Jaafar Bennouna

FOLFIRINOX versus Gemcitabine for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as compared with gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS We randomly assigned 342 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 (on a scale of 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater severity of illness) to receive FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg per square meter of body-surface area; irinotecan, 180 mg per square meter; leucovorin, 400 mg per square meter; and fluorouracil, 400 mg per square meter given as a bolus followed by 2400 mg per square meter given as a 46-hour continuous infusion, every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter weekly for 7 of 8 weeks and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. Six months of chemotherapy were recommended in both groups in patients who had a response. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the FOLFIRINOX group as compared with 6.8 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.73; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 6.4 months in the FOLFIRINOX group and 3.3 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.59; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 31.6% in the FOLFIRINOX group versus 9.4% in the gemcitabine group (P<0.001). More adverse events were noted in the FOLFIRINOX group; 5.4% of patients in this group had febrile neutropenia. At 6 months, 31% of the patients in the FOLFIRINOX group had a definitive degradation of the quality of life versus 66% in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.70; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS As compared with gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX was associated with a survival advantage and had increased toxicity. FOLFIRINOX is an option for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and good performance status. (Funded by the French government and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00112658.).

Phase III Study of Afatinib or Cisplatin Plus Pemetrexed in Patients With Metastatic Lung Adenocarcinoma With EGFR Mutations

PURPOSE The LUX-Lung 3 study investigated the efficacy of chemotherapy compared with afatinib, a selective, orally bioavailable ErbB family blocker that irreversibly blocks signaling from epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/ErbB2), and ErbB4 and has wide-spectrum preclinical activity against EGFR mutations. A phase II study of afatinib in EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma demonstrated high response rates and progression-free survival (PFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS In this phase III study, eligible patients with stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma were screened for EGFR mutations. Mutation-positive patients were stratified by mutation type (exon 19 deletion, L858R, or other) and race (Asian or non-Asian) before two-to-one random assignment to 40 mg afatinib per day or up to six cycles of cisplatin plus pemetrexed chemotherapy at standard doses every 21 days. The primary end point was PFS by independent review. Secondary end points included tumor response, overall survival, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS A total of 1,269 patients were screened, and 345 were randomly assigned to treatment. Median PFS was 11.1 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P = .001). Median PFS among those with exon 19 deletions and L858R EGFR mutations (n = 308) was 13.6 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65; P = .001). The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea, rash/acne, and stomatitis for afatinib and nausea, fatigue, and decreased appetite for chemotherapy. PROs favored afatinib, with better control of cough, dyspnea, and pain. CONCLUSION Afatinib is associated with prolongation of PFS when compared with standard doublet chemotherapy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and EGFR mutations.

Afatinib versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy for EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma (LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6): analysis of overall survival data from two randomised, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND We aimed to assess the effect of afatinib on overall survival of patients with EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma through an analysis of data from two open-label, randomised, phase 3 trials. METHODS Previously untreated patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in LUX-Lung 3 (n=345) and LUX-Lung 6 (n=364). These patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive afatinib or chemotherapy (pemetrexed-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 3] or gemcitabine-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 6]), stratified by EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion [del19], Leu858Arg, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only). We planned analyses of mature overall survival data in the intention-to-treat population after 209 (LUX-Lung 3) and 237 (LUX-Lung 6) deaths. These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00949650 and NCT01121393. FINDINGS Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 3 was 41 months (IQR 35-44); 213 (62%) of 345 patients had died. Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 6 was 33 months (IQR 31-37); 246 (68%) of 364 patients had died. In LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 28.2 months (95% CI 24.6-33.6) in the afatinib group and 28.2 months (20.7-33.2) in the pemetrexed-cisplatin group (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.17, p=0.39). In LUX-Lung 6, median overall survival was 23.1 months (95% CI 20.4-27.3) in the afatinib group and 23.5 months (18.0-25.6) in the gemcitabine-cisplatin group (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72-1.22, p=0.61). However, in preplanned analyses, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with del19-positive tumours in the afatinib group than in the chemotherapy group in both trials: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 33.3 months (95% CI 26.8-41.5) in the afatinib group versus 21.1 months (16.3-30.7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.79, p=0.0015); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 31.4 months (95% CI 24.2-35.3) versus 18.4 months (14.6-25.6), respectively (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.94, p=0.023). By contrast, there were no significant differences by treatment group for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg-positive tumours in either trial: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 27.6 months (19.8-41.7) in the afatinib group versus 40.3 months (24.3-not estimable) in the chemotherapy group (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.11, p=0.29); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 19.6 months (95% CI 17.0-22.1) versus 24.3 months (19.0-27.0), respectively (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.81-1.83, p=0.34). In both trials, the most common afatinib-related grade 3-4 adverse events were rash or acne (37 [16%] of 229 patients in LUX-Lung 3 and 35 [15%] of 239 patients in LUX-Lung 6), diarrhoea (33 [14%] and 13 [5%]), paronychia (26 [11%] in LUX-Lung 3 only), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 [5%] in LUX-Lung 6 only). In LUX-Lung 3, neutropenia (20 [18%] of 111 patients), fatigue (14 [13%]) and leucopenia (nine [8%]) were the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3-4 adverse events, while in LUX-Lung 6, the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (30 [27%] of 113 patients), vomiting (22 [19%]), and leucopenia (17 [15%]). INTERPRETATION Although afatinib did not improve overall survival in the whole population of either trial, overall survival was improved with the drug for patients with del19 EGFR mutations. The absence of an effect in patients with Leu858Arg EGFR mutations suggests that EGFR del19-positive disease might be distinct from Leu858Arg-positive disease and that these subgroups should be analysed separately in future trials. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

Carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy compared with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: IFCT-0501 randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is recommended to treat advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in fit, non-elderly adults, but monotherapy is recommended for patients older than 70 years. We compared a carboplatin and paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy regimen with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised trial we recruited patients aged 70-89 years with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and WHO performance status scores of 0-2. Patients received either four cycles (3 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of carboplatin (on day 1) plus paclitaxel (on days 1, 8, and 15) or five cycles (2 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy. Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation method. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number NCT00298415. FINDINGS 451 patients were enrolled. 226 were randomly assigned monotherapy and 225 doublet chemotherapy. Median age was 77 years and median follow-up was 30.3 months (range 8.6-45.2). Median overall survival was 10.3 months for doublet chemotherapy and 6.2 months for monotherapy (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78; p<0.0001); 1-year survival was 44.5% (95% CI 37.9-50.9) and 25.4% (19.9-31.3), respectively. Toxic effects were more frequent in the doublet chemotherapy group than in the monotherapy group (most frequent, decreased neutrophil count (108 [48.4%] vs 28 [12.4%]; asthenia 23 [10.3%] vs 13 [5.8%]). INTERPRETATION Despite increased toxic effects, platinum-based doublet chemotherapy was associated with survival benefits compared with vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy in elderly patients with NSCLC. We feel that the current treatment paradigm for these patients should be reconsidered. FUNDING Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique, Institut National du Cancer.

Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Gemcitabine/Cisplatin Alone or With Sorafenib for the First-Line Treatment of Advanced, Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib plus gemcitabine/cisplatin in chemotherapy-naive patients with unresectable stage IIIB to IV nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between February 2007 and March 2009, 904 patients were randomly assigned to daily sorafenib (400 mg twice a day) or matching placebo plus gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) for up to six 21-day cycles. Because of safety findings from the Evaluation of Sorafenib, Carboplatin and Paclitaxel Efficacy in NSCLC (ESCAPE) trial, patients with squamous cell histology were withdrawn from the trial in February 2008 and excluded from analysis. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-progression (TTP). RESULTS The primary analysis population consisted of 772 patients (sorafenib, 385; placebo, 387); the two groups had similar demographic and baseline characteristics. Median OS was similar in the sorafenib and placebo groups (12.4 v 12.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; P = .401). By investigator assessment, sorafenib improved median PFS (6.0 v 5.5 months; HR, 0.83; P = .008) and TTP (6.1 v 5.5 months; HR, 0.73; P < .001). Grade 3 to 4 drug-related adverse events more than two-fold higher in the sorafenib group included hand-foot skin reaction (8.6% v 0.3%), fatigue (7.3% v 3.6%), rash (5.7% v 0.5%), and hypertension (4.2% v 1.8%). No unexpected toxicities were observed. CONCLUSION This study did not meet its primary end point of improved OS when sorafenib was added to first-line gemcitabine/cisplatin in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Identification of predictive biomarkers is warranted in future trials of sorafenib.

LUX-Lung 3: A randomized, open-label, phase III study of afatinib versus pemetrexed and cisplatin as first-line treatment for patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung harboring EGFR-activating mutations.

LBA7500 Background: Afatinib (A) is a selective, orally bioavailable, irreversible ErbB family blocker of EGFR (ErbB1), HER2 (ErbB2), and ErbB4. This global study investigated the efficacy and safety of A compared with pemetrexed/cisplatin (PC) in pts with EGFR mutation positive advanced lung adenocarcinoma. METHODS Following central testing for EGFR mutations (companion diagnostic TheraScreen EGFR RGQ PCR kit), 345 pts (stage IIIB/IV, PS 0-1, chemo-naive) were randomized 2:1 (A: 230; PC: 115) to daily A 40 mg or iv PC (500 mg/m2 + 75 mg/m2 q21 days up to 6 cycles). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by central independent review. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were balanced in both arms: median age, 61 y; female, 65%; Asian, 72%; never-smoker, 68%; Del19, 49%; L858R, 40%; other mutations, 11%. Treatment with A led to a significantly prolonged PFS vs PC (median 11.1 vs 6.9 mos; HR 0.58 [0.43-0.78]; p=0.0004). In 308 pts with common mutations (Del19/L858R), median PFS was 13.6 vs 6.9 mos, respectively (HR=0.47 [0.34-0.65]; p<0.0001). Objective response rate was significantly higher with A (56% vs 23%; p<0.0001). Significant delay in time to deterioration of cancer-related symptoms of cough (HR=0.60, p=0.0072) and dyspnea (HR=0.68, p=0.0145) was seen with A vs PC. Most common drug-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (95%), rash (62%) and paronychia (57%) with A, and nausea (66%), decreased appetite (53%) and vomiting (42%) with PC. Drug-related AEs led to discontinuation in 8% (A; 1% due to diarrhea) and 12% of pts (PC). CONCLUSIONS LUX-Lung 3 is the largest prospective trial in EGFR mutation positive lung cancer and the first study using pemetrexed/cisplatin as a comparator. Treatment with afatinib significantly prolonged PFS compared to PC, with significant improvements in secondary endpoints. AEs with afatinib were manageable, with a low discontinuation rate. With 4.2 mos PFS improvement in the overall population and 6.7 mos in pts with common mutations, afatinib is a clinically relevant first-line treatment option.

Aflibercept and Docetaxel Versus Docetaxel Alone After Platinum Failure in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Controlled Phase III Trial

PURPOSE To compare the efficacy of aflibercept (ziv-aflibercept), a recombinant human fusion protein targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway, with or without docetaxel in platinum-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this international, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial, 913 patients were randomly assigned to (ziv-)aflibercept 6 mg/kg intravenous (IV; n = 456) or IV placebo (n = 457), both administered every 3 weeks and in combination with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Other efficacy outcomes, safety, and immunogenicity were also assessed. RESULTS Patient characteristics were balanced between arms; 12.3% of patients had received prior bevacizumab. (Ziv-)Aflibercept did not improve OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.17; stratified log-rank P = .90). The median OS was 10.1 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.6 months) for (ziv-)aflibercept and 10.4 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.9 months) for placebo. In exploratory analyses, median progression-free survival was 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.6 months) for (ziv-)aflibercept versus 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.5 to 4.3 months) for placebo (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94; P = .0035); overall response rate was 23.3% of evaluable patients (95% CI, 19.1% to 27.4%) in the (ziv-)aflibercept arm versus 8.9% (95% CI, 6.1% to 11.6%; P < .001) in the placebo arm. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurring more frequently in the (ziv-)aflibercept arm versus the placebo arm were neutropenia (28.0% v 21.1%, respectively), fatigue (11.1% v 4.2%, respectively), stomatitis (8.8% v 0.7%, respectively), and hypertension (7.3% v 0.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION The addition of (ziv-)aflibercept to standard docetaxel therapy did not improve OS. In exploratory analyses, secondary efficacy end points did seem to be improved in the (ziv-)aflibercept arm. The study regimen was associated with increased toxicities, consistent with known anti-VEGF and chemotherapy-induced events.

Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus 5‐fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX‐6) as first‐line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

A regimen consisting of 5‐fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX‐6) is widely used in France in the first‐line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). The aim of our study was to demonstrate the non‐inferiority of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus FOLFOX‐6 for this indication. Patients were randomly assigned to receive XELOX or FOLFOX‐6 for 6 months. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) in the per‐protocol (PP) population; however, progression‐free and overall survival (OS), time to response and response duration were also assessed. A total of 306 patients were enrolled (XELOX n = 156; FOLFOX‐6 n = 150). ORR was 42 and 46% with XELOX and FOLFOX‐6, respectively, in the PP population. The difference between groups was 4.7%; the upper limit of the unilateral 95% confidence interval (14.4%) was below the non‐inferiority margin of 15%. In the intent‐to‐treat population, median progression‐free survival was 8.8 months with XELOX and 9.3 months with FOLFOX‐6, and median OS was 19.9 and 20.5 months, respectively. XELOX patients had significantly more grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (12% vs. 5%) and diarrhoea (14% vs. 7%), but significantly less grade 3/4 neutropenia (5% vs. 47%), febrile neutropenia (0% vs. 6%) and neuropathy (11% vs. 26%) than FOLFOX‐6 patients. We conclude that XELOX is non‐inferior in terms of efficacy to FOLFOX‐6 in the first‐line treatment of MCRC, but has a different toxicity profile.

Safety and activity of alisertib, an investigational aurora kinase A inhibitor, in patients with breast cancer, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a five-arm phase 2 study

BACKGROUND Alisertib is an investigational, oral, selective inhibitor of aurora kinase A. We aimed to investigate the safety and activity of single-agent alisertib in patients with predefined types of advanced solid tumours. METHODS We did a multicentre phase 1/2 study at 40 centres in four countries (Czech Republic, France, Poland, and the USA). Here, we report results from phase 2; enrolment for the study began on Feb 16, 2010, and ended on May 3, 2013. Adult patients were eligible for the study if they had either breast cancer, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma that had relapsed or was refractory to chemotherapy. Patients had to have undergone two or fewer previous cytotoxic regimens (four or fewer for breast cancer patients), not including adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatments. Enrolment followed a two-stage design: to proceed to the second stage, two or more objective responses were needed in the first 20 response-assessable patients in each of the five tumour cohorts. Alisertib was administered orally in 21-day cycles at the recommended phase 2 dose of 50 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by a break of 14 days. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response, assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the response-assessable population (ie, patients with measurable disease who received at least one dose of alisertib and had undergone at least one post-baseline tumour assessment). This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01045421. FINDINGS By May 31, 2013, 249 patients had been treated, 53 with breast cancer, 60 with small-cell lung cancer, 26 with non-small-cell lung cancer, 55 with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and 55 with gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Among response-assessable patients, an objective response was noted in nine (18%, 95% CI 9-32) of 49 women with breast cancer, ten (21%, 10-35) of 48 participants with small-cell lung cancer, one (4%, 0-22) of 23 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, four (9%, 2-21) of 45 people with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and four (9%, 2-20) of 47 individuals with gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma; all were partial responses. Adverse events were similar across tumour types. The most frequent drug-related grade 3-4 adverse events included neutropenia (n=107 [43%]), leukopenia (53 [21%]), and anaemia (26 [10%]). Serious drug-related adverse events were reported in 108 (43%) patients. INTERPRETATION These data support further clinical assessment of alisertib in patients with solid tumours, particularly those with breast cancer and small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Vinflunine: A New Microtubule Inhibitor Agent

Vinflunine (Javlor) is the first fluorinated microtubule inhibitor belonging to the Vinca alkaloids family. Vinflunine is obtained by semisynthesis using superacidic chemistry to selectively introduce two fluorine atoms at the 20′ position of the catharanthine moiety. This compound has been selected for clinical development on the basis of encouraging preclinical activity that warrants study in patients with a wide spectrum of solid tumors. Clinically significant activity has been seen in phase II studies, mainly in the treatment of transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, non–small cell lung cancer, and carcinoma of the breast. Vinflunine is currently in phase III trial assessment in patients with (second line) transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium and first-line advanced breast cancer. The efficacy of vinflunine in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer previously treated with a platinum-containing regimen was confirmed by a large phase III trial.