Jean-Pascal Machiels

Prednisone plus cabazitaxel or mitoxantrone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel treatment : a randomised open-label trial

BACKGROUND Cabazitaxel is a novel tubulin-binding taxane drug with antitumour activity in docetaxel-resistant cancers. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel plus prednisone with those of mitoxantrone plus prednisone in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with progressive disease after docetaxel-based treatment. METHODS We undertook an open-label randomised phase 3 trial in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had received previous hormone therapy, but whose disease had progressed during or after treatment with a docetaxel-containing regimen. Participants were treated with 10 mg oral prednisone daily, and were randomly assigned to receive either 12 mg/m(2) mitoxantrone intravenously over 15-30 min or 25 mg/m(2) cabazitaxel intravenously over 1 h every 3 weeks. The random allocation schedule was computer-generated; patients and treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation, but the study team was masked to the data analysis. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and safety. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00417079. FINDINGS 755 men were allocated to treatment groups (377 mitoxantrone, 378 cabazitaxel) and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At the cutoff for the final analysis (Sept 25, 2009), median survival was 15·1 months (95% CI 14·1-16·3) in the cabazitaxel group and 12·7 months (11·6-13·7) in the mitoxantrone group. The hazard ratio for death of men treated with cabazitaxel compared with those taking mitoxantrone was 0·70 (95% CI 0·59-0·83, p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival was 2·8 months (95% CI 2·4-3·0) in the cabazitaxel group and 1·4 months (1·4-1·7) in the mitoxantrone group (HR 0·74, 0·64-0·86, p<0·0001). The most common clinically significant grade 3 or higher adverse events were neutropenia (cabazitaxel, 303 [82%] patients vs mitoxantrone, 215 [58%]) and diarrhoea (23 [6%] vs one [<1%]). 28 (8%) patients in the cabazitaxel group and five (1%) in the mitoxantrone group had febrile neutropenia. INTERPRETATION Treatment with cabazitaxel plus prednisone has important clinical antitumour activity, improving overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer whose disease has progressed during or after docetaxel-based therapy. FUNDING Sanofi-Aventis.

Androgen-deprivation therapy alone or with docetaxel in non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 15): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Early chemotherapy might improve the overall outcomes of patients with metastatic non-castrate (ie, hormone-sensitive) prostate cancer. We investigated the effects of the addition of docetaxel to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with metastatic non-castrate prostate cancer. METHODS In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study, we enrolled patients in 29 centres in France and one in Belgium. Eligible patients were older than 18 years and had histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate and radiologically proven metastatic disease; a Karnofsky score of at least 70%; a life expectancy of at least 3 months; and adequate hepatic, haematological, and renal function. They were randomly assigned to receive to ADT (orchiectomy or luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists, alone or combined with non-steroidal antiandrogens) alone or in combination with docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) intravenously on the first day of each 21-day cycle; up to nine cycles). Patients were randomised in a 1:1 ratio, with dynamic minimisation to minimise imbalances in previous systemic treatment with ADT, chemotherapy for local disease or isolated rising concentration of serum prostate-specific antigen, and Glass risk groups. Patients, physicians, and data analysts were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00104715. FINDINGS Between Oct 18, 2004, and Dec 31, 2008, 192 patients were randomly allocated to receive ADT plus docetaxel and 193 to receive ADT alone. Median follow-up was 50 months (IQR 39-63). Median overall survival was 58·9 months (95% CI 50·8-69·1) in the group given ADT plus docetaxel and 54·2 months (42·2-not reached) in that given ADT alone (hazard ratio 1·01, 95% CI 0·75-1·36). 72 serious adverse events were reported in the group given ADT plus docetaxel, of which the most frequent were neutropenia (40 [21%]), febrile neutropenia (six [3%]), abnormal liver function tests (three [2%]), and neutropenia with infection (two [1%]). Four treatment-related deaths occurred in the ADT plus docetaxel group (two of which were neutropenia-related), after which the data monitoring committee recommended treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. After this recommendation, no further treatment-related deaths occurred. No serious adverse events were reported in the ADT alone group. INTERPRETATION Docetaxel should not be used as part of first-line treatment for patients with non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING French Health Ministry and Institut National du Cancer (PHRC), Sanofi-Aventis, AstraZeneca, and Amgen.

Trastuzumab for Patients With Axillary-Node–Positive Breast Cancer: Results of the FNCLCC-PACS 04 Trial

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy of trastuzumab in patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormone therapy if applicable. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three thousand ten patients with operable node-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy with or without docetaxel. Patients who presented human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -overexpressing tumors were secondary randomly assigned to either a sequential regimen of trastuzumab (6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) for 1 year or observation. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS Overall 528 patients were randomly assigned between trastuzumab (n = 260) and observation (n = 268) arm. Of the 234 patients (90%) who received at least one administration of trastuzumab, 196 (84%) received at least 6 months of treatment, and 41 (18%) discontinued treatment due to cardiac events (any grade). At the date of analysis (October 2007), 129 DFS events were recorded. Random assignment to the trastuzumab arm was associated with a nonsignificant 14% reduction in the risk of relapse (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.22; P = .41, log-rank stratified on pathologic node involvement). Three-year DFS rates were 78% (95% CI, 72.3 to 82.5) and 81% (95% CI, 75.3 to 85.4) in the observation and trastuzumab arms, respectively. CONCLUSION After a 47-month median follow-up, 1 year of trastuzumab given sequentially after adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with a statistically significant decrease in the risk of relapse.

Late intensification chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation in selected small-cell carcinoma of the lung: a randomized study.

A multicentric randomized prospective trial was conducted to test whether late intensification chemotherapy would increase the remission rate, the relapse-free survival, and the survival of small-cell lung cancer patients responding to induction chemotherapy. Autologous bone marrow transplantation was used as support to reduce the duration of the aplasia induced by very high-dose chemotherapy. As induction chemotherapy, 101 patients received, during a period of 5 months, a total dosage of 120 mg/m2 methotrexate, 4.5 mg/m2 vincristine, 1,800 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide, 180 mg/m2 doxorubicin, 160 mg/m2 cisplatin, 750 mg/m2 VP-16-213, and 30 Gy prophylactic cranial irradiation. Forty-five patients, selected for their sensitivity to this induction treatment, were randomized to a last cycle of chemotherapy that combined cyclophosphamide, BCNU, and VP-16-213 either at a conventional dosage of 750 mg/m2 intravenously (IV), 60 mg/m2 IV, and 600 mg/m2 orally or alternatively at a very high dosage of 6 g/m2 IV, 300 mg/m2 IV, and 500 mg/m2 IV, respectively. In the late intensification group, the complete remission rate increased from 39% before randomization to 79% after high-dose chemotherapy. Median relapse-free survivals after randomization for intensified and control chemotherapy groups were 28 and 10 weeks, respectively (P = .002). Median overall survival after induction therapy was 68 weeks for the intensified group compared with 55 weeks for the conventional therapy group (P = .13). Four patients died during intensification. Patients in both groups relapsed at the primary site. It can thus be concluded that late intensification chemotherapy for sensitive small-cell lung cancer increases the complete remission rate and resulted in a statistically significant increase in the relapse-free survival. However, since relapse occurred at the primary site and toxicity was high, overall survival was not significantly improved.

Can Whole-body Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Diffusion-weighted Imaging Replace Tc 99m Bone Scanning and Computed Tomography for Single-step Detection of Metastases in Patients with High-risk Prostate Cancer?

BACKGROUND Technetium Tc 99m bone scintigraphy (BS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pelvis and abdomen are universally recommended for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) metastases in cancer of all stages. However, this two-step approach has limited sensitivity and specificity. OBJECTIVE Evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI (WBMRI) as a one-step screening test for PCa metastases. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS One hundred consecutive PCa patients at high risk for metastases prospectively underwent WBMRI, CT, and BS completed with targeted x-rays (BS/TXR) in case of equivocal BS. Four independent reviewers reviewed the images. MEASUREMENTS This study compares the diagnostic performance of WBMRI, CT, BS, and BS/TXR in detecting PCa metastases using area under the curve (AUC) receiver operator characteristics. A best valuable comparator (BVC) approach was used to adjudicate final metastatic status in the absence of pathologic evaluation. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Based on the BVC, 68 patients had metastases. The sensitivity of BS/TXR and WBMRI for detecting bone metastases was 86% and 98-100%, respectively (p<0.04), and specificity was 98% and 98-100%, respectively. The first and second WBMRI readers respectively identified bone metastases in 7 and 8 of 55 patients with negative BS/TXR. The sensitivity of CT and WBMRI for detecting enlarged lymph nodes was similar, at 77-82% for both; specificity was 95-96% and 96-98%, respectively. The sensitivity of the combination of BS/TXR plus CT and WBMRI for detecting bone metastases and/or enlarged lymph nodes was 84% and 91-94%, respectively (p=0.03-0.10); specificities were 94-97% and 91-96%, respectively. The 95% confidence interval of the difference between the AUC of the worst WBMRI reading and the AUC of any of the BS/TXR plus CT lay within the noninferiority margin of ±10% AUC. CONCLUSIONS WBMRI outperforms BS/TXR in detecting bone metastases and performs as well as CT for enlarged lymph node evaluation. WBMRI can replace the current multimodality metastatic work-up for the concurrent evaluation of bones and lymph nodes in high-risk PCa patients.

Zalutumumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy: an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND No treatments are presently available to increase survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of zalutumumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor, for overall survival in such patients. METHODS In our open-label, parallel-group, phase 3, randomised trial, we randomly allocated patients with squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck who were regarded as incurable with standard therapy, a WHO performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease within 6 months of platinum-based therapy in a 2:1 ratio to receive zalutumumab plus best supportive care (zalutumumab group) or best supportive care with optional methotrexate (control group) at medical centres in Europe, Brazil, and Canada. Randomisation was done via a centralised interactive voice-response system, stratified by performance status. Data were analysed when the randomisation code was broken, after the completion of the accrual and cleaning of the relevant data. An independent review committee, masked to treatment assignment, assessed tumour response and disease progression according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumours. Zalutumumab was given weekly by individual dose titration on the basis of skin rash. After a prespecified 231 deaths, we included all randomised patients in the survival analyses and all patients receiving at least one session of therapy in the safety analysis. The primary endpoint was overall survival, although progression-free survival was also assessed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00382031. FINDINGS We randomly allocated 191 (67%) of 286 eligible patients to the zalutumumab group and 95 (33%) to the control group. Median overall survival was 6.7 months (95% CI 5.8-7.0) in the zalutumumab group and 5.2 months (4.1-6.4) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] for death, stratified by WHO performance status, was 0.77, 97.06% CI 0.57-1.05; unadjusted p=0.0648). Progression-free survival was longer in the zalutumumab group than in the control group (HR for progression or death, stratified by WHO performance status, was 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84; p=0.0012). 189 patients given zalutumumab and 94 controls were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were rash (39 [21%] patients in the zalutumumab group vs none in the control group), anaemia (11 [6%] vs five [5%]), and pneumonia (nine [5%] vs two [2%]). 28 (15%) patients in the zalutumumab group had grade 3/4 infections compared with eight (9%) in the control group. The most common serious adverse events were tumour haemorrhage (28 [15%] patients given zalutumumab vs 13 [14%] controls), pneumonia (13 [7%] vs three [3%]), and dysphagia (11 [6%] vs two [2%]). INTERPRETATION Although zalutumumab did not increase overall survival, progression-free survival was extended in patients with recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck who had failed platinum-based chemotherapy. Zalutumumab dose titration on the basis of rash is safe. FUNDING Genmab.

Afatinib versus methotrexate as second-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck progressing on or after platinum-based therapy (LUX-Head & Neck 1): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) progressing after first-line platinum regimens have a poor prognosis and few treatment options. Afatinib, an irreversible ERBB family blocker, has shown efficacy in a phase 2 study in this setting. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of afatinib compared with methotrexate as second-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC progressing on or after platinum-based therapy. METHODS In this open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial conducted in 101 centres in 19 countries, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed HNSCC that was recurrent, metastatic, or both who had progressed on or after first-line platinum-based therapy, were not amenable for salvage surgery or radiotherapy, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Previous treatment with more than one systemic regimen in this setting was not allowed; previous treatment with EGFR-targeted antibody therapy (but not EGFR-targeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitors) was allowed. We randomly assigned eligible patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m(2) per week), stratified by ECOG performance status and previous EGFR-targeted antibody therapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent, central imaging review committee. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01345682. FINDINGS Between Jan 10, 2012, and Dec 12, 2013, we enrolled 483 patients and randomly assigned 322 to afatinib and 161 to methotrexate. After a median follow-up of 6·7 months (IQR 3·1-9·0), progression-free survival was longer in the afatinib group than in the methotrexate group (median 2·6 months [95% CI 2·0-2·7] for the afatinib group vs 1·7 months [1·5-2·4] for the methotrexate group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·80 [95% CI 0·65-0·98], p=0·030). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were rash or acne (31 [10%] of 320 patients in the afatinib group vs none of 160 patients in the methotrexate group), diarrhoea (30 [9%] vs three [2%]), stomatitis (20 [6%] vs 13 [8%]), fatigue (18 [6%] vs five [3%]), and neutropenia (1 [<1%] vs 11 [7%]); serious adverse events occurred in 44 (14%) of afatinib-treated patients and 18 (11%) of methotrexate-treated patients. INTERPRETATION Afatinib was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival and had a manageable safety profile. These findings provide important new insights into the treatment of this patient population and support further investigations with irreversible ERBB family blockers in HNSCC. FUNDING Boehringer Ingelheim.

Molecular Response to Cetuximab and Efficacy of Preoperative Cetuximab-Based Chemoradiation in Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE To characterize the molecular pathways activated or inhibited by cetuximab when combined with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in rectal cancer and to identify molecular profiles and biomarkers that might improve patient selection for such treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-one patients with rectal cancer (T3-4 and/or N+) received preoperative radiotherapy (1.8 Gy, 5 days/wk, 45 Gy) in combination with capecitabine and cetuximab (400 mg/m2 as initial dose 1 week before CRT followed by 250 mg/m2 /wk for 5 weeks). Biopsies and plasma samples were taken before treatment, after cetuximab but before CRT, and at the time of surgery. Proteomics and microarrays were used to monitor the molecular response to cetuximab and to identify profiles and biomarkers to predict treatment efficacy. RESULTS Cetuximab on its own downregulated genes involved in proliferation and invasion and upregulated inflammatory gene expression, with 16 genes being significantly influenced in microarray analysis. The decrease in proliferation was confirmed by immunohistochemistry for Ki67 (P = .01) and was accompanied by an increase in transforming growth factor-alpha in plasma samples (P < .001). Disease-free survival (DFS) was better in patients if epidermal growth factor receptor expression was upregulated in the tumor after the initial cetuximab dose (P = .02) and when fibro-inflammatory changes were present in the surgical specimen (P = .03). Microarray and proteomic profiles were predictive of DFS. CONCLUSION Our study showed that a single dose of cetuximab has a significant impact on the expression of genes involved in tumor proliferation and inflammation. We identified potential biomarkers that might predict response to cetuximab-based CRT.

Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Docetaxel, Estramustine, and Prednisone With Docetaxel and Prednisone in Metastatic Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To assess the efficacy and toxicity of the addition of estramustine to docetaxel (D) for the treatment of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred fifty patients were randomly assigned to D alone (35 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9, every 3 weeks) or D in combination with estramustine (D/E; 280 mg orally three times a day on days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12, every 3 weeks). All patients received prednisone (10 mg/d). The primary end point was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, which was defined as a decrease in PSA > or = 50% from baseline. The study was powered to test the hypothesis that D/E would improve the PSA response rate by 25%. RESULTS The PSA response rate was not statistically different between the two groups. PSA of less than 4 ng/mL occurred in 29 (41%) of 71 patients receiving D/E and in 17 (25%) of 69 patients receiving D (P = .05). No significant differences were found for median time to PSA progression (D/E, 6.9 months; D, 7.3 months) or median overall survival time (D/E, 19.3 months; D, 21 months). More patients had at least one grade 3 or 4 toxicity with D/E (45%) compared with D (21%; P = .005), mainly as a result of grade 3 or 4 GI toxicity (P = .05). Serious adverse events were more frequent with D/E (n = 20) than with D (n = 9; P = .04). CONCLUSION The addition of estramustine to weekly D does not provide any clinically relevant advantage. Both regimens are well tolerated, although the toxicity profile favors D without estramustine.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with primarily unresectable, advanced-stage ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE The aim of this review is to report our experience and the feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. METHODS Forty-five patients with primarily unresectable advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer were treated in our center between 1995 and 2002 by platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Their files were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS At the end of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, according to RECIST criteria, 1 patient (2.2%) had achieved a clinical complete response (CR), 33 (73.4%) a partial response (PR), and 8 (17.8%) had stable disease (SD). Only 3 (6.6%) patients showed disease progression (PD). Surgery was performed in patients with objective response or SD after a median number of 4 courses (range: 2-6) of induction chemotherapy. A complete macroscopic debulking was achieved in 24 (53.3%) out of 39 patients in whom cytoreductive surgery was performed. For the entire group, median overall survival was 29 months. Survival was significantly improved in patients with optimal debulking compared to patients with persistent tumor after surgery: 41 months versus 23 months (P = 0.0062). Median survival for patients responding to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CR and PR) was 44 months compared to 27 months for patients with SD or PD after initial chemotherapy (P = 0.01). Neither treatment-related deaths nor significant toxicities were observed. CONCLUSION Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by optimal debulking may be a safe and valuable treatment alternative in patients with primarily unresectable advanced-stage bulky ovarian cancer. Patients with an objective response to chemotherapy or absence of macroscopic residual tumor after surgery have a better outcome. This approach is currently being tested in large, prospective randomized clinical trials.