Plasma sample analysis showed that abemaciclib did not influence the pharmacokinetics of the combination agents and the combination agents did not affect abemaciclib exposure. The disease control rate was 57% for patients treated with abemaciclib–pemetrexed, 25% for abemaciclib–gemcitabine, and 54% for abemaciclib–ramucirumab. Median progression-free survival was 5.55, 1.58, and 4.83 months, respectively.Conclusions: Abemaciclib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile when dosed on a continuous twice-daily schedule in combination with pemetrexed, gemcitabine, or ramucirumab. Abemaciclib exposures remained consistent with those observed in single-agent studies. Clin Cancer Res; 24(22); 5543–51. ©2018 AACR.

First part of the appendix

Background: We analyzed the treatment patterns and safety outcomes of the most common first-line platinum-based regimens initiated on or after non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis in a real-world setting. Methods: Based on a United States oncology electronic medical record (EMR) database, patients treated with first-line platinum-based regimens after advanced NSCLC diagnosis from September 2008 to November 2014 were analyzed. Baseline characteristics and selected adverse events during treatment [incidence proportions and incidence rates (IRs)] were described by regimen. Propensity score stratification was used to adjust for baseline characteristics differences. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards model, with paclitaxel (Pac)/carboplatin (Carbo) as reference. Subgroup analysis was conducted for elderly patients (≥70 years old). Results: The most common five regimens for the eligible patients were as follows: Pac/Carbo (n=3,009), pemetrexed (Pem)/Carbo (n=1,625), Pem/Carbo/bevacizumab (Bev) (n=735), Pac/Carbo/Bev (n=531), Pem/cisplatin (Cis) (n=357), and docetaxel (Doc)/Carbo (n=355). Highest IRs were reported for anemia, neutropenia, nausea, and vomiting across these regimens in patients of all ages. After propensity score stratification, compared with Pac/Carbo, risk of anemia was significantly lower with Pac/Carbo/Bev (HR =0.67), Pem/Cis (HR =0.68), and Pem/Carbo/Bev (HR =0.82); risk of neutropenia was comparable among all regimens except Doc/Carbo (significantly lower risk; HR =0.72); and risk of nausea (HR =1.45) and vomiting (HR =1.50) was significantly higher with Pem/Cis. Safety outcomes in elderly patients were consistent with the overall population. Conclusions: While EMR data have limitations, the real-world safety outcome with individual chemotherapy regimen could be considered for the better selection of platinum-based therapies in NSCLC.

Objectives: This meta-analysis compared safety profiles (selected drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs]) of first-line pemetrexed plus carboplatin (PCb) area under the concentration-time curve 5 mg/min•mL (PCb5) or 6 mg/min•mL (PCb6), two widely used regimens in clinical practice for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. Methods: All patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 21 days with either of two carboplatin doses for up to 4–6 cycles. Safety profiles of PCb doses were compared using three statistical analysis methods: frequency table analysis (FTA), generalized linear mixed effect model (GLMM), and the propensity score method. Efficacy outcomes of PCb5 and PCb6 regimens were summarized. Results: A total of 486 patients mainly from the US, Europe, and East Asia were included in the analysis; 22% (n = 105) received PCb5 in one trial and 78% (n = 381) received PCb6 in four trials. The FTA comparison demonstrated that PCb5 vs PCb6 was associated with a statistically significantly lower incidence of TEAEs, including all-grade thrombocytopenia, anemia, fatigue, and vomiting, and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia. In the GLMM analysis, PCb5 patients were numerically less likely to experience all-grade and grade 3/4 neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. The propensity score regression analysis showed PCb5 group patients were significantly less likely than PCb6 group patients to experience all-grade hematologic TEAEs and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia and anemia. After applying propensity score 1:1 matching, FTA analysis showed that the PCb5 group had significantly less all-grade and grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities. Overall efficacy outcomes, including overall survival, progression-free survival, and response rate, were similar between the two carboplatin doses. Conclusions: Acknowledging the limitations of this meta-analysis of five trials, heterogeneous in patient’s characteristics and trial designs, the results show that the PCb5 regimen was generally associated with a better safety profile than PCb6 across three statistical approaches, with no apparent impact on survival outcomes.

Introduction JUNIPER compared the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib, a selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, with erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring a Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) mutation. Methods JUNIPER was a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial of abemaciclib versus erlotinib in patients with stage IV NSCLC and a detectable mutation in codons 12 or 13 of the KRAS oncogene, who progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and 1 additional therapy (could include immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy). Randomized patients (3:2) received either 200 mg abemaciclib twice daily or 150 mg erlotinib once daily with best supportive care until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. the primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results Between December 2014 and April 2017, 453 patients were randomly assigned to receive abemaciclib (N = 270) or erlotinib (N = 183). Median OS was 7.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.5, 8.8) with abemaciclib and 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.4, 9.5) with erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.968 [95% CI: 0.768, 1.219]; p = .77). Median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI: 2.8, 3.8) with abemaciclib and 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.9, 2.0) with erlotinib (HR = 0.583 [95% CI: 0.470, 0.723]; p, Eli Lilly and CompanyEli Lilly, This study was funded by Eli Lilly and Company.

In patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the most frequent oncogene driver mutation in Western countries is Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS), and KRAS-mutant NSCLC is associated with smoking. There are various sources of biological heterogeneity of KRAS-mutant NSCLC, including different genotypes that may be associated with specific clinical outcomes, the presence of other co-mutations that exhibit different biological features and drug sensitivity patterns, and mutant allelic content. The efficacy of chemotherapy in patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC is generally poor and numerous novel therapeutic strategies have been developed. These approaches include targeting KRAS membrane associations, targeting downstream signalling pathways, the use of KRAS synthetic lethality, direct targeting of KRAS, and immunotherapy. Of these, immunotherapy may be one of the most promising treatment approaches for patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC. Recent data also suggest the potential for distinct efficacy of immunotherapy according to the presence of other co-mutations. In view of the biological heterogeneity of KRAS-mutant NSCLC, treatment will likely need to be individualised and, in future, may require the use of rational combinations of treatment, many of which are currently under investigation.

Brain metastases (BRM) occur frequently in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and present a substantial unmet medical need. Previous literature on global BRM prevalence, treatment patterns, costs, and outcomes typically has described a subset of these factors. The primary objective of this systematic literature review was to summarize BRM-related epidemiology, treatment patterns, costs, and survival of patients with NSCLC in the United States, European Union, and Japan. The study was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Ovid MedLine, and Embase to identify studies published between 2003 and 2014. Peer-reviewed, English language, and human observational studies of patients with NSCLC and BRM were identified. Demographic characteristics, treatment patterns, histology subtype, costs, and survival data were extracted into Microsoft Excel and descriptively analyzed using SAS version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Inc). Of 8257 studies, 243 were eligible. Data from 46,422 patients with NSCLC and 27,907 patients with BRM were summarized. Radiation therapy was used by 70.7% (n = 19,736) of the total BRM population, followed by systemic therapy (8.9%, n = 2497), and surgery (6.1%, n = 1690). Reported median survival was 9.78 months ranging from 2.5 to 38 months. Radiation therapy had the best outcome at 10.0 months with 41.6% (n = 101) of the studies reporting the use of stereotactic radiosurgery. Highly variable median survival and treatment patterns were reported between countries. Costs and histology subtype data were not reported for most countries, highlighting the need for additional research to describe the economic burden of BRM and improve the diagnosis, prognosis, and prescription of effective therapies.

Pemetrexed plus carboplatin (PCb) is a frequently used first-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study examined the characteristics and safety profile of a NSCLC population treated with PCb area under the concentration-time curve 5 (PCb5) or 6 mg/mL•min (PCb6) under real-world conditions.A retrospective, observational, cohort study was conducted, utilizing data from the IMS Oncology US clinic-based, longitudinal, patient-level electronic medical records (EMR), including patients with NSCLC on PCb5 or PCb6 regimens initiated concomitantly on or after the diagnosis of lung cancer during 2004-2014. Patient characteristics and incidence of adverse events (AEs) were described for each cohort. Propensity scores were calculated based on baseline demographic and clinical factors. Propensity score stratification was used to further adjust for cohort differences.In total, 636 NSCLC patients receiving PCb5 (37% aged ≥70 years) and 184 patients receiving PCb6 (34% aged ≥70 years) who met the inclusion criteria were identified in the EMR. Patients with more comorbidities were more likely to have received PCb5. Overall incidence rates (IRs) per 100 person-years were similar for neutropenia in both cohorts, were numerically higher for anemia (IR = 43.6 vs 101.0) and thrombocytopenia (IR = 1.5 vs 17.9), and were numerically lower for nausea (IR = 14.4 vs 9.9) in the PCb6 vs PCb5 cohort. Within the PCb6 cohort, the IR per 100 person-years was higher for neutropenia for ≥70 year-old patients (IR = 41.1) compared to70 year-old patients (IR = 14.5). After propensity score stratification, adjusted IRs showed similar patterns.Limitations included lack of power for AEs other than anemia, given the nature of EMR.Results from this real-world analysis add to existing evidence from randomized clinical trials about PCb safety profiles in the overall NSCLC population and in elderly patients. These results may guide physicians when making treatment decisions.

In clinical practice, elderly patients are often undertreated relative to younger patients. This meta-analysis was designed to determine whether older patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) could derive an overall survival (OS) benefit from pemetrexed treatment comparable to that experienced by younger patients in the first-line, second-line, or maintenance settings.Data from 2671 patients with non-squamous NSCLC participating in four pemetrexed phase III studies were included in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Studies included were: JMEI (second-line pemetrexed, N=399); JMDB (first-line pemetrexed/cisplatin, N=1252); JMEN (pemetrexed maintenance after non-pemetrexed/platinum doublet, N=481); and PARAMOUNT (pemetrexed maintenance after first-line pemetrexed/cisplatin, N=539). Patients were predominantly Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) 0/1. The ratio of OS hazard ratio (HR) (pemetrexed versus control) for younger patients over that for older patients within each study was used as the measure of the differential effect of pemetrexed. Data were examined using age cutoffs of 65 and 70 years.Among the four studies, 32% of patients were aged ≥65 years and 14% were aged ≥70 years. The test of heterogeneity among studies was non-significant for subgroups defined by age 65 (P=0.083) and age 70 (P=0.848). The pooled ratio of the OS HR (pemetrexed versus control) in patients65years to that in patients ≥65 years was 0.92 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.67-1.25). Similar results were seen for the analysis using the age 70 years cut-off (0.80 [95% CI 0.62-1.04]).In patients with non-squamous NSCLC with good PS, the effect of pemetrexed on OS was not found to be different in younger and older patients undergoing treatment in the first-line, second-line, or maintenance settings.

KRAS (Kirsten Rat Sarcoma) is the most common oncogenic mutation detected in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the role of KRAS as either a prognostic factor or predictive factor (modifier of treatment effects) in NSCLC is not well established at this time. This systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis synthesized the available evidence regarding the role of KRAS mutation as a predictive factor and/or prognostic factor of survival and response outcomes in patients with advanced/metastatic (stage IIIB-IV) NSCLC. Relevant clinical trials and observational studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. Meta-analyses were performed using data extracted from multivariable and univariable analyses from clinical studies to assess the empirical evidence of KRAS mutation status as a prognostic or/and predicitive factor. 43 selected studies were identified by the SLR and included in this meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) did not demonstrate a significant prognostic effect of mutant KRAS on overall survival (OS) (HR=1.10; 95% CI [0.88, 1.38]) or progression free survival (PFS) (HR=1.03; 95% CI [0.80, 1.33]). However, when conducting meta-analyses on HRs reported in observational studies, a statistically significant negative prognostic effect of mutant KRAS was observed (OS HR=1.71; 95% CI [1.07, 2.84]; PFS HR=1.18; 95% CI [1.02, 1.36]). Meta-analyses of objective response rate (ORR) in RCTs demonstrated a negative prognostic effect of mutant KRAS (RR=0.38; 95% CI [0.16, 0.63]). Limited data were available to evaluate the role of KRAS mutation as a predictive factor. In conclusion, this research offers evidence that KRAS mutation may be a negative prognostic factor for survival and response outcomes in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, but further research is needed to address conflicting results on the importance of KRAS mutations as a predictive factor.

Purpose: Abemaciclib, a dual inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6, has demonstrated preclinical activity in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label phase Ib study was conducted to test safety, MTD, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of abemaciclib in combination with other therapies for treatment in patients with metastatic NSCLC. Patients and Methods: An initial dose escalation phase was used to determine the MTD of twice-daily oral abemaciclib (150, 200 mg) plus pemetrexed, gemcitabine, or ramucirumab, followed by an expansion phase for each drug combination. Pemetrexed and gemcitabine were administered according to label. The abemaciclib plus ramucirumab study examined two dosing schedules. Results: The three study parts enrolled 86 patients; all received ≥1 dose of combination therapy. Across arms, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue, diarrhea, neutropenia, decreased appetite, and nausea. The trial did not identify an abemaciclib MTD for the combination with pemetrexed or gemcitabine but did so for the combination of abemaciclib with days 1 and 8 ramucirumab (8 mg/kg). Plasma sample analysis showed that abemaciclib did not influence the pharmacokinetics of the combination agents and the combination agents did not affect abemaciclib exposure. The disease control rate was 57% for patients treated with abemaciclib–pemetrexed, 25% for abemaciclib–gemcitabine, and 54% for abemaciclib–ramucirumab. Median progression-free survival was 5.55, 1.58, and 4.83 months, respectively. Conclusions: Abemaciclib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile when dosed on a continuous twice-daily schedule in combination with pemetrexed, gemcitabine, or ramucirumab. Abemaciclib exposures remained consistent with those observed in single-agent studies. Clin Cancer Res; 24(22); 5543–51. ©2018 AACR.

International audience; OBJECTIVES:To assess the effect of long-term pemetrexed maintenance therapy on patients' renal function.METHODS:In the PARAMOUNT phase III trial (NCT 00789373), pemetrexed was compared with placebo as maintenance treatment in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients who completed 4 cycles of pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction therapy. To evaluate changes in renal function during pemetrexed continuation maintenance treatment, we retrospectively analyzed changes in serum creatinine (sCr), treatment-emergent adverse events, dose delays and treatment discontinuations associated with impaired renal function.RESULTS:Creatinine clearance ≥45 mL/min was required before the start of any cycle. Patients on pemetrexed maintenance had a significantly higher percentage maximum increase in sCr over baseline versus placebo for the range of ≥10% to ≥90% increase (p

WOS:000442916003199, [No Abstract Available]

Introduction:The PARAMOUNT Phase III trial showed that maintenance pemetrexed after pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction was well tolerated and effective for patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer. Approximately 17% of patients receiving maintenance therapy in this study were 70 years of age or older. Here we report efficacy and safety results from the PARAMOUNT study for elderly (≥70 years) and non-elderly (

Purpose In the phase III PARAMOUNT trial, pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy reduced the risk of disease progression versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79; P < .001). Here we report final overall survival (OS) and updated safety data. Patients and Methods In all, 939 patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received four cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin induction therapy; then, 539 patients with no disease progression and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (2:1) to maintenance pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 on day 1 of 21-day cycles; n = 359) or placebo (n = 180). Log-rank test compared OS between arms as measured from random assignment (α = .0498). Results The mean number of maintenance cycles was 7.9 (range, one to 44) for pemetrexed and 5.0 (range, one to 38) for placebo. After 397 deaths (pemetrexed, 71%; placebo, 78%) and a median follow-up of 24.3 months for alive patients (95% CI, 23.2 to 25.1 months), pemetrexed therapy resulted in a statistically significant 22% reduction in the risk of death (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P = .0195; median OS: pemetrexed, 13.9 months; placebo, 11.0 months). Survival on pemetrexed was consistently improved for all patient subgroups, including induction response: complete/partial responders (n = 234) OS HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.11 and stable disease (n = 285) OS HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.01). Postdiscontinuation therapy use was similar: pemetrexed, 64%; placebo, 72%. No new safety findings emerged. Drug-related grade 3 to 4 anemia, fatigue, and neutropenia were significantly higher in pemetrexed-treated patients. Conclusion Pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy is well-tolerated and offers superior OS compared with placebo, further demonstrating that it is an efficacious treatment strategy for patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and good performance status who did not progress during pemetrexed-cisplatin induction therapy.

Background This was a post hoc analysis of patients with non-squamous histology from a phase III maintenance pemetrexed study in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods The six symptom items' [average symptom burden index (ASBI)] mean at baseline was calculated using the lung cancer symptom scale (LCSS). Low and high symptom burden (LSB, ASBI < 25; HSB, ASBI ≥ 25) and performance status (PS: 0, 1) subgroups were analyzed for treatment effect on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using the Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for demographic/clinical factors. Results Significantly longer PFS and OS for pemetrexed versus placebo occurred in LSB patients [PFS: median 5.1 versus 2.4 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.49, P < 0.0001; OS: median 17.5 versus 11.0 months, HR 0.63, P = 0.0012] and PS 0 patients (PFS: median 5.5 versus 1.7 months, HR 0.36, P < 0.0001; OS: median 17.7 versus 10.3 months, HR 0.54, P = 0.0019). Significantly longer PFS, but not OS, occurred in HSB patients (median 3.7 versus 2.8 months, HR 0.50, P = 0.0033) and PS 1 patients (median 4.4 versus 2.8 months, HR 0.60, P = 0.0002). Conclusions ASBI and PS are associated with survival for non-squamous NSCLC patients, suggesting that maintenance pemetrexed is useful for LSB or PS 0 patients following induction.

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of first-line pemetrexed/platinum and other commonly administered regimens in a representative U.S. elderly population with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: This study utilized the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry linked to Medicare claims records. The study population included all SEER-Medicare patients diagnosed in 2008-2009 with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC (stages IIIB-IV) as their only primary cancer and who started chemotherapy within 90 days of diagnosis. The study evaluated the four most commonly observed first-line regimens: paclitaxel/carboplatin, platinum monotherapy, pemetrexed/platinum and paclitaxel/carboplatin/bevacizumab. Overall survival and total healthcare cost comparisons as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for pemetrexed/platinum versus each of the other three. Unstratified analyses and analyses stratified by initial disease stage were conducted. Results: The final study population consisted of 2,461 patients. Greater administrative censorship of pemetrexed recipients at the end of the study period disproportionately reduced the observed mean survival for pemetrexed/platinum recipients. The disease stage-stratified ICER analysis found that the pemetrexed/platinum incurred total Medicare costs of $536,424 and $283,560 per observed additional year of life relative to platinum monotherapy and paclitaxel/carboplatin, respectively. The pemetrexed/platinum versus triplet comparator analysis indicated that pemetrexed/platinum was associated with considerably lower total Medicare costs, with no appreciable survival difference. Limitations: Limitations included differential censorship of the study regimen recipients and differential administration of radiotherapy. Conclusions: Pemetrexed/platinum yielded either improved survival at increased cost or similar survival at reduced cost relative to comparator regimens in the treatment of advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Limitations in the study methodology suggest that the observed pemetrexed survival benefit was likely conservative.

Unintentional weight loss occurs among advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients and is associated with worse survival. Small studies have suggested that weight gain during treatment is associated with superior survival.A retrospective analysis analyzed data from three international phase III studies comprising 2301 advanced, non-squamous NSCLC patients who received a platinum-based, first-line doublet, with or without bevacizumab and maintenance therapy. Body weight was recorded before and after treatment by each study's schedule. The relationship between weight gain and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed using log-rank test and adjusted Cox modeling. Logistic regression assessed the association between baseline covariates and post-baseline weight gain.Four hundred and twenty-one (18.3%) patients had5% weight gain after baseline. More than half of the weight gain cohort exhibited initial weight gain by 3 weeks. The median OS was 16.7 months versus 10.7 months for the5% versus ≤5% weight gain subgroup (n = 1880) (P0.001). PFS was 6.9 versus 4.8 months, respectively (P0.001). Differences in overall tumor response rate (50.8% versus 25.4%, respectively) and disease control rate (tumor response or stable disease) (91.5% versus 63.6%, respectively) were also significant (P0.001). The Cox modeling revealed the5% subgroup had longer survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.62; P0.001] than the ≤5% subgroup after adjusting for baseline factors. Similar significant results were found for PFS (HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.52-0.67; P0.001). Unadjusted logistic regression indicated a significant association between weight gain (5% versus ≤5%) and age, and BMI.Weight gain during treatment may be an early indicator of clinical benefit. If confirmed in prospective studies, monitoring weight change may provide important information regarding survival outcomes in NSCLC and may provide ideas for new therapeutic strategies.

IntroductionIn a phase III, randomized, double-blind study (PARAMOUNT), maintenance pemetrexed demonstrated significant benefit in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present safety, resource use, and quality of life (QoL) results.MethodsAfter four 21-day cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin (N = 939), patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, whose disease had not progressed and who had a performance status of 0/1, were randomized 2:1 (N = 539) to maintenance pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. QoL was measured using the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D).ResultsFrequently reported grade 3 to 4 drug-related toxicities with maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo were anemia (4.5% versus 0.6%; p = 0.016), fatigue (4.2% versus 0.6%; p = 0.016), and neutropenia (3.6% versus 0.0%; p < 0.006). No significant differences in drug-related grade 3 to 5 toxicities were observed with long-term pemetrexed exposure (>6 cycles), except grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, which did not result in increased infections. Patients on maintenance pemetrexed required more transfusions (13.4% versus 5.0%; p = 0.003), granulocyte colony- or granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factors (5.3% versus 0.0%; p

Summary Background Pemetrexed maintenance therapy significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared with placebo, and had a good safety profile in a phase 3 placebo-controlled study in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results for quality of life, symptom palliation, and tolerability are presented here. Methods After four cycles of platinum-based induction therapy, 663 patients with stage IIIB or stage IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) from March 15, 2005, to July 20, 2007, using the Pocock and Simon minimisation method to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 every 21 days; n=441) or placebo (n=222) plus best supportive care until disease progression. The primary efficacy data have been reported previously. Patients completed the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) at baseline, after each cycle, and post-discontinuation. Worsening of symptoms was defined as an increase of 15 mm or more from baseline on a 100 mm scale for each LCSS item. The primary outcome for these quality-of-life analyses was time to worsening of symptoms, analysed for all randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00102804. Findings Baseline characteristics, including LCSS scores, were well balanced between groups. Baseline LCSS scores were low, indicating low symptom burden for patients without disease progression after completion of first-line treatment. Longer time to worsening was recorded for pain (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·59–0·99; p=0·041) and haemoptysis (HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·34–0·97; p=0·038) with pemetrexed than with placebo; no other significant differences in analyses of time to worsening were noted. Additional longitudinal analyses showed a greater increase in loss of appetite in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (4·3 mm vs 0·2 mm; p=0·028). Rates of resource use were statistically higher for pemetrexed than for placebo: admissions to hospital for drug-related adverse events (19 [4%] vs none; p=0·001), transfusions (42 [10%] vs seven [3%]; p=0·003), and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (26 [6%] vs four [2%]; p=0·017). Interpretation Quality of life during maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is similar to placebo, except for a small increase in loss of appetite, and significantly delayed worsening of pain and haemoptysis. In view of the improvements in overall and progression-free survival noted with pemetrexed maintenance therapy, such treatment is an option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who have not progressed after platinum-based induction therapy. Funding Eli Lilly.

Summary Background Several studies have shown the efficacy, tolerability, and ease of administration of pemetrexed—an antifolate antineoplastic agent—in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We assessed pemetrexed as maintenance therapy in patients with this disease. Methods This randomised double-blind study was undertaken in 83 centres in 20 countries. 663 patients with stage IIIB or IV disease who had not progressed on four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 , day 1) plus best supportive care (n=441) or placebo plus best supportive care (n=222) in 21-day cycles until disease progression. Treatment was randomised with the Simon and Pocock minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment. All patients received vitamin B 12 , folic acid, and dexamethasone. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival and the secondary endpoint of overall survival were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00102804. Findings All randomly assigned participants were analysed. Pemetrexed significantly improved progression-free survival (4·3 months [95% CI 4·1–4·7] vs 2·6 months [1·7–2·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·42–0·61, p vs 10·6 months [8·7–12·0]; HR 0·79, 0·65–0·95, p=0·012) compared with placebo. Treatment discontinuations due to drug-related toxic effects were higher in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (21 [5%] vs three [1%]). Drug-related grade three or higher toxic effects were higher with pemetrexed than with placebo (70 [16%] vs nine [4%]; p vs one [1%], p=0·001) and neutropenia (13 [3%] vs 0, p=0·006). No pemetrexed-related deaths occurred. Relatively fewer patients in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group received systemic post-discontinuation therapy (227 [51%] vs 149 [67%]; p=0·0001). Interpretation Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is well tolerated and offers improved progression-free and overall survival compared with placebo in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Funding Eli Lilly.

The antisense oligonucleotide aprinocarsen specifically inhibits the transcription of protein kinase C-alpha. This study evaluated the response rate of the combination therapy of aprinocarsen, gemcitabine, and carboplatin in previously untreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Secondary objectives included the measurement of time-to-event efficacy parameters and toxicity. Patients with stage IV or stage IIIB disease (N(3) and/or pleural/pericardial effusion) were treated with gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and carboplatin AUC 5 on day 1 every 21 days. Aprinocarsen was administered as 2mg/kg/day continuous iv infusion on the first 14 days of each cycle, following the carboplatin treatment. A total of 36 patients received a median of 3 treatment cycles, with 10 patients completing 6 cycles. No complete response was observed, while partial response was seen in 25% of patients. Stable disease and progressive disease was observed in 36.1% and 22.2% of patients. The median overall survival was 8.3 months, and the median duration of progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 3.2-7.1 months). Thrombocytopenia (78%) and neutropenia (50%) were the major grade 3/4 toxicities. Enrollment for this study was stopped and the study was terminated in March 2003 due to the results of a large phase III study, which suggested that aprinocarsen did not improve response or add survival benefit to chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC. The addition of aprinocarsen to gemcitabine+carboplatin therapy in patients with NSCLC showed moderate activity. However, this combination resulted in severe thrombocytopenia in the majority of patients.

Purpose To determine whether aprinocarsen, an antisense oligonucleotide directed against protein kinase C-alpha, when added to the chemotherapy regimen of gemcitabine and cisplatin improved survival in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly assigned to either a control arm of gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1, or experimental arms consisting of the identical chemotherapy plus aprinocarsen 2 mg/kg/d as continuous infusion for 14 days, starting on either day 1 or 3 days before chemotherapy. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. Results A total of 670 patients were randomly assigned between the control (n = 328) and experimental arms (n = 342). Due to the results from another phase III study of aprinocarsen in NSCLC, further enrollment was stopped, and the study was terminated early. The median number of cycles was four on the control arm and three on the combined experimental arms. Median overall survival was not different between the two groups (control, 10.4 months [95% CI, 8.6 to 12.2]; experimental, 10.0 months [95% CI, 8.4 to 10.8]; P = .613; hazard ratio = 1.05 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.25]). Response rates (control arm, 35.0%; experimental arms, 28.9%; P = .124) and other time-to-event measures were not significantly different. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were significantly increased for thrombocytopenia (P < .0001), epistaxis, and thrombosis/embolism in the experimental arms. Conclusion Adding aprinocarsen to gemcitabine and cisplatin regimen did not enhance survival and other efficacy measures in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Background Pemetrexed and oxaliplatin have clinical activity as single agents in colorectal cancer (response rates, 10%-17%). In this study, these drugs were used in combination as first-line therapy in a group of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Fifty-four evaluable patients were to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) with folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation and oxaliplatin (120 mg/m2) every 21 days for 6 cycles or until disease progression occurred. Patients with stable or responding disease could continue therapy beyond 6 cycles at the discretion of the investigator. Eligibility criteria included a diagnosis of untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum, measurable disease, Zubrod performance status ≤2, no adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 months, and ≥12 weeks life expectancy. Results The confirmed clinical response rate (primary endpoint) was 29.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18%-48.6%), with 1 complete response and 15 partial responses. Median time to progression was 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.9–6.3 months), and median survival was 12.3 months (95% CI, 8.6–17 months). Grade 3/4 nadir neutropenia occurred in 33.3% of patients, and 3 patients experienced grade 3 febrile neutropenia or infection associated with grade 3/4 neutropenia. Grade 3/4 nadir thrombocytopenia was seen in 11.1% of patients. Only 4% of the patients developed grade 3/4 neurotoxicity. Conclusion This regimen of pemetrexed and oxaliplatin has activity in advanced colorectal cancer, and the toxicity profile suggests that escalation of the dose of pemetrexed in this combination may be possible.

Background:Gemcitabine is the standard chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. The novel multitargeted antifolate pemetrexed (Alimta®) has also demonstrated activity in this disease. These two drugs are synergistic in vitro, and a phase I study has demonstrated activity of single-agent pemetrexed in pancreatic cancer. Aim:To evaluate pemetrexed plus gemcitabine in a multicenter phase II study in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients and methods:Chemonaive patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, metastatic or locally advanced, not amenable to curative resection, received intravenous gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 over 30 minutes on days 1 and 8 and intravenous pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 over 10 minutes on day 8 every 21 days. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Patients were evaluated for time-to-event variables including overall survival, time-to progression, time-to-treatment failure, and duration of response. Patients who were symptomatic were evaluated weekly for clinical benefit response. CT scans were obtained every two cycles. Results:Forty-two patients were treated; 41 were evaluable for efficacy. Ninety-five percent of patients had metastatic disease. There were five partial responses (objective response rate 12%), and 44% of patients had stable disease. The 1-year survival rate was 32%; median survival was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.4, 9.9). Of 30 eligible patients, four (13%) had a clinical benefit response. Grade 3 and 4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (84%), febrile neutropenia (12%), and thrombocytopenia (33%). Non-hematologic toxicities were minimal. Conclusion:The combination of pemetrexed and gemcitabine is active in advanced pancreatic cancer, and has acceptable toxicity; a 1-year survival rate of 32% is encouraging. A phase III trial comparing pemetrexed plus gemcitabine with gemcitabine has completed accrual. 1 The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.

Current treatments of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are inadequate and new therapies are being developed that target specific cellular signaling proteins associated with tumor growth. One potential target is protein kinase C (PKC)-alpha, a signaling molecule with an important role in cell regulation and proliferation. The present study examines the expression levels of PKC-alpha in NSCLC to better understand the distribution of PKC-alpha in NSCLC. We analyzed tumor specimens from an independent tumor tissue bank to determine PKC-alpha protein and messenger RNA gene expression in NSCLC. In addition, we used publicly available gene expression array data to further understand PKC-a-associated gene expression profiles in NSCLC. We found that PKC-alpha is highly expressed in < or = 20% of patients with NSCLC. We also found that PKC-alpha was preferentially expressed in adenocarcinoma compared with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung.

While there have been advances in treatment options for those with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, unmet medical needs remain, partly due to the heterogeneity of treatment effect observed among patients. The goals of this literature review were to provide updated information to complement past reviews and to identify a comprehensive set of nongenetic prognostic and predictive baseline factors that may account for heterogeneity of outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. A review of the literature between 2000 and 2010 was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. All relevant studies that met the inclusion criteria were selected and data elements were abstracted. A classification system was developed to evaluate the level of evidence for each study. A total of 54 studies were selected for inclusion. Patient-related factors (eg, performance status, sex, and age) were the most extensively researched nongenetic prognostic factors, followed by disease stage and histology. Moderately researched prognostic factors were weight-related variables and number or site of metastases, and the least studied were comorbidities, previous therapy, smoking status, hemoglobin level, and health-related quality of life/symptom severity. The prognostic factors with the most consistently demonstrated associations with outcomes were performance status, number or site of metastases, previous therapy, smoking status, and health-related quality of life. Of the small number of studies that assessed predictive factors, those that were found to be significantly predictive of outcomes were performance status, age, disease stage, previous therapy, race, smoking status, sex, and histology. These results provide a comprehensive overview of nongenetic prognostic and predictive factors assessed in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer over the last decade. This information can be used to inform the design of future clinical trials by suggesting additional subgroups based on nongenetic factors that may be analyzed to further investigate potential prognostic and predictive factors.

Objectives Two phase III trials of advanced NSCLC patients were compared to examine relative efficacy and safety of differing treatment regimens. The JMDB trial investigated first-line pemetrexed–cisplatin (pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 every 21 days; maximum: 6 cycles). The PARAMOUNT phase III trial compared maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo after patients with nonsquamous NSCLC completed 4 cycles of first-line pemetrexed–cisplatin without disease progression. Methods Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), analyzed by Kaplan–Meier and Cox methods, and toxicity rates were compared between the PARAMOUNT arms and a selected homogeneous population from JMDB: 346 patients with disease and prior treatment characteristics matching the PARAMOUNT population. Results Outcomes for the PARAMOUNT placebo arm were similar to the JMDB homogeneous group (median PFS: 5.6 versus 6.2 months, p = 0.117, HR = 1.16; median OS: 14.0 versus 14.2 months, p = 0.979, HR = 1.00). The PARAMOUNT maintenance pemetrexed group had statistically superior efficacy compared with the JMDB homogeneous group (median PFS: 7.5 versus 6.2 months, p p = 0.003, HR = 0.75). Patients who received pemetrexed maintenance (median 4 cycles, range 1–44) following 4 cycles of pemetrexed–cisplatin exhibited a higher incidence of drug-related serious adverse events compared with JMDB patients (median 6 cycles of pemetrexed–cisplatin) (10.6% versus 2.9%); grade 3/4 fatigue and renal toxicity were also higher in the pemetrexed arm of PARAMOUNT. Conclusions The across-trial comparison of a relevant JMDB study population with the two arms of the PARAMOUNT study supported the efficacy of the pemetrexed continuation maintenance strategy and suggested the results are not influenced by limiting the pemetrexed–cisplatin induction treatment to four cycles. Although longer exposure to pemetrexed–cisplatin or maintenance pemetrexed increased some toxicities, the overall incidence remained low, underscoring the relative safety of these treatment regimens.

IntroductionIn the PARAMOUNT (“A Phase 3, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed plus Best Supportive Care vs. Best Supportive Care Immediately Following Induction Treatment with Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin for Advanced Non-Squamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer”) trial, patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC) benefited from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin by extending survival, delaying disease progression, and maintaining quality of life (QoL). However, low-grade 1 or 2 toxicities during long-term maintenance treatment may become burdensome and impact QoL.Materials and MethodsPatients in this double-blind study (n = 539), who had completed 4 induction cycles (pemetrexed with cisplatin) without progressive disease (PD) and had an ECOG performance status of 0/1, were randomized 2:1 to pemetrexed maintenance (500 mg/m2, day 1) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC until PD. Adverse events (by maximum Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grade) and QoL (EuroQol 5-dimensional [EQ-5D] scale) were assessed.ResultsA median of 4 maintenance cycles was administered (range, pemetrexed 1-44; mean ± SD 7.9 ± 8.3; placebo 1-38; mean ± SD 5.0 ± 5.2), with 28% of pemetrexed and 12% of placebo patients receiving ≥ 10 maintenance cycles. The pemetrexed dose intensity was 94%. More patients receiving pemetrexed (12%) than placebo discontinued because of possible drug-related CTCAEs (4%; P = .005). Overall, pemetrexed was associated with significantly more (P < .05) low-grade events (grade 1/2 nausea, grade 2 anemia, edema, and neutropenia) than placebo. Overall, the incidence of low-grade fatigue, anemia, and neutropenia decreased with long-term pemetrexed exposure; however, renal events increased across treatment arms. EQ-5D analyses demonstrated no treatment-by-time interaction or overall treatment differences between the 2 arms.ConclusionPARAMOUNT demonstrated a low incidence of low-grade toxicities with long-term pemetrexed exposure without compromising QoL in patients with NS-NSCLC.

Background After inhalation of a glucocorticoid from a meter dose inhaler (MDI), a certain portion of the delivered dose is deposited in the lungs, and the remainder is deposited in the oropharynx. Objective To examine the absolute bioavailability of flunisolide given orally via metered dose inhaler, and metered dose inhaler with a commercially available spacer device as well as to determine the fraction of drug deposited in the lungs following inhalation. Methods Twenty-four healthy volunteers were enrolled in the study; twenty-two completed the study. The IRB approved the study protocol, and informed consent was obtained. Volunteers received four treatments: treatment A (MDI), 1.0 mg inhaled flunisolide; treatment B (MDI-S), 1.0 mg inhaled flunisolide with a spacer device; treatment C, 1.0 mg of orally administered flunisolide with 240 mL of water; and treatment D, 1.0 mg intravenous flunisolide by IV push in the antecubital vein over 60 seconds. Plasma and urine flunisolide were quantified by HPLC/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry. Results Flunisolide is a corticosteroid with low oral bioavailability (6.7%), which was found to be lower than previously reported. Similar AUCs were observed between the MDI and MDI-S groups, but by using mass balance equations, it appears that more flunisolide was delivered to the lungs in the MDI-S group (410 μg versus 280 μg). Oropharyngeal deposition was an important difference between the two inhaler groups. Approximately an 11-fold reduction in the oropharyngeal deposition of flunisolide through use of the spacer device was observed. Conclusions Use of a spacer device improved pulmonary delivery of flunisolide by almost 50% and significantly decreased the oropharyngeal exposure to drug.

Background This phase II study evaluates the tolerability and efficacy of concurrent hyperfractionated radiation therapy (HFX-RT) and high-dose intra-arterial (IA) cisplatin in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Methods Between December 1995 and November 1997, 20 patients with locally advanced T4/T3 SCCHN were treated with HFX-RT (76.8–79.2 Gy at 1.2 Gy bid over 6–7 weeks) and high-dose IA cisplatin (150 mg/m2 given at the start of RT boost treatment [start of week 6]). Seventeen patients (85%) had T4 disease, and 14 (70%) had N2/ N3 disease. Results Grade 3-5 acute toxicity was limited to one grade 4 (5%) and 14 grade 3 (70%) mucosal events. No grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was observed. Median weight loss during therapy was 9% (range, 2%–16%). Eighteen patients had complete response (90%) at the primary site; 14 were confirmed pathologically. Among 17 patients with positive neck disease, 16 (94%) achieved complete response in the neck, including 12 of 13 patients with N2/N3 disease who underwent planned neck dissection. Active follow-up ranges from 12 to 32 months (median, 20 months) with 11 patients alive without disease, 5 dead of disease, and 4 dead of intercurrent disease. Eighteen patients (90%) remained disease free at the primary site, and the locoregional control rate is 80%. Conclusions High-dose IA cisplatin and concurrent HFX-RT as used in this study is feasible and warrants further investigation. The high complete response rate and low grade 4 toxicity in this highly unfavorable subset of patients appears better than previously reported chemoradiation regimens for more favorable patients. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Head Neck 22: 543–549, 2000.

Chemotherapy treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer is universally disappointing. Evidence suggested the possibility of improved activity of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in this disease when administered by continuous infusion in combination with interferon-alpha. Thirteen patients who had histologically documented stage III and IV adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were treated with 5-FU, 250 mg/m2/day by continuous infusion, in combination with interferon-alpha, 3 million units subcutaneously 3 times per week. Treatment was adjusted for toxicity and was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 8 weeks after a complete response. Responses were documented on two separate occasions that were separated by 4 weeks. Eleven men and two women were treated an average of 48 days. There was one responder, for a response rate of 7.7% (95% confidence interval, 0.1%-36%). The duration of response was 90 days. The median survival of the entire group was 8.3 months. Toxicity was significant, with more than 50% of patients requiring treatment breaks and dosage reductions. The most common toxicities were mucositis, hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, and nausea. There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment of advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with continuous-infusion 5-FU and interferon-alpha is associated with significant toxicity without significant evidence of response.

The worldwide annual pancreatic cancer death rate equals its estimated annual incidence. Surgery has been considered the only curative modality for this disease, but only 5 to 15% of patients are candidates for potentially curative resection. Evidence that postoperative adjuvant treatment improves outcome has been limited to a single randomised trial of a well tolerated split-course chemoradiation regimen. More intensive regimens have since been developed and are associated with, at best, a modest improvement in patient outcome. The potentially significant morbidity associated with pancreaticoduodenectomy, which can compromise the delivery of postoperative adjuvant chemoradiation, has led to the development of preoperative adjuvant ('neoadjuvant') chemoradiation in these patients. Although experience suggests that such an approach is feasible, its ultimate impact awaits further evaluation. Combined modality therapy has produced the most promising results in patients with unresectable or locally advanced disease. However, only modest improvements in median survival and minimal increases in long term survival have so far been achieved. This observation has encouraged many investigators to devise innovative methods of delivering therapy, including radioisotope implantation and intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT). Combined modality therapy with radioisotope implantation appears to have the greatest potential for improving local control and survival in these patients. IORT may be associated with lower morbidity than radioisotope implantation, but its impact may be limited by the radiobiological disadvantage associated with single dose boost therapy. Although new radiosensitising drugs are being tested, the problem of distant metastasis remains significant. New chemotherapeutic agents such as gemcitabine appear to have the potential to produce better results than those achieved over the last 35 years with fluorouracil. Investigations into the optimal integration of different therapeutic modalities, along with continued advances in surgery, radiation and systemic therapy, should lead to the increased use of modern multimodality interventions. In turn, this will lead us towards further improvements in outcomes for patients with pancreatic carcinoma.

Purpose PointBreak (A Study of Pemetrexed, Carboplatin and Bevacizumab in Patients With Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer) compared the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed (Pem) plus carboplatin (C) plus bevacizumab (Bev) followed by pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (PemCBev) with paclitaxel (Pac) plus carboplatin (C) plus bevacizumab (Bev) followed by bevacizumab (PacCBev) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB or IV nonsquamous NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1 were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 combined with carboplatin area under the curve 6 and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. Eligible patients received maintenance until disease progression: pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (for the PemCBev group) or bevacizumab (for the PacCBev group). The primary end point of this superiority study was overall survival (OS). Results Patients were randomly assigned to PemCBev (n = 472) or PacCBev (n = 467). For PemCBev versus PacCBev, OS hazard ratio (HR) was 1.00 (median OS, 12.6 v 13.4 months; P = .949); progression-free survival (PFS) HR was 0.83 (median PFS, 6.0 v 5.6 months; P = .012); overall response rate was 34.1% versus 33.0%; and disease control rate was 65.9% versus 69.8%. Significantly more study drug–related grade 3 or 4 anemia (14.5% v 2.7%), thrombocytopenia (23.3% v 5.6%), and fatigue (10.9% v 5.0%) occurred with PemCBev; significantly more grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.6% v 25.8%), febrile neutropenia (4.1% v 1.4%), sensory neuropathy (4.1% v 0%), and alopecia (grade 1 or 2; 36.8% v 6.6%) occurred with PacCBev. Conclusion OS did not improve with the PemCBev regimen compared with the PacCBev regimen, although PFS was significantly improved with PemCBev. Toxicity profiles differed; both regimens demonstrated tolerability.

We have generated an IgG1 murine monoclonal anti-idiotype antibody (Ab2) designated 3H1, which mimics a specific epitope on the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Patients with CEA positive tumors are immunologically "tolerant" to CEA. We used 3H1 as a surrogate for CEA for vaccine therapy of 12 patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Each of the patients received a minimum of four intracutaneous injections of aluminum hydroxide precipitated 3H1 at either 1, 2, or 4 mg dosage per injection. 9 of 12 patients demonstrated anti-anti-idiotypic (Ab3) response to 3H1. All nine patients generated specific anti-CEA antibody demonstrated by reactivity with radiolabeled purified CEA; some cases were confirmed by immunoprecipitation of purified CEA. We also demonstrated Ab3 stained both autologous and allogeneic colonic tumors. 7 of 12 patients demonstrated idiotype specific T cell proliferative responses and four also showed T cell proliferation to CEA. Toxicity was limited to local reaction with mild fever and chills. All 12 patients eventually progressed after finishing 4-13 dosages. This is the first report demonstrating that a vaccine therapy is capable of breaking "immune tolerance" to CEA in patients with CEA positive tumors. Future studies will focus on treating patients with minimal residual disease.

This article describes the treatment rationale and study-related procedures for the A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Study of Docetaxel and Ramucirumab Versus Docetaxel and Placebo in the Treatment of Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Following Disease Progression after One Prior Platinum-Based Therapy (REVEL) study (I4T-MC-JVBA; ClinicalTrials.govNCT01168973). This international, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded phase III trial examines the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab treatment administered in combination with docetaxel, as compared with docetaxel administered with placebo, in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease progressed during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with or without maintenance treatment. The primary end point is overall survival; secondary end points include progression-free survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, patient-reported outcomes, and assessment of safety and tolerability of ramucirumab. Eligible patients (enrollment N = 1242) are randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive either docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) plus ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) (Arm A) or docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) plus placebo (Arm B). Both drugs are administered via intravenous infusion once every 3 weeks until evidence of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, noncompliance, or patient's consent withdrawal. Efficacy and safety will be compared between the study arms and in patient subgroups including patients with nonsquamous versus squamous tumor histology and patients who received prior bevacizumab treatment. Multiple blood and tumor tissue biomarker samples are collected during the study. The goal of the REVEL study is to demonstrate that ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel improves overall survival of patients with NSCLC with progressive disease after first-line therapy, and to advance our knowledge of the role of angiogenesis blockade in patients with NSCLC by identifying patients who are likely to experience maximum benefit based on extensive clinical biomarker correlative analysis.

Background: Patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) benefit from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with a platinum-containing, non-pemetrexed doublet. The PARAMOUNT trial investigated whether continuation maintenance with pemetrexed improved progression-free survival after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. Methods: In this double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, randomised placebo-controlled trial, patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC aged 18 years or older, with no previous systemic chemotherapy for lung cancer, with at least one measurable lesion, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 participated. Before randomisation, patients entered an induction phase which consisted of four cycles of induction pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m 2) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients who did not progress after completion of four cycles of induction and who had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were stratified according to disease stage (IIIB or IV), ECOG performance status (0 or 1), and induction response (complete or partial response, or stable disease), and randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive maintenance therapy with either pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 every 21 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care until disease progression. Randomisation was done with the Pocock and Simon minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00789373. Findings: Of the 1022 patients enrolled, 939 participated in the induction phase. Of these, 539 patients were randomly assigned to receive continuation maintenance with pemetrexed plus best supportive care (n=359) or with placebo plus best supportive care (n=180). Among the 359 patients randomised to continuation maintenance with pemetrexed, there was a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression over the placebo group (HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·49-0·79; p

BACKGROUND Potential synergy between 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and interferon alpha-2a (IFN-alpha-2a) has been demonstrated in the treatment of colorectal carcinoma. Continuous low-dose infusion of 5-FU may have superior response rates to bolus 5-FU in these malignancies. This report presents results of two Phase II trials using these principles in colorectal cancer. METHODS Forty-eight patients were entered onto two protocols; 18 were treated with 5-FU by a bolus infusion schedule with concurrent IFN-alpha-2a (Group 1). Thirty patients were treated with continuous low-dose 5-FU and IFN-alpha-2a thrice weekly (Group 2). RESULTS The overall response rates were 33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16-68%) and 33% (95% CI, 17-53%), respectively, for Groups 1 and 2. In Group 2, in 16 previously untreated patients, there was a response rate of 56% (95% CI, 30-80%). The median survival was 11 months and 6 months for Groups 1 and 2, respectively. Toxicity in Group 1 was as expected, except the incidence of central nervous system toxicity was low, with only one patient requiring dose reduction because of cerebellar ataxia. The toxicity in Group 2 was substantial, with four patients being removed from study because of toxicity and all patients treated for more than 2 months requiring dose reductions. The most common (67%) toxicity was mucositis, with 33% of those patients classified as Grade III or IV (Southwest Oncology Group criteria). Other major toxicities were fatigue and hand/foot syndrome. CONCLUSIONS The first trial confirms previous response rate data for bolus injection 5-FU and IFN-alpha-2a. The second trial of low-dose continuous infusion 5-FU with IFN-alpha-2a demonstrates similar efficacy with substantially greater toxicity.

Purpose: The main objectives of this phase I and pharmacokinetic, open-label study were to characterize the principal toxicities and determine the maximum tolerated dose of the multitargeted antifolate pemetrexed administered in combination with irinotecan. The study also sought to detect major pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions between these agents and preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Experimental Design: Pemetrexed was administered as a 10-min i.v. infusion followed by irinotecan given i.v. over 90 min every 3 weeks to patients with advanced solid malignancies. The study objectives were first pursued in heavily pretreated patients and then in lightly pretreated patients who also received vitamin supplementation. Results: Twenty-three heavily pretreated patients enrolled in the first stage of the study, and the maximum tolerated dose level of pemetrexed/irinotecan without vitamin supplementation was 400/250 mg/m2; further dose escalation was precluded by severe neutropenia that was protracted and/or associated with fever. In the second stage of the study, 28 lightly pretreated patients were administered pemetrexed/irinotecan with vitamin supplementation; these patients tolerated pemetrexed/irinotecan at a dose level of 500/350 mg/m2, which reflected clinically relevant single-agent doses of both agents. No major pharmacokinetic interactions between the agents were evident. Four patients, two patients each with colorectal cancer refractory to fluoropyrimidines and advanced mesothelioma, had partial responses. Conclusions: The pemetrexed/irinotecan regimen is well tolerated in patients with advanced solid malignancies at clinically relevant single-agent doses. The recommended dose level of pemetrexed/irinotecan for subsequent disease-directed evaluations involving lightly pretreated patients is 500/350 mg/m2 every 3 weeks with vitamin supplementation.

Background Pemetrexed and irinotecan have demonstrated antitumor activity as single agents in lung, pancreatic, breast, and colorectal cancer (CRC). The distinct mechanisms of action and patterns of resistance displayed by pemetrexed and irinotecan make them attractive agents for combination therapy. Patients and Methods This phase I/II, nonrandomized, open-labeled, single-arm study was composed of 3 segments. The initial phase II portion of the study enrolled 23 patients with advanced CRC who had received 1 previous dose of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)–based chemotherapy for advanced disease. Because of poorer than anticipated efficacy, a phase I dose-escalation study using vitamin supplementation (n = 12) was added to the original protocol. The phase II dose-escalation portion of the study enrolled 36 patients (64% with previous oxaliplatin-based therapy) who received pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 followed by irinotecan 300 mg/m 2 on day 1, every 21 days. Results For the 35 evaluable patients in the phase II dose-escalation study, the objective response rate was 11.4% (95% confidence interval, 3.2%-26.7%); there was 1 patient with a complete response, 3 with partial responses, and 17 with stable disease. Three of four responders had received previous oxaliplatin-based combination therapy. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included leukopenia (5.6%), anemia (2.8%), and thrombocytopenia (2.8%). Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included diarrhea (11.1%), increased aminotransferase levels (8.3%), nausea (8.3%), febrile neutropenia (5.6%), vomiting (5.6%), and reduced creatinine clearance (2.8%). Conclusion Pemetrexed plus irinotecan appears to be at least as active as FOLFIRI (leucovorin/5-FU/irinotecan) for second-line therapy of CRC following 5-FU–based combination chemotherapy. Further studies are warranted.