-
1.
Nintedanib plus mFOLFOX6 as second-line treatment of metastatic, chemorefractory colorectal cancer: The randomised, placebo-controlled, phase II TRICC-C study (AIO-KRK-0111).
Ettrich, TJ, Perkhofer, L, Decker, T, Hofheinz, RD, Heinemann, V, Hoffmann, T, Hebart, HF, Herrmann, T, Hannig, CV, Büchner-Steudel, P, et al
International journal of cancer. 2021;(6):1428-1437
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Nintedanib is a triple angiokinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1-3, fibroblast growth factor receptor 1-3 and platelet-derived growth factor receptor-a/-b. Thereby, it targets angiogenic escape mechanisms. The trial TyRosine kinase Inhibitor for the treatment of Chemorefractory Colorectal Cancer (TRICC-C) trial evaluates the addition of nintedanib to mFOLFOX6 (fluorouracil, folinic acid and oxaliplatin) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). TRICC-C is a randomised controlled, double-blinded, phase II trial in mCRC patients that received a first-line non-oxaliplatin containing chemotherapy. Patients received mFOLFOX6 + nintedanib (F + N) (2 × 200 mg p.o./d, d1-d14) or mFOLFOX6 + placebo (F + P), in a 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoint was median progression free survival (mPFS) and secondary overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and safety. Fifty-three patients (27 F + N; 26 F + P) were randomised between 12/2012 and 5/2016 (scheduled n = 180). The trial was terminated prematurely due to slow accrual. The trial did not reach its primary endpoint but mPFS, median overall survival (mOS) and disease control rate (DCR) were numerically higher in the F + N arm compared to the F + P arm; however, the difference was not significant (mPFS: F + P: 4.6 months vs F + N: 8.1 months; HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.32-1.30; P = .2156; mOS: F + P: 9.9 months vs F + N: 17.1 months; HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.48-2.23; P = .9387; DCR: F + P: 50% vs F + N: 66,7%; P = .2709). Toxicity was moderate and only different for neutropenia (F + P: 11.5%, F + N: 19.2%) and gastrointestinal disorders (F + P: 65.4%, F + N: 84.6%). Final results show safety and a nonsignificant trend towards improved PFS and DCR for the combination of mFOLFOX6 + nintedanib in the second-line therapy of mCRC.
-
2.
Phase I Study of Ceralasertib (AZD6738), a Novel DNA Damage Repair Agent, in Combination with Weekly Paclitaxel in Refractory Cancer.
Kim, ST, Smith, SA, Mortimer, P, Loembé, AB, Cho, H, Kim, KM, Smith, C, Willis, S, Irurzun-Arana, I, Berges, A, et al
Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2021;(17):4700-4709
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
PURPOSE Ceralasertib is a potent and selective oral inhibitor of the serine/threonine protein kinase ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related (ATR) protein. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with solid tumors, enriched for melanoma, received ceralasertib in combination with a fixed dose of paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 on D1, D8, D15) in 28-day cycles. The dose of ceralasertib was escalated to reach an MTD in a rolling 6 design. The starting dose of ceralasertib was 40 mg QD. Fifty-seven patients (33 patients with melanoma who failed prior PD1/L1 treatment) were enrolled in 7 dose cohorts ranging from 40 mg QD to 240 mg BD plus weekly paclitaxel. RESULTS The RP2D was established as ceralasertib 240 mg BD days 1-14 plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on D1, D8, D15 every 28 days. The most common toxicities were neutropenia (n = 39, 68%), anemia (n = 25, 44%), and thrombocytopenia (n = 21, 37%). In the full analysis set of 57 patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 22.6% (95% CI, 12.5-35.3). In 33 patients with melanoma, resistant to prior anti-PD1 therapy, the ORR was 33.3% (95% CI, 18.0-51.8). In the melanoma subset, the mPFS was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0-5.8), the median duration of response was 9.9 months (95% CI, 3.7-23.2), and the mOS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.7-11.9). CONCLUSIONS Ceralasertib in combination with paclitaxel was well tolerated in patients with advanced malignancies and showed evidence of antitumor activity. Durable responses were observed in patients with advanced cutaneous, acral, and mucosal melanoma resistant to anti-PD1/L1 treatment.See related commentary by Ashworth, p. 4667.
-
3.
Health-related Quality of Life in the Phase III LUME-Colon 1 Study: Comparison and Interpretation of Results From EORTC QLQ-C30 Analyses.
Lenz, HJ, Argiles, G, Yoshino, T, Lonardi, S, Falcone, A, Limón, ML, Sobrero, A, Hastedt, C, Peil, B, Voss, F, et al
Clinical colorectal cancer. 2019;(4):269-279.e5
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We used European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) data from the LUME-Colon 1 study to illustrate different methods of statistical analysis for health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and compared the results. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive nintedanib 200 mg twice daily plus best supportive care (n = 386) or matched placebo plus best supportive care (n = 382). Five methods (mean treatment difference averaged over time, using a mixed-effects growth curve model; mixed-effects models for repeated measurements (MMRM); time-to-deterioration (TTD); status change; and responder analysis) were used to analyze EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL and scores from functional scales. RESULTS Overall, GHS/QoL and physical functioning deteriorated over time. Mean treatment difference slightly favored nintedanib over placebo for physical functioning (adjusted mean, 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-4.34) and social functioning (adjusted mean, 2.62; 95% CI, 0.66-4.47). GHS/QoL was numerically better with nintedanib versus placebo (adjusted mean, 1.61; 95% CI, -0.004 to 3.27). MMRM analysis had similar results, with better physical functioning in the nintedanib group at all timepoints. There was no significant delay in GHS/QoL deterioration (10%) and physical functioning (16%) with nintedanib versus placebo (TTD analysis). Status change analysis showed a higher proportion of patients with markedly improved GHS/QoL and physical functioning in the nintedanib versus placebo groups. Responder analysis showed a similar, less pronounced pattern. CONCLUSION Analyses of EORTC QLQ-C30 data showed that HRQoL was not impaired by treatment with nintedanib versus placebo. Analysis and interpretation of HRQoL endpoints should consider symptom type and severity and course of disease.
-
4.
A phase I study of nintedanib combined with cisplatin/gemcitabine as first-line therapy for advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 3).
Forster, M, Hackshaw, A, De Pas, T, Cobo, M, Garrido, P, Summers, Y, Dingemans, AC, Flynn, M, Schnell, D, von Wangenheim, U, et al
Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2018;:27-33
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are limited treatment options for squamous non-small cell lung cancer (sqNSCLC) and prognosis remains poor. The safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of nintedanib, a triple angiokinase inhibitor, plus cisplatin/gemcitabine as first-line treatment for advanced sqNSCLC patients, were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS A phase I, dose-escalation study administering drugs in a 21-day cycle: cisplatin (75 mg/m2, Day 1), gemcitabine (1250 mg/m2, Days 1 and 8) and nintedanib (Days 2-7, 9-21) were given for 4-6 cycles, followed by monotherapy until disease progression or adverse events (AEs). Two nintedanib doses were tested, 150 mg twice daily (bid) and 200 mg bid, to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) based on occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during Cycle 1. DLTs were primarily defined as drug-related non-hematologic (Grade ≥3) or hematologic (Grade 4) AEs. RESULTS Sixteen patients were treated with nintedanib; n = 4 for 150 mg bid, n = 12 for 200 mg bid. No DLTs were observed in Cycle 1; therefore, the MTD was 200 mg bid. In subsequent cycles, two patients had DLTs: renal failure and reduced blood magnesium levels. The most common AEs were gastrointestinal. Three patients discontinued last study medication due to AEs and one had a nintedanib dose reduction. No relevant PK interactions were observed. Five patients had partial responses (31.3%) and eight had stable disease (50.0%); disease control rate was 81.3%. There were three long-term survivors (17-35 months). CONCLUSIONS The safety profile of nintedanib 200 mg bid plus cisplatin/gemcitabine was manageable, with AEs consistent with previous observations. PK data demonstrated no interaction, and preliminary antitumor activity was observed.
-
5.
Cytokeratin-18 fragments predict treatment response and overall survival in gastric cancer in a randomized controlled trial.
Nagel, M, Schulz, J, Maderer, A, Goepfert, K, Gehrke, N, Thomaidis, T, Thuss-Patience, PC, Al-Batran, SE, Hegewisch-Becker, S, Grimminger, P, et al
Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine. 2018;(3):1010428318764007
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gastric cancer is common malignancy and exhibits a poor prognosis. At the time of diagnosis, the majority of patients present with metastatic disease which precludes curative treatment. Non-invasive biomarkers which discriminate early from advanced stages or predict the response to treatment are urgently required. This study explored the cytokeratin-18 fragment M30 and full-length cytokeratin-18 M65 in predicting treatment response and survival in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of advanced gastric cancer. METHODS Patients enrolled in the SUN-CASE study received sunitinib or placebo as an adjunct to standard therapy with leucovorin (Ca-folinate), 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan in second or third line. Treatment response rates, progression-free survival and overall survival were assessed during a follow-up period of 12 months. Cytokeratin-18 fragments were analyzed in 52 patients at baseline and day 14 of therapy. RESULTS Levels of M30 correlated with the presence of metastasis and lymph node involvement and decreased significantly during chemotherapy. Importantly, baseline levels of M30 were significantly higher in patients who failed therapy. In addition, patients who did not respond to treatment were also identifiable at day 14 based on elevated M30 levels. By stepwise regression analysis, M30 at day 14 was identified as independent predictor of treatment response. Likewise, serum levels of full-length cytokeratin-18 M65 at baseline also correlated with treatment failure and progression-free survival. The addition of sunitinib did not exert any effects on serum levels of M30 or M65. CONCLUSION The cytokeratin-18 fragment M30 at day 14 identifies patients that fail to second- or third-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer. Validation of this non-invasive biomarker in gastric cancer is warranted.
-
6.
Sunitinib added to FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI in patients with chemorefractory advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or lower esophagus: a randomized, placebo-controlled phase II AIO trial with serum biomarker program.
Moehler, M, Gepfner-Tuma, I, Maderer, A, Thuss-Patience, PC, Ruessel, J, Hegewisch-Becker, S, Wilke, H, Al-Batran, SE, Rafiyan, MR, Weißinger, F, et al
BMC cancer. 2016;(1):699
Abstract
BACKGROUND As a multi-targeted anti-angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor sunitinib (SUN) has been established for renal cancer and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. In advanced refractory esophagogastric cancer patients, monotherapy with SUN was associated with good tolerability but limited tumor response. METHODS This double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase II clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of SUN as an adjunct to second and third-line FOLFIRI (NCT01020630). Patients were randomized to receive 6-week cycles including FOLFIRI plus sodium folinate (Na-FOLFIRI) once every two weeks and SUN or placebo (PL) continuously for four weeks followed by a 2-week rest period. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Preplanned serum analyses of VEGF-A, VEGF-D, VEGFR2 and SDF-1α were performed retrospectively. RESULTS Overall, 91 patients were randomized, 45 in each group (one patient withdrew). The main grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia and leucopenia, observed in 56 %/20 % and 27 %/16 % for FOLFIRI + SUN/FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. Median PFS was similar, 3.5 vs. 3.3 months (hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95 % CI 0.70-1.74, P = 0.66) for FOLFIRI + SUN vs. FOLFIRI + PL, respectively. For FOLFIRI + SUN, a trend towards longer median overall survival (OS) compared with placebo was observed (10.4 vs. 8.9 months, HR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.50-1.34, one-sided P = 0.21). In subgroup serum analyses, significant changes in VEGF-A (P = 0.017), VEGFR2 (P = 0.012) and VEGF-D (P < 0.001) serum levels were observed. CONCLUSIONS Although sunitinib combined with FOLFIRI did not improve PFS and response in chemotherapy-resistant gastric cancer, a trend towards better OS was observed. Further biomarker-driven studies with other anti-angiogenic RTK inhibitors are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION This study was registered prospectively in the NCT Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) under NCT01020630 on November 23, 2009 after approval by the leading ethics committee of the Medical Association of Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, in coordination with the participating ethics committees (see Additional file 2) on September 16, 2009.
-
7.
Vemurafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive metastatic or unresectable papillary thyroid cancer refractory to radioactive iodine: a non-randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.
Brose, MS, Cabanillas, ME, Cohen, EE, Wirth, LJ, Riehl, T, Yue, H, Sherman, SI, Sherman, EJ
The Lancet. Oncology. 2016;(9):1272-82
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND About half of patients with papillary thyroid cancer have tumours with activating BRAF(V600E) mutations. Vemurafenib, an oncogenic BRAF kinase inhibitor approved for BRAF-positive melanoma, showed clinical benefit in three patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive papillary thyroid cancer in a phase 1 trial. We aimed to establish the activity of vemurafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive papillary thyroid cancer. METHODS We did an open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial at ten academic centres and hospitals worldwide in patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic papillary thyroid cancer refractory to radioactive iodine and positive for the BRAF(V600E) mutation. Participants either had never received a multikinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR (cohort 1) or had been treated previously with a VEGFR multikinase inhibitor (cohort 2). Patients received vemurafenib 960 mg orally twice daily. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed best overall response in cohort 1 (confirmed on two assessments 4 weeks or longer apart). Analyses were planned to have a minimum median follow-up of 15 months (data cutoff April 18, 2014) and were done in safety, intention-to-treat, and per-protocol populations. This trial is closed and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01286753. FINDINGS Between June 23, 2011, and Jan 15, 2013, 51 patients were enrolled to the study, 26 in cohort 1 and 25 in cohort 2. Median duration of follow-up was 18·8 months (IQR 14·2-26·0) in cohort 1 and 12·0 months (6·7-20·3) in cohort 2. Partial responses were recorded in ten of 26 patients in cohort 1 (best overall response 38·5%, 95% CI 20·2-59·4). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded in 17 (65%) of 26 patients in cohort 1 and 17 (68%) of 25 patients in cohort 2; the most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were squamous cell carcinoma of the skin (seven [27%] in cohort 1, five [20%] in cohort 2), lymphopenia (two [8%] in each cohort), and increased γ-glutamyltransferase (one [4%] in cohort 1, three [12%] in cohort 2). Two individuals in cohort 2 died due to adverse events, one from dyspnoea and one from multiorgan failure, but neither was treatment related. Serious adverse events were reported for 16 (62%) of 26 patients in cohort 1 and 17 (68%) of 25 patients in cohort 2. INTERPRETATION Vemurafenib showed antitumour activity in patients with progressive, BRAF(V600E)-positive papillary thyroid cancer refractory to radioactive iodine who had never been treated with a multikinase inhibitor. As such, this agent represents a potential new treatment option for these patients. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.
-
8.
SWITCH: A Randomised, Sequential, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Sorafenib-sunitinib Versus Sunitinib-sorafenib in the Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer.
Eichelberg, C, Vervenne, WL, De Santis, M, Fischer von Weikersthal, L, Goebell, PJ, Lerchenmüller, C, Zimmermann, U, Bos, MM, Freier, W, Schirrmacher-Memmel, S, et al
European urology. 2015;(5):837-47
Abstract
BACKGROUND Understanding how to sequence targeted therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is important for maximisation of clinical benefit. OBJECTIVES To prospectively evaluate sequential use of the multikinase inhibitors sorafenib followed by sunitinib (So-Su) versus sunitinib followed by sorafenib (Su-So) in patients with mRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 SWITCH study assessed So-Su versus Su-So in patients with mRCC without prior systemic therapy, and stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk score (favourable or intermediate). INTERVENTION Patients were randomised to sorafenib 400mg twice daily followed, on progression or intolerable toxicity, by sunitinib 50mg once daily (4 wk on, 2 wk off) (So-Su), or vice versa (Su-So). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with So-Su versus Su-So, assessed from randomisation to progression or death during second-line therapy. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS In total, 365 patients were randomised (So-Su, n=182; Su-So, n=183). There was no significant difference in total PFS between So-Su and Su-So (median 12.5 vs 14.9 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-1.27; p=0.5 for superiority). OS was similar for So-Su and Su-So (median 31.5 and 30.2 mo; HR 1.00, 90% CI 0.77-1.30; p=0.5 for superiority). More So-Su patients than Su-So patients reached protocol-defined second-line therapy (57% vs 42%). Overall, adverse event rates were generally similar between the treatment arms. The most frequent any-grade treatment-emergent first-line adverse events were diarrhoea (54%) and hand-foot skin reaction (39%) for sorafenib; and diarrhoea (40%) and fatigue (40%) for sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS Total PFS was not superior with So-Su versus Su-So. These results demonstrate that sorafenib followed by sunitinib and vice versa provide similar clinical benefit in mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY We investigated if total progression-free survival (PFS) is improved in patients with advanced/metastatic kidney cancer who are treated with sorafenib and then with sunitinib (So-Su), compared with sunitinib and then sorafenib (Su-So). We found that total PFS was not improved with So-Su compared with Su-So, but both treatment options were similarly effective in patients with advanced/metastatic kidney cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00732914, www.clinicaltrials.gov.
-
9.
Effect of Extended-Release Niacin/Laropiprant Combination on Plasma Adiponectin and Insulin Resistance in Chinese Patients with Dyslipidaemia.
Hu, M, Yang, YL, Masuda, D, Yamashita, S, Tomlinson, B
Disease markers. 2015;:154014
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study examined whether the increase of adiponectin associated with extended-release (ER) niacin/laropiprant combination attenuates the adverse effect of niacin on glucose and insulin resistance in Hong Kong Chinese patients with dyslipidaemia. METHODS Patients (N = 121) were treated with ER niacin/laropiprant 1 g/20 mg for 4 weeks and then the dose was doubled for an additional 8 weeks. Measurements of fasting lipids, glucose, insulin, and adiponectin were performed at baseline and during the study. RESULTS There were significant (P < 0.001) increases in glucose (9.4 ± 13.1%), insulin (70.2 ± 91.0%), HOMA-IR (87.8 ± 103.9%), and adiponectin (169.3 ± 111.6%). The increase in adiponectin was significantly associated with increase in glucose (r = 0.221, P < 0.05), insulin (r = 0.184, P < 0.05), and HOMA-IR (r = 0.237, P < 0.01) and the association remained significant after adjustment for changes in body weight or body fat mass. CONCLUSION Treatment with ER niacin/laropiprant led to a significant increase in adiponectin levels but worsening of glucose levels and insulin resistance, and the increase in adiponectin and insulin resistance were correlated suggesting the increase in adiponectin did not ameliorate the deterioration in insulin resistance. Clinical trial is registered with number on WHO-ICTRP ChiCTR-ONC-10001038.
-
10.
A randomized phase II study of the telomerase inhibitor imetelstat as maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
Chiappori, AA, Kolevska, T, Spigel, DR, Hager, S, Rarick, M, Gadgeel, S, Blais, N, Von Pawel, J, Hart, L, Reck, M, et al
Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology. 2015;(2):354-62
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Continuation or 'switch' maintenance therapy is commonly used in patients with advancd non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we evaluated the efficacy of the telomerase inhibitor, imetelstat, as switch maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS The primary end point of this open-label, randomized phase II study was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with non-progressive, advanced NSCLC after platinum-based doublet (first-line) chemotherapy (with or without bevacizumab), any histology, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 were eligible. Randomization was 2 : 1 in favor of imetelstat, administered at 9.4 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle, or observation. Telomere length (TL) biomarker exploratory analysis was carried out in tumor tissue by quantitative PCR (qPCR) and telomerase fluorescence in situ hybridization. RESULTS Of 116 patients enrolled, 114 were evaluable. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were more frequent with imetelstat. Median PFS was 2.8 and 2.6 months for imetelstat-treated versus control [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.844; 95% CI 0.54-1.31; P = 0.446]. Median survival time favored imetelstat (14.3 versus 11.5 months), although not significantly (HR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.41-1.12; P = 0.129). Exploratory analysis demonstrated a trend toward longer median PFS (HR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.14-1.3; P = 0.124) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.11-1.46; P = 0.155) in imetelstat-treated patients with short TL, but no improvement in median PFS and OS in patients with long TL (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.39-1.88; and HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.2-1.28; P = 0.145). CONCLUSIONS Maintenance imetelstat failed to improve PFS in advanced NSCLC patients responding to first-line therapy. There was a trend toward a improvement in median PFS and OS in patients with short TL. Short TL as a predictive biomarker will require further investigation for the clinical development of imetelstat.