Helen J. Ross

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 ...

Phase III Trial Comparing Paclitaxel Poliglumex (CT-2103, PPX) in Combination with Carboplatin Versus Standard Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in the Treatment of PS 2 Patients with Chemotherapy-Naïve Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: Performance status (PS) 2 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience more toxicity, lower response rates, and shorter survival times than healthier patients treated with standard chemotherapy. Paclitaxel poliglumex (PPX), a macromolecule drug conjugate of paclitaxel and polyglutamic acid, reduces systemic exposure to peak concentrations of free paclitaxel and may lead to increased concentrations in tumors due to enhanced vascular permeability. Methods: Chemotherapy-naive PS 2 patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive carboplatin (area under the curve = 6) and either PPX (210 mg/m2/10 min without routine steroid premedication) or paclitaxel (225 mg/m2/3 h with standard premedication) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. Results: A total of 400 patients were enrolled. Alopecia, arthralgias/myalgias, and cardiac events were significantly less frequent with PPX/carboplatin, whereas grade ≥3 neutropenia and grade 3 neuropathy showed a trend of worsening. There was no significant difference in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions despite the absence of routine premedication in the PPX arm. Overall survival was similar between treatment arms (hazard ratio, 0.97; log rank p = 0.769). Median and 1-year survival rates were 7.9 months and 31%, for PPX versus 8 months and 31% for paclitaxel. Disease control rates were 64% and 69% for PPX and paclitaxel, respectively. Time to progression was similar: 3.9 months for PPX/carboplatin versus 4.6 months for paclitaxel/carboplatin (p = 0.210). Conclusion: PPX/carboplatin failed to provide superior survival compared with paclitaxel/carboplatin in the first-line treatment of PS 2 patients with NSCLC, but the results with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival were comparable and the PPX regimen was more convenient.

Phase III trial comparing paclitaxel poliglumex vs docetaxel in the second-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer

Paclitaxel poliglumex (PPX), a macromolecule drug conjugate linking paclitaxel to polyglutamic acid, reduces systemic exposure to peak concentrations of free paclitaxel. Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had received one prior platinum-based chemotherapy received 175 or 210 mg m−2 PPX or 75 mg m−2 docetaxel. The study enrolled 849 previously treated NSCLC patients with advanced disease. Median survival (6.9 months in both arms, hazard ratio=1.09, P=0.257), 1-year survival (PPX=25%, docetaxel=29%, P=0.134), and time to progression (PPX=2 months, docetaxel=2.6 months, P=0.075) were similar between treatment arms. Paclitaxel poliglumex was associated with significantly less grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (P<0.001) and febrile neutropenia (P=0.006). Grade 3 or 4 neuropathy (P<0.001) was more common in the PPX arm. Patients receiving PPX had less alopecia and did not receive routine premedications. More patients discontinued due to adverse events in the PPX arm compared to the docetaxel arm (34 vs 16%, P<0.001). Paclitaxel poliglumex and docetaxel produced similar survival results but had different toxicity profiles. Compared with docetaxel, PPX had less febrile neutropenia and less alopecia, shorter infusion times, and elimination of routine use of medications to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. Paclitaxel poliglumex at a dose of 210 mg m−2 resulted in increased neurotoxicity compared with docetaxel.

Randomized phase II multicenter trial of two schedules of lapatinib as first- or second-line monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Purpose: This randomized phase II study was initially designed to test the activity of two dose schedules of lapatinib (GW572016H), an oral, reversible, dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human EGFR-2 (HER2/neu; HER2), in chemotherapy-naive patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); it was later amended to target patients with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma or no smoking history. Experimental Design: Patients with good performance status and recurrent or metastatic NSCLC were randomized to lapatinib (orally, 1,500 mg once daily or 500 mg twice daily) until progression or intolerance. Patients could have had a maximum of one prior systemic therapy (chemotherapy or biological therapy) for NSCLC. Safety and activity were assessed every 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. Tumors were analyzed for EGFR and HER2 mutations and/or amplifications. Results: Of 75 patients in the nontargeted population, 1 (1.3%) had partial response and 16 (21%) had stable disease of ≥24 weeks. No complete or partial responses were observed in 56 patients in the targeted population; 14 (25%) had stable disease of ≥24 weeks. No responses were seen in three patients with EGFR mutations and five with EGFR gene amplification. No mutations in HER2 were found. One of two patients with HER2 amplification had a 51% decrease in tumor size; however, this response was unconfirmed. The most common adverse events were grade 1 or 2 diarrhea, rash, fatigue, nausea, and anorexia. Adverse events were similar across dosing regimens. Conclusions: Lapatinib was well tolerated, with no notable difference in toxicity between treatment groups. Lapatinib monotherapy did not induce a significant number of tumor regressions in NSCLC. Further studies may be warranted to determine whether lapatinib is active in combination with other agents in the treatment of NSCLC. Clin Cancer Res; 16(6); 1938–49

A phase II study of the safety and efficacy of the multidrug resistance inhibitor VX-710 combined with doxorubicin and vincristine in patients with recurrent small cell lung cancer

Tumors with multidrug resistance (MDR) frequently up‐regulate efflux proteins, including MDR‐associated protein (MRP‐1) and P‐glycoprotein (Pgp). MDR represents an obstacle to successful chemotherapy treatment and is reversible in Pgp‐ or MRP‐1‐expressing cells by the inhibitor VX‐710. A Phase II study was designed to evaluate VX‐710 in combination with doxorubicin and vincristine in patients with sensitive, recurrent small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Pemetrexed alone or in combination with cisplatin in previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma: outcomes from a phase IIIB expanded access program.

Background: In a randomized phase III trial, pemetrexed plus cisplatin was associated with improved survival compared with cisplatin alone for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, there are limited data available on the efficacy of these and other chemotherapy regimens in patients who have received previous systemic chemotherapy. To gather additional efficacy and safety data of pemetrexed/cisplatin and pemetrexed alone in previously treated patients, we examined patients treated on the Eli Lilly and Company expanded access program (EAP). Patients and Methods: Patients with malignant mesothelioma were enrolled in this trial. Of 1056 patients receiving at least one dose of the study drug, 187 (17.7%) were previously treated patients with MPM. Patients were treated every 21 days with pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 alone (n = 91) or in combination with cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (n = 96) for a maximum of six cycles. All patients received folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation and steroid prophylaxis. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported by investigators and compiled in a pharmaco-vigilance database for all patients enrolled in the EAP. Results: Median age of the previously treated pleural mesothelioma subset was 66 years (range, 27–87 years). Based on 153 evaluable patients (a subset of the larger intent-to-treat population of 187), the overall response rate was 32.5% for pemetrexed and cisplatin and 5.5% for pemetrexed alone. The disease control rate (response rate + stable disease) was 68.7% for pemetrexed and cisplatin and 46.6% for pemetrexed alone. Median survival was 7.6 months for pemetrexed plus cisplatin (67% censored) and 4.1 months for pemetrexed alone (55% censored). The most commonly reported serious adverse events in the overall EAP irrespective of causality were dehydration (7.2%), nausea (5.2%), vomiting (4.9%), dyspnea (3.8%), and pulmonary embolism (2.4%). Conclusions: The data from this EAP study suggest that patients with previously treated MPM can benefit from treatment with pemetrexed alone or in combination with cisplatin. The treatment is associated with acceptable toxicity.

Single-agent versus combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a performance status of 2: prognostic factors and treatment selection based on two large randomized clinical trials.

Purpose: Data from two randomized phase III trials were analyzed to evaluate prognostic factors and treatment selection in the first-line management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with performance status (PS) 2. Patients and Methods: Patients randomized to combination chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) in one trial and single-agent therapy (gemcitabine or vinorelbine) in the second were included in these analyses. Both studies had identical eligibility criteria and were conducted simultaneously. Comparison of efficacy and safety was performed between the two cohorts. A regression analysis identified prognostic factors and subgroups of patients that may benefit from combination or single-agent therapy. Results: Two hundred one patients were treated with combination and 190 with single-agent therapy. Objective responses were 37 and 15%, respectively. Median time to progression was 4.6 months in the combination arm and 3.5 months in the single-agent arm (p < 0.001). Median survival times were 8.0 and 6.6 months, and 1-year survival rates were 31 and 26%, respectively. Albumin <3.5 g, extrathoracic metastases, lactate dehydrogenase ≥200 IU, and 2 comorbid conditions predicted outcome. Patients with 0–2 risk factors had similar outcomes independent of treatment, whereas patients with 3–4 factors had a nonsignificant improvement in median survival with combination chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results show that PS2 non-small cell lung cancer patients are a heterogeneous group who have significantly different outcomes. Patients treated with first-line combination chemotherapy had a higher response and longer time to progression, whereas overall survival did not appear significantly different. A prognostic model may be helpful in selecting PS 2 patients for either treatment strategy.

PRONOUNCE: Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Study of First-Line Pemetrexed + Carboplatin Followed by Maintenance Pemetrexed versus Paclitaxel + Carboplatin + Bevacizumab Followed by Maintenance Bevacizumab in Patients ith Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: PRONOUNCE compared the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed+carboplatin followed by pemetrexed (Pem+Cb) with paclitaxel+carboplatin+bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab (Pac+Cb+Bev) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Patients ≥18 years of age with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC (American Joint Committee on Cancer v7.0), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 were randomized (1:1) to four cycles of induction Pem+Cb (pemetrexed, 500 mg/m2, carboplatin, area under the curve = 6) followed by Pem maintenance or Pac+Cb+Bev (paclitaxel, 200 mg/m2, carboplatin, area under the curve = 6, and bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg) followed by Bev maintenance in the absence of progressive disease or discontinuation. The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) without grade 4 toxicity (G4PFS). Secondary end points were PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. Resource utilization was also assessed. Results: Baseline characteristics of the patients randomized to Pem+Cb (N = 182) and Pac+Cb+Bev (N = 179) were well balanced between the arms. Median (months) G4PFS was 3.91 for Pem+Cb and 2.86 for Pac+Cb+Bev (hazard ratio = 0.85, 90% confidence interval, 0.7–1.04; p = 0.176); PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR did not differ significantly between the arms. Significantly more drug-related grade 3/4 anemia (18.7% versus 5.4%) and thrombocytopenia (24.0% versus 9.6%) were reported for Pem+Cb. Significantly more grade 3/4 neutropenia (48.8% versus 24.6%), grade 1/2 alopecia (28.3% versus 8.2%), and grade 1/2 sensory neuropathy were reported for Pac+Cb+Bev. Number of hospitalizations and overall length of stay did not differ significantly between the arms. Conclusions: Pem+Cb did not produce significantly better G4PFS compared with Pac+Cb+Bev. Pem+Cb was not superior in PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR compared with Pac+Cb+Bev. Both regimens were well tolerated, although, toxicity profiles differed.

Efficacy of GM-CSF-producing Tumor Vaccine after Docetaxel Chemotherapy in Mice Bearing Established Lewis Lung Carcinoma

In this report, we evaluated the efficacy of a GM-CSF-producing tumor vaccine given before and after docetaxel in mice bearing established lung tumors. Mice bearing established 3LL tumors were treated with docetaxel and tumor vaccines transduced with either control or GM-CSF adenoviral vectors. Docetaxel (5–20 mg/kg) treatment alone had only a minimal effect on growth of established 3LL tumors in vivo, although docetaxel was cytotoxic to 3LL cells in vitro. When mice bearing established 3LL tumors were pretreated with docetaxel followed by vaccination with irradiated GM-CSF- transduced 3LL tumor cells, significant tumor regression and prolonged survival were observed compared with chemotherapy alone. Delaying docetaxel treatment until after tumor vaccination abrogated the vaccines anti-tumor effects. Mice that survived treatment were able to resist a lethal rechallenge of 3LL tumor cells. Memory CTL specific for an epitope (MUT-1) derived from 3LL were detected in surviving mice. Docetaxel induced a mild lymphodepletion in mice, both CD4 and CD8 subsets were reduced in LN and spleens. Interestingly, docetaxel also diminished the number of memory CD8+ T cells (CD122+) and possible CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ natural Treg cells. Docetaxel treatment did not affect antigen-driven proliferation of naive T cells but significantly promoted survival of activated T cells. Thus, augmentation of vaccine induced antitumor immunity in docetaxel-treated mice primarily due to the enhanced survival of antigen-experienced T cells.

Prophylactic cranial irradiation in small-cell lung cancer: Findings from a North Central Cancer Treatment Group Pooled Analysis

BACKGROUND This pooled analysis evaluated the outcomes of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in 739 small-cell lung cancer (SCLC patients with stable disease (SD) or better following chemotherapy ± thoracic radiation therapy (TRT) to examine the potential advantage of PCI in a wider spectrum of patients than generally participate in PCI trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three hundred eighteen patients with extensive SCLC (ESCLC) and 421 patients with limited SCLC (LSCLC) participated in four phase II or III trials. Four hundred fifty-nine patients received PCI (30 Gy/15 or 25 Gy/10) and 280 did not. Survival and adverse events (AEs) were compared. RESULTS PCI patients survived significantly longer than non-PCI patients {hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52-0.72]; P < 0.0001}. The 1- and 3-year survival rates were 56% and 18% for PCI patients versus 32% and 5% for non-PCI patients. PCI was still significant after adjusting for age, performance status, gender, stage, complete response, and number of metastatic sites (HR = 0.82, P = 0.04). PCI patients had significantly more grade 3+ AEs (64%) compared with non-PCI patients (50%) (P = 0.0004). AEs associated with PCI included alopecia and lethargy. Dose fractionation could be compared only for LSCLC patients and 25 Gy/10 was associated with significantly better survival compared with 30 Gy/15 (HR = 0.67, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS PCI was associated with a significant survival benefit for both ESCLC and LSCLC patients who had SD or a better response to chemotherapy ± TRT. Dose fractionation appears important. PCI was associated with an increase in overall and specific grade 3+ AE rates.BACKGROUND This pooled analysis evaluated the outcomes of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in 739 small-cell lung cancer (SCLC patients with stable disease (SD) or better following chemotherapy ± thoracic radiation therapy (TRT) to examine the potential advantage of PCI in a wider spectrum of patients than generally participate in PCI trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three hundred eighteen patients with extensive SCLC (ESCLC) and 421 patients with limited SCLC (LSCLC) participated in four phase II or III trials. Four hundred fifty-nine patients received PCI (30 Gy/15 or 25 Gy/10) and 280 did not. Survival and adverse events (AEs) were compared. RESULTS PCI patients survived significantly longer than non-PCI patients {hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52-0.72]; P < 0.0001}. The 1- and 3-year survival rates were 56% and 18% for PCI patients versus 32% and 5% for non-PCI patients. PCI was still significant after adjusting for age, performance status, gender, stage, complete response, and number of metastatic sites (HR = 0.82, P = 0.04). PCI patients had significantly more grade 3+ AEs (64%) compared with non-PCI patients (50%) (P = 0.0004). AEs associated with PCI included alopecia and lethargy. Dose fractionation could be compared only for LSCLC patients and 25 Gy/10 was associated with significantly better survival compared with 30 Gy/15 (HR = 0.67, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS PCI was associated with a significant survival benefit for both ESCLC and LSCLC patients who had SD or a better response to chemotherapy ± TRT. Dose fractionation appears important. PCI was associated with an increase in overall and specific grade 3+ AE rates.