C. Eschbach

Molecular biomarkers in non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis of data from the phase 3 FLEX study.

BACKGROUND Findings from the phase 3 FLEX study showed that the addition of cetuximab to cisplatin and vinorelbine significantly improved overall survival, compared with cisplatin and vinorelbine alone, in the first-line treatment of EGFR-expressing, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether candidate biomarkers were predictive for the efficacy of chemotherapy plus cetuximab in this setting. METHODS Genomic DNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumour tissue of patients enrolled in the FLEX study was screened for KRAS codon 12 and 13 and EGFR kinase domain mutations with PCR-based assays. In FFPE tissue sections, EGFR copy number was assessed by dual-colour fluorescence in-situ hybridisation and PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry. Treatment outcome was investigated according to biomarker status in all available samples from patients in the intention-to-treat population. The primary endpoint in the FLEX study was overall survival. The FLEX study, which is ongoing but not recruiting participants, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00148798. FINDINGS KRAS mutations were detected in 75 of 395 (19%) tumours and activating EGFR mutations in 64 of 436 (15%). EGFR copy number was scored as increased in 102 of 279 (37%) tumours and PTEN expression as negative in 107 of 303 (35%). Comparisons of treatment outcome between the two groups (chemotherapy plus cetuximab vs chemotherapy alone) according to biomarker status provided no indication that these biomarkers were of predictive value. Activating EGFR mutations were identified as indicators of good prognosis, with patients in both treatment groups whose tumours carried such mutations having improved survival compared with those whose tumours did not (chemotherapy plus cetuximab: median 17·5 months [95% CI 11·7-23·4] vs 8·5 months [7·1-10·8], hazard ratio [HR] 0·52 [0·32-0·84], p=0·0063; chemotherapy alone: 23·8 months [15·2-not reached] vs 10·0 months [8·7-11·0], HR 0·35 [0·21-0·59], p<0·0001). Expression of PTEN seemed to be a potential indicator of good prognosis, with patients whose tumours expressed PTEN having improved survival compared with those whose tumours did not, although this finding was not significant (chemotherapy plus cetuximab: median 11·4 months [8·6-13·6] vs 6·8 months [5·9-12·7], HR 0·80 [0·55-1·16], p=0·24; chemotherapy alone: 11·0 months [9·2-12·6] vs 9·3 months [7·6-11·9], HR 0·77 [0·54-1·10], p=0·16). INTERPRETATION The efficacy of chemotherapy plus cetuximab in the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC seems to be independent of each of the biomarkers assessed. FUNDING Merck KGaA.

A phase II double-blind study to investigate efficacy and safety of two doses of the triple angiokinase inhibitor BIBF 1120 in patients with relapsed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND To assess the efficacy, safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of BIBF 1120 in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS Patients with locally advanced or metastatic relapsed NSCLC in whom first- or second-line platinum-based chemotherapy failed were randomly allocated to daily 250 mg BIBF 1120 b.i.d. or 150 mg BIBF 1120 b.i.d. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective tumour response (RECIST). Incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs) were reported. RESULTS Seventy-three patients received BIBF 1120. Median PFS was 6.9 weeks, with no significant difference between treatment arms. Median overall survival (OS) was 21.9 weeks. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 0-1 patients (n = 56) had a median PFS of 11.6 weeks and a median OS of 37.7 weeks. Tumour stabilisation was achieved in 46% of patients (ECOG 0-1 patients: 59%), with one confirmed partial response (250 mg b.i.d.). Most commonly reported drug-related AEs were nausea (57.5%), diarrhoea (47.9%), vomiting (42.5%), anorexia (28.8%), abdominal pain (13.7%) and reversible alanine transaminase (13.7%) and aspartate aminotransferase elevations (9.6%). BIBF 1120 displayed dose-linear pharmacokinetic characteristics. CONCLUSION Continuous treatment with BIBF 1120 was well tolerated, with no difference in efficacy between treatment arms. PFS and objective response with single-agent treatment in advanced disease warrants further exploration.

A randomized phase II study of pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin as first-line therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND Pemetrexed plus cisplatin was approved for first-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in patients with nonsquamous histology after initiation of this study. This phase II study evaluated pemetrexed plus cisplatin and pemetrexed plus carboplatin as first-line treatments for stage IIIB/IV NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS The patients were randomized (1:1) to 2 parallel arms: pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) or pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus carboplatin (area under the curve 6) day 1 every 3 weeks (maximum, 6 cycles). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary objective; secondary objectives included overall survival (OS), 1-year survival, and safety. RESULTS Sixty-five patients were randomized to each treatment arm. The patients treated with pemetrexed plus cisplatin had a median age of 64 years and were predominantly men (42 [64.6%]) with nonsquamous histology (53 [81.5%]), stage IV (61 [92.4%]) disease, and a performance status of 0 (40 [61.5%]). Median PFS was 6.0 months, 6-month PFS rate was 50.5%, median OS was 11.7 months, and 1-year survival rate was 47.5%. Drug-related grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia (11 [16.9%]), anemia (5 [7.7%]), thrombocytopenia (2 [3.1%]), and nausea (3 [4.6%]). Patients treated with pemetrexed plus carboplatin had a median age of 63 years, were predominantly men (46 [70.8%]) with nonsquamous histology (52 [80.0%]), stage IV (58 [86.6%]) disease, and a performance status of 0 (45 [69.2%]). The median PFS was 4.7 months, the 6-month PFS rate was 34.9%, median OS was 8.9 months, and 1-year survival rate was 39.2%. Drug-related grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia (17 [26.2%]), thrombocytopenia (11 [16.9%]), anemia (7 [10.8%]), and nausea (5 [7.7%]). CONCLUSIONS Both the pemetrexed plus cisplatin and pemetrexed plus carboplatin arms met their primary endpoints and demonstrated efficacy and tolerability as first-line therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. http://ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00402051.

Pemetrexed in the treatment of malignant mesothelioma: results from an expanded access program in Germany.

An international expanded access program was initiated to provide access to treatment with pemetrexed prior registration and reimbursement for malignant mesothelioma (MM). Chemonaïve and pretreated patients with inoperable MM of the pleura or peritoneum were eligible. This report describes the results obtained in German centers. Investigators could choose between three treatments: Pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) alone (P) or in combination with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) (PC) or carboplatin AUC 5 (PCb). From November 2002 to June 2004, a total of 567 patients (554 with pleural MM; 41% pretreated) were included. Of 548 evaluable patients with pleural MM, 191 received P, 137 PC and 220 PCb. Patients in the P group were more often pretreated (70%) and had worse performance status compared with the other groups. In the P, PC, and PCb groups overall response rate (ORR) was 16%, 24% and 18%, median time to progression (TTP) was 5.5, 8.2, and 6.9 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 8.7, 11.3 and 9.7 months respectively. Efficacy outcomes were better for chemonaïve than for pretreated patients, and P was less hematotoxic than PC or PCb. Treatment of pleural MM with pemetrexed alone or in combination with platinum was safe and active as first and second-line therapy.

A Phase II Randomized Study of Cisplatin-Pemetrexed plus either Enzastaurin or Placebo in Chemonaive Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Objectives: Enzastaurin is a serine/threonine kinase inhibitor that targets protein kinase C and AKT pathways. Enzastaurin and pemetrexed demonstrated synergy in preclinical studies. This trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of first-line enzastaurin plus cisplatin-pemetrexed in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A safety lead-in phase (n = 13) of enzastaurin 125 or 250 mg twice daily was added to cisplatin-pemetrexed. A subsequent randomized, placebo-controlled phase II study (n = 22) of the combination was conducted to evaluate efficacy. Results: The combination was well tolerated and showed activity, with 7 (53.8%, 95% CI 26.7–80.9) confirmed partial responses and 2 stable diseases in 13 treated patients in the lead-in phase. However, the study was terminated early based on interim results from two phase II NSCLC studies of enzastaurin plus cytotoxic chemotherapy, which indicated no efficacy improvement. Conclusions: Enzastaurin and cisplatin-pemetrexed is tolerable with preliminary activity in patients with advanced NSCLC, but because of a lack of efficacy improvement in other phase II NSCLC studies, the study was terminated early.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase II Trial Comparing Gemcitabine-Cisplatin plus the LTB4 Antagonist LY293111 versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin plus Placebo in First-Line Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: In this phase II study, patients with stage IIIB/IV non–small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive LY293111 (200 mg twice daily [200 LY293111] or 600 mg twice daily [600 LY293111]) or placebo for 7 days, followed by concurrent cisplatin (75 mg/m2; day 1) and gemcitabine (1250 mg/m2; days 1 and 8), every 21 days.The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, (PFS), with 75% power to detect 33% improvement compared with placebo (5 months). Methods: Of 200 randomized patients, 195 were treated. Demographics were well balanced across treatment arms: 65% of the patients were men; median age was 62 years; 85% had stage IV disease; and patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 (36%) or 1 (64%). Results: The most frequent study drug–related toxicities were nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. Response rates were similar across treatment arms (200 LY293111: 20%; 600 LY293111: 25%; placebo: 31%). Conclusions: Median PFS (95% confidence interval) was not significantly different across treatment arms (200 LY293111: 4.6 months [3.2–5.0]; 600 LY293111: 5.6 months [4.1–6.8]; placebo: 6.0 months [5.2–7.5]). LY293111 combined with gemcitabine-cisplatin did not increase median PFS compared with placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer.

Tasisulam Sodium (LY573636 Sodium) as Third-Line Treatment in Patients With Unresectable, Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase-II Study

Introduction: Tasisulam sodium (hereafter referred to as tasisulam) is a novel anticancer compound that induces apoptosis and exhibits antiangiogenesis activity in a broad range of cancer models, including non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Tasisulam was administered as a 2-hour infusion every 21 days as third-line treatment in patients with advanced (stage IIIB/IV) NSCLC. Results: Thirty-two patients received a Cmax target dose of 420 µg/ml. Median time to progression was 3.12 months, median progression-free survival was 2.69 months, and median overall survival was 8.48 months. There were no objective responses; 43.8% of patients achieved stable disease. A high rate of grade-4 hematologic toxicity in the first 30 patients led to exploration of a lower Cmax target dose of 380 µg/ml. The rate of grade-4 hematologic toxicity (thrombocytopenia and/or neutropenia) at the 380-µg/ml dose (n = 20) was 20% versus 34% at the 420-µg/ml dose. Conclusions: Tasisulam has only modest activity as a third-line treatment of patients with unresectable/metastatic NSCLC. The high rate of grade-4 hematologic toxicity observed with this highly albumin– bound compound in this patient population provided challenges for fixed Cmax-based dosing. Alternative dosing methods, including varying the Cmax target dose by predose albumin, are under investigation in other studies.

Prospective, multicenter, randomized, independent-group, open-label phase II study to investigate the efficacy and safety of three regimens with two doses of sagopilone as second-line therapy in patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION Sagopilone is the first fully synthetic epothilone in clinical development and has proven preclinical activity in tumor models. This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II study examined the efficacy and safety of three regimens with two doses and two infusion durations of second-line sagopilone in pretreated patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS Eligibility criteria included: at least one measurable lesion by modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors; World Health Organization performance status of 0 or 1; and failure of previous platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive: 16 mg/m2 sagopilone over 3 h (treatment arm A); 22 mg/m(2) sagopilone over 0.5 h (treatment arm B); or 22 mg/m2 sagopilone over 3h (treatment arm C). Treatment duration was two to six courses every 3 weeks; more than six treatment courses were permitted if there was sustained clinical benefit. The primary efficacy endpoint was best overall response after six courses; at least five confirmed responders per arm indicated a successful outcome. RESULTS In total, 128 patients (44, arm A; 41, arm B; 43, arm C) were randomized; 127 received at least one infusion of sagopilone. Baseline demographic data were similar across all arms. Eight patients across all arms had a confirmed partial response; the primary endpoint was not achieved. The most frequently reported adverse event (AE) was peripheral sensory neuropathy (75%). Most hematologic AEs were grade 1 or 2. CONCLUSION As fewer than five patients per arm responded after six treatment courses, the primary endpoint was not met. Sagopilone was only moderately tolerated. Most AEs, including peripheral neuropathy, were grade 1 or 2; hematologic toxicities were rare.

Schmerztherapie in der Palliativmedizin

A consistent pain management together with treatment of dyspnoea belongs to the main issues in symptom control in particular in palliative thoracic oncology. Together with the medicamentous therapy the psychologic and social circumstances of the affected patients have to be considered as factors influencing the experience of pain. The therapeutic fundament according to the WHO guideline for cancer pain is the opiate based medicamentous adjustment combined with non-opioids. In principle, this should be performed preferably orally, as simply as possible, according to a fix drug schedule and individually adjusted to the needed dosage. Breakthrough pain has to be treated with rapidly efficacious, non-retarded analgetics. The typical adverse reaction profile for opiates like constipation and initial nausea should be considered prophylactically by applying concurrent medication with adjuvants. Co-analgesic drugs like anticonvulsiva or corticosteroids could support the analgetic effect and are used preferably in case of neuropathic pain. Primary aim in analgesic therapy is to achieve the best possible pain reduction and hence to safeguard quality of life.

SOP – Inappetenz und Kachexie

1 Internistische Onkologie der Thoraxtumoren, Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen Heidelberg, Thoraxklinik am UniversitätsklinikumHeidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland 2 Spezialisierte ambulante Palliativversorgung Bayreuth-Kulmbach, Bayreuth, Deutschland 3 Apotheke des Universitätsklinikums Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen – EMN, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Deutschland