Henry Gomez

Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND The anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody trastuzumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib have complementary mechanisms of action and synergistic antitumour activity in models of HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. We argue that the two anti-HER2 agents given together would be better than single-agent therapy. METHODS In this parallel groups, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study undertaken between Jan 5, 2008, and May 27, 2010, women from 23 countries with HER2-positive primary breast cancer with tumours greater than 2 cm in diameter were randomly assigned to oral lapatinib (1500 mg), intravenous trastuzumab (loading dose 4 mg/kg [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED], subsequent doses 2 mg/kg), or lapatinib (1000 mg) plus trastuzumab. Treatment allocation was by stratified, permuted blocks randomisation, with four stratification factors. Anti-HER2 therapy alone was given for the first 6 weeks; weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) was then added to the regimen for a further 12 weeks, before definitive surgery was undertaken. After surgery, patients received adjuvant chemotherapy followed by the same targeted therapy as in the neoadjuvant phase to 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the rate of pathological complete response (pCR), analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00553358. FINDINGS 154 patients received lapatinib, 149 trastuzumab, and 152 the combination. pCR rate was significantly higher in the group given lapatinib and trastuzumab (78 of 152 patients [51·3%; 95% CI 43·1-59·5]) than in the group given trastuzumab alone (44 of 149 patients [29·5%; 22·4-37·5]; difference 21·1%, 9·1-34·2, p=0·0001). We recorded no significant difference in pCR between the lapatinib (38 of 154 patients [24·7%, 18·1-32·3]) and the trastuzumab (difference -4·8%, -17·6 to 8·2, p=0·34) groups. No major cardiac dysfunctions occurred. Frequency of grade 3 diarrhoea was higher with lapatinib (36 patients [23·4%]) and lapatinib plus trastuzumab (32 [21·1%]) than with trastuzumab (three [2·0%]). Similarly, grade 3 liver-enzyme alterations were more frequent with lapatinib (27 [17·5%]) and lapatinib plus trastuzumab (15 [9·9%]) than with trastuzumab (11 [7·4%]). INTERPRETATION Dual inhibition of HER2 might be a valid approach to treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. FUNDING GlaxoSmithKline.

Lapatinib Combined With Letrozole Versus Letrozole and Placebo As First-Line Therapy for Postmenopausal Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Cross-talk between human epidermal growth factor receptors and hormone receptor pathways may cause endocrine resistance in breast cancer. This trial evaluated the effect of adding lapatinib, a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor blocking epidermal growth factor receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), to the aromatase inhibitor letrozole as first-line treatment of hormone receptor (HR) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Postmenopausal women with HR-positive MBC were randomly assigned to daily letrozole (2.5 mg orally) plus lapatinib (1,500 mg orally) or letrozole and placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the HER2-positive population. Results In HR-positive, HER2-positive patients (n = 219), addition of lapatinib to letrozole significantly reduced the risk of disease progression versus letrozole-placebo (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.96; P = .019); median PFS was 8.2 v 3.0 months, respectively. Clinical benefit (responsive or stable disease >or= 6 months) was significantly greater for lapatinib-letrozole versus letrozole-placebo (48% v 29%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.8; P = .003). Patients with centrally confirmed HR-positive, HER2-negative tumors (n = 952) had no improvement in PFS. A preplanned Cox regression analysis identified prior antiestrogen therapy as a significant factor in the HER2-negative population; a nonsignificant trend toward prolonged PFS for lapatinib-letrozole was seen in patients who experienced relapse less than 6 months since prior tamoxifen discontinuation (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.07; P = .117). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more common in the lapatinib-letrozole arm versus letrozole-placebo arm (diarrhea, 10% v 1%; rash, 1% v 0%, respectively), but they were manageable. CONCLUSION This trial demonstrated that a combined targeted strategy with letrozole and lapatinib significantly enhances PFS and clinical benefit rates in patients with MBC that coexpresses HR and HER2.

Pharmacogenomic Predictor of Sensitivity to Preoperative Chemotherapy With Paclitaxel and Fluorouracil, Doxorubicin, and Cyclophosphamide in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE We developed a multigene predictor of pathologic complete response (pCR) to preoperative weekly paclitaxel and fluorouracil-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (T/FAC) chemotherapy and assessed its predictive accuracy on independent cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred thirty-three patients with stage I-III breast cancer were included. Pretreatment gene expression profiling was performed with oligonecleotide microarrays on fine-needle aspiration specimens. We developed predictors of pCR from 82 cases and assessed accuracy on 51 independent cases. RESULTS Overall pCR rate was 26% in both cohorts. In the training set, 56 probes were identified as differentially expressed between pCR versus residual disease, at a false discovery rate of 1%. We examined the performance of 780 distinct classifiers (set of genes + prediction algorithm) in full cross-validation. Many predictors performed equally well. A nominally best 30-probe set Diagonal Linear Discriminant Analysis classifier was selected for independent validation. It showed significantly higher sensitivity (92% v 61%) than a clinical predictor including age, grade, and estrogen receptor status. The negative predictive value (96% v 86%) and area under the curve (0.877 v 0.811) were nominally better but not statistically significant. The combination of genomic and clinical information yielded a predictor not significantly different from the genomic predictor alone. In 31 samples, RNA was hybridized in replicate with resulting predictions that were 97% concordant. CONCLUSION A 30-probe set pharmacogenomic predictor predicted pCR to T/FAC chemotherapy with high sensitivity and negative predictive value. This test correctly identified all but one of the patients who achieved pCR (12 of 13 patients) and all but one of those who were predicted to have residual disease had residual cancer (27 of 28 patients).

Ixabepilone Plus Capecitabine for Metastatic Breast Cancer Progressing After Anthracycline and Taxane Treatment

PURPOSE Effective treatment options for patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes are limited. Ixabepilone has single-agent activity in these patients and has demonstrated synergy with capecitabine in this setting. This study was designed to compare ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in anthracycline-pretreated or -resistant and taxane-resistant locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Seven hundred fifty-two patients were randomly assigned to ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle plus capecitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle, or capecitabine alone 2,500 mg/m(2) on the same schedule, in this international phase III study. The primary end point was progression-free survival evaluated by blinded independent review. RESULTS Ixabepilone plus capecitabine prolonged progression-free survival relative to capecitabine (median, 5.8 v 4.2 months), with a 25% reduction in the estimated risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88; P = .0003). Objective response rate was also increased (35% v 14%; P < .0001). Grade 3/4 treatment-related sensory neuropathy (21% v 0%), fatigue (9% v 3%), and neutropenia (68% v 11%) were more frequent with combination therapy, as was the rate of death as a result of toxicity (3% v 1%, with patients with liver dysfunction [>/= grade 2 liver function tests] at greater risk). Capecitabine-related toxicities were similar for both treatment groups. CONCLUSION Ixabepilone plus capecitabine demonstrates superior efficacy to capecitabine alone in patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated or resistant to anthracyclines and resistant to taxanes.

Phase III, Double-Blind, Randomized Study Comparing Lapatinib Plus Paclitaxel With Placebo Plus Paclitaxel As First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Lapatinib, a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2/ErbB2), is effective against HER-2-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This phase III trial evaluated the efficacy of lapatinib in HER-2-negative and HER-2-uncharacterized MBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women with MBC were randomly assigned to first-line therapy with paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks plus lapatinib 1,500 mg/d or placebo. A preplanned retrospective evaluation of HER-2 status was performed using fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP); secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS In the intent-to-treat population (n = 579), there were no significant differences in TTP, EFS, or OS between treatment arms, although differences in ORR and CBR were noted. In 86 HER-2-positive patients (15%), treatment with paclitaxel-lapatinib resulted in statistically significant improvements in TTP, EFS, ORR, and CBR compared with paclitaxel-placebo. No differences between treatment groups were observed for any end point in HER-2-negative patients. The most common adverse events were alopecia, rash, and diarrhea. The incidence of diarrhea and rash was significantly higher in the paclitaxel-lapatinib arm. The rate of cardiac events was low, and no difference was observed between treatment arms. CONCLUSION Patients with HER-2-negative or HER-2-untested MBC did not benefit from the addition of lapatinib to paclitaxel. However, first-line therapy with paclitaxel-lapatinib significantly improved clinical outcomes in HER-2-positive patients. Prospective evaluation of the efficacy and safety of this combination is ongoing in early and metastatic HER-2-positive breast cancer patients.

High-dose cytarabine plus high-dose methotrexate versus high-dose methotrexate alone in patients with primary CNS lymphoma: a randomised phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy with high-dose methotrexate is the conventional approach to treat primary CNS lymphomas, but superiority of polychemotherapy compared with high-dose methotrexate alone is unproven. We assessed the effect of adding high-dose cytarabine to methotrexate in patients with newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma. METHODS This open, randomised, phase 2 trial was undertaken in 24 centres in six countries. 79 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma exclusively localised into the CNS, cranial nerves, or eyes, aged 18-75 years, and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 3 or lower and measurable disease were centrally randomly assigned by computer to receive four courses of either methotrexate 3.5 g/m(2) on day 1 (n=40) or methotrexate 3.5 g/m(2) on day 1 plus cytarabine 2 g/m(2) twice a day on days 2-3 (n=39). Both regimens were administered every 3 weeks and were followed by whole-brain irradiation. The primary endpoint was complete remission rate after chemotherapy. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00210314. FINDINGS All randomly assigned participants were analysed. After chemotherapy, seven patients given methotrexate and 18 given methotrexate plus cytarabine achieved a complete remission, with a complete remission rate of 18% (95% CI 6-30) and 46% (31-61), respectively, (p=0.006). Nine patients receiving methotrexate and nine receiving methotrexate plus cytarabine achieved a partial response, with an overall response rate of 40% (25-55) and 69% (55-83), respectively, (p=0.009). Grade 3-4 haematological toxicity was more common in the methotrexate plus cytarabine group than in the methotrexate group (36 [92%] vs six [15%]). Four patients died of toxic effects (three vs one). INTERPRETATION In patients aged 75 years and younger with primary CNS lymphoma, the addition of high-dose cytarabine to high-dose methotrexate provides improved outcome with acceptable toxicity compared with high-dose methotrexate alone. FUNDING Swiss Cancer League.

Adjuvant Exemestane with Ovarian Suppression in Premenopausal Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND Adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor improves outcomes, as compared with tamoxifen, in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. METHODS In two phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer to the aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus ovarian suppression or tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression for a period of 5 years. Suppression of ovarian estrogen production was achieved with the use of the gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist triptorelin, oophorectomy, or ovarian irradiation. The primary analysis combined data from 4690 patients in the two trials. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 68 months, disease-free survival at 5 years was 91.1% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 87.3% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence, second invasive cancer, or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.85; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from breast cancer at 5 years was 92.8% in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, as compared with 88.8% in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group (hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001). With 194 deaths (4.1% of the patients), overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio for death in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.51; P=0.37). Selected adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported for 30.6% of the patients in the exemestane-ovarian suppression group and 29.4% of those in the tamoxifen-ovarian suppression group, with profiles similar to those for postmenopausal women. CONCLUSIONS In premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with exemestane plus ovarian suppression, as compared with tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression, significantly reduced recurrence. (Funded by Pfizer and others; TEXT and SOFT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00066703 and NCT00066690, respectively.).

A Genomic Predictor of Response and Survival Following Taxane-Anthracycline Chemotherapy for Invasive Breast Cancer

CONTEXT Prediction of high probability of survival from standard cancer treatments is fundamental for individualized cancer treatment strategies. OBJECTIVE To develop a predictor of response and survival from chemotherapy for newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Prospective multicenter study conducted from June 2000 to March 2010 at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center to develop and test genomic predictors for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were those with newly diagnosed ERBB2 (HER2 or HER2/neu)-negative breast cancer treated with chemotherapy containing sequential taxane and anthracycline-based regimens (then endocrine therapy if estrogen receptor [ER]-positive). Different predictive signatures for resistance and response to preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy (stratified according to ER status) were developed from gene expression microarrays of newly diagnosed breast cancer (310 patients). Breast cancer treatment sensitivity was then predicted using the combination of signatures for (1) sensitivity to endocrine therapy, (2) chemoresistance, and (3) chemosensitivity, with independent validation (198 patients) and comparison with other reported genomic predictors of chemotherapy response. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) if predicted treatment sensitive and absolute risk reduction ([ARR], difference in DRFS between 2 predicted groups) at median follow-up (3 years). RESULTS Patients in the independent validation cohort (99% clinical stage II-III) who were predicted to be treatment sensitive (28%) had 56% (95% CI, 31%-78%) probability of excellent pathologic response and DRFS of 92% (95% CI, 85%-100%), with an ARR of 18% (95% CI, 6%-28%). Survival was predicted in ER-positive (30% predicted sensitive; DRFS, 97% [95% CI, 91%-100%]; ARR, 11% [95% CI, 0.1%-21%]) and ER-negative (26% predicted sensitive; DRFS, 83% [95% CI, 68%-100%]; ARR, 26% [95% CI, 4%-48%]) subsets and was significant in multivariate analysis. Other genomic predictors showed paradoxically worse survival for patients predicted to be responsive to chemotherapy. CONCLUSION A genomic predictor combining ER status, predicted chemoresistance, predicted chemosensitivity, and predicted endocrine sensitivity identified patients with high probability of survival following taxane and anthracycline chemotherapy.

A prospective phase II trial exploring the association between tumor microenvironment biomarkers and clinical activity of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma

BackgroundIpilimumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4, has demonstrated an improvement in overall survival in two phase III trials of patients with advanced melanoma. The primary objective of the current trial was to prospectively explore candidate biomarkers from the tumor microenvironment for associations with clinical response to ipilimumab.MethodsIn this randomized, double-blind, phase II biomarker study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00261365), 82 pretreated or treatment-naïve patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma were induced with 3 or 10 mg/kg ipilimumab every 3 weeks for 4 doses; at Week 24, patients could receive maintenance doses every 12 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated per modified World Health Organization response criteria and safety was assessed continuously. Candidate biomarkers were evaluated in tumor biopsies collected pretreatment and 24 to 72 hours after the second ipilimumab dose. Polymorphisms in immune-related genes were also evaluated.ResultsObjective response rate, response patterns, and safety were consistent with previous trials of ipilimumab in melanoma. No associations between genetic polymorphisms and clinical activity were observed. Immunohistochemistry and histology on tumor biopsies revealed significant associations between clinical activity and high baseline expression of FoxP3 (p = 0.014) and indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (p = 0.012), and between clinical activity and increase in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) between baseline and 3 weeks after start of treatment (p = 0.005). Microarray analysis of mRNA from tumor samples taken pretreatment and post-treatment demonstrated significant increases in expression of several immune-related genes, and decreases in expression of genes implicated in cancer and melanoma.ConclusionsBaseline expression of immune-related tumor biomarkers and a post-treatment increase in TILs may be positively associated with ipilimumab clinical activity. The observed pharmacodynamic changes in gene expression warrant further analysis to determine whether treatment-emergent changes in gene expression may be associated with clinical efficacy. Further studies are required to determine the predictive value of these and other potential biomarkers associated with clinical response to ipilimumab.

Efficacy and Safety of Lapatinib As First-Line Therapy for ErbB2-Amplified Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE This study (EGF20009) assessed the efficacy and tolerability of two lapatinib administration schedules as first-line monotherapy in women with ErbB2-amplified locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with ErbB2-amplified, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting were randomly assigned to one of two lapatinib dose cohorts and received either 1,500 mg once daily or 500 mg twice daily. Clinical response was assessed at weeks 8 and 12 and every 12 weeks thereafter. RESULTS A total of 138 patients were treated with lapatinib for a median of 17.6 weeks. The overall response rate (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR]) was 24% in the intent-to-treat population, and 31% of patients derived clinical benefit (CR, PR, or stable disease for >or= 24 weeks). The median time to response was 7.9 weeks, and the progression-free survival rates at 4 and 6 months were 63% and 43%, respectively. The most common lapatinib-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea, rash, pruritus, and nausea, and these events were primarily grade 1 or 2. There were no significant differences in clinical activity or the AE profile between the dosing schedules. CONCLUSION Lapatinib demonstrated clinical activity and was well tolerated as first-line therapy in ErbB2-amplified locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. This study supports further evaluation of lapatinib in first-line and early-stage ErbB2-overexpressing breast cancer.