David D. Biggs

Seven-Year Follow-Up Assessment of Cardiac Function in NSABP B-31, a Randomized Trial Comparing Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Paclitaxel (ACP) With ACP Plus Trastuzumab As Adjuvant Therapy for Patients With Node-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Cardiac dysfunction (CD) is a recognized risk associated with the addition of trastuzumab to adjuvant chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer, especially when the treatment regimen includes anthracyclines. Given the demonstrated efficacy of trastuzumab, ongoing assessment of cardiac safety and identification of risk factors for CD are important for optimal patient care. PATIENTS AND METHODS In National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-31, a phase III adjuvant trial, 1,830 patients who met eligibility criteria for initiation of trastuzumab were evaluated for CD. Recovery from CD was also assessed. A statistical model was developed to estimate the risk of severe congestive heart failure (CHF). Baseline patient characteristics associated with anthracycline-related decline in cardiac function were also identified. RESULTS At 7-year follow-up, 37 (4.0%) of 944 patients who received trastuzumab experienced a cardiac event (CE) versus 10 (1.3%) of 743 patients in the control arm. One cardiac-related death has occurred in each arm of the protocol. A Cardiac Risk Score, calculated using patient age and baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by multiple-gated acquisition scan, statistically correlates with the risk of a CE. After stopping trastuzumab, the majority of patients who experienced CD recovered LVEF in the normal range, although some decline from baseline often persists. Only two CEs occurred more than 2 years after initiation of trastuzumab. CONCLUSION The late development of CHF after the addition of trastuzumab to paclitaxel after doxorubicin/ cyclophosphamide chemotherapy is uncommon. The risk versus benefit of trastuzumab as given in this regimen remains strongly in favor of trastuzumab.

Olanzapine for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

BACKGROUND We examined the efficacy of olanzapine for the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. METHODS In a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we compared olanzapine with placebo, in combination with dexamethasone, aprepitant or fosaprepitant, and a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3-receptor antagonist, in patients with no previous chemotherapy who were receiving cisplatin (≥70 mg per square meter of body-surface area) or cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin. The doses of the three concomitant drugs administered before and after chemotherapy were similar in the two groups. The two groups received either 10 mg of olanzapine orally or matching placebo daily on days 1 through 4. Nausea prevention was the primary end point; a complete response (no emesis and no use of rescue medication) was a secondary end point. RESULTS In the analysis, we included 380 patients who could be evaluated (192 assigned to olanzapine, and 188 to placebo). The proportion of patients with no chemotherapy-induced nausea was significantly greater with olanzapine than with placebo in the first 24 hours after chemotherapy (74% vs. 45%, P=0.002), the period from 25 to 120 hours after chemotherapy (42% vs. 25%, P=0.002), and the overall 120-hour period (37% vs. 22%, P=0.002). The complete-response rate was also significantly increased with olanzapine during the three periods: 86% versus 65% (P<0.001), 67% versus 52% (P=0.007), and 64% versus 41% (P<0.001), respectively. Although there were no grade 5 toxic effects, some patients receiving olanzapine had increased sedation (severe in 5%) on day 2. CONCLUSIONS Olanzapine, as compared with placebo, significantly improved nausea prevention, as well as the complete-response rate, among previously untreated patients who were receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02116530.).

Definitive Results of a Phase III Adjuvant Trial Comparing Three Chemotherapy Regimens in Women With Operable, Node-Positive Breast Cancer: The NSABP B-38 Trial

PURPOSE Anthracycline- and taxane-based three-drug chemotherapy regimens have proven benefit as adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer. This trial (NSABP B-38; Combination Chemotherapy in Treating Women Who Have Undergone Surgery for Node-Positive Breast Cancer) asked whether the incorporation of a fourth drug could improve outcomes relative to two standard regimens and provided a direct comparison of those two regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS We randomly assigned 4,894 women with node-positive early-stage breast cancer to six cycles of docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC), four cycles of dose-dense (DD) doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of DD paclitaxel (P; DD AC→P), or DD AC→P with four cycles of gemcitabine (G) added to the DD paclitaxel (DD AC→PG). Primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support was required; erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were used at the investigators discretion. RESULTS There were no significant differences in 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) between DD AC→PG and DD AC→P (80.6% v 82.2%; HR, 1.07; P = .41), between DD AC→PG and TAC (80.6% v 80.1%; HR, 0.93; P = .39), in 5-year overall survival (OS) between DD AC→PG and DD AC→P (90.8% v 89.1%; HR, 0.85; P = .13), between DD AC→PG and TAC (90.8% v 89.6%; HR, 0.86; P = .17), or between DD AC→P versus TAC for DFS (HR, 0.87; P = .07) and OS (HR, 1.01; P = .96). Grade 3 to 4 toxicities for TAC, DD AC→P, and DD AC→PG, respectively, were febrile neutropenia (9%, 3%, 3%; P < .001), sensory neuropathy (< 1%, 7%, 6%; P < .001), and diarrhea (7%, 2%, 2%; P < .001). Exploratory analyses for ESAs showed no association with DFS events (HR, 1.02; P = .95). CONCLUSION Adding G to DD AC→P did not improve outcomes. No significant differences in efficacy were identified between DD AC→P and TAC, although toxicity profiles differed.

NSABP B-38: Definitive analysis of a randomized adjuvant trial comparing dose-dense (DD) AC→paclitaxel (P) plus gemcitabine (G) with DD AC→P and with docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC) in women with operable, node-positive breast cancer.

LBA1000 Background: The primary aims were to determine whether adjuvant DD AC→PG will be superior to DD AC→P as well as to TAC in DFS and to compare the relative DFS of TAC and DD AC→P. Secondary endpoints include survival and toxicity. METHODS From Nov 3, 2004 to May 3, 2007, 4894 women were randomized; 1630 to TAC (docetaxel [T] 75 mg/m2, doxorubicin [A] 50 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide [C] 500 mg/m2 q3 wks x 6), 1634 to DD AC→P (A 60 mg/m2 and C 600 mg/m2 q2 wks x 4 followed by P 175 mg/m2 q2 wks x 4), and 1630 to DD AC→PG (A 60 mg/m2 and C 600 mg/m2 q2 wks x 4 → P 175 mg/m2 + G 2000 mg/m2q2 wks x 4). Primary G-CSF support was required and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) were used at investigator discretion. 52% were postmenopausal, 65% had 1 - 3 positive nodes, and 80% had HR+ breast cancer. Log-rank tests were used for pair-wise comparisons of the primary (DFS) and secondary (OS) endpoints among the three treatment arms. RESULTS With 64 months median follow-up, 5-year DFS in DD AC→PG group was 80.6% compared with 82.2% in DD AC→P group (HR=1.1; p=0.27) and 80.1 % (HR=0.97; p=0.71) in TAC group. 5-year OS was 90.8% in DD AC→PG group as compared with 89.1% (HR=.89; p=0.25) in DD AC→P group and 89.6 % (HR=0.90; p=0.32) in TAC group. HR for DFS and OS of DD AC→P vs. TAC were 0.89 (p=0.14) and 1.01 (p=0.92) respectively. Toxicities for TAC, DD AC→P, DD AC→PG, respectively: febrile neutropenia (Gr 3/4: 9%, 4%, 4% [p<0.001]), sensory neuropathy (Gr 3/4: <1%, 7%, 6% [p<0.001]), diarrhea (Gr 3/4: 8 %, 2%, 2% [p<0.001]). Hgb was <10 in 12%, 26%, 33% with ESA use in 35.2%, 47%, 51.6% and transfusions in 3.7%, 6.3%, 9.4%. Deaths on treatment: N=13, 5, 7 (p=0.2). AML/MDS N=5, 8, 11. All cycles completed in 91% for TAC and 88% for DD regimens. CONCLUSIONS Addition of G to DD AC→P did not improve outcomes. No significant differences in efficacy endpoints were identified between DD AC→P and TAC, though toxicity profiles differed. FUNDING NCI PHS U10-CA-37377, -69974, -12027, -69651 and NCCTG U10-CA25224, with additional funding from Eli Lilly & Company, and Amgen, Inc.

A Phase II Study of Estramustine, Docetaxel, and Exisulind in Patients with Hormone- Refractory Prostate Cancer: Results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 90004

PURPOSE Docetaxel/estramustine is a known active regimen in hormonerefractory prostate cancer (HRPC). A phase II study was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of docetaxel/estramustine combined with exisulind, an apoptotic antineoplastic drug. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eighty men with chemotherapy-naive HRPC were enrolled in a multicenter, cooperative group study. The treatment regimen consisted of oral estramustine (280 mg 3 times daily for 5 days), docetaxel 70 mg/m2, oral exisulind (250 mg twice daily), oral dexamethasone (8 mg twice daily for 3 days), and oral warfarin (2 mg daily). RESULTS Seventy-five eligible patients were treated with a median of 6 cycles of therapy. Fortyseven patients (62.7%; 95% CI, 50.7%-73.6%) had a > or = 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen levels. Forty-six patients had measurable disease with 6 partial responses (13%; 95% CI, 4.9%-26.3%). The main grade 3/4 toxicities were neutrophils (79%), fatigue (15%), and thrombosis/embolism (10%). The median time to first progression was 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.4-6.3 months) and the median survival time was 17.8 months (95% CI, 14.7-20.1 months). CONCLUSION The combination of estramustine/docetaxel/exisulind was associated with significant thomboembolic toxicity despite prophylactic warfarin. The contribution of exisulind to toxicity is uncertain. Prostate-specific antigen decline, response rates, and progression-free and overall survival are similar to those reported with docetaxel/estramustine.

Feasibility assessment of patient reporting of symptomatic adverse events in multicenter cancer clinical trials

Importance In cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials. Objective To examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials. Design, Setting, and Participants A total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted &kgr; statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014. Results Of the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24-88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling “too ill” in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most &kgr; < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance Participants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials.

BRCA1 E1644X: a deleterious mutation in an African American individual with early onset breast cancer

An African American individual with early onset breast cancer has a unique BRCA1 germline mutation, E1644X, that truncates the protein’s carboxy terminal region. DNA sequencing for E1644X mutation and five BRCA1 exon-11 single nucleotide polymorphisms showed tumor LOH. Clinical history suggests paternal transmission of the deleterious allele, and tumor polymorphisms provide some insight into the ancestral origins of the mutation.

Phase II study of carboplatin, pemetrexed, and bevacizumab in advanced nonsquamous non–small‐cell lung cancer

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death throughout the world. Despite new chemotherapeutic, immunomodulating and molecularly targeted agents, patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease still have a poor prognosis. This trial looked to combine antiangiogenic therapy with a first‐line cytotoxic chemotherapy doublet, hoping to extend median progression‐free survival (PFS) while minimizing toxicity in patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this single institution, single‐arm study, 51 patients (age >18 yo) were followed from 2007 to 2012. Patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC and patients with recurrent unresectable disease (nonradiation candidates) were eligible. Treatment consisted of carboplatin AUC 5 IV 30‐60 minutes, pemetrexed 500/mg2 IV 10 minutes, bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV (90 minutes 1st dose, 60 minutes 2nd dose, 30 minutes subsequent doses). Treatment was administered every 21 days and planned for 6 cycles, in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicities. Growth factor support was not permitted prophylactically but allowed for toxicities, as were dose reductions. Maintenance treatment for those with stable disease or better consisted of Bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 1 year. Between November 2007 and March 2012, 51 patients were followed in the phase II trial of carboplatin, pemetrexed, and bevacizumab. Patients were enrolled over a 24‐month period. After the end of treatment visits, subjects were followed at least every 3 months for survival data. The median follow‐up period was 49 weeks (6 weeks to 178), and the median number of treatment cycles was 6 (range, 1‐6). Among the 50 patients assessable for response, median overall survival was 49 weeks (95% CI, 0‐62.7) with median PFS of 28 weeks (95% CI, 0‐132.4). A complete or partial response was seen in 28 (59.5%) patients. Grade 3‐4 treatment‐related adverse events occurred in 9 (17.6%) of 51 patients; the most common were thrombocytopenia (4 [7.8%]) and neutropenia (3 [5.9%]). Three (5.8%) of 51 patients were discontinued because of treatment‐related adverse events (grade 3 diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, dehydration, fatigue, and grade 4 respiratory distress), and 1 patient (1.9%) was found to be ineligible due to anticoagulation use. A novel 3‐drug combination for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC shows promising efficacy with modest toxicity.