Edward McKenna

Expanded access study of patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma treated with the Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, vismodegib.

BACKGROUND Vismodegib, a first-in-class Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, was US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for advanced basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) based on a single, nonrandomized, phase-II trial. Consequently, additional clinical data are critical to confirm the efficacy and safety of vismodegib. OBJECTIVE We sought to assess efficacy and safety of vismodegib, while providing early drug access to patients with advanced BCC and limited treatment options. METHODS This was an open-label, multicenter study in patients with advanced BCC inappropriate for radiotherapy or surgery. Patients received 150 mg vismodegib daily until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Tumor response was assessed via Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0. RESULTS A total of 119 patients with advanced BCC took vismodegib for a median of 5.5 months. Objective responses occurred in 46.4% of locally advanced BCC and 30.8% of patients with metastatic BCC. Response was negatively associated with prior systemic therapy in patients with locally advanced BCC (P = .002). Mean follow-up for safety was 6.5 months, with muscle spasms (70.6%), dysgeusia (70.6%), alopecia (58.0%), and diarrhea (25.2%) as the most common adverse events. LIMITATIONS Abbreviated follow-up time because of study termination upon FDA approval was a limitation. CONCLUSION This study provides important clinical data supporting the efficacy and safety of vismodegib. Larger studies are underway to assess predictors of response and long-term outcomes.

Impact of age and medical comorbidity on adjuvant treatment outcomes for stage III colon cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from four randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND Adjuvant oxaliplatin plus capecitabine or leucovorin/5-fluorouracil (LV/5-FU) (XELOX/FOLFOX) is the standard of care for stage III colon cancer (CC); however, there is disagreement regarding oxaliplatin benefit in patients aged >70. In most analyses, the impact of medical comorbidity (MC) has not been assessed. Efficacy and safety of adjuvant XELOX/FOLFOX versus LV/5-FU were compared with respect to age and MC using pooled data from four randomized, controlled trials, selected for access to patient-level MC data and including commonly endorsed and utilized regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS Individual data from patients with stage III CC in NSABP C-08, XELOXA, X-ACT, and AVANT were pooled, excluding bevacizumab-treated patients. Patients were grouped by treatment, MC (low versus high), or age (<70 versus ≥70), and compared for disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression controlled for gender, T stage, and N stage. RESULTS DFS benefits were shown for XELOX/FOLFOX versus LV/5-FU regardless of age or MC, although benefits were modestly attenuated for patients aged ≥70. Hazard ratios were 0.68 (P < 0.0001) and 0.77 (P < 0.014) for <70 and ≥70 age groups; 0.69 (P < 0.0001) and 0.59 (P < 0.0001) for Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤1 and >1 groups; and 0.70 (P < 0.0001) and 0.58 (P < 0.0001) for National Cancer Institute Combined Index ≤1 and >1 groups. OS was also significantly improved in all groups. Grade 3/4 serious AE rates were comparable across cohorts and MC scores and higher in patients aged ≥70. Oxaliplatin-relevant grade 3/4 AEs, including neuropathy, were comparable across ages and MC scores. CONCLUSIONS Results further support consideration of XELOX or FOLFOX as standard treatment options for the adjuvant management of stage III CC in all age groups and in patients with comorbidities, consistent with those who were eligible for these clinical trials.

Association of body-mass index and outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy: a retrospective, multicohort analysis

BACKGROUND Obesity has been linked to increased mortality in several cancer types; however, the relation between obesity and survival outcomes in metastatic melanoma is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between body-mass index (BMI) and progression-free survival or overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma who received targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy. METHODS This retrospective study analysed independent cohorts of patients with metastatic melanoma assigned to treatment with targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy in randomised clinical trials and one retrospective study of patients treated with immunotherapy. Patients were classified according to BMI, following the WHO definitions, as underweight, normal, overweight, or obese. Patients without BMI and underweight patients were excluded. The primary outcomes were the associations between BMI and progression-free survival or overall survival, stratified by treatment type and sex. We did multivariable analyses in the independent cohorts, and combined adjusted hazard ratios in a mixed-effects meta-analysis to provide a precise estimate of the association between BMI and survival outcomes; heterogeneity was assessed with meta-regression analyses. Analyses were done on the predefined intention-to-treat population in the randomised controlled trials and on all patients included in the retrospective study. FINDINGS The six cohorts consisted of a total of 2046 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy between Aug 8, 2006, and Jan 15, 2016. 1918 patients were included in the analysis. Two cohorts containing patients from randomised controlled trials treated with targeted therapy (dabrafenib plus trametinib [n=599] and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib [n=240]), two cohorts containing patients treated with immunotherapy (one randomised controlled trial of ipilimumab plus dacarbazine [n=207] and a retrospective cohort treated with pembrolizumab, nivolumab, or atezolizumab [n=331]), and two cohorts containing patients treated with chemotherapy (two randomised controlled trials of dacarbazine [n=320 and n=221]) were classified according to BMI as normal (694 [36%] patients), overweight (711 [37%]), or obese (513 [27%]). In the pooled analysis, obesity, compared with normal BMI, was associated with improved survival in patients with metastatic melanoma (average adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·77 [95% CI 0·66-0·90] for progression-free survival and 0·74 [0·58-0·95] for overall survival). The survival benefit associated with obesity was restricted to patients treated with targeted therapy (HR 0·72 [0·57-0·91] for progression-free survival and 0·60 [0·45-0·79] for overall survival) and immunotherapy (HR 0·75 [0·56-1·00] and 0·64 [0·47-0·86]). No associations were observed with chemotherapy (HR 0·87 [0·65-1·17, pinteraction=0·61] for progression-free survival and 1·03 [0·80-1·34, pinteraction=0·01] for overall survival). The association of BMI with overall survival for patients treated with targeted and immune therapies differed by sex, with inverse associations in men (HR 0·53 [0·40-0·70]), but no associations observed in women (HR 0·85 [0·61-1·18, pinteraction=0·03]). INTERPRETATION Our results suggest that in patients with metastatic melanoma, obesity is associated with improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared with those outcomes in patients with normal BMI, and that this association is mainly seen in male patients treated with targeted or immune therapy. These results have implications for the design of future clinical trials for patients with metastatic melanoma and the magnitude of the benefit found supports further investigation of the underlying mechanism of these associations. FUNDING ASCO/CCF Young Investigator Award, ASCO/CCF Career Development Award, MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) Melanoma Moonshot Program, MDACC Melanoma SPORE, and the Dr Miriam and Sheldon G Adelson Medical Research Foundation.

Incidence, course, and management of toxicities associated with cobimetinib in combination with vemurafenib in the coBRIM study

Background In the coBRIM phase III trial, the addition of cobimetinib, an MEK inhibitor, to vemurafenib, a BRAF inhibitor, significantly improved progression-free survival [hazard ratio (HR), 0.58; P < 0.0001] and overall survival (HR, 0.70; P = 0.005) in advanced BRAF-mutated melanoma. Here, we report on the incidence, course, and management of key adverse events (AEs) in the coBRIM study. Patients and methods Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive vemurafenib (960 mg twice a day) and either cobimetinib (60 mg once a day, 21 days on/7 days off) or placebo. In addition to standard safety evaluations, patients underwent regular ophthalmic, cardiac, and dermatologic surveillance examinations. Results Of 495 patients recruited to the study, 493 patients received treatment and constituted the safety population (cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib, 247; vemurafenib, 246). At data cut-off (30 September 2015), median follow-up was 18.5 months. Nearly every patient experienced an AE. In patients who received cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib, the frequency of grade ≥3 AEs was higher than in patients who received vemurafenib alone (75% versus 61%). Most AEs, including grade ≥3 AEs, occurred within the first treatment cycle. After the first cycle (28 days), the incidence of common AEs (rash, diarrhoea, photosensitivity, elevated creatine phosphokinase, serous retinopathy, pyrexia, and liver laboratory abnormalities) decreased substantially over time. Most AEs were managed conservatively by supportive care measures, dose modifications of study treatment, and, occasionally, permanent treatment discontinuation. Conclusions These data indicate that most AEs arising from treatment with cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib generally occur early in the treatment course, are mild or moderate and are manageable by patient monitoring, dose modification and supportive care. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01689519.

BRAF V600 mutations in solid tumors, other than metastatic melanoma and papillary thyroid cancer, or multiple myeloma: a screening study

Background Mutations in the BRAF gene have been implicated in several human cancers. The objective of this screening study was to identify patients with solid tumors (other than metastatic melanoma or papillary thyroid cancer) or multiple myeloma harboring activating BRAFV600 mutations for enrollment in a vemurafenib clinical study. Methods Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples were collected and sent to a central laboratory to identify activating BRAFV600 mutations by bidirectional direct Sanger sequencing. Results Overall incidence of BRAFV600E mutation in evaluable patients (n=548) was 3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7–4.7): 11% in colorectal tumors (n=75), 6% in biliary tract tumors (n=16), 3% in non-small cell lung cancers (n=71), 2% in other types of solid tumors (n=180), and 3% in multiple myeloma (n=31). There were no BRAFV600 mutations in this cohort of patients with ovarian tumors (n=68), breast cancer (n=86), or prostate cancer (n=21). Conclusion This multicenter, national screening study confirms previously reported incidences of BRAFV600 mutations from single-center studies. Patients identified with BRAFV600 mutations were potentially eligible for enrollment in the VE-BASKET study.

Safety and efficacy of vismodegib in patients aged ≥65 years with advanced basal cell carcinoma

Because many patients with unresectable basal cell carcinoma (BCC) are aged ≥65 years, this study explores the efficacy and safety of vismodegib in these patients with locally advanced (la) or metastatic (m) basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in the ERIVANCE BCC trial and the expanded access study (EAS).We compared patients aged ≥65 years to patients aged <65 years taking vismodegib 150 mg/day, using descriptive statistics for response and safety. Patients aged ≥65 years (laBCC/mBCC) were enrolled in ERIVANCE BCC (33/14) and EAS (27/26). Investigator-assessed best overall response rate in patients ≥65 and <65 years was 46.7%/35.7% and 72.7%/52.6% (laBCC/mBCC), respectively, in ERIVANCE BCC and 45.8%/33.3% and 46.9%/28.6%, respectively, in EAS. These differences were not clinically meaningful. Safety was similar in both groups, although those aged ≥65 years had a higher percentage of grade 3-5 adverse events than those aged <65 years. Vismodegib demonstrated similar clinical activity and adverse events regardless of age.

Comparative effectiveness of chemotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

463 Background: The management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has evolved considerably with advances in chemotherapeutic agents that have led to improved outcomes. Less is known about the benefits of newer agents in the real-world setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate treatment patterns and survival in older, demographically diverse mCRC patients. METHODS Using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 5931 stage IIIB, IIIC and IV CRC patients diagnosed between 1/1/ 2000 - 12/31/2007, who were >66 years, enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B, and received first-line treatment with 5FU/LV (n=2907), CAP (capecitabine; n=963), FOLFOX (n=1856) or CAPOX (CAP + oxaliplatin; n=205). Date of last follow-up was 12/31/2009. Statistical comparisons were made between 5FU/LV vs. CAP and FOLFOX vs. CAPOX. Cox regression with backward elimination estimated the relative risk of death, adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS Compared to 5FU/LV, patients treated with CAP were older (>80 years) at diagnosis (36% vs. 22%; p<.0001) and more likely female (59% vs. 53%; p=.0025), while patients receiving CAPOX were older (>80 years: 12% vs 8%; p<0.05) compared to FOLFOX. The mean time to chemotherapy initiation after diagnosis was similar between CAP and 5FU/LV (76 vs. 71 days) and between FOLFOX and CAPOX (75 vs. 70 days). The mean duration of treatment was longer for 5FU/LV (144 days) vs. CAP (122 days; p<.0001) and comparable between CAPOX (144 days) and FOLFOX (150 days; p=0.2139). The incidence of adverse events (AE) within 180 days after initiation of treatment were higher in patients treated with 5FU/LV (37%) vs. CAP (9%); p<.0001 and in FOLFOX (58%) vs. CAPOX (44%); p<0.0001. In multivariate analysis there were no significant differences in risk of death between CAP and 5FU/LV, and between CAPOX and FOLFOX ( table ). CONCLUSIONS Overall survival was comparable between CAP and 5FU/LV and between CAPOX and FOLFOX with fewer AEs associated with CAP and CAPOX. This provides real-world confirmation of clinical trial data. [Table: see text].

Modeled Prognostic Subgroups for Survival and Treatment Outcomes in BRAF V600–Mutated Metastatic Melanoma: Pooled Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance Prognostic models may provide insight into clinical trial results and inform the clinical management of patients with BRAF V600–mutated metastatic melanoma. Objective To identify subgroups with distinct survival outcomes based on clinical and genomic characteristics and to assess survival in identified prognostic subgroups across cohorts treated with dacarbazine, vemurafenib, or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective and exploratory recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) modeled associations between prespecified covariates and survival outcomes using pooled data from the BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7, and coBRIM studies. Interventions Dacarbazine, vemurafenib, or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib. Main Outcomes and Measures Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results The RPA included 1365 patients (783 men; 57.4%). Of these, 1032 (75.6%) were older than 65 years; 310 received cobimetinib plus vemurafenib; 717, vemurafenib alone; and 338, dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 14.1 months (interquartile range, 6.3-28.3 months). In the RPA that included all patients, baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), presence or absence of liver metastases, and baseline sum of longest diameters of target lesions (SLDs) were significant prognostic factors for PFS: Median PFS was longest in patients with lower LDH (⩽2 × upper limit of normal [ULN]), ECOG PS 0, and shorter SLD (⩽44 mm) (11.1 months; 95% CI, 7.0-18.4 months), and shortest in those with elevated LDH (>2 × ULN) (3.5 months; 95% CI, 3.0-3.8 months). The subgroup with normal baseline LDH and no liver metastases had the longest median OS (22.7 months; 95% CI, 20.3-27.2 months). Similar PFS trends were observed when these prognostic subgroups were applied to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib, vemurafenib alone, and dacarbazine cohorts. Baseline LDH, ECOG PS, and SLD were significant prognostic factors for OS: Median OS was longest in patients with normal LDH and shorter SLD (⩽45 mm) (27.2 months; 95% CI, 22.1-32.1 months) and shortest in those with elevated LDH (>2 × ULN) (6.0 months; 95% CI, 5.3-6.8 months). Among patients in the most favorable subgroup (normal LDH and SLD ⩽45 mm), 3-year OS rates were 53.3% (95% CI, 39.5%-67.1%) in the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib cohort, 35.6% (95% CI, 27.4%-43.8%) in the vemurafenib cohort, and 35.6% (95% CI, 24.8%-46.4%) in the dacarbazine cohort. Among patients with available gene expression data, RPA identified gene signature as a significant prognostic factor for PFS in those with normal LDH; 3-year PFS rates were 21.9%, (95% CI, 15.4%-28.4%) and 8.8% (95% CI, 3.6%-14.1%) in immune and cell cycle signature, respectively. The RPA for OS did not identify gene signature as a significant factor. Conclusions and Relevance Baseline LDH, ECOG PS, disease burden, and gene signature appear to be key determinants of survival outcomes in patients with BRAF V600–mutated metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors. These results are consistent with survival benefits of cobimetinib plus vemurafenib over vemurafenib alone observed in the coBRIM study.