Hyun Cheol Chung

Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2), was investigated in combination with chemotherapy for first-line treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer. METHODS ToGA (Trastuzumab for Gastric Cancer) was an open-label, international, phase 3, randomised controlled trial undertaken in 122 centres in 24 countries. Patients with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer were eligible for inclusion if their tumours showed overexpression of HER2 protein by immunohistochemistry or gene amplification by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a chemotherapy regimen consisting of capecitabine plus cisplatin or fluorouracil plus cisplatin given every 3 weeks for six cycles or chemotherapy in combination with intravenous trastuzumab. Allocation was by block randomisation stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, chemotherapy regimen, extent of disease, primary cancer site, and measurability of disease, implemented with a central interactive voice recognition system. The primary endpoint was overall survival in all randomised patients who received study medication at least once. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01041404. FINDINGS 594 patients were randomly assigned to study treatment (trastuzumab plus chemotherapy, n=298; chemotherapy alone, n=296), of whom 584 were included in the primary analysis (n=294; n=290). Median follow-up was 18.6 months (IQR 11-25) in the trastuzumab plus chemotherapy group and 17.1 months (9-25) in the chemotherapy alone group. Median overall survival was 13.8 months (95% CI 12-16) in those assigned to trastuzumab plus chemotherapy compared with 11.1 months (10-13) in those assigned to chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.60-0.91; p=0.0046). The most common adverse events in both groups were nausea (trastuzumab plus chemotherapy, 197 [67%] vs chemotherapy alone, 184 [63%]), vomiting (147 [50%] vs 134 [46%]), and neutropenia (157 [53%] vs 165 [57%]). Rates of overall grade 3 or 4 adverse events (201 [68%] vs 198 [68%]) and cardiac adverse events (17 [6%] vs 18 [6%]) did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy can be considered as a new standard option for patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): a phase 3 open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND D2 gastrectomy is recommended in US and European guidelines, and is preferred in east Asia, for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Adjuvant chemotherapy improves patient outcomes after surgery, but the benefits after a D2 resection have not been extensively investigated in large-scale trials. We investigated the effect on disease-free survival of adjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin after D2 gastrectomy compared with D2 gastrectomy only in patients with stage II-IIIB gastric cancer. METHODS The capecitabine and oxaliplatin adjuvant study in stomach cancer (CLASSIC) study was an open-label, parallel-group, phase 3, randomised controlled trial undertaken in 37 centres in South Korea, China, and Taiwan. Patients with stage II-IIIB gastric cancer who had had curative D2 gastrectomy were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant chemotherapy of eight 3-week cycles of oral capecitabine (1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 of each cycle) plus intravenous oxaliplatin (130 mg/m(2) on day 1 of each cycle) for 6 months or surgery only. Block randomisation was done by a central interactive computerised system, stratified by country and disease stage. Patients, and investigators giving interventions, assessing outcomes, and analysing data were not masked. The primary endpoint was 3 year disease-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. This study reports a prespecified interim efficacy analysis, after which the trial was stopped after a recommendation by the data monitoring committee. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00411229). FINDINGS 1035 patients were randomised (520 to receive chemotherapy and surgery, 515 surgery only). Median follow-up was 34·2 months (25·4-41·7) in the chemotherapy and surgery group and 34·3 months (25·6-41·9) in the surgery only group. 3 year disease-free survival was 74% (95% CI 69-79) in the chemotherapy and surgery group and 59% (53-64) in the surgery only group (hazard ratio 0·56, 95% CI 0·44-0·72; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 279 of 496 patients (56%) in the chemotherapy and surgery group and in 30 of 478 patients (6%) in the surgery only group. The most common adverse events in the intervention group were nausea (n=326), neutropenia (n=300), and decreased appetite (n=294). INTERPRETATION Adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin treatment after curative D2 gastrectomy should be considered as a treatment option for patients with operable gastric cancer. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche and Sanofi-Aventis.

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.

Capecitabine and cisplatin with or without cetuximab for patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (EXPAND): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND Patients with advanced gastric cancer have a poor prognosis and few efficacious treatment options. We aimed to assess the addition of cetuximab to capecitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer. METHODS In our open-label, randomised phase 3 trial (EXPAND), we enrolled adults aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed locally advanced unresectable (M0) or metastatic (M1) adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastro-oesophageal junction. We enrolled patients at 164 sites (teaching hospitals and clinics) in 25 countries, and randomly assigned eligible participants (1:1) to receive first-line chemotherapy with or without cetuximab. Randomisation was done with a permuted block randomisation procedure (variable block size), stratified by disease stage (M0 vs M1), previous oesophagectomy or gastrectomy (yes vs no), and previous (neo)adjuvant (radio)chemotherapy (yes vs no). Treatment consisted of 3-week cycles of twice-daily capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) (on days 1-14) and intravenous cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (on day 1), with or without weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) initial infusion on day 1 followed by 250 mg/m(2) per week thereafter). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), assessed by a masked independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered at EudraCT, number 2007-004219-75. FINDINGS Between June 30, 2008, and Dec 15, 2010, we enrolled 904 patients. Median PFS for 455 patients allocated capecitabine-cisplatin plus cetuximab was 4.4 months (95% CI 4.2-5.5) compared with 5.6 months (5.1-5.7) for 449 patients who were allocated to receive capecitabine-cisplatin alone (hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.92-1.29; p=0.32). 369 (83%) of 446 patients in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group and 337 (77%) of 436 patients in the chemotherapy group had grade 3-4 adverse events, including grade 3-4 diarrhoea, hypokalaemia, hypomagnesaemia, rash, and hand-foot syndrome. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was more common in controls than in patients who received cetuximab. Incidence of grade 3-4 skin reactions and acne-like rash was substantially higher in the cetuximab-containing regimen than in the control regimen. 239 (54%) of 446 in the cetuximab group and 194 (44%) of 436 in the control group had any grade of serious adverse event. INTERPRETATION Addition of cetuximab to capecitabine-cisplatin provided no additional benefit to chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer in our trial. FUNDING Merck KGaA.

Randomized dose-finding clinical trial of oncolytic immunotherapeutic vaccinia JX-594 in liver cancer

Oncolytic viruses and active immunotherapeutics have complementary mechanisms of action (MOA) that are both self amplifying in tumors, yet the impact of dose on subject outcome is unclear. JX-594 (Pexa-Vec) is an oncolytic and immunotherapeutic vaccinia virus. To determine the optimal JX-594 dose in subjects with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), we conducted a randomized phase 2 dose-finding trial (n = 30). Radiologists infused low- or high-dose JX-594 into liver tumors (days 1, 15 and 29); infusions resulted in acute detectable intravascular JX-594 genomes. Objective intrahepatic Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) (15%) and Choi (62%) response rates and intrahepatic disease control (50%) were equivalent in injected and distant noninjected tumors at both doses. JX-594 replication and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) expression preceded the induction of anticancer immunity. In contrast to tumor response rate and immune endpoints, subject survival duration was significantly related to dose (median survival of 14.1 months compared to 6.7 months on the high and low dose, respectively; hazard ratio 0.39; P = 0.020). JX-594 demonstrated oncolytic and immunotherapy MOA, tumor responses and dose-related survival in individuals with HCC.

Sunitinib Versus Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE Open-label, phase III trial evaluating whether sunitinib was superior or equivalent to sorafenib in hepatocellular cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were stratified and randomly assigned to receive sunitinib 37.5 mg once per day or sorafenib 400 mg twice per day. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS Early trial termination occurred for futility and safety reasons. A total of 1,074 patients were randomly assigned to the study (sunitinib arm, n = 530; sorafenib arm, n = 544). For sunitinib and sorafenib, respectively, median OS was 7.9 versus 10.2 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.30; one-sided P = .9990; two-sided P = .0014); median progression-free survival (PFS; 3.6 v 3.0 months; HR, 1.13; one-sided P = .8785; two-sided P = .2286) and time to progression (TTP; 4.1 v 3.8 months; HR, 1.13; one-sided P = .8312; two-sided P = .3082) were comparable. Median OS was similar among Asian (7.7 v 8.8 months; HR, 1.21; one-sided P = .9829) and hepatitis B-infected patients (7.6 v 8.0 months; HR, 1.10; one-sided P = .8286), but was shorter with sunitinib in hepatitis C-infected patients (9.2 v 17.6 months; HR, 1.52; one-sided P = .9835). Sunitinib was associated with more frequent and severe adverse events (AEs) than sorafenib. Common grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (29.7%) and neutropenia (25.7%) for sunitinib; hand-foot syndrome (21.2%) for sorafenib. Discontinuations owing to AEs were similar (sunitinib, 13.3%; sorafenib, 12.7%). CONCLUSION OS with sunitinib was not superior or equivalent but was significantly inferior to sorafenib. OS was comparable in Asian and hepatitis B-infected patients. OS was superior in hepatitis C-infected patients who received sorafenib. Sunitinib-treated patients reported more frequent and severe toxicity.

Everolimus for Previously Treated Advanced Gastric Cancer: Results of the Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III GRANITE-1 Study

PURPOSE The oral mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus demonstrated promising efficacy in a phase II study of pretreated advanced gastric cancer. This international, double-blind, phase III study compared everolimus efficacy and safety with that of best supportive care (BSC) in previously treated advanced gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced gastric cancer that progressed after one or two lines of systemic chemotherapy were randomly assigned to everolimus 10 mg/d (assignment schedule: 2:1) or matching placebo, both given with BSC. Randomization was stratified by previous chemotherapy lines (one v two) and region (Asia v rest of the world [ROW]). Treatment continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, and safety. RESULTS Six hundred fifty-six patients (median age, 62.0 years; 73.6% male) were enrolled. Median OS was 5.4 months with everolimus and 4.3 months with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.08; P = .124). Median PFS was 1.7 months and 1.4 months in the everolimus and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.78). Common grade 3/4 adverse events included anemia, decreased appetite, and fatigue. The safety profile was similar in patients enrolled in Asia versus ROW. CONCLUSION Compared with BSC, everolimus did not significantly improve overall survival for advanced gastric cancer that progressed after one or two lines of previous systemic chemotherapy. The safety profile observed for everolimus was consistent with that observed for everolimus in other cancers.

Lapatinib Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel Alone in the Second-Line Treatment of HER2-Amplified Advanced Gastric Cancer in Asian Populations: TyTAN— A Randomized, Phase III Study

PURPOSE In Asian countries, paclitaxel once per week is used as second-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer, including human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive tumors. The role of anti-HER2 agents, including lapatinib, in this setting and population is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS TyTAN was a two-part, parallel-group, phase III study in Asian patients. An open-label, dose-optimization phase (n = 12) was followed by a randomized phase (n = 261), in which patients who were HER2 positive by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) received lapatinib 1,500 mg once per day plus once-per-week paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) or paclitaxel alone. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), time to response, response duration, and safety. Analyses were based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and gastrectomy status, prior trastuzumab therapy, and regional subpopulations. RESULTS Median OS was 11.0 months with lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus 8.9 months with paclitaxel alone (P = .1044), with no significant difference in median PFS (5.4 v 4.4 months) or TTP (5.5 v 4.4 months). ORR was higher with lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone (odds ratio, 3.85; P < .001). Better efficacy with lapatinib plus paclitaxel was demonstrated in IHC3+ compared with IHC0/1+ and 2+ patients and in Chinese compared with Japanese patients. A similar proportion of patients experienced adverse events with each treatment (lapatinib plus paclitaxel, 100% v paclitaxel alone, 98%). CONCLUSION Lapatinib plus paclitaxel demonstrated activity in the second-line treatment of patients with HER2 FISH-positive IHC3+ advanced gastric cancer but did not significantly improve OS in the intent-to-treat population.

Pembrolizumab for patients with PD-L1-positive advanced gastric cancer (KEYNOTE-012): a multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial

BACKGROUND Expression of PD-L1 has been shown to be upregulated in some patients with gastric cancer. As part of the phase 1b KEYNOTE-012 study, we aimed to assess the safety and activity of the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastro-oesophageal junction. METHODS This study was a multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial done at 13 cancer research centres in the USA, Israel, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. We enrolled patients with PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastro-oesophageal junction. Patients received intravenous pembrolizumab at 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks for 24 months or until progression or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. Response was assessed every 8 weeks in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The primary objectives were safety in patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab and the proportion of patients achieving overall responses in patients who received at least one pembrolizumab dose and who either had a post-baseline scan or who discontinued therapy because of clinical disease progression or a treatment-related adverse event before the first post-baseline scan. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01848834, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS From Oct 23, 2013, to May 5, 2014, 39 patients were enrolled. 36 were evaluable for response by central assessment. Eight (22%, 95% CI 10-39) patients were judged to have had an overall response at central review; all responses were partial. All 39 patients were included in the safety analyses. Five (13%) patients had a total of six grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events, consisting of two cases of grade 3 fatigue, one case each of grade 3 pemphigoid, grade 3 hypothyroidism, and grade 3 peripheral sensory neuropathy, and one case of grade 4 pneumonitis. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION In this population of patients with recurrent or metastatic PD-L1-positive gastric cancer, pembrolizumab had a manageable toxicity profile and promising antitumour activity, warranting further study in phase 2 and 3 trials. FUNDING Merck & Co.

Adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): 5-year follow-up of an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND The CLASSIC trial was done to compare adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin versus observation after D2 gastrectomy for patients with stage II or III gastric cancer. The planned interim analysis of CLASSIC (median follow-up 34 months) showed that adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin significantly improved disease-free survival, the primary endpoint, compared with observation after D2 gastrectomy. We report the 5-year follow-up data from the trial. METHODS CLASSIC was a phase 3, randomised, open-label study done at 35 cancer centres, medical centres, and hospitals in China, South Korea, and Taiwan. Patients with stage II-IIIB gastric cancer who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) after surgery to receive adjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (eight 3-week cycles of oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 plus intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1) for 6 months or observation alone. Randomisation was stratified by country and disease stage with a permuted block (size four) design. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This analysis presents the final preplanned assessment of outcomes after 5 years. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00411229. FINDINGS We enrolled 1035 patients: 520 were randomly assigned to adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin, and 515 to observation. Median follow-up for this analysis in the intention-to-treat population was 62·4 months (IQR 54-70). 139 (27%) patients had disease-free survival events in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 203 (39%) patients in the observation group (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·58, 95% CI 0·47-0·72; p<0·0001). Estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 68% (95% CI 63-73) in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 53% (47-58) in the observation alone group. By the clinical cutoff date, 103 patients (20%) had died in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 141 patients (27%) in the observation group (stratified HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·51-0·85; p=0·0015). Estimated 5-year overall survival was 78% (95% CI 74-82) in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 69% (64-73) in the observation group. Adverse event data were not collected after the primary analysis. INTERPRETATION Adjuvant treatment with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin after D2 gastrectomy should be considered for patients with operable stage II or III gastric cancer. FUNDING F Hoffmann La-Roche and Sanofi.