Erika Kettner

Rituximab Added to First-Line Mitoxantrone, Chlorambucil, and Prednisolone Chemotherapy Followed by Interferon Maintenance Prolongs Survival in Patients With Advanced Follicular Lymphoma: An East German Study Group Hematology and Oncology Study

PURPOSE Rituximab has been shown to be active in follicular lymphoma (FL), both as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy. We conducted a randomized trial comparing mitoxantrone, chlorambucil, and prednisolone (MCP) chemotherapy plus rituximab with MCP alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS Previously untreated patients with stage III or IV CD20+ indolent or mantle cell lymphoma were randomly assigned to either eight 28-day cycles of MCP plus rituximab (R-MCP; n = 181) or eight cycles of MCP alone (n = 177). All patients who achieved a complete or partial remission were treated with interferon maintenance until relapse. Herein, we report the results from the primary analysis population of patients with FL, who constituted the majority of patients (56%) recruited to the trial (n = 201; R-MCP, n = 105; MCP, n = 96). RESULTS Rates of overall and complete response were significantly higher in the R-MCP arm than the MCP arm (overall response, 92% v 75%, respectively; P = .0009; complete response, 50% v 25%, respectively; P = .004). With a median follow-up time of 47 months, median event-free survival (EFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) times were significantly prolonged with R-MCP compared with MCP (EFS, not reached v 26 months, respectively; P < .0001; PFS, not reached v 28.8 months, respectively; P < .0001), and overall survival (OS) was significantly improved with R-MCP compared with MCP (4-year OS rate, 87% v 74%, respectively; P = .0096). CONCLUSION The R-MCP regimen significantly improves complete and overall response rates, EFS, PFS, and OS in patients with previously untreated advanced FL, without a clinically significant increase in toxicity.

Gemcitabine plus erlotinib followed by capecitabine versus capecitabine plus erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised phase 3 trial of the ‘Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie’ (AIO-PK0104)

Objective AIO-PK0104 investigated two treatment strategies in advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a reference sequence of gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by 2nd-line capecitabine was compared with a reverse experimental sequence of capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine. Methods 281 patients with PC were randomly assigned to 1st-line treatment with either gemcitabine plus erlotinib or capecitabine plus erlotinib. In case of treatment failure (eg, disease progression or toxicity), patients were allocated to 2nd-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) after 1st- and 2nd-line therapy (TTF2; non-inferiority design). KRAS exon 2 mutations were analysed in archival tumour tissue from 173 of the randomised patients. Results Of the 274 eligible patients, 43 had locally advanced and 231 had metastatic disease; 140 (51%) received 2nd-line chemotherapy. Median TTF2 was estimated with 4.2 months in both arms; median overall survival was 6.2 months with gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine and 6.9 months with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine, respectively (HR 1.02, p=0.90). TTF for 1st-line therapy (TTF1) was significantly prolonged with gemcitabine/erlotinib compared to capecitabine/erlotinib (3.2 vs 2.2 months; HR 0.69, p=0.0034). Skin rash was associated with both TTF2 (rash grade 0/1/2–4:2.9/4.3/6.7 months, p<0.0001) and survival (3.4/7.0/9.6 months, p<0.0001). Each arm showed a safe and manageable toxicity profile during 1st- and 2nd-line therapy. A KRAS wild-type status (52/173 patients, 30%) was associated with an improved overall survival (HR 1.68, p=0.005). Conclusion Both treatment strategies are feasible and demonstrated comparable efficacy; KRAS may serve as biomarker in patients with advanced PC treated with erlotinib. Trial registration number This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00440167. Significance of this study What is already known on this subject? Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy remains an international standard of care for patients with non-resectable, advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). Anti-EGFR treatment with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib, as well as chemotherapy intensification by application of the FOLFIRINOX regimen, both significantly improved overall survival in randomised phase 3 trials. The optimal (sequential) regimen for the use of gemcitabine, erlotinib and the oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine remains unclear in advanced PC. Molecular predictors for the efficacy of anti-EGFR treatments in PC have not been defined up to now. What are the new findings? The sequential use of gemcitabine, erlotinib and capecitabine is safe and equally effective in PC; gemcitabine appears to be more effective in 1st- and 2nd-line therapy than capecitabine and therefore remains the preferred combination partner for erlotinib. Skin rash is strongly correlated with efficacy outcome measures in PC patients treated with erlotinib. KRAS wild-type status appears to be associated with improved overall survival in patients treated with erlotinib in this AIO study. Significance of this study How might it impact on clinical practice in the foreseeable future? The benefit of adding erlotinib to chemotherapy is restricted to patients that experience skin rash during treatment; non-rash patients are characterised by a very poor outcome and need to be offered novel treatment strategies. Second-line salvage chemotherapy is effective and safe in selected PC patients. KRAS could serve as the first biomarker for improved survival in erlotinib-treated patients; the predictive value of KRAS for erlotinib efficacy remains to be defined prospectively.

Erlotinib 150 mg daily plus chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer: an interim safety analysis of a multicenter, randomized, cross-over phase III trial of the 'Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie'.

To date, only limited toxicity data are available for the combination of erlotinib with either capecitabine or gemcitabine as front-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Within a randomized phase III trial, 281 treatment-naive patients were randomly assigned between capecitabine (2000 mg/m2/day, for 14 days, once every 3 weeks) plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 as a 30-min infusion) plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). In case of treatment failure, patients were crossed over to a second-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was the time to treatment failure of second-line therapy (TTF2). This interim analysis of toxicity contains safety data from the first 127 randomized patients. During first-line therapy, patients received a median number of three treatment cycles (range 0–13) in both the arms. Regarding chemotherapy, a treatment delay was observed in 12% of the cycles in arm A and in 22% of the cycles in arm B. Dose reductions of the cytostatic drug were performed in 18 and 27% of treatment cycles, respectively. Erlotinib dose reductions were performed in 6 and 11% of all cycles. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity was <10% in both the arms; major grade 3/4 toxicities in arms A and B were diarrhea (9 vs. 7%), skin rash (4 vs. 12%), and hand–foot syndrome (7 vs. 0%). No treatment-related death was observed. In conclusion, this interim safety analysis suggests that treatment with erlotinib 150 mg/day is feasible in combination with capecitabine or gemcitabine.

Extended RAS analysis and correlation with overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer

Background:Mutations in the KRAS gene can be detected in about 70–90% of pancreatic cancer (PC) cases. Whether these mutations have a prognostic or predictive value remains elusive. Furthermore, the clinical relevance of the extended RAS (KRAS+NRAS) mutational status is unclear in PC.Methods:We prospectively defined a PC patient population who received erlotinib-free chemotherapy regimens. A statistically significant difference between KRAS wild-type and KRAS mutated tumours in at least 160 patients in this population would support the assumption of a rather prognostic role of KRAS.Results:One hundred and seventy-eight tumour samples were collected from prospective clinical studies and successfully analysed for the extended RAS status: 37 tumours were KRAS wild-type (21%), whereas 141 (79%) carried a KRAS mutation; 132 of these mutations were found in KRAS exon 2 (74%), whereas only 9 mutations (5%) were detected in KRAS exon 3. Within KRAS exon 4 and NRAS exons 2–4, no mutations were apparent. There was no significant difference in overall survival for KRAS wild-type vs mutant patients (9.9 vs 8.3 months, P=0.70).Conclusions:Together with the results of the AIO-PK-0104-trial, the present analysis supports the notion that KRAS mutation status is rather predictive than prognostic in advanced PC.

Impact of hand-foot skin reaction on treatment outcome in patients receiving capecitabine plus erlotinib for advanced pancreatic cancer: A subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104

Abstract Background. Drug-induced skin toxicity may correlate with treatment efficacy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or biological agents. The correlation of the capecitabine-associated hand-foot skin reaction (HFS) on outcome parameters in pancreatic cancer (PC) has not yet been investigated. Methods. Within the multicentre phase III AIO-PK0104 trial, patients with confirmed advanced PC were randomly assigned to first-line treatment with either capecitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) or gemcitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). A cross-over to either gemcitabine (arm A) or capecitabine (arm B) was performed after failure of the first-line regimen. Data on skin toxicity were correlated with efficacy study endpoints using uni- and multivariate analyses. To control for guarantee-time bias (GTB), we focused on subgroup analyses of patients who had completed two and three or more treatment cycles. Results. Of 281 randomised patients, skin toxicity data were available for 255 patients. Median time to capecitabine-attributed HFS was two cycles, 36 of 47 (77%) HFS events had been observed by the end of treatment cycle three. Considering HFS during first-line treatment in 101 patients treated with capecitabine for at least two cycles within the capecitabine plus erlotinib arm, time to treatment failure after first- and second-line therapy (TTF2) and overall survival (OS) both were significantly prolonged for the 44 patients (44%) with HFS compared to 57 patients without HFS (56%) (TTF2: 7.8 vs. 3.8 months, HR 0.50, p = 0.001; OS: 10.4 vs. 5.9 months, HR 0.55, p = 0.005). A subgroup analysis of 70 patients on treatment with capecitabine for at least three cycles showed similar results (TTF2: 8.3 vs. 4.4 months, HR 0.53, p = 0.010; OS: 10.4 vs. 6.7 months, HR 0.62, p = 0.056). Conclusion. The present subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104 suggests that HFS may serve as an independent clinical predictor for treatment outcome in capecitabine-treated patients with advanced PC.

Chemotherapy for mobilisation of Ph-negative progenitor cells from patients with CML: impact of different mobilisation regimens

Mobilised peripheral blood stem cells are widely used for autografting in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) and it is generally thought that a high proportion of Ph-negative progenitor cells in the graft is desirable. We report here the results of 91 stem cell mobilisations performed with various chemotherapy regimens followed by G-CSF. We show that mobilisation of Ph-negative cells is possible after diagnosis as well as in advanced stages of the disease. The yield of Ph-negative cells is highly dependent on the chemotherapy regimen: while the combination of idarubicin and cytarabin for 3–5 days (IC3–5) mobilised Ph-negative cells in most patients, high-dose cyclophosphamide was ineffective. Mobilisation of Ph-negative progenitor cells after IC3 was at least as effective as after IC5; however, less apheresis sessions were required, and toxicity was much reduced after IC3. Compared to historical controls, IC was equally effective as the widely used ICE/minilCE (idarubicin, cytarabin, etoposide) protocol. No correlation was found between graft quality and the cytogenetic response to subsequent treatment with interferon-α. We conclude that IC3 is an effective and well-tolerated regimen for mobilising Ph-negative cells that compares well with more aggressive approaches such as IC5 and ICE/minilCE. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2001) 27, 1125–1132.