Klaus H. Baumann

Trastuzumab Beyond Progression in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: A German Breast Group 26/Breast International Group 03-05 Study

PURPOSE Trastuzumab shows clinical activity in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)-positive early and advanced breast cancer. In the German Breast Group 26/Breast International Group 03-05 trial, we investigated if trastuzumab treatment should be continued beyond progression. METHODS Patients with HER-2-positive breast cancer that progresses during treatment with trastuzumab were randomly assigned to receive capecitabine (2,500 mg/m(2) body-surface area on days 1 through 14 [1,250 mg/m(2) semi-daily]) alone or with continuation of trastuzumab (6 mg/kg body weight) in 3-week cycles. The primary end point was time to progression. RESULTS We randomly assigned 78 patients to capecitabine and 78 patients to capecitabine plus trastuzumab. Sixty-five events and 38 deaths in the capecitabine group and 62 events and 33 deaths in the capecitabine-plus-trastuzumab group occurred during 15.6 months of follow-up. Median times to progression were 5.6 months in the capecitabine group and 8.2 months in the capecitabine-plus-trastuzumab group with an unadjusted hazard ratio of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.48 to 0.97; two-sided log-rank P = .0338). Overall survival rates were 20.4 months (95% CI, 17.8 to 24.7) in the capecitabine group and 25.5 months (95% CI, 19.0 to 30.7) in the capecitabine-plus-trastuzumab group (P = .257). Overall response rates were 27.0% with capecitabine and 48.1% with capecitabine plus trastuzumab (odds ratio, 2.50; P = .0115). Continuation of trastuzumab beyond progression was not associated with increased toxicity. CONCLUSION Continuation of trastuzumab plus capecitabine showed a significant improvement in overall response and time to progression compared with capecitabine alone in women with HER-2-positive breast cancer who experienced progression during trastuzumab treatment.

Incorporation of Pazopanib in Maintenance Therapy of Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE Pazopanib is an oral, multikinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) -1/-2/-3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) -α/-β, and c-Kit. Preclinical and clinical studies support VEGFR and PDGFR as targets for advanced ovarian cancer treatment. This study evaluated the role of pazopanib maintenance therapy in patients with ovarian cancer whose disease did not progress during first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Nine hundred forty patients with histologically confirmed cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, International Federation Gynecology Obstetrics (FIGO) stages II-IV, no evidence of progression after primary therapy consisting of surgery and at least five cycles of platinum-taxane chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive pazopanib 800 mg once per day or placebo for up to 24 months. The primary end point was progression-free survival by RECIST 1.0 assessed by the investigators. RESULTS Maintenance pazopanib prolonged progression-free survival compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.91; P = .0021; median, 17.9 v 12.3 months, respectively). Interim survival analysis based on events in 35.6% of the population did not show any significant difference. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events of hypertension (30.8%), neutropenia (9.9%), liver-related toxicity (9.4%), diarrhea (8.2%), fatigue (2.7%), thrombocytopenia (2.5%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (1.9%) were significantly higher in the pazopanib arm. Treatment discontinuation related to adverse events was higher among patients treated with pazopanib (33.3%) compared with placebo (5.6%). CONCLUSION Pazopanib maintenance therapy provided a median improvement of 5.6 months (HR, 0.77) in progression-free survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy. Overall survival data to this point did not suggest any benefit. Additional analysis should help to identify subgroups of patients in whom improved efficacy may balance toxicity (NCT00866697).

Trastuzumab beyond progression: overall survival analysis of the GBG 26/BIG 3-05 phase III study in HER2-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND Continuation of trastuzumab plus capecitabine (XH) showed a significantly improved overall response rate and time to progression compared with capecitabine (X) alone in women with HER2-positive breast cancer progressing during trastuzumab treatment. Here, we report the final analysis on overall survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer who progressed during treatment with trastuzumab with or without 1st-line metastatic chemotherapy were prospectively randomised to X (2500mg/m(2) on days 1-14, q3w) or XH (6 (8)mg/kg, q3w). Overall survival was a pre-specified secondary end-point. RESULTS Median follow-up at June 2010 was 20.7months. Fifty nine of 74 and 60 of 77 patients died in the X and XH arm, respectively. Median overall survival was 20.6 and 24.9months with X and XH, respectively (HR=0.94 [0.65-1.35]; p=0.73). Performance status and metastatic site were independent prognosticators for overall survival. No difference between treatment arms was observed for patients who achieved clinical response or clinical benefit, respectively. Patients who continued/restarted anti-HER2 treatment (trastuzumab or lapatinib) after 2nd progression (N=52) had a post-progression survival of 18.8 compared with 13.3months for those who did not receive 3rd line treatment with anti-HER2 agents (N=88) (HR 0.63; p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS Final overall survival analysis of the GBG-26 study did not demonstrate a significant survival benefit for treatment beyond progression with trastuzumab. However, in a post-hoc analysis, patients receiving anti-HER2 treatment as 3rd line therapy showed a better post-progression survival than those not receiving this targeted treatment.

Randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of pazopanib versus placebo in women who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (AEOC): Results of an international Intergroup trial (AGO-OVAR16).

LBA5503 Background: Pazopanib is an oral, multikinase inhibitor of VEGFR-1, -2, -3, PDGFR-α and -β, and c-Kit. Preclinical and clinical studies support VEGF(R) and PDGF(R) as targets for AEOC treatment. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of pazopanib maintenance therapy in patients who have not progressed after first-line chemotherapy for AEOC. METHODS Patients with histologically confirmed AEOC, FIGO II-IV, and no evidence of progression after surgery and ≥ 5 cycles of platinum-taxane chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive 800 mg pazopanib once daily or placebo for up to 24 months. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, PFS by GCIG criteria, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS Most of the 940 randomized patients had stage III/IV disease (91%) at initial diagnosis, and no residual disease after surgery (58%). The median time from diagnosis to randomization was 7.1 months in the placebo arm and 7.0 months in the pazopanib arm. The median follow-up was 24 months. Patients in the pazopanib arm had a prolonged PFS vs placebo (HR = 0.766; 95% CI: 0.64-0.91; p = 0.0021; medians 17.9 vs 12.3 months, respectively). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses of PFS, and analysis of PFS by GCIG criteria, were consistent with the primary analysis. The first interim analysis for OS (only 189 OS events = 20.1% of population) showed no difference between arms. Pazopanib mean exposure was shorter vs placebo (8.9 vs 11.7 months). Pazopanib treatment was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (26% vs 11%) vs placebo. The most common AEs were hypertension, diarrhea, nausea, headache, fatigue, and neutropenia. Fatal SAEs were reported in three patients on pazopanib and one patient on placebo. CONCLUSIONS Pazopanib maintenance therapy provided a statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS benefit in patients with AEOC; OS data are not mature. The safety profile of pazopanib in this setting was consistent with its established profile. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION NCT00866697.

Abagovomab as maintenance therapy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: A phase III trial of the AGO OVAR, COGI, GINECO, and GEICO-the MIMOSA study

PURPOSE To determine whether abagovomab maintenance therapy prolongs recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with ovarian cancer in first clinical remission. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III to IV ovarian cancer in complete clinical remission after primary surgery and platinum- and taxane-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 in a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. Abagovomab 2 mg or placebo was administered as 1-mL suspension once every 2 weeks for 6 weeks (induction phase) and then once every 4 weeks (maintenance phase) until recurrence or up to 21 months after random assignment of the last patient. The primary end point was RFS; secondary end points were OS and immunologic response. RESULTS Characteristics of the 888 patients included: mean age, 56.3 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, ≤ 1 in > 99% of patients; serous papillary subtype, 81.5%; stage III, 85.9%; and cancer antigen 125 ≤ 35 U/mL after third cycle, 80.9%. Mean exposure to study treatment (± standard deviation) was 449.7 ± 333.08 days. Hazard ratio (HR) of RFS for the treatment group using tumor size categorization (≤ 1 cm, > 1 cm) was 1.099 (95% CI, 0.919 to 1.315; P = .301). HR of OS using tumor size categorization (≤ 1 cm, > 1 cm) was 1.150 (95% CI, 0.872 to 1.518; P = .322). The most frequently reported type of adverse event was an injection site reaction in 445 patients (50.2%), followed by injection site erythema and fatigue in 227 (25.6%) and 212 patients (23.9%), respectively. By the final visit, median anti-anti-idiotypic antibody level was 493,000.0 ng/mL, indicating a robust response. CONCLUSION Abagovomab administered as repeated monthly injections is safe and induces a measurable immune response. Administration as maintenance therapy for patients with ovarian cancer in first remission does not prolong RFS or OS.

Adjuvant Therapy in Lymph Node–Positive Vulvar Cancer: The AGO-CaRE-1 Study

Background: Women with node-positive vulvar cancer have a high risk for disease recurrence. Indication criteria for adjuvant radiotherapy are controversial. This study was designed to further understand the role of adjuvant therapy in node-positive disease. Methods: Patients with primary squamous-cell vulvar cancer treated at 29 gynecologic cancer centers in Germany from 1998 through 2008 were included in this retrospective exploratory multicenter cohort study. Of 1618 documented patients, 1249 had surgical groin staging and known lymph node status and were further analyzed. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Four hundred forty-seven of 1249 patients (35.8%) had lymph node metastases (N+). The majority of N+ patients had one (172 [38.5%]) or two (102 [22.8%]) positive nodes. The three-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate of N+ patients was 35.2%, and the overall survival (OS) rate 56.2% compared with 75.2% and 90.2% in node-negative patients (N-). Two hundred forty-four (54.6%) N+ patients had adjuvant therapy, of which 183 (40.9%) had radiotherapy directed at the groins (+/-other fields). Three-year PFS and OS rates in these patients were better compared with N+ patients without adjuvant treatment (PFS: 39.6% vs 25.9%, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI[= 0.51 to 0.88, P = .004; OS: 57.7% vs 51.4%, HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.56 to 1.11, P = .17). This effect was statistically significant in multivariable analysis adjusted for age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Union internationale contre le cancer stage, grade, invasion depth, and number of positive nodes (PFS: HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.78, P < .001; OS: HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.91, P = .01). Conclusion: This large multicenter study in vulvar cancer observed that adjuvant radiotherapy was associated with improved prognosis in node-positive patients and will hopefully help to overcome concerns regarding adjuvant treatment. However, outcome after adjuvant radiotherapy remains poor compared with node-negative patients. Adjuvant chemoradiation could be a possible strategy to improve therapy because it is superior to radiotherapy alone in other squamous cell carcinomas.

A phase II trial (AGO 2.11) in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: a randomized multicenter trial with sunitinib (SU11248) to evaluate dosage, schedule, tolerability, toxicity and effectiveness of a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy

BACKGROUND Recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer usually has a poor outcome with conventional chemotherapeutic therapy and new treatment modalities are warranted. This phase II study was conducted to evaluate sunitinib, an oral antiangiogenic multitargeted tyrosin kinase inhibitor, in this setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS The primary end point of this randomized phase II trial was the objective response rate according to RECIST criteria and/or Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup CA125 response criteria to sunitinib in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who were pretreated with up to three chemotherapies. A selection design was employed to compare two schedules of sunitinib (arm 1: 50 mg sunitinib daily orally for 28 days followed by 14 days off drug; and arm 2: 37.5 mg sunitinib administered daily continuously). RESULTS Of 73 patients enrolled, 36 patients were randomly allocated to the noncontinuous treatment arm (arm 1) and 37 patients were randomly allocated to the continuous treatment arm (arm 2). The mean age was 58.8 and 58.5 years, respectively. We observed six responders (complete response+partial response) in arm 1 (16.7%) and 2 responders in arm 2 (5.4%). The median progression-free survival (arm 1: 4.8 [2.9-8.1] months; arm 2: 2.9 [2.9-5.1] months) and the median overall survival (arm 1: 13.6 [7.0-23.2] months; arm 2: 13.7 [8.4-25.6] months) revealed no significant difference. Adverse events included fatigue as well as cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and abdominal symptoms, hematologic and hepatic laboratory abnormalities. Pattern and frequency of adverse events revealed no substantial differences between both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS Sunitinib treatment is feasible and moderately active in relapsed platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The noncontinuous treatment schedule should be chosen for further studies in ovarian cancer.BACKGROUND Recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer usually has a poor outcome with conventional chemotherapeutic therapy and new treatment modalities are warranted. This phase II study was conducted to evaluate sunitinib, an oral antiangiogenic multitargeted tyrosin kinase inhibitor, in this setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS The primary end point of this randomized phase II trial was the objective response rate according to RECIST criteria and/or Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup CA125 response criteria to sunitinib in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who were pretreated with up to three chemotherapies. A selection design was employed to compare two schedules of sunitinib (arm 1: 50 mg sunitinib daily orally for 28 days followed by 14 days off drug; and arm 2: 37.5 mg sunitinib administered daily continuously). RESULTS Of 73 patients enrolled, 36 patients were randomly allocated to the noncontinuous treatment arm (arm 1) and 37 patients were randomly allocated to the continuous treatment arm (arm 2). The mean age was 58.8 and 58.5 years, respectively. We observed six responders (complete response + partial response) in arm 1 (16.7%) and 2 responders in arm 2 (5.4%). The median progression-free survival (arm 1: 4.8 [2.9-8.1] months; arm 2: 2.9 [2.9-5.1] months) and the median overall survival (arm 1: 13.6 [7.0-23.2] months; arm 2: 13.7 [8.4-25.6] months) revealed no significant difference. Adverse events included fatigue as well as cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and abdominal symptoms, hematologic and hepatic laboratory abnormalities. Pattern and frequency of adverse events revealed no substantial differences between both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS Sunitinib treatment is feasible and moderately active in relapsed platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The noncontinuous treatment schedule should be chosen for further studies in ovarian cancer.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Shows Similar Response in Patients With Inflammatory or Locally Advanced Breast Cancer When Compared With Operable Breast Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the GeparTrio Trial Data

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by mastectomy is the treatment of choice in patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) or locally advanced breast cancer (LABC), but it is considered less effective in these diseases than in operable breast cancer (OBC). We report a prospective comparison of the GeparTrio trial of patients with IBC (cT4 days) or LABC (cT4a-c or cN3; stage IIIB or IIIC) and patients with OBC (cT2-3). PATIENTS AND METHODS Participants were stratified by stage and were randomly assigned to six or eight cycles of docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (TAC) or to two cycles of TAC followed by four cycles of vinorelbine/capecitabine. We present results of a secondary aim of the study, which was to compare pathologic complete response (pCR; ie, no remaining invasive/noninvasive tumor in breast and lymph nodes) in different stage groups. Results A total of 287 patients with IBC (n = 93) or LABC (n = 194) and 1,777 patients with OBC were entered onto the trial. At baseline, parameters were as follows for the three types of cancer, respectively: median tumor sizes: 8.0 cm, 7.0 cm, and 4.0 cm (P < .001); multiple lesions: 31.2%, 27.3%, and 19.6% (P < .001); nodal involvement: 86.6%, 71.2%, and 51.6% (P < .001); grade 3: 44.4%, 30.4%, and 39.9% (P = .178); lobular-invasive type: 7.5%, 17.5%, and 13.3% (P = .673); negative hormone receptor status: 38.0%, 20.0%, and 36.4% (P = .008); and positive human growth factor receptor 2 status: 45.1%, 38.9%, and 35.7% (P = .158). Response rates for IBC, LABC, and OBC, respectively, were 8.6%, 11.3%, and 17.7% for pCR (P = .002); 71.0%, 69.6%, and 83.4% for overall response by physical or sonographic examination (P < .001); and 12.9%, 33.0%, and 69.9% for breast conservation (P < .001). All P values were for IBC and LABC versus OBC. However, tumor stage itself was not an independent predictor for pCR in multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.88 to 2.59; P = .13). CONCLUSION No evidence of a difference in response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was found by tumor stage when analysis was adjusted for baseline characteristics.

Intraperitoneal treatment with the trifunctional bispecific antibody Catumaxomab in patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer: A phase IIa study of the AGO Study Group

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to select the best catumaxomab regimen for further investigation in ovarian cancer based on confirmed tumour response. METHODS Randomised open-label phase IIa study in women with platinum-resistant or -refractory epithelial ovarian cancer. Catumaxomab (6-hour intraperitoneal infusion on days 0, 3, 7 and 10) was administered at a low (10, 10, 10 and 10 μg) or high dose (10, 20, 50 and 100 μg). Responders were patients with either a complete (CR) or partial (PR) response. RESULTS Forty-five patients were randomised to receive either low dose (23) or high dose (22). There were no responders in the low-dose versus one patient (5%) in the high-dose group with a PR. In the low-dose group, two patients (9%) had stable disease compared with five patients (23%) in the high-dose group. Catumaxomab was well tolerated and there was no difference between the dose groups in the incidence of treatment-induced adverse events, the most common of which were gastrointestinal and injection-site reactions. CONCLUSION Catumaxomab had modest activity in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The high-dose regimen was associated with a slightly better therapeutic index than the low dose regimen.

Gross cystic disease fluid protein 15 (GCDFP-15) expression in breast cancer subtypes

BackgroundGross cystic disease fluid protein 15 (GCDFP-15), which is regulated by the androgen receptor (AR), is a diagnostic marker for mammary differentiation in histopathology. We determined the expression of GCDFP-15 in breast cancer subtypes, its potential prognostic and predictive value, as well as its relationship to AR expression.Methods602 pre-therapeutic breast cancer core biopsies from the phase III randomized neoadjuvant GeparTrio trial (NCT00544765) were investigated for GCDFP-15 expression by immunohistochemistry. Expression data were correlated with disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) time as well as pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Results239 tumors (39.7%) were GCDFP-15 positive. GCDFP-15 expression was positively linked to hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 positive tumor type, while most triple negative carcinomas were negative (p < 0.0001). GCDFP-15 was also strongly correlated to AR expression (p 0.001), and to the so-called molecular apocrine subtype (HR-/AR+, p < 0.0001). Higher rates of GCDFP-15 positivity were seen in tumors of lower grade (<0.0001) and negative nodal status (p = 0.008). GCDFP-15 positive tumors tended to have a more favourable prognosis than GCDFP-15 negative tumors (DFS (p = 0.052) and OS (p = 0.044)), which was not independent from other factors in multivariate analysis. GCDFP-15 expression was not linked to pCR. Histological apocrine differentiation was frequent in molecular apocrine carcinomas (60.7%), and was associated with GCDFP-15 within this group (p = 0.039).ConclusionsGCDFP-15 expression is higher in tumors with favorable prognostic features. GCDFP-15 expression is further a frequent feature of AR positive tumors and the molecular apocrine subtype. It might have reduced sensitivity as a diagnostic marker for mammary differentiation in triple negative tumors as compared to HR or HER2 positive tumor types.