Baktiar Hasan

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Compared With Surgery Alone for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Stomach and Cardia: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Trial 40954

PURPOSE Patients with locally advanced gastric cancer benefit from combined pre- and postoperative chemotherapy, although fewer than 50% could receive postoperative chemotherapy. We examined the value of purely preoperative chemotherapy in a phase III trial with strict preoperative staging and surgical resection guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction (AEG II and III) were randomly assigned to preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery or to surgery alone. To detect with 80% power an improvement in median survival from 17 months with surgery alone to 24 months with neoadjuvant, 282 events were required. RESULTS This trial was stopped for poor accrual after 144 patients were randomly assigned (72:72); 52.8% patients had tumors located in the proximal third of the stomach, including AEG type II and III. The International Union Against Cancer R0 resection rate was 81.9% after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as compared with 66.7% with surgery alone (P = .036). The surgery-only group had more lymph node metastases than the neoadjuvant group (76.5% v 61.4%; P = .018). Postoperative complications were more frequent in the neoadjuvant arm (27.1% v 16.2%; P = .09). After a median follow-up of 4.4 years and 67 deaths, a survival benefit could not be shown (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.35; P = .466). CONCLUSION This trial showed a significantly increased R0 resection rate but failed to demonstrate a survival benefit. Possible explanations are low statistical power, a high rate of proximal gastric cancer including AEG and/or a better outcome than expected after radical surgery alone due to the high quality of surgery with resections of regional lymph nodes outside the perigastic area (celiac trunc, hepatic ligament, lymph node at a. lienalis; D2).

Trimodality therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma: results from an EORTC phase II multicentre trial

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC; protocol 08031) phase II trial investigated the feasibility of trimodality therapy consisting of induction chemotherapy followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy and post-operative radiotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (with a severity of cT3N1M0 or less). Induction chemotherapy consisted of three courses of cisplatin 75 mg·m−2 and pemetrexed 500 mg·m−2. Nonprogressing patients underwent extrapleural pneumonectomy followed by post-operative radiotherapy (54 Gy, 30 fractions). Our primary end-point was “success of treatment” and our secondary end-points were toxicity, and overall and progression-free survival. 59 patients were registered, one of whom was ineligible. Subjects’ median age was 57 yrs. The subjects’ TNM scores were as follows: cT1, T2 and T3, 36, 16 and six patients, respectively; cN0 and N1, 57 and one patient, respectively. 55 (93%) patients received three cycles of chemotherapy with only mild toxicity. 46 (79%) patients received surgery and 42 (74%) had extrapleural pneumonectomy with a 90-day mortality of 6.5%. Post-operative radiotherapy was completed in 37 (65%) patients. Grade 3–4 toxicity persisted after 90 days in three (5.3%) patients. Median overall survival time was 18.4 months (95% CI 15.6–32.9) and median progression-free survival was 13.9 months (95% CI 10.9–17.2). Only 24 (42%) patients met the definition of success (one-sided 90% CI 0.36–1.00). Although feasible, trimodality therapy in patients with mesothelioma was not completed within the strictly defined timelines of this protocol and adjustments are necessary.

A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase III intergroup study of gefitinib in patients with advanced NSCLC, non-progressing after first line platinum-based chemotherapy (EORTC 08021/ILCP 01/03)

BACKGROUND EORTC study 08021/ILCP 01/03 evaluated the role of consolidation gefitinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), administered in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), not progressing following standard 1st-line chemotherapy. METHODS Patients with advanced NSCLC, not-progressing after four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy, were randomised to receive either gefitinib 250mg/d or matched placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end-point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. The study was powered to detect a 28% increase in OS from a median of 11-14.1months (HR=0.78) and planned to randomise 598 patients to observe 514 deaths. RESULTS After inclusion of 173 patients, the trial was prematurely closed due to low accrual. Baseline characteristics for gefitinib (n=86) and placebo (n=87) arms were well balanced. After a median follow up of 41months, the difference in median OS in the gefitinib and placebo arms was not statistically significant (10.9 and 9.4months, HR 0.83 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60-1.15]; p=0.2). The difference in median PFS significantly favoured gefitinib (4.1 and 2.9months, HR=0.61, [95% CI 0.45, 0.83]), p=0.0015). Adverse events reported in more than 10% of patients were rash (47% with gefitinib versus 13% with placebo) and diarrhoea (34% with gefitinib versus13% with placebo). CONCLUSIONS Despite its premature closure, this trial confirms previous evidence that consolidation gefitinib is safe and improves PFS. However, no difference in OS was observed in this study (NCT00091156).

Prospective International Multicenter Phase II Trial of Intravenous Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin Monochemotherapy in Patients With Stage IIB, IVA, or IVB Advanced Mycosis Fungoides: Final Results From EORTC 21012

PURPOSE Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most common primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. There is a need for multicenter trials involving defined patient populations using rigorous assessment criteria. We have investigated pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in a clearly defined patient population with advanced MF. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had stage IIB, IVA, or IVB MF, refractory or recurrent after at least two previous systemic therapies. Patients were registered to receive a maximum of six cycles of PLD 20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, every 28 days (one cycle). The primary end point was response rate (RR). RESULTS Nine centers recruited 49 eligible patients. The median number of chemotherapy cycles received was five. There were no grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities. Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic/nonbiochemical toxicities included cardiac symptom (2%), allergy/hypersensitivity (2%), constitutional symptom (4%), hand and foot reaction (2%), other dermatologic toxicity (6%), other GI toxicity (4%), infection (4%), pulmonary embolism (2%), and cardiac ischemia (2%). Of 49 patients, 20 (40.8%) were responders (complete clinical response [CCR] or partial response [PR] as overall response): three (6.1%) experienced CCRs, and 17 (34.7%) experienced PRs. A 50% or greater reduction of cutaneous manifestations was observed in 26 (60.5%) of 43 assessable patients. Two early deaths were reported, resulting from related cardiovascular toxicity and disease progression. The lower limit of the one-sided 90% CI for RR was 31.2%. Median time to progression and median duration of response were 7.4 and 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSION PLD has an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced MF. The efficacy of PLD seems promising.

New clinical research strategies in thoracic oncology: clinical trial design, adaptive, basket and umbrella trials, new end-points and new evaluations of response.

In the genomics era, our main goal should be to identify large and meaningful differences in small, molecularly selected groups of patients. Classical phase I, II and III models for drug development require large resources, limiting the number of experimental agents that can be tested and making the evaluation of targeted agents inefficient. There is an urgent need to streamline the development of new compounds, with the aim of identifying “trials designed to learn”, which could lead to subsequent “trials designed to conclude”. Basket trials are often viewed as parallel phase II trials within the same entity, designed on the basis of a common denominator, which can be a molecular alteration(s). Most basket trials are histology-independent and aberration-specific clinical trials. Umbrella trials are built on a centrally performed molecular portrait and molecularly selected cohorts with matched drugs, and can include patients’ randomisation and strategy validation. Beyond new designs, new end-points and new evaluation techniques are also warranted to finally achieve methodology and clinical improvements, in particular within immunotherapy trials.

Biomarkers for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor with poor prognosis, whose main etiology is exposure to asbestos fibers. The incidence of MPM is anticipated to increase worldwide during the first half of this century. For various reasons, MPM is difficult to diagnose and is notoriously refractory to most treatments. However, recently two active chemotherapy regimens have been demonstrated to significantly increase survival in patients with MPM, and several therapeutic agents and strategies are currently under evaluation.Researchers have actively sought MPM biomarkers for more than 20 years. Biomarkers would be helpful in managing three clinical aspects of MPM: early diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment outcome prediction. The aims of the present review are to summarize the published and recently presented data on MPM biomarkers and to identify the prospects for future translational research projects.Among the ‘classical’ diagnostic biomarkers measured in biological fluids, such as cytokeratins and cell surface antigens, none discriminate patients with MPM from those with other malignancies and nonmalignant diseases. Osteopontin, soluble mesothelin, and megakaryocyte potentiating factor (MPF) appear to be the most promising of the recent biomarkers, but are still subject to some limitations. Osteopontin lacks specificity for mesothelioma, while both soluble mesothelin and MPF lack sensitivity for detecting non-epithelial subtypes. Panels consisting of a small set of biomarkers do not improve the diagnostic yield, and results from molecular profiling are too preliminary to be brought into daily clinical practice. While a large number of biomarkers have been assessed in biological fluids and tumor tissue for their prognostic value, none have had a widespread impact on clinical practice. In contrast, data concerning predictive biomarkers are very limited, even though they are most interesting from the perspective of clinicians.Additional prospective studies, in large and independent samples of patients, with rigorous statistical methodology and standardized laboratory techniques are now warranted to validate and define the precise value of diagnostic and prognostic MPM biomarkers. Future research efforts should focus on biomarkers predictive of the efficacy and toxicity of standard chemotherapy. Translational research should be systematically incorporated into the design of clinical trials assessing new targeted agents in MPM.

Efficacy and safety of bexarotene combined with psoralen-ultraviolet A (PUVA) compared with PUVA treatment alone in stage IB-IIA mycosis fungoides: final results from the EORTC Cutaneous Lymphoma Task Force phase III randomized clinical trial (NCT00056056)

Background  Psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA) is the standard treatment for early stages of mycosis fungoides. There have been no adequate randomized controlled trials with sufficient power comparing this modality with other therapies.

Phase II study of first-line bortezomib and cisplatin in malignant pleural mesothelioma and prospective validation of progression free survival rate as a primary end-point for mesothelioma clinical trials (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 08052)

BACKGROUND This was a prospective phase II study of cisplatin and bortezomib (CB) in the first line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) with validation of progression free survival rate at 18 weeks (PFSR-18)(1) as primary end-point. METHODS Chemotherapy-naïve patients with histologically proven MPM and performance status (PS) 0/1, were treated with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and bortezomib 1.3mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, 11 every 3 weeks. The primary end-point validation utilised the landmark method. RESULTS Between 2007 and 2010 82 patients were entered. PFSR-18 was 53% (80% confidence intervals, CIs, 42-64%). The overall survival (OS) was 13.5 months (95% CI 10.5-15) with 56% (95% CI 44-66%) alive at 1 year. The median PFS was 5.1months (95% CI 3.3-6.5) and the response rate was 28.4% (95% CI 18.9-39.5%). The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were hyponatremia (46%), hypokalaemia (17%), fatigue (12.2%), thrombocytopenia (11%), neutropenia (9.7%) and neurotoxicity (motor, sensory, other: 1.2%, 8.5%, 2.4%). There were two toxic deaths (32 and 74days) due to acute pneumonitis and cardiac arrest. End-point validation showed that patients with no progression/progression at 18 weeks had median OS of 16.9/11.9 months, respectively. Hazard ratio was 0.46 (CI 0.32-0.67), logrank test and C-index were 0.007 and 0.60. CONCLUSION The 50% PFSR-18 for CB was contained within the 80% CI for (42-64%). Therefore the null hypothesis could not be rejected. Accordingly this combination does not warrant further investigation. PFSR-18 was confirmed as a strong predictor of survival.

Randomised phase II study of amrubicin as single agent or in combination with cisplatin versus cisplatin etoposide as first-line treatment in patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer – EORTC 08062

PURPOSE The EORTC 08062 phase II randomised trial investigated the activity and safety of single agent amrubicin, cisplatin combined with amrubicin, and cisplatin combined with etoposide as first line treatment in extensive disease (ED) small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with previously untreated ED-SCLC, WHO performance status (PS) 0-2 and measurable disease were randomised to 3 weekly cycles of either amrubicin alone 45mg/m(2) i.v. day(d) 1-3 (A), cisplatin 60mg/m(2) i.v. d1 and amrubicin 40mg/m(2) i.v. d1-3 (PA), or cisplatin 75mg/m(2) i.v. d1 and etoposide 100mg/m(2) d1, d2-3 i.v./po (PE). The primary end-point was overall response rate (ORR) as assessed by local investigators (RECIST1.0 criteria). Secondary end-points were treatment toxicity, progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS The number of randomised/eligible patients who started treatment was 33/28 in A, 33/30 in PA and 33/30 in PE, respectively. Grade (G) ⩾3 haematological toxicity in A, PA and PE was neutropenia (73%, 73%, 69%); thrombocytopenia (17%, 15%, 9.4%), anaemia (10%, 15%, 3.1%) and febrile neutropenia (13%, 18%, 6%). Early deaths, including treatment related, occurred in 1, 3 and 3 patients in A, PA and PE arms, respectively. Cardiac toxicity did not differ among the 3 arms. Out of 88 eligible patients who started treatment, ORR was 61%, (90% 1-sided confidence intervals [CI] 47-100%), 77% (CI 64-100%) and 63%, (CI 50-100%) for A, PA and PE respectively. CONCLUSION All regimens were active and PA met the criteria for further investigation, despite slightly higher haematological toxicity.

The APPLE Trial: Feasibility and Activity of AZD9291 (Osimertinib) Treatment on Positive PLasma T790M in EGFR-mutant NSCLC Patients. EORTC 1613

The AZD9291 (Osimertinib) Treatment on Positive PLasma T790M in EGFR-mutant NSCLC Patients (APPLE) trial is a randomized, open-label, multicenter, 3-arm, phase II study in advanced, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, to evaluate the best strategy for sequencing gefitinib and osimertinib treatment. Advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients, with World Health Organization performance status 0-2 who are EGFR TKI treatment-naive and eligible to receive first-line treatment with EGFR TKI will be randomized to: In all arms, a plasmatic ctDNA T790M test will be performed by a central laboratory at the Medical University of Gdansk (Poland) but will be applied as a predictive marker for making treatment decisions only in arm B. The primary objective is to evaluate the best strategy for sequencing of treatment with gefitinib and osimertinib in advanced NSCLC patients with common EGFR mutations, and to understand the value of liquid biopsy for the decision-making process. The progression-free survival rate at 18 months is the primary end point of the trial. The activity of osimertinib versus gefitinib to prevent brain metastases will be evaluated.