Ellen Richmond

Phase I Study in Advanced Cancer Patients of a Diversified Prime-and-Boost Vaccination Protocol Using Recombinant Vaccinia Virus and Recombinant Nonreplicating Avipox Virus to Elicit Anti–Carcinoembryonic Antigen Immune Responses

PURPOSE This trial sought to determine, for the first time, the validity in human vaccinations of using two different recombinant vaccines in diversified prime-and-boost regimens to enhance T-cell responses to a tumor antigen. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eighteen patients with advanced tumors expressing carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were randomized to receive either recombinant vaccinia (rV)-CEA followed by three avipox-CEA vaccinations, or avipox-CEA (three times) followed by one rV-CEA vaccination. Subsequent vaccinations in both cohorts were with avipox-CEA. Immunologic monitoring was performed using a CEA peptide and the enzyme-linked immunospot assay for interferon gamma production. RESULTS rV-CEA followed by avipox-CEA was superior to the reverse order in the generation of CEA-specific T-cell responses. Further increases in CEA-specific T-cell precursors were seen when local granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and low-dose interleukin (IL)-2 were given with subsequent vaccinations. The treatment was extremely well tolerated. Limited clinical activity was seen using vaccines alone in this patient population. Antibody production against CEA was also observed in some of the treated patients. CONCLUSION rV-CEA was more effective in its role as a primer of the immune system; avipox-CEA could be given up to eight times with continued increases in CEA T-cell precursors. Future trials should use rV-CEA first followed by avipox-CEA. Vaccines specific to CEA are able to generate CEA-specific T-cell responses in patients without significant toxicity. T-cell responses using vaccines alone may be inadequate to generate significant anticancer objective responses in patients with advanced disease. Cytokines such as GM-CSF and IL-2 may play a key role in generating such responses.

Phase I Study in Cancer Patients of a Replication-Defective Avipox Recombinant Vaccine That Expresses Human Carcinoembryonic Antigen

PURPOSE A phase I clinical trial in patients with advanced carcinoma was conducted, using a replication-defective avipox vaccine containing the gene for the human carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). The canarypox vector, designated ALVAC, has the ability to infect human cells but cannot replicate. PATIENTS AND METHODS The recombinant vaccine, designated ALVAC-CEA, was administered intramuscularly three times at 28-day intervals. Each cohort of six patients received three doses of either 2.5 x 10(5), 2.5 x 10(6), or 2.5 x 10(7) plaque-forming units of vaccine. RESULTS The vaccine was well tolerated at all dose levels and no significant toxicity was attributed to the treatment. No objective antitumor response was observed during the trial in patients with measurable disease. Studies were conducted to assess whether ALVAC-CEA had the ability to induce cytolytic T-lymphocyte (CTL) responses in patients with advanced cancer. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from patients with the MHC class I A2 allele were obtained before vaccine administration and 1 month after the third vaccination. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were incubated with the CEA immunodominant CTL epitope carcinoembryonic antigen peptide-1 and interleukin 2 and quantitated using CTL precursor frequency analysis. In seven of nine patients evaluated, statistically significant increases in CTL precursors specific for CEA were observed in PBMCs after vaccination, compared with before vaccination. CONCLUSION These studies constitute the first phase I trial of an avipox recombinant in cancer patients. The recombinant vaccine ALVAC-CEA seems to be safe and has been demonstrated to elicit CEA-specific CTL responses. These studies thus form the basis for the further clinical exploration of the ALVAC-CEA recombinant vaccine in phase I/II studies in protocols designed to enhance the generation of human T-cell responses to CEA.

Chemoprevention of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer With Celecoxib: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background Preclinical studies indicate that the enzyme cyclooxygenase 2 plays an important role in ultraviolet-induced skin cancers. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor, as a chemopreventive agent for actinic keratoses, the premalignant precursor of nonmelanoma skin cancers, and for nonmelanoma skin cancers, including cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) and basal cell carcinomas (BCCs). Methods A double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial involving 240 subjects aged 37–87 years with 10–40 actinic keratoses was conducted at eight US academic medical centers. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 200 mg of celecoxib or placebo administered orally twice daily for 9 months. Subjects were evaluated at 3, 6, 9 (ie, completion of treatment), and 11 months after randomization. The primary endpoint was the number of new actinic keratoses at the 9-month visit as a percentage of the number at the time of randomization. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the incidence of actinic keratoses was compared between the two groups using t tests. In exploratory analyses, we evaluated the number of nonmelanoma skin cancers combined and SCCs and BCCs separately per patient at 11 months after randomization using Poisson regression, after adjustment for patient characteristics and time on study. The numbers of adverse events in the two treatment arms were compared using χ2 or Fisher exact tests. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results There was no difference in the incidence of actinic keratoses between the two groups at 9 months after randomization. However, at 11 months after randomization, there were fewer nonmelanoma skin cancers in the celecoxib arm than in the placebo arm (mean cumulative tumor number per patient 0.14 vs 0.35; rate ratio [RR] = .43, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.75; P = .003). After adjusting for age, sex, Fitzpatrick skin type, history of actinic keratosis at randomization, nonmelanoma skin cancer history, and patient time on study, the number of nonmelanoma skin cancers was lower in the celecoxib arm than in the placebo arm (RR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.72, P = .002) as were the numbers of BCCs (RR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.93, P = .032) and SCCs (RR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.93, P = .032). Serious and cardiovascular adverse events were similar in the two groups. Conclusions Celecoxib may be effective for prevention of SCCs and BCCs in individuals who have extensive actinic damage and are at high risk for development of nonmelanoma skin cancers.

A nutrient approach to prostate cancer prevention: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT).

The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) randomized 35,533 healthy men, >55 yr old (>50 yr if African American), with normal digital rectal exams and prostate specific antigens <4 ng/ml to 1) 200 μg/day l-selenomethionine, 2) 400 IU/day all-rac-alpha-tocopheryl acetate (vitamin E), 3) both supplements, or 4) placebo for 7 to 12 yr. The hypotheses underlying SELECT, that selenium and vitamin E individually and together decrease prostate cancer incidence, derived from epidemiologic and laboratory evidence and significant secondary endpoints in the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer (selenium) and Alpha-Tocopherol Beta-Carotene (vitamin E) trials. In SELECT, prostate cancer incidence did not differ among the 4 arms: hazard ratios [99% confidence intervals (CIs)] for prostate cancer were 1.13 (99% CI = 0.95–1.35, P = 0.06; n = 473) for vitamin E, 1.04 (99% CI = 0.87–1.24, P = 0.62; n = 432) for selenium, and 1.05 (99% CI = 0.88–1.25, P = 0.52; n = 437) for selenium + vitamin E vs. 1.00 (n = 416) for placebo. Statistically nonsignificant increased risks of prostate cancer with vitamin E alone [relative risk (RR) = 1.13, P = 0.06) and newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes mellitus with selenium alone (RR = 1.07, P = 0.16) were observed. SELECT data show that neither selenium nor vitamin E, alone or together, in the doses and formulations used, prevented prostate cancer in this heterogeneous population of healthy men.

Randomized phase II trial of sulindac, atorvastatin, and prebiotic dietary fiber for colorectal cancer chemoprevention.

Sulindac, atorvastatin, or prebiotic dietary fiber may reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. However, clinical trial data are currently limited. We conducted a randomized, phase II chemoprevention trial involving subjects 40 years or older, with previously resected colon cancer or multiple/advanced colorectal adenomas. Magnification chromoendoscopy (MCE) was performed to identify and characterize rectal aberrant crypt foci (ACF); eligibility criteria required five or more rectal ACFs at baseline. Intervention assignments were as follows: (a) atorvastatin 20 mg qd; (b) sulindac 150 mg bid; (c) oligofructose-enriched inulin (as ORAFTI®Synergy1) 6 gm bid; or (d) control (maltodextrin) 6 gm bid, for 6 months. Percent change in rectal ACF number (%ΔACF) within arm was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included changes in proliferation (Ki67) and apoptosis (caspase-3), as measured from normal mucosa biopsy samples. Among 85 eligible randomized subjects, 76 (86%) completed the trial per protocol. The median (range) of rectal ACF was 9 (5–34) and 8 (0–37) at baseline and postintervention, respectively. The median (SD) for %ΔACF was 5.6 (−69% to 143%), −18.6 (−83% to 160%), −3.6 (−88% to 83%), and −10.0 (−100% to 117%) in the atorvastatin, sulindac, ORAFTI®Synergy1 and control arms, respectively. Neither within-arm (P = 0.12–0.59) nor between-arm (P = 0.30–0.92) comparisons of %ΔACF were statistically significant. The active and control interventions also seemed to have similar effects on mucosal proliferation and apoptosis (P > 0.05 for each comparison). Data from this multicenter, phase II trial do not provide convincing evidence of CRC risk reduction from 6-month interventions with atorvastatin, sulindac, or ORAFTI®Synergy1, although statistical power was limited by the relatively small sample size. Cancer Prev Res; 4(2); 259–69. ©2011 AACR.

The Safety and Efficacy of Celecoxib in Children With Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

OBJECTIVES:Celecoxib is approved as an adjunctive chemopreventive agent in adults with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Its safety and efficacy for colorectal polyps in children is unknown. We evaluated the short-term (3 months) safety and preliminary efficacy of celecoxib in children with FAP.METHODS:This was a phase I, dose-escalation trial, with three successive cohorts of six children. Children of ages 10–14 years with APC gene mutations and/or adenomas with a family history of FAP were studied at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and the Cleveland Clinic. Colonoscopy was performed at baseline and month 3. Random assignment was in a 2:1 generic:placebo ratio, escalating from cohort 1 (4 mg/kg/day) to cohort 2 (8 mg/kg/day) to cohort 3 (16 mg/kg/day). Adherence and adverse event (AE) monitoring was conducted at 2-week intervals during drug administration. Safety profile, difference in number, and percent change in colorectal polyps were compared among the four treatments (placebo and the three dose-escalation groups).RESULTS:Eighteen subjects completed drug dosing and both colonoscopies. Median age was 12.3 years (56% female). No clinically meaningful differences in AEs were seen between placebo subjects and subjects at any of the three celecoxib doses. Median polyp count at baseline was 31. There was a 39.1% increase in the number of polyps in placebo subjects at month 3, whereas in the highest dose celecoxib group, 16 mg/kg/day, a 44.2% reduction was seen (P=0.01).CONCLUSIONS:Celecoxib at a dose of 16 mg/kg/day, corresponding to the adult dose of 400 mg BID, is safe, well tolerated, and significantly reduced the number of colorectal polyps in children with FAP.

A Combination of Esomeprazole and Aspirin Reduces Tissue Concentrations of Prostaglandin E2 in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus

UNLABELLED BACKGROUND& AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs might prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with Barretts esophagus (BE), but there are limited data from clinical trials to support this concept. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial to assess the effects of the combination of aspirin (3 different doses) and esomeprazole on tissue concentrations of prostaglandin (PG) E(2) in patients with BE with no dysplasia or low-grade dysplasia. METHODS Participants were recruited through the multicenter Cancer Prevention Network and randomly assigned to groups that were given 40 mg esomeprazole twice daily in combination with an aspirin placebo once daily (arm A; n = 30), with 81 mg aspirin once daily (arm B; n = 47), or with 325 mg aspirin once daily (arm C; n = 45) for 28 days. We collected esophageal biopsy specimens before and after the intervention period to determine the absolute change in mean concentration of PGE(2) (the primary end point). RESULTS Based on data from 114 patients, baseline characteristics were similar among groups. The absolute mean tissue concentration of PGE(2) was reduced by 67.6 ± 229.68 pg/mL in arm A, 123.9 ± 284.0 pg/mL in arm B (P = .10 vs arm A), and 174.9 ± 263.62 pg/mL in arm C (P = .02 vs arm A). CONCLUSIONS In combination with esomeprazole, short-term administration of higher doses of aspirin, but not lower doses or no aspirin, significantly reduced tissue concentrations of PGE(2) in patients with BE with either no dysplasia or low-grade dysplasia. These data support further evaluation of higher doses of aspirin and esomeprazole to prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma in these patients. Clinical trial registration number NCT00474903.

A randomized controlled trial of celecoxib to prevent recurrence of nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer

Significant morbidity and expense result from frequent recurrences of nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) after standard treatment, and carcinoma in situ (Tis) is a poor prognostic factor. Predicated on observational and preclinical data strongly supporting cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) in the pathogenesis, and the activity of COX-2 inhibitors, in bladder cancer, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether celecoxib could reduce the time-to-recurrence (TTR) in NMIBC patients at high risk for recurrence. A total of 146 patients were randomized to celecoxib (200 mg) or placebo orally twice daily for at least 12 months. The average treatment duration was 1.25 years. Primary intent-to-treat analysis revealed celecoxib did not statistically significantly prolong TTR compared with placebo (P = 0.17, log rank) with a median follow-up of 2.49 years. The recurrence-free rate at 12 months with celecoxib was 88% (95% CI: 0.81–0.96) versus 78% (95% CI: 0.69–0.89) with placebo. After controlling for covariates with Cox regression analysis, recurrence rates did not differ between the two study arms (HR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.37–1.29). However, celecoxib had a marginally significant effect on reducing metachronous recurrences (vs. placebo) with HR of 0.56 (95% CI: 0.3–1.06; P = 0.075). Celecoxib was well tolerated, with similar adverse events and quality-of-life in both arms. Our clinical trial results do not show a clinical benefit for celecoxib in preventing NMIBC recurrence but further investigation of COX-2 inhibitors in this setting is warranted. Cancer Prev Res; 4(10); 1580–9. ©2011 AACR.

An international randomised trial of celecoxib versus celecoxib plus difluoromethylornithine in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

Background and aim Although Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce colorectal adenoma burden in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), the utility of combining chemopreventive agents in FAP is not known. We conducted a randomised trial of celecoxib (CXB) versus CXB+diflouromethylornithine (DFMO) to determine the synergistic effect, if any. Methods The primary endpoint was % change in adenoma count in a defined field. Secondary endpoints were adenoma burden (weighted by adenoma diameter) and video review of entire colon/rectal segments. Adverse event (AEs) were monitored by National Cancer Institution toxicity criteria. Results 112 subjects were randomised: 60 men and 52 women at a mean age of 38 years. For the 89 patients who had landmark-matched polyp counts available at baseline and 6 months, the mean % change in adenoma count over the 6 months of trial was −13.0% for CXB+DFMO and −1.0% for CXB (p=0.69). Mean % change in adenoma burden was −40% (CXB+DFMO) vs −27% (CXB) (p=0.13). Video-based global polyp change was −0.80 for CXB+DFMO vs −0.33 for CXB (p=0.03). Fatigue was the only significant AE, worse on the CXB arm (p=0.02). Conclusions CXB combined with DFMO yielded moderate synergy according to a video-based global assessment. No significant difference in adenoma count, the primary endpoint, was seen between the two study arms. No evidence of DFMO-related ototoxicity was seen. There were no adverse cardiovascular outcomes in either trial arm and no significant increase in AEs in the CXB+DFMO arm of the trial. Differences in outcomes between primary and secondary endpoints may relate to sensitivity of the endpoint measures themselves. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov number N01-CN95040.

Chemoprevention of colorectal carcinogenesis

Abstract The field of cancer prevention is advancing rapidly, largely owing to post-genomic technology that has revolutionized our ability to identify and characterize molecular profiles for cancer. Advances in colorectal cancer screening (e.g., endoscopy, fecal occult blood testing, and mutational analysis) have made the detection and eradication of preinvasive neoplastic lesions the standard of care. Basic and translational sciences are building on these advances, and continue to expose molecular hallmarks of carcinogenesis that can be exploited as targets for molecularly targeted preventive interventions (i.e., chemoprevention). These targets will help identify more effective and better tolerated preventive agents. Carcinogenesis is now recognized as a disease in itself and has become the target of an ever-expanding array of preventive interventions.