Charles Butts

Randomized Phase IIB Trial of BLP25 Liposome Vaccine in Stage IIIB and IV Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of BLP25 liposome vaccine (L-BLP25) on survival and toxicity in patients with stage IIIB and IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Secondary objectives included health-related quality of life (QOL) and immune responses elicited by L-BLP25. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 and stable or responding stage IIIB or IV NSCLC after any first-line chemotherapy were prestratified by stage and randomly assigned to either L-BLP25 plus best supportive care (BSC) or BSC alone. Patients in the L-BLP25 arm received a single intravenous dose of cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 followed by eight weekly subcutaneous immunizations with L-BLP25 (1,000 microg). Subsequent immunizations were administered at 6-week intervals. RESULTS The survival results indicate a median survival time of 4.4 months longer for patients randomly assigned to the L-BLP25 arm (88 patients) compared with patients assigned to the BSC arm (83 patients; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.739; 95% CI, 0.509 to 1.073; P = .112). The greatest effect was observed in stage IIIB locoregional (LR) patients, for whom the median survival time for the L-BLP25 arm has not yet been reached compared with 13.3 months for the BSC arm (adjusted HR = 0.524; 95% CI, 0.261 to 1.052; P = .069). No significant toxicity was observed. QOL was maintained longer in patients on the L-BLP25 arm. CONCLUSION L-BLP25 maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC is feasible with minimal toxicity. The survival difference of 4.4 months observed with the vaccine did not reach statistical significance. In the subgroup of patients with stage IIIB LR disease, a strong trend in 2-year survival in favor of L-BLP25 was observed.

Body Composition as an Independent Determinant of 5-Fluorouracil–Based Chemotherapy Toxicity

Purpose: Evidence suggests that lean body mass (LBM) may be useful to normalize doses of chemotherapy. Data from a prospective study were used to determine if the highest doses of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) per kilogram LBM would be associated with dose-limiting toxicity in stage II/III colon cancer patients treated with 5-FU and leucovorin. Experimental Design: Toxicity after cycle 1 was graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 2.0. Muscle tissue was measured by computerized tomography. An extrapolation to the LBM compartment of the whole body was employed. Results: Mean values of 5-FU/LBM of the entire population were different in terms of presence or absence of toxicity (P = 0.036). A cut point of 20 mg 5-FU/kg LBM seemed to be a threshold for developing toxicity (P = 0.005). This observation was pertinent to women (odds ratio, 16.73; P = 0.021). Women in this study had a relatively low proportion of LBM relative to their body surface area. Conclusion: Our study shows that low LBM is a significant predictor of toxicity in female patients administered 5-FU using the convention of dosing per unit of body surface area. We conclude that variation in toxicity between females and males may be partially explained by this feature of body composition.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Vinorelbine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Observation in Completely Resected Stage IB and II Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Updated Survival Analysis of JBR-10

PURPOSE Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (ACT) is now an accepted standard for completely resected stage II and III A non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Long-term follow-up is important to document persistent benefit and late toxicity. We report here updated overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) data. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with completely resected stage IB (T2N0, n = 219) or II (T1-2N1, n = 263) NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive 4 cycles of vinorelbine/cisplatin or observation. All efficacy analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Results Median follow-up was 9.3 years (range, 5.8 to 13.8; 33 lost to follow-up); there were 271 deaths in 482 randomly assigned patients. ACT continues to show a benefit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.99; P = .04). There was a trend for interaction with disease stage (P = .09; HR for stage II, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.5 to 0.92; P = .01; stage IB, HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.52; P = .87). ACT resulted in significantly prolonged DSS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.97; P = .03). Observation was associated with significantly higher risk of death from lung cancer (P = .02), with no difference in rates of death from other causes or second primary malignancies between the arms. CONCLUSION Prolonged follow-up of patients from the JBR.10 trial continues to show a benefit in survival for adjuvant chemotherapy. This benefit appears to be confined to N1 patients. There was no increase in death from other causes in the chemotherapy arm.

Tecemotide (L-BLP25) versus placebo after chemoradiotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (START): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Effective maintenance therapies after chemoradiotherapy for lung cancer are lacking. Our aim was to investigate whether the MUC1 antigen-specific cancer immunotherapy tecemotide improves survival in patients with stage III unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer when given as maintenance therapy after chemoradiation. METHODS The phase 3 START trial was an international, randomised, double-blind trial that recruited patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer who had completed chemoradiotherapy within the 4-12 week window before randomisation and received confirmation of stable disease or objective response. Patients were stratified by stage (IIIA vs IIIB), response to chemoradiotherapy (stable disease vs objective response), delivery of chemoradiotherapy (concurrent vs sequential), and region using block randomisation, and were randomly assigned (2:1, double-blind) by a central interactive voice randomisation system to either tecemotide or placebo. Injections of tecemotide (806 μg lipopeptide) or placebo were given every week for 8 weeks, and then every 6 weeks until disease progression or withdrawal. Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m(2) (before tecemotide) or saline (before placebo) was given once before the first study drug administration. The primary endpoint was overall survival in a modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00409188. FINDINGS From Feb 22, 2007, to Nov 15, 2011, 1513 patients were randomly assigned (1006 to tecemotide and 507 to placebo). 274 patients were excluded from the primary analysis population as a result of a clinical hold, resulting in analysis of 829 patients in the tecemotide group and 410 in the placebo group in the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was 25.6 months (95% CI 22.5-29.2) with tecemotide versus 22.3 months (19.6-25.5) with placebo (adjusted HR 0.88, 0.75-1.03; p=0.123). In the patients who received previous concurrent chemoradiotherapy, median overall survival for the 538 (65%) of 829 patients assigned to tecemotide was 30.8 months (95% CI 25.6-36.8) compared with 20.6 months (17.4-23.9) for the 268 (65%) of 410 patients assigned to placebo (adjusted HR 0.78, 0.64-0.95; p=0.016). In patients who received previous sequential chemoradiotherapy, overall survival did not differ between the 291 (35%) patients in the tecemotide group and the 142 (35%) patients in the placebo group (19.4 months [95% CI 17.6-23.1] vs 24.6 months [18.8-33.0], respectively; adjusted HR 1.12, 0.87-1.44; p=0.38). Grade 3-4 adverse events seen with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were dyspnoea (49 [5%] of 1024 patients in the tecemotide group vs 21 [4%] of 477 patients in the placebo group), metastases to central nervous system (29 [3%] vs 6 [1%]), and pneumonia (23 [2%] vs 12 [3%]). Serious adverse events with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were pneumonia (30 [3%] in the tecemotide group vs 14 [3%] in the placebo group), dyspnoea (29 [3%] vs 13 [3%]), and metastases to central nervous system (32 [3%] vs 9 [2%]). Serious immune-related adverse events did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION We found no significant difference in overall survival with the administration of tecemotide after chemoradiotherapy compared with placebo for all patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. However, tecemotide might have a role for patients who initially receive concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and further study in this population is warranted. FUNDING Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany).

Multitargeted Antifolate LY231514 as First-Line Chemotherapy for Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase II Study

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the multitargeted antifolate LY231514 (MTA) in patients receiving initial chemotherapy for unresectable, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with measurable, advanced NSCLC who had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced disease were considered for this study. Eligible patients who gave written informed consent initially received MTA 600 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) for 10 minutes every 3 weeks. After three patients received treatment at this dose, the dose was reduced to 500 mg/m(2) IV at the same infusion time and frequency because of toxicity seen in this study and another Canadian MTA trial in colorectal cancer. Patients received up to four cycles after complete or partial remission or six cycles after stable disease was documented. RESULTS Thirty-three patients were accrued onto the study. All were assessable for toxicity, and 30 patients were assessable for response. All but one patient had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, 18 patients (55%) had adenocarcinoma, and nine patients (27%) had squamous cell carcinoma. Twenty-five patients (76%) had stage IV disease, and the remainder had stage IIIB disease at trial entry. Seven patients experienced a confirmed partial response and no complete responses were seen; thus, the overall response rate was 23.3% (95% confidence interval, 9.9% to 42.3%). The median duration of response was 3.1 months (range, 2. 3 to 13.5 months) after a median follow-up period of 7.9 months. Four (67%) of six patients with stage IIIB disease and three (12.5%) of 24 with stage IV disease responded to treatment. Four patients (13.3%) experienced febrile neutropenia and 13 (39%) experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, whereas only one patient (3%) developed grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Nonhematologic toxicity was generally mild or moderate, but 39% of patients developed a grade 3 skin rash. Most other toxicities comprised grade 1 or 2 stomatitis, diarrhea, lethargy, and anorexia. Ten patients stopped protocol therapy because of toxicity. CONCLUSION MTA seems to have clinically meaningful activity as a single agent against advanced NSCLC. Toxicity is generally mild and tolerable. Further study of this agent in combination with cisplatin and other active drugs is warranted in this disease.

Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin or Carboplatin, With or Without Cetuximab, As First-Line Therapy for Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab added to first-line gemcitabine/platinum in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods In this noncomparative, randomized trial, chemotherapy-naive patients with recurrent/metastatic NSCLC (stage IV or stage IIIB with malignant pleural effusion) were eligible. Patients received cisplatin (75 mg/m2 IV, every 3 weeks) or carboplatin (area under the concentration-versus-time curve of 5 intravenously [IV], every 3 weeks), and gemcitabine (1,250 or 1,000 mg/m2 IV, days 1 and 8) plus cetuximab (400 mg/m2 IV day 1, followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly), in arm A, or chemotherapy alone, in arm B. Response rate was the primary end point; safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary end points. Results Sixty-five patients were randomly assigned to arm A and 66 to arm B. Partial responses were observed in 18 patients (27.7%; 95% CI, 17.3 to 40.2) in arm A and 12 (18.2%; 95% CI, 9.8 to 29.6) in arm ...

First-Line Erlotinib Followed by Second-Line Cisplatin-Gemcitabine Chemotherapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The TORCH Randomized Trial

PURPOSE Erlotinib prolonged survival of unselected patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were not eligible for further chemotherapy, and two phase II studies suggested it might be an alternative to first-line chemotherapy. A randomized phase III trial was designed to test whether first-line erlotinib followed at progression by cisplatin-gemcitabine was not inferior in terms of survival to the standard inverse sequence. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage IIIB (with pleural effusion or supraclavicular nodes) to IV NSCLC and performance status of 0 to 1 were eligible. With a 95% CI upper limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio (HR) for death, 80% power, a one-sided α = .025, and two interim analyses, a sample size of 900 patients was planned. RESULTS At the first planned interim analysis with half the events, the inferiority boundary was crossed, and the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended early termination of the study. Seven hundred sixty patients (median age, 62 years; range, 27 to 81 years) had been randomly assigned. Baseline characteristics were balanced between study arms. As of June 1, 2011, median follow-up was 24.3 months, and 536 deaths were recorded (263 in the standard treatment arm and 273 in the experimental arm). Median survival was 11.6 months (95% CI, 10.2 to 13.3 months) in the standard arm and 8.7 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 10.5 months) in the experimental arm. Adjusted HR of death in the experimental arm was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.47). There was no heterogeneity across sex, smoking habit, histotype, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. CONCLUSION In unselected patients with advanced NSCLC, first-line erlotinib followed at progression by cisplatin-gemcitabine was significantly inferior in terms of overall survival compared with the standard sequence of first-line chemotherapy followed by erlotinib.

Phase II Study of Vandetanib or Placebo in Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Complete or Partial Response to Induction Chemotherapy With or Without Radiation Therapy: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study BR.20

PURPOSE This double-blind randomized phase II trial examined whether vandetanib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial and epidermal growth factor receptors, could prolong progression-free survival in responding patients with small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to combination chemotherapy (+/- thoracic or prophylactic cranial radiation) received oral vandetanib 300 mg/d or matched placebo. With 100 patients and 77 events, the study had 80% power to detect an improvement in median progression-free survival from 4 to 6.5 months (one-sided, 10%-level test). RESULTS Between May 2003 and March 2006, 107 patients were accrued; 46 had limited disease and 61 extensive disease. There were fewer patients with a performance status of 0 (n = 11 v 20), and fewer had CR to initial therapy (n = 4 v 8) in the vandetanib arm. Vandetanib patients had more toxicity and required more dose modifications for gastrointestinal toxicity and rash. Asymptomatic Corrected QT interval (QTC) prolongation was observed in eight vandetanib patients. Median progression-free survival for vandetanib and placebo was 2.7 and 2.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 80% CI, 0.75 to 1.36; one-sided P = .51). Overall survival for vandetanib was 10.6 versus 11.9 months for placebo (HR, 1.43; 80% CI, 1.00 to 2.05; one-sided P = 0.9). In planned subgroup analyses, a significant interaction was noted (P = .01): limited-stage vandetanib patients had longer overall survival (HR, 0.45; one-sided P = .07) and extensive-stage vandetanib patients shorter survival compared with placebo (HR, 2.27; one-sided P = .996). CONCLUSION Vandetanib failed to demonstrate efficacy as maintenance therapy for small-cell lung cancer.

Class III β-Tubulin Expression and Benefit from Adjuvant Cisplatin/Vinorelbine Chemotherapy in Operable Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Analysis of NCIC JBR.10

Purpose: High class III β-tubulin (bTubIII) expression in advanced non–small cell lung cancer is known to correlate with reduced response rates and inferior survival with anti-microtubule agents. JBR.10 showed a 12% and 15% improvement in 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively, with the addition of cisplatin and vinorelbine following resection of stage IB-II non–small cell lung cancer. We sought to determine the effect of bTubIII on patient outcome and benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in the JBR.10 trial. Experimental Design: We did a semiquantitative immunohistochemical assay for bTubIII on primary tumor tissue available from 265 of the 482 patients in JBR.10. Tumors were classified as bTubIII “low” or “high” using a validated method. We examined the prognostic effect of bTubIII in patients treated with or without chemotherapy and the survival benefit from chemotherapy in low versus high bTubIII subgroups. Results: High bTubIII expression was associated with poorer RFS and OS in patients treated with surgery alone but not in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy. The RFS and OS benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy were greater in high versus low tubulin expressors. However, with Cox regression, the interaction between bTubIII status and chemotherapy treatment in predicting RFS or OS did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: Chemotherapy seemed to overcome the negative prognostic effect of high bTubIII expression. Greater benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy was seen in patients with high bTubIII expression. This is contrary to what has been seen in the setting of advanced disease; possible reasons for this difference are being explored.

Gefitinib Versus Placebo in Completely Resected Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of the NCIC CTG BR19 Study

PURPOSE Survival of patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unsatisfactory, and in 2002, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy was not established. This phase III study assessed the impact of postoperative adjuvant gefitinib on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with completely resected (stage IB, II, or IIIA) NSCLC stratified by stage, histology, sex, postoperative radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gefitinib 250 mg per day or placebo for 2 years. Study end points were OS, disease-free survival (DFS), and toxicity. RESULTS As a result of early closure, 503 of 1,242 planned patients were randomly assigned (251 to gefitinib and 252 to placebo). Baseline factors were balanced between the arms. With a median of 4.7 years of follow-up (range, 0.1 to 6.3 years), there was no difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.64; P = .14) or DFS (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.61; P = .15) between the arms. Exploratory analyses demonstrated no DFS (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.76; P = .14) or OS benefit (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.71; P = .18) from gefitinib for 344 patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type tumors. Similarly, there was no DFS (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 0.44 to 7.73; P = .395) or OS benefit (HR, 3.16; 95% CI, 0.61 to 16.45; P = .15) from gefitinib for the 15 patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors. Adverse events were those expected with an EGFR inhibitor. Serious adverse events occurred in ≤ 5% of patients, except infection, fatigue, and pain. One patient in each arm had fatal pneumonitis. CONCLUSION Although the trial closed prematurely and definitive statements regarding the efficacy of adjuvant gefitinib cannot be made, these results indicate that it is unlikely to be of benefit.