Bobby L. Clark

Phase II Trial of Bevacizumab and Everolimus in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of bevacizumab, an angiogenesis inhibitor, and everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, in the treatment of patients with advanced clear cell renal carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two groups of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma were eligible for this study: those with no previous treatment with targeted agents and those with previous treatment with sunitinib and/or sorafenib. All patients received bevacizumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks and everolimus 10 mg orally daily. Patients were evaluated for response after 8 weeks of treatment; patients with objective response or stable disease continued treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred. RESULTS Eighty patients (50 untreated, 30 previously treated) entered this clinical trial. The combination of bevacizumab/everolimus showed activity in both groups. Median progression-free survivals in previously untreated and previously treated patients were 9.1 and 7.1 months, respectively. Overall response rates (30% and 23%) were similar in both groups. The regimen was well tolerated by most patients, with a toxicity profile as expected based on the known toxicities of these two agents. Grade 3 to 4 proteinuria was more frequent than expected (25%) and led to treatment discontinuation in six patients. CONCLUSION Bevacizumab/everolimus is active and well tolerated in the treatment of advanced clear cell renal cancer, either as first-line treatment or after treatment with sunitinib and/or sorafenib. The benefits of this combination regimen, versus sequential use of these two agents, requires further study.

Concurrent radiotherapy and temozolomide followed by temozolomide and sorafenib in the first-line treatment of patients with glioblastoma multiforme

The current study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of sorafenib, an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, when added to standard radiotherapy and temozolomide in the first‐line treatment of patients with glioblastoma multiforme.

Bevacizumab and everolimus in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: a phase 2 trial of the Sarah Cannon Oncology Research Consortium.

In this phase 2 study, the activity and tolerability of the combination of bevacizumab, an inhibitor of angiogenesis, and everolimus, an inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), was evaluated in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma.

Phase I/II Trial of Preoperative Oxaliplatin, Docetaxel, and Capecitabine With Concurrent Radiation Therapy in Localized Carcinoma of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

PURPOSE Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is a primary treatment option for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. Combination regimens using newer agents may improve patient outcomes. This multicenter community-based phase I/II trial examined a modern triplet regimen comprised of oxaliplatin, docetaxel, and capecitabine (ODC) combined with radiation therapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS The primary end point was the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Eligibility criteria included resectable stage I to III cancer of the mid-/distal-esophagus or gastroesophageal junction, measurable disease, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 or 1. Treatment included oxaliplatin 40 mg/m(2), docetaxel 20 mg/m(2) (intravenous, weekly x 5); capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) orally twice daily on days 1 to 7, 15 to 21, and 29 to 35; and concurrent RT (45 Gy). Resection was performed during weeks 9 to 12. ODC and RT safety was determined in a phase I portion (n = 10) preceding phase II. RESULTS Fifty-nine patients were enrolled (September 2005 to February 2008; phase I/cohort 1, 10 patients; phase I/cohort 2/phase II, 49 patients). Baseline characteristics included median age of 63 years; 84% male; ECOG PS 0 and 1, 51% and 49%, respectively; adenocarcinoma and squamous cell, 69% and 18%, respectively; stage I, II, and III, 12%, 41%, and 45%, respectively. Phase I revealed no dose-limiting toxicity. Responses: pCR rate, 49%; objective response rate, 61% (24 complete and six partial responses); stable disease, 6%; and progressive disease, 2%. Sixty-nine percent of patients underwent surgery. Survival: median follow-up, 116 weeks; median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 16.3 and 24.1 months, respectively. Two-year DFS and OS were 45.1% and 52.2%, respectively. Most common (>or= 5%) grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicities were anorexia (20%), dehydration (16%), diarrhea (8%), dysphagia (10%), esophagitis (20%), fatigue (12%), hyperglycemia (6%), nausea (16%), pulmonary symptoms (14%), sepsis (6%), and vomiting (16%). All other grade 3 to 4 hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were uncommon (< 5%). CONCLUSION Preoperative ODC plus RT is active and relatively safe in patients with locoregional esophageal cancer. Importantly, this therapy can be administered within 8 weeks. This regimen warrants additional study in this setting and in combination with newer biologic agents.

Paclitaxel/carboplatin/etoposide versus gemcitabine/irinotecan in the first-line treatment of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site: a randomized, phase III Sarah Cannon Oncology Research Consortium Trial.

Purpose:To compare the results of empiric first-line therapy with paclitaxel/carboplatin/etoposide (PCE) versus gemcitabine/irinotecan, both followed by single-agent gefitinib, in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site. Patients and Methods:Patients with previously untreated carcinoma of unknown primary site were randomized to receive either PCE or gemcitabine/irinotecan. Responding and stable patients continued treatment for 4 to 6 cycles. Patients with no evidence of tumor progression at that time received single-agent gefitinib until tumor progression. The trial was designed to detect an improvement in the 2-year survival rate from 20% to 30%. Results:Between September 2003 and July 2008, 198 patients entered this multicenter, community-based trial. Because of slow accrual, the trial was stopped short of its target accrual of 320 patients. Clinical characteristics were comparable for patients receiving PCE (N = 93) and gemcitabine/irinotecan (N = 105). PCE and gemcitabine/irinotecan produced similar 2-year survival (15% vs. 18%), median survival (7.4 months vs. 8.5 months), median progression-free survival (3.3 months vs. 5.3 months), and response rate (18% vs. 18%). Grade 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and red blood cells transfusions were more common with PCE; diarrhea was more common with gemcitabine/irinotecan. The median duration of gefitinib maintenance was 3 months, suggesting no role as a maintenance therapy in this setting. Discussion:The PCE and gemcitabine/irinotecan regimens have comparable efficacy in the first-line treatment of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site. Gemcitabine/irinotecan is the preferable regimen, due to its favorable toxicity profile. However, the moderate efficacy of both regimens underscores the need for novel treatment approaches in this patient population.

Hormonal Therapy Plus Bevacizumab in Postmenopausal Patients Who Have Hormone Receptor–Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Phase II Trial of the Sarah Cannon Oncology Research Consortium

PURPOSE Preclinical models suggest that addition of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy may improve the efficacy of anti-estrogens in hormone-sensitive breast cancer. This phase II trial evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of bevacizumab added to either anastrozole or fulvestrant in the first-line treatment of patients who have hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS Women who had newly diagnosed metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer were eligible. Patients who had relapsed while receiving, or ≤ 12 months after receiving, adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy were treated with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) and fulvestrant (loading dose 500 mg intramuscularly [IM], then 250 mg IM 2 weeks later, then 250 mg IM every 4 weeks). All other patients received fulvestrant/bevacizumab or anastrozole (1 mg orally daily)/bevacizumab. Patients who were HER2-positive could also receive trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks). Patients were reevaluated after 8 weeks of therapy; responding or stable patients continued treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS Seventy-nine patients were enrolled (38 were administered anastrozole 41 fulvestrant). Median treatment duration was 8 months in the anastrozole group and 5.5 months in the fulvestrant group. Both regimens were efficacious: overall response rate and median progression-free survival for the entire group were 28% and 13.5 months, respectively. Both regimens were well-tolerated; toxicity was consistent with the known toxicity profiles of each single agent. CONCLUSION Bevacizumab combined with either anastrozole or fulvestrant was feasible and active in the first-line treatment of patients who have hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. Phase III trials evaluating the efficacy of bevacizumab added to endocrine therapy are in progress.

Brief-Duration Rituximab/Chemotherapy Followed by Maintenance Rituximab in Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Who Are Poor Candidates for R-CHOP Chemotherapy: A Phase II Trial of the Sarah Cannon Oncology Research Consortium

INTRODUCTION Patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are very elderly or have poor performance status are difficult to treat with a full course of R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/ prednisone) therapy. In this phase II trial, we treated this group of patients with a novel regimen containing 3 courses of rituximab/chemotherapy followed by maintenance rituximab. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed stage II-IV DLBCL were eligible if they were considered poor candidates for 6-8 cycles of R-CHOP therapy. Patients who were eligible for anthracycline therapy received 3 cycles of rituximab plus cyclophosphamide/ mitoxantrone/vincristine/prednisone (CNOP); the remainder of patients received R-CVP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide/ vincristine/prednisone). Patients without progression after completion of 3 cycles received 4 courses of maintenance rituximab (375 mg/m2 weekly x 4, repeated every 6 months) for 24 months. RESULTS Between May 2003 and July 2007, 51 patients were enrolled. The median age was 78 years, and 43% of patients were > 80 years of age. Nineteen patients (37%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2, and 72% had high-intermediate or high-risk International Prognostic Index scores. After a median follow-up of 48 months, the 2-, 3-, and 4-year progression-free survival rates are 71%, 65%, and 56%, respectively. The 2-, 3-, and 4-year overall survival rates are 72%, 67%, and 67%, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated, with few severe toxicities and no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION This abbreviated course of rituximab/chemotherapy, followed by maintenance rituximab, was active and well tolerated in these very elderly patients. Brief-duration rituximab/chemotherapy as well as maintenance rituximab merit further evaluation in this setting.

A Phase II Randomized Crossover Study of Liposomal Doxorubicin Versus Weekly Docetaxel in the First-line Treatment of Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE We aim to compare the efficacy and toxicity of liposomal doxorubicin and weekly docetaxel as first-line treatments for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients who had received no previous chemotherapy for MBC were eligible. Previous hormonal therapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, and radiation therapy were allowed. Patients were randomized to receive liposomal doxorubicin 40 mg/m(2) intravenously [I.V.] every 28 days or weekly docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) I.V. days 1, 8, and 15, repeated every 28 days. Patients with objective response or stable disease after 2 cycles continued treatment until tumor progression or unacceptable toxicity. At progression, patients were allowed to cross over to the other regimen. The trial was designed to detect a true difference of 10% in response rate with an 80% power. RESULTS Between March 2001 and July 2007, 102 patients were randomized. The 2 groups had similar demographics; 68% of patients had received previous adjuvant chemotherapy. Liposomal doxorubicin and weekly docetaxel produced similar objective response rates (28% vs. 31%), disease control rates (48% vs. 44%), and progression-free survival (6.5 months vs. 5.5 months). Both agents were well tolerated. Both agents produced crossover responses as second-line treatment (liposomal doxorubicin, 35%; weekly docetaxel, 14%). CONCLUSION Liposomal doxorubicin is well tolerated and has activity similar to weekly docetaxel in the first-line treatment of patients with MBC.

A Phase II Study of Higher Dose Weekly Topotecan in Relapsed Small-Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND Five-day topotecan is approved by the US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) for sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). We previously found that 4 mg/m(2) intravenous (I.V.) weekly dosing resulted in low-grade 3/4 toxicity but an overall response rate (ORR) < 10%. We hypothesized that higher topotecan dosing could improve ORR without significantly increasing toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS This multicenter phase II trial sought a 25% ORR (α = 0.04; β = 0.20). Eligible patients (sensitive or refractory relapsed SCLC; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status [PS] 0-1; measurable disease) received weekly topotecan (6 mg/m(2) I.V. for 6 weeks) and were restaged every 8 weeks. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were N = 38, enrolled 5/2006-10/2007; median age 64 years (range, 35-82), 47% female, 74% ECOG PS 1, 50% refractory relapsed SCLC. The median follow-up was 15 months (range, 12-24 months). No patients received all planned therapy; only 1 patient was able to receive all planned treatment in cycle 1 because of hematologic toxicity and progressive disease (PD). Among all patients, ORR was 8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2%-21%), 24% had stable disease, and disease in 47% progressed. Among sensitive relapsed patients ORR was 16% (95% CI, 3%-40%) with no complete responses; median response duration was 3.3 months. Five (26%) patients had stable disease; 8 (42%) patients had PD. Among sensitive relapsed patients, the median time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) was 2.5 months and 8.6 months, respectively. Among refractory relapsed patients there were no ORRs, and median TTP and OS were 1.5 months and 3.7 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicities (> 10%) included neutropenia (53%), leukopenia (42%), thrombocytopenia (37%), anemia (13%), fatigue (13%), and pain (13%). There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION Weekly topotecan (6 mg/m(2) I.V.) is not feasible because of hematologic toxicity and does not improve efficacy in patients with relapsed SCLC.

Phase II Trial of Vinflunine in Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Vinflunine is a new microtubule inhibitor with preclinical activity in small cell lung cancer (SCLC). In this phase II trial, we evaluated vinflunine in patients with relapse-sensitive and refractory SCLC. Methods: This trial aimed to achieve a 20% objective response rate (ORR) in platinum-sensitive patients. Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2 and measurable disease received vinflunine (320 mg/m2 IV) every 21 days (≤6 cycles; response evaluation every 6 weeks). Results: Patient characteristics (N = 51): median age 63 years (range, 37–85 years); male, 55%; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 2, 16%; relapse-sensitive SCLC, 53%. The overall ORR was 19.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 10–33%). Twelve (23.5%) patients had stable disease; 18 (35.3%) patients had progressive disease. Among relapse-sensitive patients, ORR was 22.2% (95% CI 9–42%). Among relapse-refractory patients, ORR was 16.7% (95% CI 5–37%). Median follow-up was 15 months (range, 12–18 months); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.6 months (95% CI 1.3–3.9 months); median overall survival (OS) was 4.9 months (95% CI 3.2–6.5 months). Among relapse-sensitive patients, PFS and OS were 1.6 and 4.9 months, respectively. Among relapsed-refractory patients, PFS and OS were 1.4 and 4.0 months, respectively. In general, vinflunine was well tolerated, although neutropenia was a notable toxicity. Grade 3/4 toxicities (>5%): neutropenia (32%), arthralgia/myalgia (16%), fatigue (16%), hyponatremia (12%), leukopenia (12%), nausea/vomiting (12%), constipation (6%), and thrombocytopenia (6%). The rates of toxicities were relatively well balanced among relapse-sensitive and refractory patients; one patient died of sepsis that was possibly treatment related. Conclusions: Vinflunine has activity in relapsed SCLC, including refractory relapsed patients. Neutropenia was common but associated with rare febrile episodes. Additional study in relapse-refractory SCLC is indicated.